Parking ticket in Asda car park - Is this legal, can they take me to court?

Tim_Deegan

uktim29 wrote: »

Heres a quote from that article

"The one chink of light, industry figures say, are farmers' markets, which have flourished over the past decade. There are an estimated 550 now a weekly fixture in some towns."

The article also states that more than two thirds in fact very near of three quarters of Butcher should still be open. The increase of farmers markets is another viable alternative which will account for to some extent and cancel out one in four butchers closing.

So if theres still more or less three quarters of butchers open, an increase of trading such as farmers markets how come people can't find them? It's because they don't bother looking!

You've a habit of doing this Phil but again you seem to have found an article which when you read through journalistic cynicism and look at the fact three quarters of the population should still be able to find butchers. There has been an increase in activity such as farmers markets. If people bother they'll still be able to find/use these traders but the do and to make an effort to actually visit.

The actual figures in that article show high streets are hardly dead. What it more shows is what I said, people don't bother to look. Thats why around 26% of the business's will have closed. It was never the Supermarkets fault. It was the consumers. If consumers keep deluding themselves saying to themselves "high streets are dead" for their reason for not going to them then more business's will close.

Theres certainly enough small retailers around in the average high street to do your shopping if you want to. Whether people will use them or not is their own problem.

The post directly above whilst I wrote my reply also pretty much proves what I've said. Consumers by choice don't visit high streets, it's not because they're "dead".

How far off topic are you trying to get??

There was a statement in this thread that just happened to mention that there has been a decline in the number of small shops, and for this reason more people are driving to supermarkets. This isn't supposed to be a thread about how many shops there are left, or why there has been a decline.

So please get back on topic.

Tim_Deegan

parkerparker wrote: »

Which particular LAW are you referring to :rolleyes:

Criminal damage.......when you suggested people take a grinder to a wheel clamp.

uktim29

Tim_Deegan wrote: »

So how often did you do the shopping when you were 16?

Frequently, didn't like mums cooking!

Tim_Deegan wrote: »

How far off topic are you trying to get??

So please get back on topic.

Theres you happily responding and asking how old I am!

mrposhman

Well I would be very happy to know that people who aren't disabled or have children and park in disabled and P&c bays are getting fined.

You don't know how annoying it is when people do that.

My local sainsburys employs a contractor to apparantly monitor the car park (not that i've EVER seen anyone in there) who clearly do a very poor job. I park there with my 3 month old and need to open the door wide to be able to get to her properly. I generally put her in our baby carrier (carry her on my chest) and I'd rather strap her in next to the car rather than in the middle of the road.

Frankly, every single time I've gone there, there have been at least 2 or 3 cars parked illegally in P&C spaces, most parents don't seem to take the car seats out as trolleys have the strap in seats now so its obvious who has a child or not (the car seat tends to give it away). I have complained numerous times to sainsburys and they have said theres nothing they can do so I'm writing to the monitoring company and copying letters to sainsburys and m&s head offices (theres an m&s there too) stating about the lack of action and the fact that I have changed my shopping patterns, in fact I've now changed my shopping patterns enough that our big shops are NEVER carried out in sainsburys anymore but a more considerate rival who in fact are Asda.

I would have thought knowing that at least 1 customer is jumping ship could well mean more will follow and hopefully this might spur the monitoring company to actually do their job. To be frank, its not exactly hard.

In fact, I've often thought, "hey I could sit here an earn a few bob whilst the missus does the shopping" - Maybe thats the way to go!!

RichyRich

Tim_Deegan wrote: »

Because the quality of food sold in supermarkets doesn't even come close to that sold in many smaller shops.

But that's the way the market works...

If people want cheap, they'll shop at Tesco
If people want quality, they'll shop at M. Ahsan & Sons (or wherever)

If that means small shops shut down, then the market (i.e. consumers) obviously prefer cheap to quality. Therefore, small shops aren't serving the market with what they want! So why should they survive?

uktyler

parkerparker wrote: »

Motorists who park in P&C or disabled spaces on private land are not criminals and break no civil law in the UK.

It's all in your mind :rolleyes:

Its not about the legality of it, its about the morals of it, I'm sure that's lost on you, as you don't seem to have any.

uktyler

parkerparker wrote: »

The old jealosuy gene surfaces quite a lot on here doesn't it :rolleyes:

It woud be more appropriate if supermarkets provided "nice car" spaces so we don't have to park our expensive motors next to your puny little environmentally unfriendly smokey rust buckets.

And us "nice car" owners tend to have plenty of cash to splash wherever we choose to shop

Why don't you just stay at home and have Harrods deliver the food direct to your door then?

RichyRich

uktyler wrote: »

Its not about the legality of it, its about the morals of it, I'm sure that's lost on you, as you don't seem to have any.

And what's so morally right about someone coming along with a clamp and refusing to remove it until such time as the vehicle owner pays an extortionate amount of money to have it removed, without any trial or tribunal to establish that he is guilty of nothing more than trespass, itself only a tort (and not a crime) the only legal remedy to which is liquidated damages equivalent to the actual loss incurred by the landowner as a result of the trespass?

uktim29

RichyRich wrote: »

And what's so morally right about someone coming along with a clamp and refusing to remove it until such time as the vehicle owner pays an extortionate amount of money to have it removed, without any trial or tribunal to establish that he is guilty of nothing more than trespass, itself only a tort (and not a crime) the only legal remedy to which is liquidated damages equivalent to the actual loss incurred by the landowner as a result of the trespass?

It's meant to be a deterrent, it's not suppose to be nice. Fining people 2p wouldn't work!

RichyRich

uktim29 wrote: »

It's meant to be a deterrent,

You mean like a penalty?

May I refer you to the case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company v. New Garage and Motor Company for details of the law on penalties in private contracts?

People (and corporations) imposing their own "fines" or "penalties" rather than allowing the law to impose real (and legal) ones is nothing more than vigilante justice - people imposing and enforcing such arbitrary and unfair rules as they see fit wherever and whenever they like.

Private law (the law of contract and tort) has been developed over hundreds of years in order to reach its current state...I very much doubt it will change overnight to guarantee mothers of three with Ford Galaxies they struggle to park a space twenty yards from Morrisons' entrance!