Following a recent letter from Fishers, I see that it has been decided to bring in a clamping company.
This was done at an AGM meeting with very few attendees and I was wondering if this move is actually welcomed by the majority of the residents and not just the few who are affected by current parking issues?

I am more than sympathetic to their problems but I think it is very unfair that all the residents of the development are now going to suffer for the sake of helping these few. Surely there is a better way to address this issue?
One that doesn't require the purchase of a pass to park in the visitor spaces of my home, something that should be free.
I also don't like loosing the flexibility to invite anyone I like to my home without fear of them being clamped.

Mostly though, what I don't like is that a decision of this magnitude was taken by such a few.
I know this is how decisions are made on our behalf, but when an action has the potential to individually affect every resident of the development, then every effort should be made to gauge the opinion of all residents, not just those who attend the AGM. Lets face it, no one attends unless they have an issue and as such, representation is not actually that representative.

Something really doesn't feel right about this for me.

Anyone else have an opinion?



New Member
Following a recent letter from Fishers, I see that it has been decided to bring in a clamping company.
This was done at an AGM meeting with very few attendees
So, why did so few attend??? The AGM is to get a vote from members on decisions needed to fix issues in the development.

Maybe this will encourage more people to attend next year.

If it's voted in by those who attended then there is not much can be done until the next AGM.
I went to the AGM and had no issues to bring up. I voted for the clamping. It can only be a good thing. It's €6 for a permit and that's it forever. You invite somebody over you give them the pass to display, it's no hassle.

It will also get people to pay up their mgmt fees as they can't get a pass without being up to date, so that's also a good thing.

You should probably have made an effort to go along if you don't want decision being made by residents behind your back.
To be honest I've had so much hassle with my own assigned parking space, if this is going to address the matter I have no problem paying for a couple of visitor permits for parking. The other day I left my apartment & got as far as the lights at Charlestown when I had to return as I'd forgotten something - I was gone about 2 mins & yet again somebody had parked in my space.

It's starting to get out of hand so if this will make people cop on - work away!
I could not make the AGM due to work commitments but I have been to every meeting so far. I am always surprised to hear about parking problems (once a year at the AGM). We have two cars and to be honest no parking problems for the last 5 years. Nobody ever parks in our space and I always find a visitor space somewhere, it may be a bit further away from our apartment but there is plenty of them to go around. I personally would not have voted for clamping. I think it is just another money making racket. I already pay a service charge for no service and now I have to pay for a service I don't want. Withholding permits may assist this year with outstanding fees but there are no expiry dates on the permits (I checked with Fisher) therefore we will have the same issue next year when people don't pay up. How are you supposed to anticipate how many visitors you are going to have at any one time. Ok one or two visitor permits is fine for a normal week but what about once off occassions such as my little girls birthday/family gatherings am I expected to go and purchase enough visitor permits for a once off event that last a couple of hours in case one of guests gets clamped and I am left mortified. I know I won't be asking them to pay the unclamping fee as its not their fault.