hi rob, asmost people know i have been the victim of clampers in the past, to the tune of £155.
unfortunately you appear to have been the victim of police bullying.
this incident is a typical example of the lack of respect we truck/lorry drivers receive from the general public and just about every professional person that happens to be out there.
10 years ago it would have been the clampers that would have been arrested for being stupid enough to try and clamp a vehicle that is parked waiting to enter the premises of a land occupier of the company that are employing them to clamp.
as has been suggested already i would be seeking legal advice as to what the next step will be to ensure that this happens to no one else and although i am against the principle of the claims system i think i would definately be seeking some sort of financial reimbursement for the distress and embarrasment caused to me.
i would be looking at a claim against the clamping company and the landowners that have employed them.
they have obviously employed a company of dubious character and they can be held responsible for what happens to persons whilst they are on their property.
secondly the police for the poor treatment and failure to establish the facts before arresting you and for false arrest and wrongful imprisonment.
i would also be seeking damages from the company that employed you because it happened whilst at work and they are responsible for your well being, land rover too because i assume that you had already reported to their security and advised them that you are there awaiting permission to enter their premises, they are then responsible for ensuring that they off load your goods as quickly as possible.
i would first contact the owners of the property and advise them of your intention to seek legal advice in reference to a claim for compensation from them as you were on their property at the time and it is them that have employed the clampers without vetting the company properly to ensure they are professional.
good luck.
you could also contact your local mp regarding this matter, it is no good contacting the mp for the area you were clamped in as they are only interested in the concerns of the local constituants, people that live in the area and vote them in or out when the time comes.
p.s. i never took my claim any further due to lack of support and the initial fee to take it to the small claims court being £80 with no guarentees of a successful plea.
Hi Rob
Just read this thread for the first time and am appalled at your treatment by the police and wish you luck in getting some retribution.
As I have written before I have seen the clampers out and about last year but have not seen them recently.
This whole carry on at UCI/Landrover is quite disgusting, and has only happened since UCI took over the contract around Xmas time. I never used to see trucks waiting to tip when TNT had the contract all last year(apart from the occasional foreign truck)
I feel that UCI should take some of the responsibility for the situation as it their own incompetence that is causing this mess and now the clampers know there are easy bucks to be made they will be back.
Could you get your boss to speak to UCI to find out what they propose to do about the situation?
I wonder what would happen if queuing trucks parked up on Bickenhill Parkway (the road that leads into Starley Way) instead? This is a dual carriageway with yellow lines and is a public road. Trucks do park on the road when queuing at Chep just along the way.
I think that until something is sorted drivers should refuse to wait on Starley Way but then we all know how likely that will be.
All the best
Calv
To look at this problem from another perspective, what on earth is the local council up to? How long has this situation prevailed of having a private road as access to a large industrial site. How did Land Rover get planning consent? Why did the council not adopt the road at the time? Surely sensible answers will spring to mind, but we are addressing the bureaucratic nightmare. Will these questions be raised by your solicitor? Will this give another arrow to your bow?
Best of luck, you have all our support. 
“oddsodz”]the parking bans if i remember right only come in after 5.00pm until 6.00am?
Last year I was working for a Belgian company who did a lot of the UCI work to Land-Rover and Jaguar,we only used to unload during the day and whilst I have had to wait at DC2 for several hours usually it was a quick turn-round at DC1.
However,one morning after I’d unloaded I pulled out of Land-Rover onto the approach road to make some coffee whilst the office were sorting out where I should back-load.Within 5mins there was a security guy banging on my door telling me that parking wasn’t allowed and to move,I politely told him that I would be a few minutes until the coffee was made then I would be on my way.He said in a distinctly east european accent that unless I go straight away he would call in a clamping team,ok I said you do that!
So off he went,don’t know if they arrived or not as the coffee was ready and so I left.
As for Land-Rover being interested,I think not,all the storage and logistics is contracted out to UCI and then TNT before that.Land-Rover don’t want to know.
And Rob,I have every sympathy with you as I have been the victim of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and I ended up in court to receive 5 penalty points and £180 fine for an accident that I was never involved in.
In fact I wonder where the old adage has gone “Innocent until proven guilty” and “Beyond reasonable doubt” as the police had no evidence against me and said so in court.It was my word against a car driver,I was even told before going to court by the police and my lawyer that I would be found guilty because I am a lorry driver!!!
One of the main reasons I decided to leave the UK.
Get a solicitor and then DEMAND the file from the police with the details of the person making the complaint (he has slandered you), the police officer who took his statement, (they are a witness). Then produce your tacho as an indicator of the speed you were doing and take both the individual and his employers to the cleaners making sure that the press in both Birmingham and your home town get to here about it. Then take the local plod to task for wrongfull arrest they should have seen from your chart the speed alleged and actual came from totally different events.
These people are just lying or incompetent. I’ll leave you to figure out which applies to whome
Hi guys,
Back online & house move complete now… Just caught up with all the latest posts since last Sunday… With working nights and moving house I haven’t sought legal advice yet so no new news from this end yet. I’m also a bit put-off after reading an article in the Which? consumer association magazine about solicitors which was quite alarming so seeking a reputable good solicitor is proving to be a daunting task. Must do it though, can’t let this go.
I’m also now concerned about having gone “public” with the story - as such - as the cops in question are likely to turn round and tell me to “do one” as I’ve gone public; they’re unlikely to bother doing any investigating 
I haven’t had any response from T & D so I assume that they’re not going to run the story which is good as things stand at the moment but I’ll need to get in contact with CM.
Will keep you(s) posted.
this is one of the most frequent asked questions about clamping companies that says it all really
Q: How much will this service cost?
A: We do not charge the client as our fees are payable by the offending motorists.
Rob,
Have you approach either the haulier or your employers about them offering practical support over this. Even a consulatation with the bosses solicitor would give you some idea of where you stand. I think you will be very pleasantly surprised about just how strong a case you have here.
Alternatively, these people may be of some use, its right up their street.
www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/
All the best.
Rob, when you go to see a solicitor, go and see a number of them on the free appointment or fixed fee appointment.
Give them brief details and then interview them for the job, remember while you are paying for their time, they are your employee, you would interview any other employee, why not a solicitor.
You want one that will FIGHT your side, if need be, like a pit bull, a soppy one is no good to you.
It’s been pointed out to me that my “case” against the police will probably come to nothing as they’re entitled to hold you for 24hrs (maybe 48?) anyway, without charging you for anything.
A bit of investigation into the police law has revealed that the section 47 arrest is actually a public order offence although I’m not clear on the details (too much legal waffle) and section 102 which it was changed to is a road traffic offence. I have decided to write to Solihull North cop station and ask for the details of what I was arrested with, the transcript and a copy of the interview tape, plus seeing if I am entitled to the details of the clamping company from their statement.
Whilst that is in the pipeline, I will bell the solicitor that represented me on the night and run by him the change of arrest details and the overall level of “service” I received and get his realistic opinion of whether I will achieve anything by complaining of a unlawful arrest (obviously after finding out exactly what I was “charged” with as such) and also whether complaining about my treatment will do anything considering that they are entitled to hold me anyway.
Armed with that info, I will then have a better idea of which route to take; the likely one being to sue the clamping company for the aggravation and inconvenience caused in being arrested for basically no reason.
As the police have dismissed the case by choosing to take no further action then basically they’re saying I’m right which puts them on my side.
I’ve changed contracts for this coming week and am back on the UPS Haulfast contract so I’ll be away all week on tramping week from Shaw Cross at Ossett, so I won’t be able to update you til next Friday.
…Cheers.
Rob K:
It’s been pointed out to me that my “case” against the police will probably come to nothing as they’re entitled to hold you for 24hrs (maybe 48?) anyway, without charging you for anything.
…but only if the arrest was lawful and you are being investigated for that offence. From what you’ve said, the arrest was anything but lawful.
Rob ,sorry to read of your troubles,can you get any support from your firm?, situations like this you could ? be better to let them clamp your vehicle and then ring your boss and let him sort it?Sorry not much help but as for solicitors backhouse jones have featured in trade Mags i think Jonathan Lawton or Lawson,definitely transport specialists on www.backhouses.co.uk. hope some of this helps
regards derek N. Ireland
Rob K
I’ve just caught up with this thread and you have my sympathies for the hassle you are going through.
Although this is after the fact, these are the thoughts going through my head:
If you have witnesses to the fact that you were waiting and not parked (i.e. the drivers of the wagons in front and behind you) then the clampers don’t have a leg to stand on so you have access to the following points of law.
- by trying to fit a clamp to your vehicle the clamping crew were attempting to OBTAIN PROPERTY BY DECEPTION contrary to section 15 of the Theft Act 1968 (indictable offence subject to 10 years max) in that they were trying to get payment (money=property) for releasing the clamp whilst knowing that you were not liable to be clamped (therefore deception). This is supported by the fact that they did not attempt to clamp the vehicles in front of and behind you.
or - alternatively they were attempting to OBTAIN SERVICES BY DECEPTION contrary to section 1 of the Theft Act 1978 (indictable, 5 years), the service being release of the clamp.
- When they told the police that you had driven at them at speed and tried to run them over they were lying, also the information from their statement referring to your vehicle as being switched off and unoccupied was also a lie therefore they issued a FALSE STATEMENT probably best covered by section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911 (indictable)
Regarding the police the following points should be considered:
4. when you were having your heated discussion just prior to being arrested, were the police involved in the discussion. If they weren’t then their initial investigation was deficient as they did not question you about the incident (to get your side of the story) prior to arresting you. This is a good foundation for a wrongful arrest claim.
5. on arrival at the station you claim that the sergeant told the arresting officer that you could not be charged under s.47 so here’s a big quote:
"Charging of Prisoners.
- Acceptance of charge
As soon as possible after an arrest without warrant the facts of the case must be reported to the officer in charge of the police station for the time being. It is often the practice for the facts of the report to be recited in the presence and hearing of the accused. After consideration of the evidence available, the officer in charge has to make decision on one of three possible courses, viz.:
TO REFUSE THE CHARGES - If evidence is not considered sufficient to sustain the charge, an entry is to be made in the station record of the charge on which the arrest was made, and the grounds for its refusal. The prisoner must be released without delay with an explanation of the reason. (underline added for emphasis. JW)
TO DELAY THE CHARGE - If it appears to the officer in charge that the arrest was justified but that further enquiry is needed and cannot be completed forthwith the prisoner may be released on bail to appear at the police station at a specified time and date later, unless notified in the meantime in writing that his presence is no longer required. This procedure is often referred to as a ‘delayed charge’ or ‘deferred charge’ (Magistrates Court Act 1980, s43). See further on p. 129.
TO ACCEPT THE CHARGE - When the charge is accepted it must be correctly formulated, and contain a reference to the Act and section creating the offence." Baker & Wilkie’s Police Promotion Handbook vol.2 - Criminal Evidence and Procedure. 7th ed.
By refusing to accept the s.47 charge the sergeant should have released you immediately with an apology according to the procedure outlined above. As he didn’t, the question now is - not only were you wrongfully arrested, were you wrongfully detained aswell?
6. Why were you required to be barefoot in the cell? As you were still technically at work, whilst in the custody of the police they must assume responsibility for your health and safety pursuant to H&SAW 1974. Based on your description of the cell, this fact alone should validate a claim for unlawful detention.
In order to make the most of your solicitor, you should try to present him with options based on language he understands and give him clear guidance as to what you want. For example, saying
“I’m (insert own expletive here) off and I want money!”
is not going to be very effective whereas if you were to explain what happened and say something like
“I believe that the clampers were acting illegally (citing the above for reference) and I am seeking redress for loss of earnings and inconvenience and, furthermore, I believe I was badly treated by the police (ref: above) and I require an apology at least” is more likely to get the result you want.
On the subject of solicitors, try your employer’s as he would be more likely to persue the redress claim on the company’s behalf and include your case as well.
All of the above information is taken from reference material at least 10 years old. Although it should still be valid, get the solicitor to check whether it is still current, if not then he should be able to find the relevant sections of the relevant acts from this.
This post is written for your benefit (hopefully) and you do not need my permission to use a hard copy to help persue your claim (if you want to that is 
)
Best of luck
Jules
Hi folks
Thanks for all the replies and advice. I’ll reply back probably Monday as I believe I won’t be working.
It beggars belief that the Old Bill can stoop so low as to rush to help such low life scum as wheel clampers, yet an OAP suffering a break in has to wait several hours before anybody reponds to their plight.
Makes you wonder if the Old Bill, the so called gaurdians of the law, take some sort of commision from the wheel clampers, hence the high priority quick reponse time.
Bit of an update on this. If you recall, I was intending to seek legal advice on how to go about claiming compensation one way or another.
I saw two individual solicitors who “specialise” in such cases but the general overview is that don’t bother persuing anything to do with the cops because it won’t happen, you’ll lose and you’ll end up seriously out of pocket. Basically the cops have more legal backing that you can ever shake a stick at and will happily invent things that didn’t happen that you can’t prove is disprove to clear their own backs. Yes, write to the chief cheese and bleat at him about it but don’t expect anything back other than an apology and “we’re investigating it” which is the last you’ll hear.
As far as the clampers are concerned you can’t use a no-win-no-fee which is the usual way of things these days. The no-win-no-fee schemes are for simple things such as x supermarket just mopped floor, didn’t put out sign saying it was wet and you go and fall over and fracture your elbow or something. They think it might be a good case in that I might win it but they’re not sure so won’t take the case on on a no-win-no-fee thing. If I really want to go ahead with it (which they don’t advise as there are 3rd parties involved which is messy and time-consuming) then I would need to take out insurance (to the tune of several hundred quid at least) should I lose. There was a whole pile more ifs and buts to go with it all and to be honest I can’t be arsed with the time, effort and hassle involved in persuing it all, especially when the end result could go against me and that effort, hassle was for zip.
It really stinks that they can get away with it, also the treatment in the cop shop and cell but isn’t that typical of the way this country is run ? 
Makes me sick.
[btw, Jen B - please print, also T&D Dave something please print and anyone else in media circles, cheers].
(Sorry Rob 
, but I’ve edited that phrase to something a bit more acceptable - AndyM)
Rob, What a bummer, seems like the laws in this land are only for the illegal, members, sorry to hear bout this was hoping that you could see justice done for what happend to you but it seems thats not the way, bit of a bad run for you dont know what to say but hope it gets better for you soon.
Not sure if this is connected to Robs run-in, but I noticed last week that the clampers signs along Starley Way where Rob was almost clamped have all been removed so now there are no visible parking restrictions along the road.
not much good to Rob though now as he’s on the fridges but I thought you might like to know…
Calv
That’s interested me Calv, cheers. I still keep pondering whether to bother persuing it on not but working 6 days per week doesn’t help the situation in terms of free time to set some wheels in motion and secondly is it really worth the hassle
One naturally wants to get it all sorted out and get people nailed for blatantly taking the urine and getting away with this kind of [zb] but then a few days later when one has cooled down it all seems like a whole bunch of unneeded extra hassle. 