Clamping on private land is a criminal offence

Bailiffs clamping on private land is a criminal offence.

It is the practice of police forces to train their officers to say bailiffs recovering a debt, are in a class above the law if they are reported for clamping vehicles on private land.

Regulation 18 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 provides for vehicles to be clamped for 2 hours if it is found on a highway. Exclusions include the vehicle being used, a child or vulnerable person in the vehicle. See regulation 10 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013

Regulation 16 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 provides for clamping of vehicles on private land only if the vehicle is not causing an obstruction or hindering access to a building, and a notice has been affixed.

Clamping vehicles on public roads is illegal under Regulation 17(3) of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 when the driver (not necessarily the owner) has not received a statutory Notice of Enforcement, or the vehicle does not belong to the debtor. Paragraph 10 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007

Clamping of motor vehicles on private land that is not the debtors land is a criminal offence Section 54 of Chapter 2 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

A person commits an offence who, without lawful authority—

(a)immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or

(b)moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means,

In 2011, a company operating as a trade association representing bailiff companies at Parliament attempted to last minute amendment to the law to exclude bailiffs, but Parliament rejected the proposal.

Source Parliamentary document

And this is the actual legislation as it is on the statute book.

The trade association sought to create a class of exempt persons from committing an offence of clamping on private land. It asked Parliament to amend Paragraph 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 by adding the following:

54 (7) In this section ‘lawful authority’ includes a warrant or order issued from or authorised by a magistrates’ court, a county court or the High Court for the seizure of goods.

Parliament expressed its intention that bailiffs executing warrants continue to commit an offence by rejecting the proposal to add the above into Section 54.

If your vehicle is on your own driveway. Just move it to someone else's.

Bailiffs cannot remove goods situated on land that is not the debtors address. They can only take control of goods or vehicles found on a highway or on the debtors land. They cannot interfere with goods if they are situated on somebody else's property or land.

Huntress Search Ltd v Canapeum Ltd on appeal [2010] EWHC 1270 (QB)

Mr Justice Eady. Paragraph 37 of his judgment.

Finally, I return to the question of whether or not the address appearing on the writ confined the enforcement officer's authority to carry out enforcement at Unit 8. Should it be treated as a direction to execute there and only there? There is little direct authority to assist on this point. Traditionally, the writ of fi fa has been treated as authorising the high sheriff (now the enforcement officer) to execute in respect of any goods belonging to the debtor within his or her bailiwick or district. It would be absurd, argued Mr Wilson, if the enforcement officer were to appear at the premises identified on the writ and, having spotted that the debtor's goods were located somewhere in the vicinity, he was not entitled to execute – but would rather have to return and seek additional authority by an amendment to the writ.