"The notice even imposes a £50 penalty for 'abuse'."
What sort of abuse ? The verbal type ?
|
i know the place you mean. it is now run by a family as a diy type of supermarket but with some really competitive prices for brnded stuff (to the extent that some of the rich boat owners from the nearby marinas now go there) .
the parking problem has arisen due to the introduction of parkiong wardens and loss of free parking (soon to be the case in the new shopping centre too). the owners of the private parking in front of the "courts" diy place have decided that their only option to deter non-customers from using their shop's parking is to use this extortionate method.
rightly or wrongly, that is their choice.
|
as long as it is their property and it is VERY CLEARLY marked I dont see it as a problem!
Expensive though!
|
Some people think they can park anywhere they like for free. If you're a land owner I think you should be entitled to charge anything you like for unauthorised parking on your land.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
I don't like that "abuse" thing, seems like someone taking the law into their own hands.
|
I don't like that "abuse" thing, seems like someone taking the law into their own hands.
it is simply one of those unenforceable "polite" notices, designed purely to frighten your average law abiding citizen in to compliance (although the regular court clients will know the law better).
|
Judging from the sums of money quoted by HJ it could be very enforceable! If it is private property or parking prohibitions are laid down by the local council violation of the private or public rules will bring retribution.
|
Judging from the sums of money quoted by HJ it could be very enforceable!
alrright, to make it clear what i am talking about: the parking bit may be enforceable.
but the "abuse" which is not defined to mean anything, now that is what pugugly (and in turn i ) was referring to. how can you enforce the breach of an undefined term?
i have been in the shop a couple of times a few months ago, and have talked to the owner before the signs appeared. the sign may have been drafted by a non-legal knowledgeable person.
the stock seems to be of the type sourced from bankrupt businesses, and is at very low prices compared to local competition such as homebase, woolworths and wilkinsons.
it is frequented by people who fall in the lower 5% income bracket in this district (which is probably next to kensington & chelsea in wealth). the parking places at the shop are at a premium.
|
|
You're right D. - could imagine that "abuse" thing becoming a bit of a sport !
|
I think we have 2 things here. 1. swingeing fines for illegal parking and 2. A penalty for abuse - might this be swearing at the clampers or the tow away people? If it is their private property I guess they make up any rules they like, any penalties they like and any enforcement (within the law) that they like. If one doesn't like it don't park there and don't shop there, that'll save the parking penalty and don't swear at the employees that will save the abuse fine. Sound like a place to avoid on many levels!
|
If it's private land then it's not a fine, it's an invoice. The sums involved sound about right for the South East.
The abuse thing is meaningless. The invoice bit can generally be ignored, it's the clamp that's the big problem. But as mentioned by others, if it's private land then it's the owner's perogative, providing signage is good.
A personal flat bed with HIAB is one answer, just make it clear to the clamping neanderthals that you intend to return the clamp. I sometimes wonder about surreptitious freezing of the clamp with liquid nitrogen.
"Oh look, it's fractured into many little pieces, how odd"
|
|
|
|
I know---but still. Since 1997 everyone wants to fine everyone else for everything....
|
p.s. you need to select the aerial view to see satellite images of the locations above.
|
|
That isn't HJ's 'ouse is it ? :-)
|
That isn't HJ's 'ouse is it ? :-)
that house is probably not more than a mile away from him. it is within 400 yards of me though!
more likely owned by a minor celebrity such as mick-hucknall or geoff-hurst or such like who live in the ashley park estate. michael-aspel lives just half a mile down manor road shown in the first link.
|
more likely owned by a minor celebrity such as mick-hucknall or geoff-hurst or such like who live in the ashley park estate. michael-aspel lives just half a mile down manor road shown in the first link.
you'd have thought some of them would have the sense to put a roof & heating over their swimming pools. this isn't Florida (actually, you could probably get about 5 Miami Beach mansions for the price of a house there).
|
|
Am I right in thinking that a) this is not allowed to happen in Scotland, and b) the "abuse" fee entitles one to let rip at the contractor up to a predefined limit?
|
.. some of them would have the sense to put a roof & heating over their swimming pools ..
most only use the swimming pools from june to september. the cleaning and chlorination costs are quite high on their own, but the costs of heating the water are astronomical (can be more than the annual cost of heating the home). one of these had a new boiler put in for their swimming pool last year at a cost of £30,000 !
p.s. a large proportion of the owners are the traditional "stockbroker belt" people, either directors of ftse companies or partners in the big city finance, banking, legal and insurance companies.
they are still not in the same league as the adjoining two private estates - burwood-park and st.georges-hill.
|
"the "abuse" fee entitles one to let rip at the contractor up to a predefined limit?"
My thoughts exactly, might be worth £50.00
|
|
|
|
In response to the extortionate parking charges thread, can I hypothesise a scenario put forward by Jeremy Clarkson. Imagine you've parked on private land (NOT council controlled), and an "enforcement" company is hitching your car to a lorry and is about to lift it onboard. You take a flying leap and jump onto your car's bonnet, and sit there.
Presumably, they can't continue to lift on health and safety grounds, nor can they attempt to pull you off your car as you'd have them for assault. What happens next?
|
|
There was a picture in The Sun a while back where a car was 15ft up in the air with the driver in it. They had wanted to lift it on to their truck, he had wanted to not let them, and they did it anyway.
|
& didn't Porsche/other expensive sports car, get driven OFF of a transporter, by the owner, after being lifted. Reported a few months back.
I would imagine thet the owner would be liable for arrest - causing obstruction, or some other similar offence.
VB
|
|
|
|
