Indeed. Our 'local' Costco is a fifty mile round trip, and again, probably four times a year. I've just renewed the subscription, and am not convinced it is worthwhile. Having said that, Wifey had a free eye test there, and bought specs for far less than high street prices, so perhaps that alone makes it worthwhile for another year.
In my case, yes. But I do only tend to speak for myself, not others.
You'd obviously prefer the smell of pigs.
That certainly says you're not speaking from experience.
Which is why you use the very good PT for those sort of journeys.
Not sure I'd take your views on who is and isn't unappealing as relevant. ;-)
As it is in just about every UK city.
Stay at home, then.
They have my name (obviously) and the time and date. Both appear on my till receipt. All that's needed is look up the branch records corresponding to those. After all they will likely have logged what was bought for marketing purposes. Do you really thing they can't do something as simple as this? After all, it's hardly going to be the first time it was needed.
no you didn't
you said:
"As to Beavis I'm not aware of any judgement being made"
tim
Even the till receipt has my name on it.
My feeling exactly. And although I could easily enough provide a copy of the receipt in this instance, I wouldn't be able to if it was simply groceries, as I don't keep those. And it would be a very odd shopper who did.
The principle being that the fine does not conform to the assumption that it must be a reasonable estimate of actual loss.
The case is arguable (if you have unlimited pockets)
tim
I don't agree
the offence is one of "forgetting to enter his details at the time"
as such it IS the OP's job to prove that they were otherwise entitled to free parking, It is this mistake which has caused the company the inconvenience of establishing this, so it is HIS task to prove it.
tim
When did you start reading Shakespeare?
They have parrots in them round here. Nasty things which make a lot of noise. And a particularly unpleasant one.
Yes - it took quite some time for the first letter to arrive.
As it happened I'd used the same Lidl later, and realised they'd not stopped the till person having to log your car number. So was half expecting it.
Interesting. We don't have an Aldi close enough yet - although one is due to open shortly.
Lidl salad and fruit isn't as good as Tesco. Not really sure about price as I tend to buy that sort of thing on quality.
We get lots of Parakeets around here and they make an awful screeching sound.
I hadn't realised that banks passed the cardholder's name to the retailer as part of the transaction and don't recall ever having had a receipt of this kind showing my name. Obviously Lidl do collect and print the name though. I've learned something.
I suppose it's easier to send out a letter saying 'Dear xxxx, you owe us £x for parking in Lidl's car park' than ask Lidl 'we see a car kept by xxxxx was parked in your car park between xx.xx and yy.yy . Could you look and see if a card transaction in that name was made at that time?'.
Not my job to enter the details. The checkout person does this. And failed to do so on this occasion.
Bollocks. It is their job to prove an 'offence' took place. It's not my job to prove my innocence.
Yup - that's them. They've got as far away from the parrot person as possible. Who wouldn't?
And you're right. Just looked at the receipt and there isn't a name on it. Or even the full card number. Which means it's of no use on its own to prove I made a purchase when I said I did as I could simply have picked one up from the carpark floor, or out of a trolley, etc. Unless the receipt number is cross referenced to the actual purchase, which then is cross referenced to me.
Sorry about that. But I'm pretty certain they'd know the name too - it's hardly a secret being printed on the card.
The Lidl receipt that I've just found does not have my name on it, but of course, my credit card has my name embossed on it.
What area are you in? We are in Langley, Berkshire.
How ?
If the level of the fine was known beforehand then it was open to the appelant to make that calculation beforehand and decide whether to risk incurring the fine or not.
Nobody at any time forced him to contravene those parking regulations.
michael adams
...
(if you have unlimited pockets)
Which is correct. The judgement in question is the one which is yet to be announced upon which people can base their future conduct.
Nobody is going to base their conduct on judgements which have been appealed; and which from that moment on are reduced to total irrelevance.
The first page of hits on google for "Beavis" "parking" mainly features appealed judgements concerning his case. Or are you unaware of that fact ?
michael adams
...
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required