We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
COMPLAINTS ABOUT CLAMPING to Dublin City Council reveal that a number of people were clamped when using the Parking Tag app and others claim they were clamped before the 10-minute grace period was up.
In one case a woman was clamped while delivering goods to a charity shop.
Last month, TheJournal.ie revealed the most common areas and offences that Dublin City Council (DCC) receive clamping complaints about.
From May 2016 to May 2017, the council recorded 63 complaints about clamping on its appeals system. A number of them led to refunds or partial refunds.
We’ve looked at the recurring themes of these complaints. Namely, pay machines being out of service, tickets being turned upside down because of windy weather, and a few cases of clamps not being put on properly. We’ve also examined cases of elderly people who were clamped.
Today we’re looking at cases involving issues with the Parking Tag app, people who say they weren’t given the 10 minutes grace period they expected before being clamped and a case of a woman who was clamped when giving goods to charity.
Tick tock
In one case a mother described how she was clamped while dropping her baby to crèche but she said she was not out of the car for 10 minutes. She said she signed her baby in at 8.45 am on the morning in question and her car was clamped at 8.47am.
She had proof of signing in her baby at the said time and records of making a call to the clampers at 8.49 am. She said the clampers told her she was parked there from 8.36am but she denied this, saying she was in traffic at that time. A note on the page read, “refund”.
In another case a student described how he knew he was running late but was conscious that he had a 10-minute period of grace to get back to his car.
His ticket expired at 2.45pm and he arrived back at 2.55pm just as the clampers were putting on the clamp. He said he pleaded with them not to clamp the car, pointing out that he had returned within the 10 minutes.
Despite my pleas the clamping officials ignored me and hurriedly put the clamp on my car.
Record show the clamp was put on at 2.56pm. A note on the complaint read, “refund”.
Another complainant described how he discovered he was clamped on his way back from the machine where he paid for parking.
At the time the car was being clamped I went looking for change, went to a machine and paid for parking and returned to the car where I found a gentleman had just clamped my car.
“I explained to him that I went looking for change but he explained to me that he had already activated the clamp and that it could only be released upon payment and then I should appeal the fine.”
A note on the complaint said, “refund with caution”.
App difficulties
In two cases, the complainants claimed that they were clamped because the Parking Tag mobile app allowed them to pay for parking in an area that became a clearway.
In the first case, the driver was parked on a clearway but argued that the fault lies with the app and not them because if they were paying with a machine, it would not have accepted money.
The basis of my appeal is that the Parking Tag app should not have accepted payment for the location in question.
The complainant claimed that the GPS on the app correctly located the vehicle and should recognise the times that the street is a clearway.
I am puzzled why there is a different treatment for those that use the parking meter and those that use the app.
The second complaint was from a driver who paid for parking with the Parking Tag app up until 4.30pm, not realising the area became a clearway after 4pm.
Again the complainant argued that the app should not allow users to pay for parking on a clearway.
My issue is by using the app, it put me in the position of unknowingly leaving my vehicle parked on a clearway after 4pm.
The driver also notes that: “At no point did the Parking Tag app highlight that there may be different restrictions for different areas of the same street”.
The driver added that they adhered to the rules under which the Parking Tag app operates, as they were advised.
“I followed the notification given by Parking Tag that my time limit was expiring and I duly paid for an additional half an hour.”
The notes on both of these complaints read “declined”.
A spokesperson for the Parking Tag app said, “It is the customer’s responsibility to always check local signage before they leave their vehicle. The Parking Tag app prompts customers to do this each time it is used.”
In another case an app user was clamped as they were driving a different car than usual and when they paid for parking using the app, it was paid for the car they usually drive.
The driver said:
The app chooses your default reg number and does not prompt you to make sure you are using the correct reg.
The complainant added that “steps should be taken to rectify this”. A note on this complaint read, “50% refund with caution, gesture of goodwill”.
No good deed goes unpunished
In one case a complainant described how they were clamped while giving bags of goods to a charity shop.
The person admits that they parked in a loading bay but added that they were unloading their car and there was nowhere else suitable to park.
I was unloading my car with goods going to a charity shop! Where is one meant to park when unloading in this area? There is a car park across the road at Tesco but the boxes were heavy and there were many.
They also said that people should not be clamped for doing a good deed and there should be communication between the council, local councillors and the charity shop in question.
Despite feeling that they should be “fully reimbursed”, a note on the complaint read, “50% refund with caution, gesture of goodwill”.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Why are comments being disabled on the majority of articles?
@DK: Why? Why is it in any way important whether an asylum seeker is single???
@Aidy McBride: It’s a shame, as I, like most people I would imagine, only come here for the comments. The actual news delivery isn’t great so if there’s no comments I can’t see The Journal lasting long.
@sean o’dhubhghaill: single as in coming on their own here and not as part of a family unit but you new that didn’t you? Just trying to deflect for some reason. Are these men going to want sexual relationships with women here? How many women in Ireland are going to want sexual relationships with asylum seekers, let’s be honest? Do you not think this might lead to issues down the road if we get 50k male asylum seekers every year and about 5k of women? Need to have some adult conversations in this country but too many like to try their best avoid it with deflection like yours and throwing around the racist word.
@DK: Jeez! How sexist can a comment get! You don’t seem tobe worried at all about the 5k women wanting ‘sexual relations’ with good Irish men!
@sean o’dhubhghaill: What’s sexist in my comment. Well those women will have a load of male asylum seekers to choose from if they so wish, not so much choice for the males.
@The next small thing: You’re on to something.
@Aidy McBride: Because of your incessant incendiary remarks.
@The next small thing: Either government or some such like intervention to stifle free speech seen as dangerous, and/or the emerging left liberal stance as seen in the previous iteration of Twitter. If one has to stifle free speech and a possible alternative viewpoint, one doubts ones own point of view.
@Aidy McBride: I guess the Journal doesn’t like free speech, however constructive. ‘The shape of things to come’.
@DK: men are being demonised and portrayed like animals! And that seems to be ok… WOW!! In the era of pc and being easily offended, it seems to be open season when it comes to passing remark on men.
Well what we have learned is that the middle are still being squeezed lifeless.
Voting in chancers like Haughey+Bertie was always going to end in tears. Bertie bought 2007 GE and people voted him in despite knowing about his ‘dig outs’. We as voters own the crash too.
Same with Johnson, Trump, Bolsonara.
@James Gorman: FF and Jack Lynch ‘bought’ the 1977 election too, and we, as a nation, are STILL suffering from and struggling with the mad decision to abolish local rates.
I know loads of people in Brand new houses that don’t and never have worked..They seem to squeeze in a feed of pints every day though.
@Redseat92: That’s our politicians for you. Mind you, those are subsidised pints.
@Fiona Fitzgerald: Most underrated comment!
Still paying for it via austerity taxes, (property tax an usc)and those born during the time the banks needed us to give them a loan are about to join the workforce and will also be paying for that bailout.
Also it was only around 2016/17 when markets normalised, not 2013. And we still await taxes normalising. So we are essentially living in those times.
Great nuanced well researched article.
More of this please
@Niamh Hayes: Haha.
My heart bleeds for the squeezed middle and working poor I ALMOST can’t blame them when they turn septic and declare themselves a single parent and go on the housing list.
How can they ever afford a house when they have to compete with councils buying units to give away to welfare tourists.
have your say