Saturday, 29 November 2008


You should read this blog if you are a resident at Fairways and own a vehicle.

The purpose of this forum is to gain an estimated combined figure of the money generated by Ethical Parking Management from the residents of Fairways and to log the reasons for these fines to see if we can find a way to deal with this obvious problem.

As we understand it, Ethical Parking Management Ltd has been employed by our managing agents, Clifford Dann, to protect our residents parking spaces from being used by non residents.

Sounds great in practice. However, in reality, it is the residents themselves who are being targeted by this system.

Please register any issues you have had with the company with this blog using the comments hyperlink (email me for hep if you need it!). Include:

The exact reason they say you were fined, clamped or towed
The total figure you paid to Ethical Parking Management
The month and year that this occurred.

This forum is NOT a place to vent you personal feelings about the company, as this may undermine the objective of this forum, which is to establish the extent of the problem with illegal parking at Fairways.

Thanks for your support, we look forward to hearing from you


unfairparking said...

Many fines, clampings and even towings relate to “permits not being visible”.

This could mean that they have partially slipped down the dashboard, or onto the drivers seat or into the footwell on the floor of the car.

A fine for this could be deemed acceptable, but to clamp and tow away a fully legal, safe vehicle belonging to a resident is an outrage.

It would be interesting to get an idea of just how much revenue is being derived from we the residents, compared to the “non resident” parkers Ethical Parking are paid to seek out for us.

If the only real problem is the lack of visibility of residents permits, then there is not real problem with illegal parking and so I can see not the need for a parking management company at all.

Alternatives could be:

1. That residents supply Registration Numbers for their vehicles and log these with Ethical Trading on a database system. If a car has a pesky “non visible” permit, it could be checked against the database back at the office. A fine could be levied and a a letter sent to the resident (cost of admin covered by the fine). No need to clamp or tow a resident.

This would cost ethical trading very little to set up in terms of costs, but would unfortunately cost them lots in terms of revenue stream.

Which kind of ticket would you produce if you wanted to create a situation where it could become “non visible” with a little nudge here, a turn of the corner as you come into the complex or a gust of wind there.... What about a large, laminated slippery one, with the permit info on just one side? Just right for sliding around in the car and becoming “non-visible”! voila! Why not do what the council do...a window screen mount allowing your pass to be visible at all times. Just what you need when you are....a resident and so will be using the permit 24/7

Why not? I think we all know why not.

Debrett's Peerage said...

I agree the 'parking management' co are rather extreme in their actions. On more than one occassion I have been affected by the clamping, each time with a perfectly valid permit (as issued by the Fairways managing agent, currently Clifford Dann).

There are several points that concern me.

1) the remit of the 'parking management' agenc(ies) over the period. Why has there been so many agencies? Is it because each one has failed in its duty to uphold the remit given by the Directors of Fairways?

2) Why would the Directors of Fairways decide to change the parking management Co from one to another when the Register at Co's Hse clearly shows all of the parking management co's to be run from the same location and by association the same person in Worthing ! Guardian = Ethical(!) = VM = Allied.

SEE BELOW for Co's Hse info

3)How is it that the parking management co are able to treat the Fairways people in the way they do ? Surely their remit of employment (set by our Fairways Directors) is to safeguard the parking rights of Fairways' inhabitants.

4)There should be a document (available to view in each of the blocks at Fairways) clearly outlining the contract details & remit given to the parking management co by the Directors of Fairways. Indeed there should also be clear information vis-a-vis the legal entitlements of the parties in a dispute. Eg the level of proof required to support a claim.

5)There should be a much more Fairways-centric leaning to the policing of parking management, such that e.g a proof of inhabitancy at Fairways is sufficient and which could be proven to qualify/disqualify the entitlement to parking with perhaps Fairways Directors acting as legitimate intermediaries.
(with visitors permits perhaps excluded). Or as you mention, a system regulated using a list of registered vehicles to Fairways.

Anyway, I find it quite remarkable that these issues have not been addressed before, particularly considering we all see the 'tractor mums' getting away after illegally parking in Fairways to drop the kids off to Windlesham School.

The parking management Co should not have the freedom and independence they do to act in the way they do when they have NO apparent regard for the people they have a contract with.

Interesting Co Hse info

Companies Hse Info;
WEST SUSSEX BN13 3EU 04/09/2008



BN12 5JD 14/06/2007


BN13 3EU
Reg No : 05992210
Reg No : UC6105110
Guardian Facilities
Reg No UC5566637
Arundel Road Worthing West Sussex BN13 3EU

BeccaPecca said...

Twice I, a leaseholder and part shareholder of Fairways, have had to stump up the cost of a fine. Both cases were due to my permit not being clearly visible. I am aware of the rules and paid the fines, all be it begrudgingly. However, I was offered digital photo evidence by the parking attendant (of the then, Guardian firm) to check.

Fairways Ltd should surely look into this. I'd be interested to know just how many other residents this has happened too.

What really really annoys me is that it appears to be the Fairways residents which are lining Ethical Parking's pocket. Why don't they fine and clamp the genuine abusers of the parking, mainly parents in their four by fours picking up their children from the school next door?

It seems Ethical can do what it likes, including generating a Christmas bonus at our expense. I would far rather the money I paid in fines went towards a security gate, better permits or a truly ethical parking firm, rather than a bunch of unethical communists.

Anonymous said...

Hi I would like to add my parking fine story.

I bought my first car 3 weeks ago and it was parked by the seller in the parking space along the front of the main road in the furthest space next to the Booth Museum as I am unable to drive yet.

The permit was placed on the dashboard in the front of the car.

The car remained undriven / unmoved without any problems for weeks. One day, I noticed the car missing and assumed it was stolen. I called the police. They told me "It is worse, it has been towed away by Ethical parking"

I could not believe this could have happened as I KNEW the permit was in the car from day 1.

The car cost me £800 to buy and Ethical wanted £300 to give it back to me.

I asked for the evidence, I was told that this could not be provided until I paid. I paid and was told the evidence could not be provided as it was not in the in effect I have paid £300 on the say so of a person I have never met!!

I requested an appeal, but I doubt I will ever hear back.

All I know is that the card was on the dash for 3 weeks.

The car was unmoved until Ethical took it.

The card was on the floor of my car when I picked it up from the yard....

I have no / timeline to prove when any photo was taken and when the car was moved. I would be easy to knock the slippery permit from the dash of an old fiesta with just a shove or lift.

The car had not moved for sometime and the clamp and notice were placed on the side least visible facing the bushes. This would make it highly likely that this vehicle would end up being towed away as the owner could not see the notice unless he was looking for it, which you wouldn't be if you KNEW your permit was in it. As such I have paid for a clamping fee, towing fee and storage for a legally parked, taxed and insured vehicle owned by a RESIDENT - How on earth has it come to this? I fine I could accept but to tow away the car is crazy and robbery. I expect someones family will be sitting down to a nice xmas due to their Xmas bonus at my expense.

Clifford Dann please provide suitable permits which do the job and can't be shunted of the dashboard by a gust of wind , slam of a door, or,....well,,,you do the math.

Debrett's Peerage said...

the latest post (miserableXmas) highlights the scandal that exists within the contract between Ethical Parking' and those responsible for giving them a contract.
HOW on earth can Fairways allow this to continue !

. . Without being given evidence (eg EXIF photographic details)it is like being sentenced for a crime to which you have been given no details of and to which you are denied a fair hearing. It is a KANGAROO court and a DISGRACE.

Having your car taken from a parking space outside your own residence by an external agent 'Ethical Parking' (themselves contracted by your own Fairways representative Directors),is an utter disgrace.
A review of the parking management is long overdue, as is clearly the management of the relationship BETWEEN the 'parking' co and those responsible for providing their remit.

It can only be assumed that there was either
a) an oversight (by those giving the contract) in managing the detail of it.


c)A lack of will and effort to challenge the disproportionate balance of judgement (favouring the pockets of 'Ethical' rather than the sovereignty of Fairways residents).

d) A distinct naivete in the contract relationship

d) one or more of the above.

I would be ashamed to be involved in the responsibility of upholding the rights and rules of Fairways if my name was associated with the 'Ethical' fiasco.

. . .'Ethical' . .! ! !

A shambles

Debrett's Peerage

Debrett's Peerage said...

There is not any board or authority overseeing the activities of 'vehicle immobilisor' privateers. A licence to trade by the SIA (Security Industry Auth) costs £245 (for between 1 & 3 yrs).
However this authority only acts on the side of the Co. This means that NO-ONE INDEPENDENTLY REGULATES THEIR BEHAVIOUR, nor the clamping ,towing or storage of vehicle charges !

Following MiserableXmas' post,if you feel you've been clamped or towed illegitimitely by any privateer immobiliser Co, you should seek advice by e.g.'ConsumerDirect' immediately.

(By changing the name of the parking management Co as readily as they do (within 2yrs), 'Ethical' are likely to get away without paying tax on their profits!)


Anonymous said...

I am currently interested in grouping everyone fined by EPM, i may have a way to get a full or partial refund whether you did deserve to be clamped or not. please search facebook and add yoruself to the "ethical parking management" group, where i will post details once i hear back from my legal aid.

Anonymous said...

Take a look at to see if you have been treated unfairly/illegally.

Anonymous said...

This isn't limited to Fairways....I park in a space provided by the City Council and have a permit. On this day the permit had been blown onto the seat when the passenger door was shut ! I returned to the car Clamped....apparantly no-one at the council has the authority to tell the company, which they contract, to remove the clamp from a car parked legally in a space owned by the city council !!!! I agree maybe another change of name because Ethical they certainly aren't.

jactalk said...

I've been a tenant at Fairways since July. Yesterday I found my car had been clamped for the permit not being visible. It cost £120 to get my car released.

I have previously been a victim of burglary and I work for the police so I am very security minded. Therefore, I am unwilling to have something permanently displayed in my windscreen which advertises my home address to anyone who looks at my car when it is parked on street or in a public carpark. Let's face it, the wording on the permits is hardly a difficult code to crack! Unfortunately, this means that I may forget to display my permit or it may get knocked to the floor when I get out of the car with shopping bags (as obviously happened when I parked on Saturday).

Needless to say, I'm very angry that I was clamped! The patronising person at EPM told me that I wouldn't expect to go to a public carpark and not pay and display. This is NOT a public carpark and I HAVE paid. The rental value of my flat includes residents parking. Likewise, all leaseholders have bought their flats at a price that includes residents parking. Therefore, residents parking is a right not a privilege or favour bestowed upon us. To apply the same rules that are appropriate to a public carpark to residents in a private carpark for which they have paid and have every right to use is Draconian and outrageous.

I assume all leaseholders are paying for EPM via management fees paid to Clifford Dann. This makes it even more unfair.

Why are residents paying for a service which appears to be doing nothing other than line the pockets of EPM and antagonise the other residents? The existence of parking management at all appears to be questionable. I would be interested to know if EPM have ever clamped a vehicle that does NOT belong to a resident

From the comments made to me yesterday by other residents while I was waiting to be released indicate that many people have been victims of clamping, so I'm surprised to see so few posts here.

Comments were also made that EPM employees have been seen 'sneaking' around the carpark in the dead of night checking vehicles with torches. 'Ethical' seems an ironic choice of name!

I will be writing a letter of complaint to Clifford Dann and will copy it to the residents association.