Reverse clamping?
Discussion
Not researched this but.....
I understand that the law behind clamping people parked on private land is based on the law of contract. If I am right, it goes something like this.
The land owner puts up a sign saying that if you park on the land you will be subject to clamping and a fee for release. You see this sign, and if you then park you accept the contract.
If that's right, then....
What if I put a sign in my car saying: This car is private property. If you apply a clamp to this car you accept that it will be destroyed and you agree to pay a fee of £1,000 for the return of the parts.
Would they, on applying the clamp, be accepting that contract under the same law?
I understand that the law behind clamping people parked on private land is based on the law of contract. If I am right, it goes something like this.
The land owner puts up a sign saying that if you park on the land you will be subject to clamping and a fee for release. You see this sign, and if you then park you accept the contract.
If that's right, then....
What if I put a sign in my car saying: This car is private property. If you apply a clamp to this car you accept that it will be destroyed and you agree to pay a fee of £1,000 for the return of the parts.
Would they, on applying the clamp, be accepting that contract under the same law?
Dwight VanDriver said:
Two wrongs don't make a right eliminator... DVD
Very true, like those guys in the film 'The Great Escape' trying to get away. Or self defence - it's wrong to hurt or kill people, whatever the reason. And the french resistance during WWII - bunch of terrorists. I won't even start Luke in 'Star Wars' for his rebellious mayhem to the state.
- just turn the other cheek elim., and while you're at it try overpaying the fines too - the clamping company boss will truely appreciate you
eliminator said:
What if I put a sign in my car saying: This car is private property. If you apply a clamp to this car you accept that it will be destroyed and you agree to pay a fee of £1,000 for the return of the parts.
Would they, on applying the clamp, be accepting that contract under the same law?
You are correct that it is contract law. I believe that you are correct in your suggestion - likewise a sign saying you do not accept the contract is also valid.
Certainly it has been sucessfully argued in the past that where the sign is not clearly visable then no contract exists.
Problem is
1) Your car is still clamped
2) You need to go to court to get them to release it.
Far as I know if your deemed to accept their terms they are deemed to have accepted yours by putting the clamp on, thus stale made.
In theory if it went to court you could win, there is such a case, see below.
The point remains – if they ignore it, your still clamped, you would have to be really determined to go the distance. Its more that with such a notice, they may just think twice to avoid the hassle and move on to the next motor.
In theory if it went to court you could win, there is such a case, see below.
The point remains – if they ignore it, your still clamped, you would have to be really determined to go the distance. Its more that with such a notice, they may just think twice to avoid the hassle and move on to the next motor.
Seems that we should all put this notice on the car. Not intending to park where I might be clamped is one thing, but there are so many stories of people not realising they could get caught. Might make them think, and adds a second line of defence to your "the signs are not obvious" claim.
In law a contract requires 'consideration'. 'Consideration' is usually a payment or something in exchange, ie in consideration of £1 you may park here. The absence of consideration indicates the absence of a contract and its express or implied conditions.
Equally conditions you attach to a contract must be reasonable and known to the other party.
Any notice board including conditions are usually 'an offer to treat' ie an invitation to contract with the other party. If you appear to take up the offer but include your own conditions, then that is not a contract, but a revised 'offer to treat' by you, which has not been accepted and void and the initial 'offer to treat' will supervene.
Equally conditions you attach to a contract must be reasonable and known to the other party.
Any notice board including conditions are usually 'an offer to treat' ie an invitation to contract with the other party. If you appear to take up the offer but include your own conditions, then that is not a contract, but a revised 'offer to treat' by you, which has not been accepted and void and the initial 'offer to treat' will supervene.
kenp said:Ooooooor, bugger.
In law a contract requires 'consideration'. 'Consideration' is usually a payment or something in exchange, ie in consideration of £1 you may park here. The absence of consideration indicates the absence of a contract and its express or implied conditions.
Equally conditions you attach to a contract must be reasonable and known to the other party.
Any notice board including conditions are usually 'an offer to treat' ie an invitation to contract with the other party. If you appear to take up the offer but include your own conditions, then that is not a contract, but a revised 'offer to treat' by you, which has not been accepted and void and the initial 'offer to treat' will supervene.
edc said:
And if you don't pay for the parking because a) it's free (for particular customers etc) or b) you 'forgot', where's the exchange?
a)In consideration of buying from our store, you may park here for free.QED
b)If you forget then you are in breach because you failed with your consideration.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff