Leeds Bradford airport rip off

shaun_from_Africa

dfh2012 wrote: »

If all the big supermarkets got together and decided that they would charge 100000 for a tin of beans because they can, we would be in a whole heap of trouble !

I believe there are laws which stop companies ganging up together to set prices of items? I'm sure a couple of the big supermarkets got done on this a couple of years ago?

It's covered by the Competition act 1998. (and just to show Hothead that it's easy to prove that a law does exist as opposed to proving that one doesn't).


(

2 Agreements etc. preventing, restricting or distorting competition.

1)Subject to section 3, agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings or concerted practices which—

(a)may affect trade within the United Kingdom, and

(b)have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the United Kingdom,
are prohibited unless they are exempt in accordance with the provisions of this Part.

(2)Subsection (1) applies, in particular, to agreements, decisions or practices which—

(a)directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

2sides2everystory

fluffnutter wrote: »

I'm certainly not arguing that the OP's point isn't valid. If you untangle your panties for a second you might also notice that the OP is not being surrounded like a 'pack of hyenas', rather dfh2012 (who is not the OP) has willingly entered into a spat with a number of posters because of his/her pedantry and bizarre logic.

OK so dfh2012 is not the OP. dfh2012 was actually one of the few posters who stated full agreement with the OP before you hyenas gathered.

"willingly entered into a spat" - what kind of language is that? Were you also willingly part of it, too? Is that logical?

Have you anything useful to say for the benefit of consumers who use this website ?

Optimist

2sides2everystory wrote: »

OK so dfh2012 is not the OP. dfh2012 was actually one of the few posters who stated full agreement with the OP before you hyenas gathered.

"willingly entered into a spat" - what kind of language is that? Were you also willingly part of it, too? Is that logical?

Have you anything useful to say for the benefit of consumers who use this website ?

I think pointing out that a company can offer a product/service at a price that they feel they can get away with, and that there is no law to stop them doing so is pretty useful to consumers who use this website.

2sides2everystory

Optimist wrote: »

I think pointing out that a company can offer a product/service at a price that they feel they can get away with, and that there is no law to stop them doing so is pretty useful to consumers who use this website.

Well I can see how you deduced that, but try one further step in your thinking because that will be the one that is truly useful i.e. the notion that we do not have to tolerate misleading business practice and if we are so disposed we can indeed prosecute because we do not live in a lawless Wild West.

Optimist

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Well I can see how you deduced that, but try one further step in your thinking because that will be the one that is truly useful i.e. the notion that we do not have to tolerate it.

Indeed the choice to buy that product or service is the consumers but that wasn't your point when you went into your rant at fluffnutter.

Edit I note you have now changed your posting but I really cant be bothered re-quoting

2sides2everystory

Optimist wrote: »

Indeed the choice to buy that product or service is the consumers but that wasn't your point when you went into your rant at fluffnutter.

Edit I note you have now changed your posting but I really cant be bothered re-quoting

Well get you !

So you have nothing useful to say either, Optimist? How about some commentary on how CPRs 2008 might be used in this case instead of the lazy "I can't be bothered" ?

somethingcorporate

I don't think it illegal though as it is clearly signed before going into the area that a charge will be payable.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=49981523&postcount=12

I think we have clashed before though, I remember laughing at your signature.

Optimist

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Well get you !

So you have nothing useful to say either, Optimist? How about some commentary on how CPRs 2008 might be used in this case instead of the lazy "I can't be bothered" ?

Perhaps you should actually read it before quoting it.

There seems nothing in the way of misleading descriptions or pricing. There are as far as I am aware no aggressive sales tactics.

I am open to your interpretation of how charging for dropping of at the airport falls into this legistlation though.

2sides2everystory

somethingcorporate wrote: »

I don't think it illegal though as it is clearly signed before going into the area that a charge will be payable.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=49981523&postcount=12

I think we have clashed before though, I remember laughing at your signature.

And in your case, its the username that is a warning of what's might follow. Which is in stark contrast to the sign outside the car park. Having got close enough to read the sign, just how exactly does one excuse oneself from using their car park facility?

You may ave noticed that other types of toll facility provide clear advance notice to drivers who drive as opposed to hindsight merchants in armchairs who point at smallprint. Other types of toll charge facility also provide big clear signs as opposed to excuses and a slip road for those who wish to easily avoid being corralled and ripped off.

2sides2everystory

Optimist wrote: »

Perhaps you should actually read it before quoting it.

There seems nothing in the way of misleading descriptions or pricing. There are as far as I am aware no aggressive sales tactics.

I am open to your interpretation of how charging for dropping of at the airport falls into this legistlation though.

Don't worry - I've had cause to refer to it many times. There's a hell of a lot more to it than your petty selections.

Here it is: The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008