A story of dishonesty, daylight robbery, disgust and deceit.

[vonhosen]

10 Pence Short said:

vonhosen said:

10 Pence Short said:

vonhosen said:

The shop have a problem with people using their bays who shouldn't be.
They've contracted a company to deal with it who will make their money enforcing the conditions of use.
If the conditions of use are breached I doubt the shop owner can interfere, they've got a contract with the clampers they have to adhere to.

Without being party to the contract there is no way you can suppose either way.

I can't see the clampers taking it on without.

10 Pence Short said:

Secondly, I very much doubt the clamping is there to rectify an exisiting problem. More likely the landowner was sold a service on a commercial basis that made financial gain for both parties.

For whatever reason Argos have done it they've done it & given power to the clampers in doing so.

10 Pence Short said:

Thirdly, like parking tickets on private land, I very much doubt the release fee would be maintained were the case to go to the County Court. I would imagine the land owner or their agent would have to demonstrate a tangible loss to account for the removal fee, which would be difficult to prove.

I disagree (I don't see it as totally like parking tickets on private land & the get outs available with them).
Only two spaces available

I guess someone will have to pay to find out.

There will be a contract, but it will more than likely have clauses which allow the land owner and possibly any tennents to adjudicate over decisions- very much like private parking companies operating on retail parks and the like. A land owner would be very unlikely to form a contract that could lose them the right to park or choose who parks on their own land.

Argos are probably not the land owners and probably did not form the contract.

With regards to the contractual side of things- it's a general contractual civil issue. You cannot 'fine' people for not abiding by a contract. You can claim for losses incurred by breach of contract, but not penalise someone in an unreasonable way. This is what both private parking companies do and clampers. If there was a sign by the parking bay saying "£125 for 5 minutes parking", maybe they'd have a case. Not that anyone would pay £125 for that. Unless you're in Soho!

Edited by 10 Pence Short on Friday 17th July 21:23

Again I disagree, both with how much control Argos are likely to retain over the clampers activities & in regarding the fee as a fine.

The fee is not for losses resulting from the misuse of the parking space, it's reasonable costs in lawfully protecting themselves from that potential loss. It's not a fine for parking there.

[vonhosen]

Dizeee said:

To clarify, the Argos in question has no bearing or working with these guys. They are a seperate outfit employed, one presumes, by some of the residents who also park there. This is a small back door drop off point bheind the shop accpompanied with around other bays. Permits are required to park there, but the rear entrance is signposted "customer collection point" and Argos direct customers there to collect.

VH is probably right and this is the reponse I am awaiting, however, I argue that the signage does not indicate specifics about how long and where must one be etc - it says collection point, and I was collecting, simple as.


I was parked where the red dot is. My route is indicated in blue. A marks Argos, the front of the shop is above it and points out to the pedestrian highstreet.

I personally wouldn't like to gamble on courts seeing collection as to include shopping/purchasing, bearing in mind how restrictively loading/unloading etc is interpreted.

[Dizeee]

Your probably right. But it all comes down to the circs I guess. I am hoping this is just too much of a biscuit take for even the courts to see sense with.

[Timsta]

vonhosen said:

I personally wouldn't like to gamble on courts seeing collection as to include shopping/purchasing, bearing in mind how restrictively loading/unloading etc is interpreted.

I wouldn't worry too much about whether or not you were shopping/collecting or browsing. I think the clampers still fall foul of the "Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999."

An unfair contract is one which is, amongst other things, to the detriment of the consumer and benefit the seller or supplier to an excessive degree.

I would say that the clamping is heavily biased towards the clampers, and therefore unlawful.

I doubt they would like to test that.

[JustinP1]

vonhosen said:

Dizeee said:

To clarify, the Argos in question has no bearing or working with these guys. They are a seperate outfit employed, one presumes, by some of the residents who also park there. This is a small back door drop off point bheind the shop accpompanied with around other bays. Permits are required to park there, but the rear entrance is signposted "customer collection point" and Argos direct customers there to collect.

VH is probably right and this is the reponse I am awaiting, however, I argue that the signage does not indicate specifics about how long and where must one be etc - it says collection point, and I was collecting, simple as.


I was parked where the red dot is. My route is indicated in blue. A marks Argos, the front of the shop is above it and points out to the pedestrian highstreet.

I personally wouldn't like to gamble on courts seeing collection as to include shopping/purchasing, bearing in mind how restrictively loading/unloading etc is interpreted.

How a court may see a council run area as to a private area is completely different.

In this situation it would be entirely decided by the law of contract.

In this situation, the OP was under the understanding that he was there legitimately. If the signage was not specific and somehow their definition is differing then there was no 'meeting of minds' and therefore no valid contract for them to be able to charge a contractual fee upon.

Further to this the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regs would outline where there is not an exact definition of what 'collection' or 'loading' was then it would be interpreted in the way with a bias toward the consumer.

If the OP wasn't there buying a TV he would be on a sticky wicket, but in all accounts to a third party it would seem that he is complied with the spirit of the contract completely. This has been backed up by the lessor of the space.

[vonhosen]

JustinP1 said:

vonhosen said:

Dizeee said:

To clarify, the Argos in question has no bearing or working with these guys. They are a seperate outfit employed, one presumes, by some of the residents who also park there. This is a small back door drop off point bheind the shop accpompanied with around other bays. Permits are required to park there, but the rear entrance is signposted "customer collection point" and Argos direct customers there to collect.

VH is probably right and this is the reponse I am awaiting, however, I argue that the signage does not indicate specifics about how long and where must one be etc - it says collection point, and I was collecting, simple as.


I was parked where the red dot is. My route is indicated in blue. A marks Argos, the front of the shop is above it and points out to the pedestrian highstreet.

I personally wouldn't like to gamble on courts seeing collection as to include shopping/purchasing, bearing in mind how restrictively loading/unloading etc is interpreted.

How a court may see a council run area as to a private area is completely different.

In this situation it would be entirely decided by the law of contract.

In this situation, the OP was under the understanding that he was there legitimately. If the signage was not specific and somehow their definition is differing then there was no 'meeting of minds' and therefore no valid contract for them to be able to charge a contractual fee upon.

Further to this the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regs would outline where there is not an exact definition of what 'collection' or 'loading' was then it would be interpreted in the way with a bias toward the consumer.

If the OP wasn't there buying a TV he would be on a sticky wicket, but in all accounts to a third party it would seem that he is complied with the spirit of the contract completely. This has been backed up by the lessor of the space.

The potential of the outcome is enough for me personally to avoid parking in such places where clamping is advertised.
I suppose if others want to put themselves forward as test cases & through the inconvenience prior to that (even if they are in the end successful) then they are no doubt free to do so.
It's certainly not something that I imagine is going to be resolved to their satisfaction quickly.

Of course we haven't heard what the warning signs say, only that there were signs stating it was parking for collections.

As Dizeee has said though, you won't get the Police intervening on behalf of clamped parkers where there are signs etc.

[jensen2000]

So what's the going rate for a locksmith call-out? I quite fancy doing a locksmith course, specialising in padlock picking. Fixed rate for victims of clamping. Few jobs could be quite so rewarding, although I get the feeling I'd need to ensure my fire insurance was up to date judging by the demographic drawn to the clamping career-path.

Dizzeeeeeee-do not let them get away with it. If the contract so displayed was for collection and does not specifically include purchasing as an exclusion, bearing in mind this is a private contract not highway regs as "loading" is, then surely you have fulfilled the terms of the contract.

Best wishes
Jen

[TOPTON]

Dizeee, in a previous post you have just ended with a statement saying

" it says collection point, and I was collecting, simple as."


You weren't collecting, you were shopping and then collecting. Big difference.

Very unfair to get clamped, but INMHO you were in the wrong and I would guess the small claims court will not back you. Collection points are there for what it says, COLLECTION.

Swap the situation around a little. You walk into Argos to buy a massive tv, pay for it and are told to drive to the collection point at the rear of the building. When you get there, some twunt has parked there and gone. You can't get near the doors to load/collect your massive tv. 10 minutes later, twunt returns and says, sorry it was really busy and I had to que while I was waiting to pay.


"Well why didn't you pay first and then come round here to collect like I did" would be your first response

[Mr Green]

TOPTON said:

Dizeee, in a previous post you have just ended with a statement saying

" it says collection point, and I was collecting, simple as."


You weren't collecting, you were shopping and then collecting. Big difference.

Very unfair to get clamped, but INMHO you were in the wrong and I would guess the small claims court will not back you. Collection points are there for what it says, COLLECTION.

Swap the situation around a little. You walk into Argos to buy a massive tv, pay for it and are told to drive to the collection point at the rear of the building. When you get there, some twunt has parked there and gone. You can't get near the doors to load/collect your massive tv. 10 minutes later, twunt returns and says, sorry it was really busy and I had to que while I was waiting to pay.


"Well why didn't you pay first and then come round here to collect like I did" would be your first response

My thoughts entirely. Suppose you went to collect an item that you as yet haven't purchased(I would call it shopping)and they were out of stock? Would you then be illegally parked? According to your reasoning any one could park in the 'collection only bay' and just go browsing in Argos and come away with the cheapest item they sell after an hour.
It's not on is it.

[esselte]

Dizeee said:

RacerMDR said:

ok - I have questions

1. Is an Argos Angle Grinder man enough to cut the clamp off?
2. Would Bolt cutters get it off?
3. What would be the legality in simply winching YOUR car onto a trailer and driving it away?

I'm assuming ape clamp scum are waiting on site to steal your cash anyway - making all of these options difficult?

Clamper not initially present, but all of the above is criminal damage Im afraid, and theft in number 3 of the clamp, or at least grounds to suspect it in the first instance.

Surely it's no more theft than them "lifting" your car?

[aw51 121565]

Invisible man said:

... I cannot understand why, even our inept bunch of lying crooks, cannot put an end to this parasitic business

This is like playing SimCity, and screwing over the residents financially when funds are running/have run out. As SimCity Mayor with little/no cash, you have a vested interest in doing so - and stuff the residents.

Extend this (admittedly poor) simile to the current administration , eg why on the current clamping consultation (that ends on 23rd July) is there no option to make clamping illegal??? For reasons I daren't even have a stab at, the government seem to wish clamping to continue...

Gruesome, isn't it?

[Mr Green]

esselte said:

Dizeee said:

RacerMDR said:

ok - I have questions

1. Is an Argos Angle Grinder man enough to cut the clamp off?
2. Would Bolt cutters get it off?
3. What would be the legality in simply winching YOUR car onto a trailer and driving it away?

I'm assuming ape clamp scum are waiting on site to steal your cash anyway - making all of these options difficult?

Clamper not initially present, but all of the above is criminal damage Im afraid, and theft in number 3 of the clamp, or at least grounds to suspect it in the first instance.

Surely it's no more theft than them "lifting" your car?

What would happen if you placed a trolly jack under your car and dragged it to a legal parking place complete with clamp, and for good measure chained your car to another car(owned by yourself or a friend)?

[Chrisgr31]

With Argos you can order and reserve online. So the OP could have known the TV was in stock as was merely collecting his order. As part of the collection he had to pay for it.

[HRG.]

Mr Green said:

TOPTON said:

Dizeee, in a previous post you have just ended with a statement saying

" it says collection point, and I was collecting, simple as."


You weren't collecting, you were shopping and then collecting. Big difference.

Very unfair to get clamped, but INMHO you were in the wrong and I would guess the small claims court will not back you. Collection points are there for what it says, COLLECTION.

Swap the situation around a little. You walk into Argos to buy a massive tv, pay for it and are told to drive to the collection point at the rear of the building. When you get there, some twunt has parked there and gone. You can't get near the doors to load/collect your massive tv. 10 minutes later, twunt returns and says, sorry it was really busy and I had to que while I was waiting to pay.


"Well why didn't you pay first and then come round here to collect like I did" would be your first response

My thoughts entirely. Suppose you went to collect an item that you as yet haven't purchased(I would call it shopping)and they were out of stock? Would you then be illegally parked? According to your reasoning any one could park in the 'collection only bay' and just go browsing in Argos and come away with the cheapest item they sell after an hour.
It's not on is it.

In this case the manager of Argos wrote him a letter stating he was using the space Argos use in line with their collection policy. Court should be a walk in the park.

[dcw@pr]

Dizeee said:

sleep envy said:

Dizeee said:

Clamper not initially present, but all of the above is criminal damage Im afraid, and theft in number 3 of the clamp, or at least grounds to suspect it in the first instance.

even if they had unlawfully clamped the car?

It's still their property and the question as to whether it is unlawful or not would not come out until after a long protracted appeals process. Cops aren't judges. The system allows it.

so if i didnt like someone, could I attach a padlock to the towing eye on their car, then when they drive home report them to the police for theft?

[NWTony]

Mr Green said:

TOPTON said:

Dizeee, in a previous post you have just ended with a statement saying

" it says collection point, and I was collecting, simple as."


You weren't collecting, you were shopping and then collecting. Big difference.

Very unfair to get clamped, but INMHO you were in the wrong and I would guess the small claims court will not back you. Collection points are there for what it says, COLLECTION.

Swap the situation around a little. You walk into Argos to buy a massive tv, pay for it and are told to drive to the collection point at the rear of the building. When you get there, some twunt has parked there and gone. You can't get near the doors to load/collect your massive tv. 10 minutes later, twunt returns and says, sorry it was really busy and I had to que while I was waiting to pay.


"Well why didn't you pay first and then come round here to collect like I did" would be your first response

My thoughts entirely. Suppose you went to collect an item that you as yet haven't purchased(I would call it shopping)and they were out of stock? Would you then be illegally parked? According to your reasoning any one could park in the 'collection only bay' and just go browsing in Argos and come away with the cheapest item they sell after an hour.
It's not on is it.

How about you go to collect something but it turns out the Argos computer doesn't tally with the physical stock so it isn't there - are you parked illegally?

[F i F]

Chrisgr31 said:

With Argos you can order and reserve online. So the OP could have known the TV was in stock as was merely collecting his order. As part of the collection he had to pay for it.

Very easy to arrange a simple sting operation based on a true collection. I, for one, would not like to bet against a similar result, ie vehicle clamped and appeal turned down despite letter from manager.

There are many situations where once the cat is out of the bag it's difficult to put it back, but this is solveable, as has been shown in Scotland.

One wonders if there are any MPs with vested interests in this scum industry. Despite all the weasel words on that website it is a marginal operation which relies on fear and ignorance.

[vonhosen]

F i F said:

Chrisgr31 said:

With Argos you can order and reserve online. So the OP could have known the TV was in stock as was merely collecting his order. As part of the collection he had to pay for it.

Very easy to arrange a simple sting operation based on a true collection. I, for one, would not like to bet against a similar result, ie vehicle clamped and appeal turned down despite letter from manager.

There are many situations where once the cat is out of the bag it's difficult to put it back, but this is solveable, as has been shown in Scotland.

One wonders if there are any MPs with vested interests in this scum industry. Despite all the weasel words on that website it is a marginal operation which relies on fear and ignorance.

Or it's providing a legal service to fed up land owners (depending on which you look at it).

[rypt]

vonhosen said:

F i F said:

Chrisgr31 said:

With Argos you can order and reserve online. So the OP could have known the TV was in stock as was merely collecting his order. As part of the collection he had to pay for it.

Very easy to arrange a simple sting operation based on a true collection. I, for one, would not like to bet against a similar result, ie vehicle clamped and appeal turned down despite letter from manager.

There are many situations where once the cat is out of the bag it's difficult to put it back, but this is solveable, as has been shown in Scotland.

One wonders if there are any MPs with vested interests in this scum industry. Despite all the weasel words on that website it is a marginal operation which relies on fear and ignorance.

Or it's providing a legal service to fed up land owners (depending on which you look at it).

Again, if that bay is reserved for Argos pickups then it is surely up to Argos to decide who has the right to use the bay ...

[vonhosen]

rypt said:

vonhosen said:

F i F said:

Chrisgr31 said:

With Argos you can order and reserve online. So the OP could have known the TV was in stock as was merely collecting his order. As part of the collection he had to pay for it.

Very easy to arrange a simple sting operation based on a true collection. I, for one, would not like to bet against a similar result, ie vehicle clamped and appeal turned down despite letter from manager.

There are many situations where once the cat is out of the bag it's difficult to put it back, but this is solveable, as has been shown in Scotland.

One wonders if there are any MPs with vested interests in this scum industry. Despite all the weasel words on that website it is a marginal operation which relies on fear and ignorance.

Or it's providing a legal service to fed up land owners (depending on which you look at it).

Again, if that bay is reserved for Argos pickups then it is surely up to Argos to decide who has the right to use the bay ...

When Argos contract somebody out to enforce that on their behalf they are agreeing the circumstances within which the clampers can take action. They are relinquishing a degree of their control to the agent. If the clampers have clamped in breach of that contract Argos can do something about it, if they haven't Argos can't do jack except try to re-negotiate the contract for the future.

What matters is what's in the contract, not what the Argos manager says (unless of course the contract says his/her decision is final, but of course we are back to the contract).

Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 19th July 10:29