Comments on: CoH: Sue Us For Clamping, We Will Counterclaim

By: mj

mj — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 12:50:06 +0000

need to know what is lawful and what is ordinance. what is legal and what is juris prudence? until we know exactly what LAW means we are all in limbo! a policy is not law, an ordinance is not law, and if a proceedure is to become law it must be gazetted also public have a right to respond, object or agree… no one person or entity can decide law! some things are necessary but not expedient! we are not properly informed so sometimes we as people make decisions based on popularity and not focus on reality..

By: mj

mj — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 12:43:37 +0000

+when you licence your car after paying insurance it includes a tax that allows you to operate on the roads. why are we being charged for parking is my beef??!~!~!! never happened years ago it is enough parking space in hamilton and also we pay far too much to licence insure and upgrade our vehicles we do not need to be stressed anymore with extra payments some people really just don’t get it penalize penalize is the only word they know! it is not necessary to have people slapping parking tickets on cars either, that is another guilty before innocent tactic that will not work, what offence has car committed…there can be parking attendents to direct people to available parking areas, it does not have to be penal!

By: memory lo$$

memory lo$$ — Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:15:09 +0000

Correct!

By: memory lo$$

memory lo$$ — Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:11:25 +0000

and no “no trespassing signs” which we know is required to get rid of ppl legally.

By: Yea right !

Yea right ! — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 20:51:34 +0000

If that is the case then they are not geared to run a parking lot !! What does that say about everything else they do? Bunch of nincomepoops !!!!!

By: Christopher James

Christopher James — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 20:18:17 +0000

But in order to achieve this, the computer geeks at Government might have to do a bit of work. It is shameful that this has still not been achieved.

By: hmmm

hmmm — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 18:50:02 +0000

Completely agree with this. If you can’t , then your car should be impounded too.

By: Silence Do Good

Silence Do Good — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:54:01 +0000

In May 2015 the Ratepayers and Residence will get to vote for a new City Council. Once the City Council is elected I hope they fire the legal firm that is advising them and any City Manager that is on board with being so disrespectful to the public that financially support you.

Businesses make money by selling goods and services to the public who patron Hamilton. Business use those revenues earned to pay municipal taxes. Why is the CoH trying so hard to disenfranchise the public from visiting businesses in Hamilton?

If you want to control parking at your lots, get the fare price for time spent and stop abuse put in ticketed gates that require individuals to pay before they can leave. Then it does not matter if they park there 1 hour and go 10 minutes over or park there for a month you will get the revenue. Clamping you have to pay individuals to ride around in a van and think of the message it is sending when you are punitive to the person who is a few minutes over.

By: watchfuleyes

watchfuleyes — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:13:13 +0000

Let’s boycott the City Hall parking lot people

By: watchfuleyes

watchfuleyes — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:10:27 +0000

COH did something illegal by clamping cars and now they are threatening us if we do take action against them?? The nerve!!! Do they own the site of the parking lot or do we the public own it?

By: Puma

Puma — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:46:27 +0000

Define your land coh……pubilc access has certain inaliable legal criteria….public access common area is by definition public…

By: Jadon

Jadon — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:31:28 +0000

We “the people “pay their wages. The close the parking lots the businesses in town will suffer and eventually wither away. Go ahead close them. Only hurting yourself. Bunch of selfish ********!

By: Raymond Ray

Raymond Ray — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:00:10 +0000

Totally agree! “Who are your legal advisers? I’m not a Lawyer or nor do I profess to understand the workings of the Law but this counter sue threat is logically wrong. Also threatening the public of more financial loss and thereby dissuading folks to equitable recourse seems highly unfair.
Please can one of the large law firms do some pro bono work om this, the people seem to have been threatened? Their freedoms have been threatened, (in my humble and naive opinion of course. What do I know )

By: Jadon

Jadon — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:59:05 +0000

Lol they have clamped my car 3 times. I have broke every single clamp off and left it in the parking lot. They don’t want to give out tickets because then the government gets the monies paid for a ticket. If they clamp it you have to pay COH. Just break it off with a few swift kicks lol !

By: Agree

Agree — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:00:40 +0000

If everyone paid their unpaid parking tickets then there would be plenty to go around!

By: Agree

Agree — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:58:41 +0000

When you licence your car each year, you should have to pay off your outstanding tickets before being able to do so. Would bring in a lot of revenue I’m sure!!

By: Inquiring minds

Inquiring minds — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:50:35 +0000

The facts are that the land in question is owned by the corporation. It is not public land and not owned by the crown .
The corporation uses the land to generate revenue (parking fees) otherwise it gets revenue from municipal rates . The more it earns in parking the less it needs to get from rates. So if the parking cannot be enforced ( in 2007 they were losing$300k a year) then close them and find another revenue stream or turn them into parkland and raise the rates , less hassle .
Clearly most commenters seem to think they have a right to park on other peoples land for free or as long as they feel like without any penalty so they can use the other private car parks and see how that works for them..

By: Truth be Told

Truth be Told — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:27:07 +0000

Ahhh WHAT! eh?

By: Truth be Told

Truth be Told — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:21:51 +0000

The CoH is run by unqualified personal from the top to bottom in City Hall! This latest notion is prof positive of complete and absolute stupidity of G.O.! Do City Hall a solid favour and get out!

By: Know it All

Know it All — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 06:16:15 +0000

Clamp my car and I won’t bother with a lawsuit….file criminal charges for wilful damage, entrapment, kidnapping and bribery. Have a good day.

By: Sad Bermudians

Sad Bermudians — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 05:11:58 +0000

That’s crazy when they’ve been clamping for years now?

By: rene

rene — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 04:36:41 +0000

I believe the corporation doesn’t own the land it belongs to the queen and her citizens. Her subjects can use queen land subject to the corporation s control. Hard to imagine how the corporation could allow trespassing in the absence of proper notice that no trespassing was allowed. Thats if the corporation could actually put up a no trespassing sign in the first place. The corporation only has a fiduciary contract with Hamilton not permission to block access to the queens citizens.

By: Casi

Casi — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 03:46:04 +0000

The CoH not only made a foul of themselves, but they also make this island look pathetic to the real world. Our newspapers are read in many countries. How can we allow this unprofessional behavior?

By: Inquiring minds

Inquiring minds — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 03:03:28 +0000

Clearly another comment without any knowledge. The ordinance discussion is moot if you read the judgement” the government invalidated all ordinances without certain specific parameters. Even if it was published by CoH ift would have been invalidated by the amendment act2013.
As to the comment the secretary in 2007 is not the same as the one today so not sure how you sanction someone today for someone else’s failure.
It is a mess that needs sorting but most of the comments are non sensical and not helpful. Maybe CoH should just close their car parks until the issue is fixed and they can enforce non payments and timed out patrons. Let’s see where the nasty comments get you then eh?

By: edwin

edwin — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 02:50:05 +0000

Hell No.

By: Build a Better Bermuda

Build a Better Bermuda — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 02:34:47 +0000

The fact of the matter is, any action in the courts going forward to recoup, will simply cost everyone… Well everyone except the layers. The courts have ruled that clamping by CoH is illegal, so going forward they can no longer practice it, any suits against the CoH to recoup past fines means the legal battling is going to cost the CoH… And where do they get their money… Taxpayers, so they are are the ones who lose out. Until the CoH sort this out legislatively, any attempt to go to the courts further with this will just make us all losers.

By: ole Onion

ole Onion — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 02:33:34 +0000

We should just boycott them !!!

By: ole Onion

ole Onion — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 02:26:40 +0000

I’ve been clamped before ! Didn’t like the consequences for going over the time limit !
How do they arrive at such a figure when you only pay 2$ for an hour???? This left a very foul taste I refuse to use their facilities that require payments ! I’m waiting for someone to sue them for the dumb idea to put red bricks which are uneven on a side walk ! Unsafe !!! Whose dumb idea was that ooops did I say dumb ? You can tell when pen pushers make practical decisions ! Doesn’t add up !

By: Anon Omus

Anon Omus — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 01:55:52 +0000

You can’t take someone to court for trespassing if the individual is not made aware that they are trespassing. This can be done through registered letter or signage. CoH doesn’t have a leg to stand on! What a joke!

By: Hmmm

Hmmm — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 01:15:30 +0000

Why aren’t that made up peoples group marching on the COH. Slilence is all we here.

By: Hmmm

Hmmm — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 01:10:14 +0000

By clamping them, you are forcing them to remain as trespassers. You are in effect welcoming trespassing by forcing them to stay there.

If you invited them to park there how can they be trespassers. They oustayed their welcome yes and can be ticketed at that time. But to sue them for trespassing don’t make sense. There was no pre warning of tresspassing or trespassing penalties. How can you turn around and trick people . That would be disgusting and probably not legally sound.

Think perhaps you need to take another look at that.

Who are your legal advisers….i am not a lawyer or nor do I profess to understand the workings of the law….but this counter sue threat is logically wrong. Also threatening the public of more financial loss and thereby dusuading folks to equitable recouse seems highly unfair.

Please can one of the large law firms do some pro bono work om this….the people sseem to have been threatened. Their freedoms have been threatened, in my humble and naive opinion of course. What do I know.?

By: Stuntman

Stuntman — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 01:04:05 +0000

Technical officers at CoH are to blame for this mess – especially the Secretary. He is ultimately responsible for the ordinance that was improperly advertised and thus rendered invalid. Why is he not sanctioned? Another example of senior civil servants above scrutiny for poor performance.

By: Rick Olson

Rick Olson — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:57:46 +0000

The CoH sued be sued by city taxpayers for wasting our money on the Black Mayors conference.

By: in the news

in the news — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:46:18 +0000

Next it will be clamp my car, clamp your ankle…. 100 dollars to unclamp your ankle… what next

By: memorylo$$

memorylo$$ — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:35:25 +0000

Perhaps we should start talking boycott of COH shopping. St g and dockyard would love to stock up for Xmas for you. Just give them a few days to truck the merchandise out of town.
Sorry to be rude,but these ………

By: Cardine Alice

Cardine Alice — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:32:57 +0000

They need better legal advice. (Their advice and case so far has been flawed.)

A counterclaim would be thrown out. They and the opportunity to proceed on that motion at the time but chose to illegally clamp. No court will allow them to conveniently try that on. If legal costs are awarded it would be against them…again.

And even if there was trespass. What of the damages – a few dollars, assuming they could prove how long the overpark was. Counterbalanced by their illegal act. They’d still be obliged to pay the funds back, then waste legal fees in counterclaiming. I’d counter sue them for damages incurred by me in the process.

No self respecting court would countenance their bully boy tactics. It was extortion, now it’s intimidation…

By: Look

Look — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:22:14 +0000

I understand your point and I do not condone the CoH’s albeit illegal actions. However, I also know of some people that have run up about 200 parking/speeding tickets and not paid them. Police do not follow up or enforce the fact that certain people have blatant disregard for the law. I am simply saying that some people need to follow the law and legally park. Laws are formed to ensure the smooth operation of a society. The law is the law no matter if you are an elected body or a regular member of society.

By: Darwin's Child

Darwin's Child — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:14:55 +0000

It’s not trespassing if you have a licence (legal term meaning permission of the owner basically) to park there (ie paid the fee). As soon as that licence expires you can be said to be there without permission and therefore trespassing.

It sounds good in theory but not sure how it would hold up in court.

By: MB

MB — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:03:50 +0000

The statement is nonsensical- on one hand they speak of present parking issues and then suddenly they are talking about about well if you parked and got clamped and sue … … Troubling that our city is this CoH’s hands, and I am beginning to wonder about Fahy if he continues to allow this mockery … and poor management

By: Lebron

Lebron — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 23:28:40 +0000

Just call the police if they clamp you. COH will soon get bored of that.

By: Watcher55

Watcher55 — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 22:27:19 +0000

This statement is typical of the Corporations can’t touch us attitude, these people are completely incapable of running a very small city they don’t engineer anything and it seems like Hamiltons a big experiment and they are learning as they go. This bully boy attitude has to be stamped out!

By: Well...

Well... — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 22:20:34 +0000

Exactly, I can see the CofH getting in very hot water with this one… They still have no legal right to clamp cars…and if a car is damaged in the process both the CofH and the security company as well as possibly the gard personally could be liable.

By: Stunned

Stunned — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 22:04:54 +0000

the merchants of Hamilton need to rise up against this foolishness. the COH is deterring would-be shoppers. I am one of them. COH is bad for business, PERIOD.

By: Cardine Alice

Cardine Alice — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 22:04:26 +0000

No- they can fine you. But it is illegal to clamp.

By: Cardine Alice

Cardine Alice — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 22:02:24 +0000

No- they can fine you. But it is illegal to clamp.

By: Time Shall Tell

Time Shall Tell — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:46:52 +0000

Any counter claim they may file for will be thrown out right away on the fact that their initial act of clamping the vehicle has already deemed illegal. Only ground they can stand on is for a parking ticket but that falls under the traffic warden so….

By: $99.00 dollars per night

$99.00 dollars per night — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:24:35 +0000

Everyone catch the bus and ferry service and ride their bikes for 3 weeks and see how much hurt they will feel, I’m in for that. Then they can start laying these fools off. See how much pocket hurt they’ll feel than

By: bermyluv

bermyluv — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:16:46 +0000

I say class action!!!

By: Common Sense

Common Sense — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:12:50 +0000

My understanding is that the Chief Justice ruled the Ordinance passed by the Coporation giving them authority to clamp vehicles was not published in the Official Government Gazette as it should have been. Surely the common sense solution to this issue is for the Corporation to pass the Ordinance and have it published in the Official Government Gazette. Is that too complicated?

By: Come Correct

Come Correct — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:12:25 +0000

Yes, and also if someone trespasses on your property you have to send them a registered letter before you can do anything about it. Why would it be different for them?