Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Discuss all of your private conveyance issues here. DVLA, Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs), MOT, Tax, Insurance, Wheelclampers and any other related topics.

Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby Sibs » Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:48 pm

I have been clamped twice now by this company "Newlyn" , the first time they clamped me was on the 23/12. This was the day after i sent my notice of intent and claim of rights to the DVLA reclaiming ownership of my car. They clamped it the day after and i phoned them, i did not enter into contract with them and i simply told them i would like to inform them that they have tresspassed on my private property in putting that clamp on my car. If it is not removed my lawyer will be in touch, they removed the clamp within the day !!! Today , 4/1/10 they have returned and clamped my car again.

I phoned them and mentioned them tress passing the first time, I asked them to provide me with proof i entered into contract with them."which they can not" I asked them to provide me with proof that i owe them anything. Then I told them they are a 3rd party interloper and they should stay out of my commerical affairs. I have not entered into contract with you and i do not wish too.

They then posted a unsigned letter through my post box stating that if i do not pay within 6 days they will take my car.

I phoned them back, maybe i shouldnt have but I was pissed at this time and told him. Before you make your next move with regards to my automobile you should contact DVLA because DVLA no longer owns my car. No road traffic Act applys to my car because i do not consent.

Thats the remix, does anyone here have any suggestions as to what my next step should be in this matter ??

Thank you for your help in advance for any help offered.... :grin:
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby ElScampio » Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:30 pm

Can you please define: "outside my private property"

Where was your car? Was it on your drive?

If it was on my drive, personally I would say see you in 6 days and by the way my dogs will be in my front garden, trespass and you will be forcibly removed from my property.

Have you sent the company a Withdrawal of Implied Right of Access?? If not I would, they definitely should get the message.
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 3:11 am

Re: Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby Sibs » Fri Jan 15, 2010 4:46 pm

Oh I would love to hear more about that one... :8-):

When I say my private property, I mean it is out side in my back garden in my private parking bay.. There is electic gates preventing people who are not invited getting in.. I believe the second time he came around someone opened the gate for him... What do you think ??!!

Thank you so much for the help ElScampio....
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby jonboy » Fri Jan 15, 2010 9:35 pm

Just grind the clamp off and leave the car at a friends or neighbours. Alternatively you can use bolt-cutters.
We cut one off Earlier this year and never heard anything.

"Reason is the life of the law; nay, the common law itself is nothing else but reason. The law which is perfection of reason" Sir Edward Coke 1552-1634.


It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness.
User avatar
Posts: 1375
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: Albion

Re: Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby apsert » Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:09 pm

From my understanding, I see that a corporation has come along and desired to use your property,naming the "wheel".
I am happy to allow any corporation to use my wheel in advance of notice.
PROVIDING they can show a contract? If no contract exists, then i get to fulfill the terms.
after all wheres the consideration

So if you want to use my car or a part of it "thats fine" (get it that a fine?)Here is my fee for use of my Wheel £3000 per hour.
Well unless someone wants to prove in a court of law that the car IS NOT YOURS meaning you are not the legal owner which i feel is unlikely
given the mount of interest DVLA has on this topic alone and would not want a precedence being set!

Send them a copy of your terms and conditions-
One of the clause that can be used is as follows= If the fee of £3000 for each hour is NOT settled within 30 days
of agreement the clamp will be removed and our contract will be in void due to non compliance fiduciary duties breached

So there is now no contract ONLY YOURS YOU CREATED AND SENT THEM A COPY OF. But you are still restricted due to a clamp.
You have every right to CUT IT OFF! It was in your agreement remember and they acquiesced to this due to there silence?
Consent makes the law.
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 2:11 pm

Re: Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby Sibs » Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:27 pm

I love that one apsert !!

They seem to want to disregard all my letters and set all the rules... Today, is the last day DVLA got to rebutt my claim of rights and understanding, I didnt hear anything from them so i'm very interested to see how long this clamp is going to stay on my car... If its not removed by the end of this week I will cut it off.. I sent them a letter the other day, even with their legal BS, they still dont have a leg to stand on and the courts just stand by and let them do this....

They are really taking libertys, I want to hear from someone that has recieved money with their FEE SCHEDULE !! , dose anyone know anyone that has got money from them for all the libertys ??
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby emmanualgoldstein » Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:58 am

Can you pick the lock, replace the lock and resell it as a fully working wheel clamp. More chance of recouping your losses here than through the "just is" system in my limited experience.
Posts: 608
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby Sibs » Sat Jan 23, 2010 4:15 pm

so this is where we are so far..... I sent them this...

Dear Sirs

I am informing you that on 30th September 2009 (issued by hand in person to your agent ------------ of Jacobs Bailiffs, on -- October 2009) I issued you with a Notice that the implied right of access to ADDRESS had been removed. This Notice was clearly displayed on the automobile ---------. The notice also stated...

Please also take notice that the land known as England is a common law jurisdiction and any transgression of this notice will be dealt with according to common law...

Despite this your agent Richard Allen, with advice from his peers/superiors by way of mobile phone, STILL clamped the automobile disregarding my clear instructions that I did not consent to be in contract, refused to be in contract & was not in contract, he was now committing an unlawful act. In addition by clamping the automobile and demanding monies to release it is in fact a violation of the Bill of Rights, the Magna Carta & the Human Rights Act.

I am surprised to find that --------------- Parking Services, --------Bailiffs, or its agents, appear to be attempting to extort money in an unlawful manner. Please find enclosed an extract of the Bill of Rights Act 1689, enacted and formally entered into Statute following the Declaration of Rights 1689. I draw your attention to the section that I have highlighted:

"That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void".

This states that a conviction is necessary before a fine or forfeit can be imposed. As you will be aware, the Bill of Rights is a "constitutional statue" and may not be repealed impliedly. As stated in the "Metric Martyrs" Judgment in the Divisional Court (18th February 2002) by Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Crane (I will paraphrase, but have included a copy of the judgment's relevant sections 62 and 63):

62."We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were 'ordinary' statutes and 'constitutional statutes.' The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights.

Examples are the ... Bill of Rights 1689 ... 63. Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not…"

I am not aware that the Road Traffic Act 1991 makes express reference to repealing the Bill of Rights Act 1689. Please state which section, sub-section or any amendment says that it allows you to circumvent the Bill of Rights Act 1689.

Therefore, it would appear that Lambeth Parking Services, Jacobs Bailiffs and its agents have no lawful authority to demand money for an alleged infringement that has not been dealt with by a Court of Law, i.e. a Jury. If you wish to proceed against me, please refer the matter to a Court of Law in an orderly fashion. Otherwise, the forfeit demanded of me is illegal and void.

Please also confirm to me in writing that you have advised the relevant officers of the Council and its agents that they are acting illegally by attempting to claim powers which are forbidden to them, and that all issuing of penalties is being done only after conviction by a Court of Law.

In addition to the provisions of the Declaration and Bill of Rights, and in support of my own assertion that this process is not constituted in accordance with our laws, I must ask you to recognise the Great Charter of Our Liberties that is now incorporated into Statute Law under the name of the Magna Carta. I draw your particular attention to the provisions made at Articles 39 & 40 of the Statute, which states as follows:-

39. No free man shall be arrested, or imprisoned, or deprived of his property, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any way destroyed, nor shall we go against him or send against him, unless by legal judgement of his peers, or by the law of the land.

40. To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.

I do not believe that ------------ Parking Services, ----------- Bailiff & their agents are my peers, and they are certainly not the law of the land. I believe that HM Court Service is the law of the land. There can be no doubt that I am a free man and that Articles 39 & 40 apply to me. It is clear & very well recorded that the entire purpose of Magna Carta was to reduce the power of the king and not to increase this power and in consequence of the very obvious, it is clear that the option of trial by the judgment of my peers or by the law of the land is an option that is secured to me in all circumstances such as this, and not an option that may be exercised by or at the behest of the Crown, or by any authority that claims to hold an authority under the Crown. E.g. The Local Authority Corporation ----------- Parking Services with which I find myself in dispute.

In addition to the provisions of the Declaration and Bill of Rights, and the Magna Carta. I would like to draw your attention to the Human Rights Act 1998, and in particular to Article 6 (Right To A Fair Trail), and the provisions made in paragraph 1:

1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.

It is clear that the demands you are making seem unlawful and unclear as such I am issuing you with a Notice of Discharge of Outstanding Demand, Request for Clarification & the IMMEDIATE Release of Automobile -------------

Please read the following notice thoroughly and carefully before responding. It is a notice. It informs you. It means what it says.

The reason why you need to read carefully is simple. I am offering conditional agreement. This removes controversy, and means that you no longer have any ultimate recourse to a court of law in this matter, because there is no controversy upon which it could adjudicate. You always have the option of dragging these conditions into a court of law only to be told that they are, indeed, perfectly lawful. That is, of course, always your prerogative should you decide to waste your time.

For this reason it is important that you consider and respond to the offer in substance. The 'nearest official form' will not suffice, and consequently is likely to be ignored by myself without any dishonour on my part.

On the other hand there is a time-limit on the agreement being offered. It is reasonable, and if it runs out then you and all associated parties are in default, removing any and all lawful excuse on your part for proceeding in this matter.

For these reasons it is recommended that you carefully consider this notice and respond in substance, which means actually addressing the points raised herein.

You have apparently made demands upon me.

I do not understand those apparent demands and therefore cannot lawfully fulfil them. I seek clarification of your document so that I may act according to the law and maintain my entire body of inalienable Natural Rights.

Failure to accept this offer to clarify and to do so completely and in good faith within 7 (seven) days of the above date will be deemed by all parties to mean you and your principal or other parties abandon all demands upon me.

I conditionally accept your offer to agree that I am legal fiction 'person' your full name here and in capitals’ and that I must furnish you with details for consideration for forfeiture rendered by your company, upon proof of claim of all of the following:

1. Upon proof of claim that I am a person, and not a human being.

2. Upon proof of claim that you know what a 'person' actually is, in legal terms.

3. Upon proof of claim that you know the difference between a 'human being' and a 'person', legally speaking.

4. Upon proof of claim that you know the difference between 'legal' and a 'lawful'.

5. Upon proof of claim that I am legal fiction 'person' full name here in capitals again, being the entity to which your paperwork was addressed, and Cee: of Mr family, as commonly called.

6. Upon proof of claim that the charge was the result of a lawful investigation unmarred by prejudice.

7. Upon proof of claim that I am a member of the society whose statutes and subsisting regulations you are enforcing.

8. Upon proof of claim that I showed you some sort of identification.

9 Upon proof of claim that there is a nameable society that I belong to and that the laws covered within any alleged transgressions state that they apply to me within that named society.

10. Upon proof of claim that you provide a BILL for the sum demanded. As it is not possible to pay solely on presentation of either statement or notice. (For your information a BILL is an unconditional ORDER in writing, addressed by one person to another, signed by the person giving it, requiring the person to whom it is addressed to pay, on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time, a sum certain in money to or to the order of a specified person or bearer. (See Bills of Exchange Act)

11. Until the above proof of claims are received that you action the Immediate release/removal of the clamp from automobile ------------- or the unlawful clamp will be deemed as an obstruction & violating my freedom as granted under the Great Charter of Our Liberties that is now incorporated into Statute Law under the name of the Magna Carta Articles 39 & 40 & liable for a fee of £500, excluding fees for labour & costs that may relate to the liberation of the automobile ---------------.

12. Reimbursement for all travel costs whilst automobile ------------- is unlawfully clamped thus delaying me my rights to travel freely.

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity,

Cee: of the Mr family
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, i.e. all Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved
Please address all future correspondence in the matter to a direct Human Self, namely Cee name of the Mr family, as commonly called.

They have now sent me a letter saying....

thank you for your resent letter and contents of which have been noted.

we would advice the vehicle has been clamped and impounded under the authority of the issued county court warrant of execution and upon instruction of our client. The vehicle will not be released until the balance above is paid in full. If you continue to evade the issue and payment is not forthcoming the vehicle will be sold at public auction and the proceeds of the sale will be allocated to your outstanding debt including any further fees applied.

We were passed this file in october 2009 and despite multiple letters and visits being made you failed to contact us to discuss the matter or make paymentnn. Therefore our bailiff is correct in enforcing the ourtstanding debt and has acted correctly under the authority granted by the county court. Every opportunity was given to you to make payment at an earlier stage in order to prevent further actioni by our bailiff

please contact our office immediately to discuss the current status of your file and arrange payment as the vehicle is due to be sold at auctioni within the next 7 working days

I hope this clarifies matters but should you require further information please write to the ddress provided above...

They have just disregarded everything mentioned in the earlier letter....

Has anyone got any ideas... :puzz: :grr: :8-):
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Unlawfully clamped my car outside my private property

Postby Dipsy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:47 am

Mmm interesting. So your problem is the court has ordered this action it has nothing to do with the DVLA or clamper company at this point. Reason being the court was convinced at the time of judgment they had all the legal (and lawful as you presented no objection in time) justification to proceed. So your NOTICE's to DVLA was too late the horse had already bolted. I don't know the time scales involved but you should have had notice from the court they intended to take action. That was your opportunity to provide remedy. Now the court has instructed the bailiff to clamp your car the court may not have all the facts and certainly no paper trail.

The bailiff has right of entry if causing no damage. Alike entry to a property can be sought to seize goods by open window or insecure door. If someone let them in to your rear yard gate to access your automobile they have gained legal access. If you cut the clamp off you will have to answer to the court. I'm pretty damn sure you will be arrested for criminal damage. So you have to petition the court and ask them to consider your dilemma. You can try and prove they have no jurisdiction or no right of entry or its not a car but automobile or your the keeper and not the owner thus not responsible to pay for fines and clamps etc etc.

If you watch Rob Menard he basically says if you want to be a FREE traveler-on-the-land then you need bonds and liens in place BEFORE any action so that you have lawful remedy on someones head(s).

So write to the court and put your argument across.
Posts: 187
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:58 pm

Return to Motoring issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests