On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:14:47 +0100, "BruceB" wrote:



"Derek Geldard" wrote in message
.. .

How do they prove you read it,, are literate, and understand English ?

How do they prove it was you driving the car?

In the normal way, balance of probabilities when sitting in front of the
judge sitting in the small claims court. If you understand the English the
judge speaks to you he is likely to infer you can read a sign.

Perhaps not well enough to understand a contract

More
difficult to prove it was you driving if you are willing to lie to the
judge.

The judge will not ask the question.

But if the have photo/video or you are the registered keeper with
insurance in your name only then do the math - again balance of
probabilities applies.


Reg no. I can't accept. I have several cars driven by all drivers in
the family, at one time I was a Company Secretary and IIRC had a
couple of dozen cars registered in my name.

It would have to be a good photograph indeed (Probably taken from a
fixed camera) to identify me to the right standard driving behind a
car windscreen.


Anyhow, it is most certainly not the case if there is no provision for
you to negotiate the terms of the contract.

You are dreaming. It is perfectly possible under English law to enter a
contract by your actions without negotiation. Do you negotiate the cost of
electricity, water, gas etc before you start using it when you move into a
house?

Yes to all. But prices don't differ so much as to make it worth
spending much time on the task whilst the moving men are waiting on
the drive chafing at the bit.

Do you fill your tank with petrol and then negotiate a price?

I do it beforehand. True my negotiating position is on the weak side.
Effectively I accept their price or decline it

What position are you in if you draw fuel with no intention of paying
the price displayed. It would appear to be theft.

I do believe "abstracting electricity" (and gas) is an offence in it's
own right as many Cannabis growers have found out to their cost.



Who says they are profitable.

I assert it.

Hmm, some figures would be nice, but 1 mega-quid country wide is not a
whole lot of money (It's 3 houses round here. 1 in Gerrards Cross).

Surely it is obvious that if it were not profitable then the
close to criminal types engaged in clamping activities would not be doing
it. I feel fairly sure I could make a profit charging £250 a time to
unclamp cars.


1 a day and your earnings are on a par with a painter /decorator.
Won't pay many Solicitors/Bailffs/Heavies.


FWIR only one such case has been awarded against a motorist. That
because he thought his case was so self evident he didn't even bother
arguing it in court. but the judge took the view that it wasn't down
to him to argue the case for one or other party.

But you could look at it the other way and say that the millions of
motorists who have paid up and not taken the parking or clamping company to
court have not done so because the likelihood of them winning was low.

The ones of my aquaintance that paid up did so because the penalty
charge invoice was got up to look like an official legal document from
the proper authority, and they knew no better.

I am not saying these implied contracts are always fair in the sense of the
Unfair Contracts Terms Act nor that they may not fall foul of the
prohibition of 'penalties' in normal contract law, just that there is
nothing in principle to stop you entering into a contract by your actions.


You reckon I am bound by a piece of paper I have not seen stuck to a
lamp post in the trees round the corner ? (My particular instance).

In another instance at Mickey D's I simply didn't bother to read the
notice, thought it was an advert . Am I legally bound to read them
all??

How about that then Eh?

Derek