A situation that intrigues (and bothers) me

gutt3d

Hi,

I popped down to the local shops to pick up some supplies, and noticed something that piqued my interest.

Please note that I'm merely interested as an observer. I'm not making any claims against anyone, nor am I defending anyone. I'm simply just interested - though if pushed I'd have to admit some sort of sympathy with (I assume) the land owner.

Situation is this. I parked briefly outside a Chinese restaurant. I was not a customer, so (in my mind) this was a cheeky thing for me to do. There's even a sign up saying "Customer Parking Only. Unauthorised vehicles may be clamped" or something along those lines. It's a prominent sign, and there are only about 5 spaces - I couldn't miss it, and I parked in the space furthest away. The restaurant wasn't open, however, which (in my mind) made things less cheeky - I didn't deprive a paying customer of a parking space. I went to the shop next door, and all was well.

Anyway - cheekiness aside, I went and bought the supplies, and returned within a couple of mins. All good. But when I got back, I noticed something had been posted on the restaurant "customer only" sign - so I wandered across to have a look. It seems that someone has posted a print-out of some legislation which makes it illegal to clamp vehicles on private property. I kind of knew about this, and it's great that action has been taken over cowboy clampers.

But after all that preamble, here's the thing. There was a car parked directly in front of the "customer only" sign. No idea whose it was, but just for a second can you imagine if the driver (or RK, whoever) is the same person that posted the notice over the original sign... Now - this car is in 2nd space from the restaurant window - and again it's directly in front of the restaurant sign. I think it would be difficult to argue that the owner/RK could have missed the sign.

So hypothetically speaking if the driver/RK was being a tool and had deliberately parked there as part of a dispute with the restaurateur, does the restaurateur have any legal means of getting the car moved?

This is just a typical Chinese takeaway restaurant - nothing fancy. I have to admit that in this mad scenario I've dreamed up I would definitely side with the restaurateur here. (I have no affiliation with them - I don't know them, even - but their food isn't bad )

Again - hypothetically speaking if the land really was private, and the driver/RK had decided to go on a mission against the restaurateur, could the restaurateur even do anything about it? Seems kind of harsh that such a situation could exist where someone else can't take action about a vehicle left on their property.

What's to stop someone - anyone - parking on my drive, and then just leaving their car there? My driveway is private, right? But if I understand correctly I wouldn't be able to get a car removed from my driveway. That's crazy! Is it actually same sort of thing if someone deliberately and "maliciously" parked outside a restaurant right in front of the sign that says "customers only"? (Or is that a different situation and not comparable with my driveway scenario)?

Sorry for long post. I just am genuinely intrigued by this....

pogofish

Its utterly irrelevant.

And frankly, if this place still has clamping signs-up they deserve all they get. These are illegal and DOT insisted on their removal by a full two years ago. Even giving an extention for landowners/PPCs to comply.

As for your drive - there must be hundreds of threads in here covering this. Why not read them instead of wasting our time again!

gutt3d

Wow - thanks for the friendly response.

gutt3d

pogofish wrote: »

Its utterly irrelevant.

Just out of interest, which bit exactly is utterly irrelevant?

Thanks for you knowledge. You truly are a saint.

pogofish

All of it! - There are several good legal ways to shift a person indulging in a bit of harassment and none of them involve parking.

gutt3d

pogofish wrote: »

All of it!

Inspirational.

pogofish wrote: »

There are several good legal ways to shift a person indulging in a bit of harassment and none of them involve parking.

Thanks for a slightly more sensible answer.

Clearly this is all hypothetical as I've got no idea whose car it is. It might be the restaurateur's car, for all I know. I suggested the private driveway thing without knowing any better, though I have since read on this forum and have seen stuff about "trespass" etc. (I'm sure you'll forgive me for not initially searching for "car parked at my local Chinese restaurant may constitute harassment") so I can see that the situation is different - as indeed I wondered whether it might be (see my original post).

I think companies that engage in clamping and harassment of the public are villainous scum. That said, if I were operating a small business it would utterly p1ss me off if someone appeared to be making some sort of point by parking on my property - right in front of the sign saying "customers only" - and possibly also posting a notice over the sign; but I'd also 'assume' (rightly or wrongly) that taking them to task would be too expensive. If it were some massive multinational I'd actually find some humour in this hypothetical situation - but I'd find it morally wrong for someone to park like that just because they know they can get away with it, especially when it might actually be 'hurting' a small business. I would think that to be wrong - and I'd be firmly on side of the restaurateur in such a situation.

I just didn't know, that was all. But thanks for enlightenment.

(I'm not affiliated to the restaurant in any way, and neither do I currently have any problems with someone parking on my drive at home).

Redx

gutt3d wrote: »

I think companies that engage in clamping and harassment of the public are villainous scum. .

none of these companies indulge in clamping, it was outlawed 3 years ago in 2012 !!

the harassment continues, but not the clamping

your drive is private property and you are not inviting others to park there, so its trespass and obstruction and always has been , nothing to do with "parking"

as mentioned above, its been discussed to death on here so I dont know why you havent used the forum search to find out what was said about these issues

gutt3d

Redx wrote: »

none of these companies indulge in clamping, it was outlawed 3 years ago in 2012 !!

Yes, point taken. Although it's a shame you missed my point.

Redx wrote: »

the harassment continues, but not the clamping

Yes, my point is that they're scum. And I'm not trying to defend them.

Redx wrote: »

your drive is private property and you are not inviting others to park there, so its trespass and obstruction and always has been , nothing to do with "parking"

Yep, I see that now. Thanks. As mentioned a couple of times already, I didn't initially know that. But thanks.

Redx wrote: »

as mentioned above, its been discussed to death on here so I dont know why you havent used the forum search to find out what was said about these issues

Holy hell, I was just asking what I though was a reasonable question - and after initial Google searching, this looked like a friendly and helpful place. Sorry to have caused so much angst. Jeeeez :(:(

pogofish

In our experience, this is a most unreasonable question - in fact it almost always comes with an unpleasant agenda behind it. Which is why you won't find many here willing to engage with it.

Redx

gutt3d wrote: »

Holy hell, I was just asking what I though was a reasonable question - and after initial Google searching, this looked like a friendly and helpful place. Sorry to have caused so much angst. Jeeeez :(:(

it may have been if you had done the research prior to posting, but you have typed a lot of bull and now complain for being pulled up about all the "bull" and errors on your part

get the facts straight , then repost the "point" or question in a better manner so people can follow it and not lose concentration on whatever the point was that you were trying to make

its so long and rambling I am not sure what your point actually was, or is, I doubt that anyone else knows either

what I do know is half of it was a fairy story on ancient history and clearly based on doing no research or checking the "facts" before posing the "question" or "point"

people lose the will to live when they read such a long diatribe, so you need to be clear, concise and factual when asking a question , all of which your post lacks completely , sorry to say

you may understand what you are asking, I cannot say I do

plus I dont care about signage that predates POFA 2012 , because it isnt relevant , neither is the tv guide in the newspaper that was bought in that shop in 2012 , its just as useless as any old clamping sign

car spaces are there to invite people to park, or park and shop , how a landowner enforces it "under the law" is their business , which can prove difficult to enforce under present laws

my drive and your drive have no relevance to what you are asking, so should not be referenced, neither should car clamping companies, because there are none

too many holes in the story, so any meaning or "point" is lost, was lost on me, was probably "lost" to anyone else reading it

please try again , in clear and concise terms, with all "facts" checked for validity before posting , otherwise people will just "auto correct" your mistakes, which both sides dont like , you especially !

so my point to you in my reply was

"do the research, dont post garbage , check your facts before posting , stick to "the point" , make sure you have given a clear indication of what you are asking, with no sidetracking, no errors , plus research the question thoroughly beforehand , which is what post #1 should have been (and isnt)

I wasnt addressing "your point" , I was putting right a lot of mistakes on your part , nothing more , the more mistakes we see, the more meaningless the topic becomes

Guys_Dad

gutt3d wrote: »

Hi,

So hypothetically speaking if the driver/RK was being a tool and had deliberately parked there as part of a dispute with the restaurateur, does the restaurateur have any legal means of getting the car moved?

Again - hypothetically speaking if the land really was private, and the driver/RK had decided to go on a mission against the restaurateur, could the restaurateur even do anything about it?

On these two paragraphs, there is a remedy in law, but things are so skewed against transgressors by using the courts or police (who would not be interested) that it is so frustrating. I am thinking, in particular, about getting non-paying tenants out of your property or annoying neighbours who frequently park over your drive.

On here, most cases involve people who have made a mistake one way or another when parking, or PPCs being inhumanly unreasonable or worse.

Personally, I think you asked a reasonable question, albeit perhaps not the most sensible thing to do to bring up the "parking on my drive" scenario as this is a favourite comparison used by PPCs , but as a newbie, you might not have realised that it is something that has been dealt with several times on here.