Car clampers are near the top of the list in the unpopularity stakes. But Brighton and Hove City Council is on the brink of unleashing even more clampers to crack down on people parking illegally on its estates.

Reporter Andy Robbins spoke to those who think the wheel clampers shouldn't have it all their own way.

All is fair in love and war, so goes the saying. But angry drivers in Brighton and Hove are arguing that is certainly not the case when it comes to car clamping.

Car parks on 25 council estates are already patrolled by contractors on the look-out for those flouting the law and leaving their motors where they shouldn't.

But Brighton and Hove City Council will this week discuss proposals to send even more clampers to estates, council offices and public spaces across the city.

The existing contract generates about £64,000 a year in fines.

Brighton resident Tony Greenstein says it is time to kick the clampers into touch.

Last year he won a court case against Security Core of Brighton Ltd - a company contracted at the time by the city council - after his wife's car was clamped in Jubilee Street while she called into the nearby library.

She displayed a Blue Badge in the window because her teenage son Daniel is autistic.

Her vehicle was clamped when the badge slipped from the dashboard but a district judge at Brighton County Court ordered the clamping company to refund her the £125 release fee, as well as pay £10 costs and £5 interest.

Mr Greenstein believed it was unfair that private contractors were able to act as judge and jury.

He said: "There is no proper appeals process in my opinion. It is a complete charade. The clampers are a judge in their own court.

"I would like to see no clamping at all. There are others means such as fixed penalties and towing cars away. Clamping is just a way to print money."

He said he wanted England to follow Scotland, where it was now illegal for private clamping companies to operate.

Jeane Lepper, city councillor for Hollingbury and Stanmer, said she had received several complaints from elderly residents who had appealed after having their vehicles clamped.

She said she was shocked to find out the companies which dished out the fines were the ones which considered the appeals.

Coun Lepper said: "When people consider they have been unfairly clamped they ask if they can appeal, but then they find out they have to appeal to the company which clamped them in the first place.

"What incentive is there for these companies to give people back their money? I'm not against the council using contracted clampers but the whole process needs to be more transparent.

"The companies which have been contracted by the council should be under the same scrutiny as all other council departments.

"Ideally I think the council should be the ones who are responsible for handling the appeals."

Brighton Pavilion MP David Lepper went one step further and said the city council should consider bringing clamping back in-house so it had closer control.

He said: "I think there should be some form of independent arbitrator to rule on appeals over these issues.

"I'm very concerned about things I've heard about how some of these companies operate and I think there should always be an independent body to oversee them.

"I would feel exactly the same if it was the council which was operating the clamping itself. It only seems fair."

Brighton and Hove City Council said wheel clamping had only been introduced on a number of estates as a direct response to appeals from residents' associations.

The council said a report going before the policy and resources committee simply looked at re-tendering an existing service and the possibility of it being extended to parking areas on other council housing estates and council buildings.

It stressed that any wheel clamping on council land was carried out in accordance with strict Government legislation.

Guardian Parking Management Ltd has been operating as the council's clampers since November 2007, charging a £100 fee for releasing vehicles.

Despite anger from motorists who claimed they had been unfairly treated by the firm, director Mark Lynch said his businesses played strictly by the rules.

He said his employees faced daily intimidation from drivers who simply couldn't accept they were in the wrong.

Mr Lynch said: "In the past we've had tyres slashed and lots of verbal threats. In one instance we had a guy threatened by a man wielding an axe. But at the end of the day, if people didn't park illegally I wouldn't be in business.

"We've got well-signed vehicles and we certainly don't employ thugs.

"We spend a lot of time and money on the appeals process as well. We have to demonstrate the appeals process is fair and if we haven't done what we are supposed to then we will refund people.

"We put up plenty of signs to encourage people to park legally, but if they choose to ignore that they can't turn around and complain."