What are my legal obligations?

[dogsnbikes]

Back in April of 2010 I allowed a so called friend to park his rotten old boat in our drive as it was only going to be there for a week 10days at the most.....

I have contacted him several times since both by phone and in person Last time was in October 2011 and told him the boat needs too be gone by Dec 2011 and yet the boat or pile of shit still sits in my driveway,I don't want to tow it anywhere as the Trailer is also stuffed and doult it would make it down the road very far

At this point,I see my only options are to get a towie in to take it too the tip or cut the bastard up (the boat I mean) Either way is going to cost me either in time or money

What are your thoughts

[nodrog]

Tow it out onto the road, it will be removed shortly afterwards.

[F5 Dave]

out on the road & call the council

[beat me to it]

[mashman]

cut the bastard up and bury the evidence at sea

[ellipsis]

sign out on the street....'free firewood, on a trailer'...

[sil3nt]

$1 reserve trademe.

[Scuba_Steve]

Sella (no fees then) list under freebies someone will take it :yes:

[pzkpfw]

Geez. I've had this. Mate pissed off to Dunedin (from Wellington) to go to Uni and filled my garge with his crap before he left. It was up to ME to put his stuff in boxes and send to him - using a book of courier stamps he'd got. The bugger even came by Wellington on some holidays and didn't pop-in to help do some packing and sending. Caused big strife between me and Wife, too.

You feel like you want to do right by your mate, but end up feeling used and abused.

Has the guy even replied to your messages?

[nzspokes]

Petrol and a lighter. Add a few beers and a BBQ for a good night. Sorted.

[pzkpfw]

Does the trailer still have a plate? Stick the thing on the road, it'll be him who gets the fines.

[SMOKEU]

Write him a letter stating that he has 14 days to remove the boat from your property. If he fails to remove the boat, you will then have the right to sell it and keep all proceeds to yourself.

Hand the letter to him in person and make sure you have a witness with you so he can't deny anything at a later stage. Sending him the same thing by email would be a good idea, then you have evidence in case he tries to claim theft.

[willytheekid]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_xcmsZvKwSy8/TCkEu4okuGI/AAAAAAAABxc/Xs3I4ioEL3Q/s1600/VikingFuneral.jpghttp://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/ndi0624l.jpg

A good imagination and some clever advertising on Tardme...you could make some serious coin mate :laugh:

[HenryDorsetCase]

Petrol and a lighter. Add a few beers and a BBQ for a good night. Sorted.

this: I'll chip in a box of beers

[dogsnbikes]

Yeah he's replied too to texts etc and Ive even spoken too him in person and its always the same reply "yeah no prob's".....

Have thought about having a taitanic moment in the pool but Ice bergs are bloody hard too come by atm,

As parts fall off it I been cutting them up for fire wood.......I guess I can scrap the trailor and motor and sell the cleets and whinch of the trailer

[scumdog]

Text him;

You: "I see you picked up the boat"

Him: "Nah, wotchoo talkin' 'bout?"

You: "It's gone, I thought you musta picked it up"

And let us know the result...

[Voltaire]

A friend of mine had a similar problem.
Apparently after a day in the Disputes Court you need to have advertised the fact it has been left and to be removed or sold etc in the public notices.....bit old fashioned but that the way it appears to work.
....and it appears unlikely you can charge storage unless agreed earlier in writing.
I would not to anything rash as it may come back and bite you.
Best ask a legal type.

Still the idea of sticking it on TM and sending the link to him has some appeal....

[mashman]

Text him;

You: "I see you picked up the boat"

Him: "Nah, wotchoo talkin' 'bout?"

You: "It's gone, I thought you musta picked it up"

And let us know the result...

Genius Mrs scumdog, if only your husband was as smart...

Doooo eeeeeeet Baaaaaaaaaazzzzaaaaaa

[yachtie10]

Text him;

You: "I see you picked up the boat"

Him: "Nah, wotchoo talkin' 'bout?"

You: "It's gone, I thought you musta picked it up"

And let us know the result...

Best idea yet

I wouldnt sell it as a whole thngs as you may be passing a hassle on to the buyer
but if he doesnt do anything about the text then do what you like

[Usarka]

I would not to anything rash as it may come back and bite you.
Best ask a legal type.


+1. As much as you'd love to sell i'm pretty sure there's a law about how you go about this.

Maybe call the CAB....?

[thecharmed01]

Your best bet is to call a towing firm and get it removed as an illegally parked vehicle.

You've asked the owner to remove it and he hasn't, so you are well within your rights to have it towed from your property as you have revoked your permission to have it parked there.
It's really a very simple process.
Also, the cost to you will be nothing, as the tow firm will attempt to recoup costs from the owner - the owner pays on collection. And should he not bother to pick it up, the tow company are able to make application to dispose of it completely legally, in order to cover their costs.

Means you can wash your hands of it, for a quick phone call to see which of your local tow companies has a truck with a towbar - or a flatdeck.
No disputes tribunal necessary and there is no ability for the owner to come back to you as it's your private property and you don't even have to tell him you have revoked permission :innocent:

[TrentNz]

whats it made out of?
it its mostly all metal scrap it and make some cash from it.

[avgas]

Push it onto road, put a sign saying "Free to a good home", take a photo and send him the photo.

See if he is faster than the local collectors.

[Winston001]

Lots of inventive thinking here lads, I like it. :2thumbsup:

Frankly you need lateral ideas because the strict law is cumbersome to follow.

Very briefly Dogsnbikes, you are a voluntary not-for-reward bailee at will of the boat and trailer. You accepted possession without any requirement for payment. You are responsible for the property to the true owner. Legally you do not own it, you can't destroy it, sell it, or throw it away.

The fact the true owner has broken the agreement and wilfully refuses to remove the boat and trailer does change the legal position in the sense that he would have a hard time getting compensation from you. Its arguable the property is abandoned.

I kinda like simply putting it on the roadside and letting the council take care of it. You can tell the guy first if you feel you ought to.

[caspernz]

Scummy's idea would be my favourite....:innocent:

[tigertim20]

Back in April of 2010 I allowed a so called friend to park his rotten old boat in our drive as it was only going to be there for a week 10days at the most.....

I have contacted him several times since both by phone and in person Last time was in October 2011 and told him the boat needs too be gone by Dec 2011 and yet the boat or pile of shit still sits in my driveway,I don't want to tow it anywhere as the Trailer is also stuffed and doult it would make it down the road very far

At this point,I see my only options are to get a towie in to take it too the tip or cut the bastard up (the boat I mean) Either way is going to cost me either in time or money

What are your thoughts

as I understand, since you agreed to look after it by allowing it on your property, you are responsible for what happens to it while in your care.
My suggestion. send him an email or a text (something with a trail you can prove later that you sent him a message if the shit hits the fan) saying that if he doesnt not remove it with 5 days, it will be put on the road and it will be up to him to take responsibility for it.

if he doesnt pick it up, park it on the road.

youve given notice and its his problem

[nothingflash]

rotten old boat...pile of shit... I don't want to tow it anywhere as the Trailer is also stuffed and doult it would make it down the road very far



...As parts fall off it I been cutting them up for fire wood.......I guess I can scrap the trailor and motor and sell the cleets and whinch of the trailer

I'm picking your so called friend probably doesn't have any long term plans for it. I'd either push it onto the road (in front of the neigbours house of course) and forget about it or have a word with a towie.

The degree of advice you give your friend about it is probably proportionate to the likelihood of you remaining friends with him. Given you ask "us" for advice instead of talking with him about it would tend to suggest you shouldn't bother telling him.

[avgas]

Lots of inventive thinking here lads, I like it. :2thumbsup:

Frankly you need lateral ideas because the strict law is cumbersome to follow.

Very briefly Dogsnbikes, you are a voluntary not-for-reward bailee at will of the boat and trailer. You accepted possession without any requirement for payment. You are responsible for the property to the true owner. Legally you do not own it, you can't destroy it, sell it, or throw it away.

The fact the true owner has broken the agreement and wilfully refuses to remove the boat and trailer does change the legal position in the sense that he would have a hard time getting compensation from you. Its arguable the property is abandoned.

I kinda like simply putting it on the roadside and letting the council take care of it. You can tell the guy first if you feel you ought to.
I thought possession was 9/10th of the law.
Or is that just for drugs.

[p.dath]

Tow it out onto the road, it will be removed shortly afterwards.


out on the road & call the council

[beat me to it]

+1. I'd just move it onto the street. Tell him you moved it there, and he'll need to make arrangements before the council does. It's his responsibility then.

[oldrider]

Neighbours had this sort of problem following a mortgagee sale of a section with two big containers on it!

They bought the section but not the containers ... the legal tangles were a nightmare for them.

They finally were able to sell them and send the owner the money ..... "he sent it back"! :facepalm: .... Banked and sorted! :confused:

[dogsnbikes]

Interesting comments......I couldn't tow it out onto the road as its an eyesore and full of rusty old fish hooks etc and I have really good neighbours,because We dont have any road frontage it feels morally wrong..

I have found the plate on a lighting board that was in the boat and the plates are dead rego ran out 14/02/2001

[thecharmed01]

as I understand, since you agreed to look after it by allowing it on your property, you are responsible for what happens to it while in your care.

ummmmmmmmmm NO.
If that's true, then how the heck do you think carpark owners get on?
They allow you to park any vehicle (which covers a trailer) on their property, but they bear NO responsibility for it at any time.
Just because you allow someone to park their vehicle - or trailer in this case - on your property does NOT mean you have accepted responsibility for it.
In the case of the container, that is the case, as a container is not a vehicle. It is property.

We own a towing firm, and I double checked with our lawyer this morning.
He confirmed that if I was to issue a job of this nature, that my earlier post was correct.
A vehicle (which a trailer is covered under) may be towed from private property with no repercussions to the landowner/tenant who requests the tow.

[oneofsix]

ummmmmmmmmm NO.
If that's true, then how the heck do you think carpark owners get on?
They allow you to park any vehicle (which covers a trailer) on their property, but they bear NO responsibility for it at any time.
Just because you allow someone to park their vehicle - or trailer in this case - on your property does NOT mean you have accepted responsibility for it.
In the case of the container, that is the case, as a container is not a vehicle. It is property.

We own a towing firm, and I double checked with our lawyer this morning.
He confirmed that if I was to issue a job of this nature, that my earlier post was correct.
A vehicle (which a trailer is covered under) may be towed from private property with no repercussions to the landowner/tenant who requests the tow.

Not disagreeing but just interested in clearing a couple of points that occurred to me, and no I haven't read through the whole thread so apologises if these have already been addressed.
In car parks there are signs warning that the landowner doesn't take responsibly for vehicle damage and there is a 'lease' agreement when you purchase the use of the park, usually fine print on the ticket. I understood this is how they limited their liability regarding your vehicle and limited your use of their property thereby giving them the right to remove your vehicle when your use of their property had expired.
From the bit I have read of this thread the OP has made it very clear that the use of his property has long since expired. The bit the OP may be missing is the warning that if the trailer and boat isn't removed he will have it removed at the owner's expense (that fine print on the parking voucher)

[thecharmed01]

Not disagreeing but just interested in clearing a couple of points that occurred to me, and no I haven't read through the whole thread so apologises if these have already been addressed.
In car parks there are signs warning that the landowner doesn't take responsibly for vehicle damage and there is a 'lease' agreement when you purchase the use of the park, usually fine print on the ticket. I understood this is how they limited their liability regarding your vehicle and limited your use of their property thereby giving them the right to remove your vehicle when your use of their property had expired.
From the bit I have read of this thread the OP has made it very clear that the use of his property has long since expired. The bit the OP may be missing is the warning that if the trailer and boat isn't removed he will have it removed at the owner's expense (that fine print on the parking voucher)

With private property, signs and T&C info is actually not required by law.
If it was, every single property in the country would require this, to cover any visitors or residents and that would get ridiculous pretty quickly.
These are done as a courtesy to users.
As soon as you drive off a public road, you are on SOMEONE'S private property. As such, think of it like entering a small country - the owner/tenant of the property set the rules.
So everyone will be different. Some will allow anyone use of their property for parking, others wont. But it's up to you the visitor to find out how the owner works things on their property.
They don't have to tell you - you have to ask.

With commercial carparks, if you have paid a fee to park, it's a contract between you and the property owner, to allow you to be there. But there are still no actual laws surrounding it - scary right. However you are covered under the contracts act, whereby if they towed you without reason, you have a comeback if they haven't stuck to their end of the contract.

With private property, even if you have express permission to park on someone's lawn, should they decide at ANY time they have changed their mind, they have every right to remove you without notice.
They don't have to tell you, it's their property, their rules and they call the shots.
Something to be aware of next time you ask to park at a mates place while you go into town - we've towed hundreds of cars because the wife/flatmate/husband had no idea whose car was in the driveway or on the lawn. In most cases we've had, the person who called for the tow has paid the bill as it's been towed by mistake and we often discount it for this reason. But they have to jump through hoops first :P

[dogsnbikes]

Thanks Charmed01 I off on a Mish

[p.dath]

...
With commercial carparks, if you have paid a fee to park, it's a contract between you and the property owner, to allow you to be there. But there are still no actual laws surrounding it - scary right. However you are covered under the contracts act, whereby if they towed you without reason, you have a comeback if they haven't stuck to their end of the contract.
...

I disagree. I would think both the Consumers Guarantee Act and the Fair Trading Act apply.

With regards to the CGA, I pay to park may vehicle in a car park with the expectation that it will be safe. Why else would I use such a service? Otherwise I wouldn't bother parking it there. Would a reasonable consumer park their car in a car park, and pay for the service if there was a reasonable expectation of if not being safe?
The CGA requires that the service I am paying for be fit for the purpose.

I don't think that putting up a sign saying "all care no responsibility" for my car in their pay car park could be sufficient to contract out of the CGA.

Would love to see a test case.

[Drunken Monkey]

We are also having ongoing carparking issues. Charmed01 is 100% correct. For specific references, look up:

Distress damage fesant

Jamieson's Tow and Salvage v Murray (High Court)

Arthur v Anker (UK law, but applies here - see Christchurch and Auckland district court references to this case)

Land Transport Act 1998 PART 7 - DISQUALIFICATION, DEMERIT POINTS, LICENCE SUSPENSION, AND VEHICLE IMPOUNDMENT

[chanceyy]

hmm bonfire tonite when I get there Baz ?? :lol:

[thecharmed01]

We are also having ongoing carparking issues. Charmed01 is 100% correct. For specific references, look up:

Distress damage fesant

Jamieson's Tow and Salvage v Murray (High Court)

Arthur v Anker (UK law, but applies here - see Christchurch and Auckland district court references to this case)

Land Transport Act 1998 PART 7 - DISQUALIFICATION, DEMERIT POINTS, LICENCE SUSPENSION, AND VEHICLE IMPOUNDMENT

tee hee

We own Jamieson's Tow & Salvage :Punk:

[thecharmed01]

I disagree. I would think both the Consumers Guarantee Act and the Fair Trading Act apply.

With regards to the CGA, I pay to park may vehicle in a car park with the expectation that it will be safe. Why else would I use such a service? Otherwise I wouldn't bother parking it there. Would a reasonable consumer park their car in a car park, and pay for the service if there was a reasonable expectation of if not being safe?
The CGA requires that the service I am paying for be fit for the purpose.

I don't think that putting up a sign saying "all care no responsibility" for my car in their pay car park could be sufficient to contract out of the CGA.

Would love to see a test case.

Actually that's 100% right, you see, while the carpark owner, would be responsible if you could somehow prove they themselves caused damage to your vehicle, they have no control over other people or what happens while your vehicle is parked.
If your car is dinged by another person parking, then it's tough luck I'm afraid. The owner of the park doesn't even have an obligation to help you find out who damaged your car.
The contract between you and a carpark, is that you give them a set fee, for permission to place your vehicle on their property. Nothing more.
They don't guarantee that your car will be 100% safe (except of course in the cases of premium carparks where they do offer that type of security at large costs) much in the same way that renting a house, will never warranty you for a random person to come and break your windows, or break in and steal stuff, or even just throw a molotov cocktail at it as they go past - extreme ideas, but should that happen to you, are you really silly enough to think you can claim it off your landlord? Doubtful...

[dogsnbikes]

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woo hoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::wooho o::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woo hoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::wooho o::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
THE BOAT IS GONE

Made a susprise visit too the owner just before 11 this morning(he wasn't expecting that)

After a civil chat and confirming that he was happy for me to dispose of the boat,I rang the local tip about disposing of it in general rubbish and was given a number of a old fella(his dad) building a boat,who has just taken it away,he wanted too pay me for it but I said No your doing me a favour,he reakon I was doing him a favour as it had all the controls,motor and boat bits he needed,so we agreed he would drop of some fresh fish when he gets out fishing :yes:

[nzspokes]

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woo hoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::wooho o::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woo hoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::wooho o::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
THE BOAT IS GONE

Made a susprise visit too the owner just before 11 this morning(he wasn't expecting that)

After a civil chat and confirming that he was happy for me to dispose of the boat,I rang the local tip about disposing of it in general rubbish and was given a number of a old fella(his dad) building a boat,who has just taken it away,he wanted too pay me for it but I said No your doing me a favour,he reakon I was doing him a favour as it had all the controls,motor and boat bits he needed,so we agreed he would drop of some fresh fish when he gets out fishing :yes:

Perfect outcome. :wings:

[merv]

Yes good outcome Baz - hope the fish come soon too.

[p.dath]

Actually that's 100% right, you see, while the carpark owner, would be responsible if you could somehow prove they themselves caused damage to your vehicle, they have no control over other people or what happens while your vehicle is parked.
If your car is dinged by another person parking, then it's tough luck I'm afraid. The owner of the park doesn't even have an obligation to help you find out who damaged your car.
The contract between you and a carpark, is that you give them a set fee, for permission to place your vehicle on their property. Nothing more....

Again, I don't agree. It doesn't matter what the implied contract is - the CGA gives me additional rights, specifically, it gives me "guarantees".

For example:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0091/latest/DLM312839.html#DLM312839

28. Subject to section 41, where services are supplied to a consumer there is a guarantee that the service will be carried out with reasonable care and skill.

If I park at Wilson Parking, and upon return to my vehicle I find it is damaged (doesn't matter by whoom) can you reasonably say that the service was carried out with reasonable care and skill to prevent the damage? Chances are the Wilson car park is unmanned, and they took no measures what soever to protect my vehicle. Is that a demonstration of reasonable care and skill? Simply accepting my money does not demonstrate either care or skill in providing the service.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0091/latest/DLM312840.html#DLM312840

29. Guarantee as to fitness for particular purpose
Subject to section 41, where services are supplied to a consumer there is a guarantee that the service, and any product resulting from the service, will be—
(a) reasonably fit for any particular purpose; and
(b) of such a nature and quality that it can reasonably be expected to achieve any particular result,—
that the consumer makes known to the supplier, before or at the time of the making of the contract for the supply of the service, as the particular purpose for which the service is required or the result that the consumer desires to achieve, as the case may be, except where the circumstances show that—
(c) the consumer does not rely on the supplier's skill or judgment; or
(d) it is unreasonable for the consumer to rely on the supplier's skill or judgment.

So lets say I write to Wilson Parking, making it known that I expect my vehicle to be safe and free from damage while in their care. I turn up, the the machine accepts my money - they are now contracted. I experience damage to my car. It was under their care. The CGA guarantees me that the parking service will will be reasonably fit to achieve the expected result.


Like I say, there needs to be a test case. I'm not at all convinced that by simply putting up a sign saying they accept no liability for damage to your property while in their care is sufficient to contract out of the guarantee made in law.

[Winston001]

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woo hoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::wooho o::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woo hoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::wooho o::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
THE BOAT IS GONE



Excellent result. Might I add that you seem to be a very decent bloke. You've been treated badly by a friend and yet you haven't taken direct action without considering your neighbours and giving the guy every chance to get his property.

The world is a better place with people like you. :niceone:

[scumdog]

If I park at Wilson Parking, and upon return to my vehicle I find it is damaged (doesn't matter by whoom) can you reasonably say that the service was carried out with reasonable care and skill to prevent the damage? Chances are the Wilson car park is unmanned, and they took no measures what soever to protect my vehicle. Is that a demonstration of reasonable care and skill? Simply accepting my money does not demonstrate either care or skill in providing the service.


So lets say I write to Wilson Parking, making it known that I expect my vehicle to be safe and free from damage while in their care. I turn up, the the machine accepts my money - they are now contracted. I experience damage to my car. It was under their care. The CGA guarantees me that the parking service will will be reasonably fit to achieve the expected result.



Sooo. you park in George Street, put your money in the meter and walk off for half an hour.

You come back and your car has been backed into, its healight and grille smashed and no note on your windscreen saying 'sorry, here's my number, call me'.

You can't remember what sort of car had been parked on front of you let alone it's rego.

Do you sue the City Council??:blink:

[thecharmed01]

Again, I don't agree. It doesn't matter what the implied contract is - the CGA gives me additional rights, specifically, it gives me "guarantees".

For example:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0091/latest/DLM312839.html#DLM312839


If I park at Wilson Parking, and upon return to my vehicle I find it is damaged (doesn't matter by whoom) can you reasonably say that the service was carried out with reasonable care and skill to prevent the damage? Chances are the Wilson car park is unmanned, and they took no measures what soever to protect my vehicle. Is that a demonstration of reasonable care and skill? Simply accepting my money does not demonstrate either care or skill in providing the service.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0091/latest/DLM312840.html#DLM312840


So lets say I write to Wilson Parking, making it known that I expect my vehicle to be safe and free from damage while in their care. I turn up, the the machine accepts my money - they are now contracted. I experience damage to my car. It was under their care. The CGA guarantees me that the parking service will will be reasonably fit to achieve the expected result.


Like I say, there needs to be a test case. I'm not at all convinced that by simply putting up a sign saying they accept no liability for damage to your property while in their care is sufficient to contract out of the guarantee made in law.

Good luck, I would put money on you losing....

[F5 Dave]

Excellent result. Might I add that you seem to be a very decent bloke. You've been treated badly by a friend and yet you haven't taken direct action without considering your neighbours and giving the guy every chance to get his property.

The world is a better place with people like you. :niceone:

Indeed. . . . So now it is time to plot revenge. :2guns:

Don't happen to own a CX400 custom or an XZ550 you can abandon at his place do you?

[p.dath]

Sooo. you park in George Street, put your money in the meter and walk off for half an hour.

You come back and your car has been backed into, its healight and grille smashed and no note on your windscreen saying 'sorry, here's my number, call me'.

You can't remember what sort of car had been parked on front of you let alone it's rego.

Do you sue the City Council??:blink:

Like I say, I would like to see a test case to see the limits of the CGA in this regard. It would seem to me that the council is providing a service, and again I ask, can it be said they cook reasonable care in providing the service?

[Winston001]

We are also having ongoing carparking issues. Charmed01 is 100% correct. For specific references, look up:

Distress damage feasant

Jamieson's Tow and Salvage v Murray (High Court)

Arthur v Anker (UK law, but applies here - see Christchurch and Auckland district court references to this case)

Land Transport Act 1998 PART 7 - DISQUALIFICATION, DEMERIT POINTS, LICENCE SUSPENSION, AND VEHICLE IMPOUNDMENT

Haven't looked at this stuff for years - good man for posting references.

P.dath asks the right questions but so far as I recall car park operators now cover themselves very effectively.

Going back to first principles, if you rent/lease a storage space to somebody for a fee, you owe a duty of care to the owner to protect that property. A private car park = storage space. Technically you are a bailee for reward.

This is in everyone's interests: the park owner gets paid and knows to keep his eyes open for risks, the car owner knows his vehicle is safe.

But there have been various cases over the years where vehicles were damaged by third parties and naturally carpark operators have moved to limit their liability...to nothing. Fair enough.

[bikaholic]

Ah but in this scenario there is no consideration, so no contract.

[FJRider]

Ah but in this scenario there is no consideration, so no contract.

I hope none of you find yourselves (or have found yourselves) ... in the position (or similar) of the boat owner in question ...

[bikaholic]

Like I say, I would like to see a test case to see the limits of the CGA in this regard. It would seem to me that the council is providing a service, and again I ask, can it be said they cook reasonable care in providing the service?You would have to weigh up the service the carpark is actually supppling versus the service you think you are buying, and what is reasonable practise in the industry generally, and then prove they where negligent.

[merv]

.... but you guys are pleased Baz got the boat moved aren't ya :yes:

[bikaholic]

I hope none of you find yourselves (or have found yourselves) ... in the position (or similar) of the boat owner in question ...Don't get what you are saying there FJ. Consideration is the exchange of benefits, goods or performance for each other or money, which makes a contract enforcable. No consideration = no binding contract.

[FJRider]

Don't get what you are saying there FJ. Consideration is the exchange of benefits, goods or performance for each other or money, which makes a contract enforcable. No consideration = no binding contract.

You get what you pay for ... a $2 parking ticket gets you a space to park your vehicle for a specified time. (usually stated on the receit ticket) anything else is NOT part of the contract. (unless stated ON that ticket) THEY provide a service (a place to park) you PAY for that service.
If YOU think there is a risk parking there ... dont park there ... (or increase your own insurance)

To EXPECT anything more from YOUR $2 is foolish ... at best.

[bikaholic]

You get what you pay for ... a $2 parking ticket gets you a space to park your vehicle for a specified time. (usually stated on the receit ticket) anything else is NOT part of the contract. (unless stated ON that ticket) THEY provide a service (a place to park) you PAY for that service.
If YOU think there is a risk parking there ... dont park there ... (or increase your own insurance)

To EXPECT anything more from YOUR $2 is foolish ... at best.Agree, implying ones own contract on the other party would be foolish without their consent.

[FJRider]

Agree, implying ones own contract on the other party would be foolish without their consent.

"Terms of contract" are usually on signs in the area, or printed ON the receit.

And as far as Dunedin goes ... to pay money to a council that prides itself on it's Scottish traditions and ancestory ... and expect value for money ... :killingme

[bikaholic]

And as far as Dunedin goes ... to pay money to a council that prides itself on it's Scottish traditions and ancestory ... and expect value for money ... :killingmeInverscaregill is the best, during Burt Munroe week, motorbikes parked all over the footpaths in town, even if metered parking is available. Never seen anyone ticketed during that week. (the only week i ever go to Invers anyway).

[FJRider]

Inverscaregill is the best, during Burt Munroe week, motorbikes parked all over the footpaths in town, even if metered parking is available. Never seen anyone ticketed during that week. (the only week i ever go to Invers anyway).

The parking warden takes her holiday that week ... :laugh:

[bikaholic]

The parking warden takes her holiday that week ... :laugh:Well their mayor had to ask 'who ol' fart' was.

[thecharmed01]

.... but you guys are pleased Baz got the boat moved aren't ya :yes:

Absolutely!!!

[oneofsix]

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woo hoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::wooho o::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woo hoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::wooho o::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::w oohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
THE BOAT IS GONE

Made a susprise visit too the owner just before 11 this morning(he wasn't expecting that)

After a civil chat and confirming that he was happy for me to dispose of the boat,I rang the local tip about disposing of it in general rubbish and was given a number of a old fella(his dad) building a boat,who has just taken it away,he wanted too pay me for it but I said No your doing me a favour,he reakon I was doing him a favour as it had all the controls,motor and boat bits he needed,so we agreed he would drop of some fresh fish when he gets out fishing :yes:


Well done, both the result and your handling of the issue.

[Winston001]

Ah but in this scenario there is no consideration, so no contract.

Yezzz true that. In which case the duties lie in tort which does provide remedies.

[oldrider]

Excellent result. Might I add that you seem to be a very decent bloke. You've been treated badly by a friend and yet you haven't taken direct action without considering your neighbours and giving the guy every chance to get his property.

The world is a better place with people like you. :niceone:

I second that opinion (or is that impression?) you done good! I am impressed! :confused:

[bikaholic]

A boat for disposal, You Tube, ummm, something great could have happened there (evil).

[rainman]

a $2 parking ticket

Clearly, you don't live in Auckland.

[TrentNz]

So.. no gearbox on his doorstep then :no:

[Brett]

Again, I don't agree. It doesn't matter what the implied contract is - the CGA gives me additional rights, specifically, it gives me "guarantees".

For example:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0091/latest/DLM312839.html#DLM312839


If I park at Wilson Parking, and upon return to my vehicle I find it is damaged (doesn't matter by whoom) can you reasonably say that the service was carried out with reasonable care and skill to prevent the damage? Chances are the Wilson car park is unmanned, and they took no measures what soever to protect my vehicle. Is that a demonstration of reasonable care and skill? Simply accepting my money does not demonstrate either care or skill in providing the service.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0091/latest/DLM312840.html#DLM312840


So lets say I write to Wilson Parking, making it known that I expect my vehicle to be safe and free from damage while in their care. I turn up, the the machine accepts my money - they are now contracted. I experience damage to my car. It was under their care. The CGA guarantees me that the parking service will will be reasonably fit to achieve the expected result.


Like I say, there needs to be a test case. I'm not at all convinced that by simply putting up a sign saying they accept no liability for damage to your property while in their care is sufficient to contract out of the guarantee made in law.

Interesting argument.

In terms of your Wilson argument (which I don't disagree with by the way) it could be argued that Wilsons are providing a self storage facility (ie you park it, pay for the time parked, but it isn't their responsibility to also ensure security and protection necessarily, ie they could choose to stipulate this in their terms and conditions).
Also, would sending them a letter and then walking up to an automatic machine and popping in some money actually create a contract? Law 101 states that in order to create a valid contract, there are 3 essential requirements:
1) That the parties intend the agreement to be legally binding
2) That the agreement has been made via the acceptance of an offer and
3) That the obligations of the parties are supported by consideration.

If Wilson have not been able to respond to you agreeing to your letter, then this has not formed part of the acceptance (change in terms of contract) surely as the law requires some outward sign from Wilsons showing that they accept the altered terms of the contract from you? (This is assuming that it isn't covered somewhere in their Terms & Conditions).

Your argument could apply to any similar parking situation such as a mall then surely? Given that consideration doesn't need to be in cash, nor does it have to be fair in value, it could also be argued that by going to the mall and parking in their parking lot constitutes a type of contract. (Shop here at our mall and we will let you park your car here...) But I have never heard of a mall accepting responsibility for the vehicles parked there that get damaged, broken in to etc.