# What's worse than parking in a disabled space?



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Parking in two disabled spaces in a range rover!

I couldn't believe this jerk! No there wasn't any disabled sticker :evil:


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

P.S. FLAME ROOM :wink:


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Did you accidentally lean on his car and let the rivets on your jeans leave an imprint?


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

'lean on it'? I would have introduced his f*cking paintwork to my keys!! :x


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

I was sorely tempted to let his tyres down. It would also be good if someone did a line in disposable wheel clamps :twisted:


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

Would have been nice to see some one park behind him and block him in for a few days


----------



## The Silver Surfer (May 14, 2002)

John-H said:


> I was sorely tempted to let his tyres down. It would also be good if someone did a line in disposable wheel clamps :twisted:


John, you're too nice a chap to be doing any of these things.

Outrageous bit of parking though. :x


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

The Silver Surfer said:


> John-H said:
> 
> 
> > I was sorely tempted to let his tyres down. It would also be good if someone did a line in disposable wheel clamps :twisted:
> ...


Yes I was only dreaming.. . besides knowing my luck the vehicle was probably accidentally abandoned there when the driver had a heart attack whilst manoevering and was rushed to hospital leaving seven starving children and various pets which have now had to be taken in by the RSPCA and it's all very sad and I'd feel guilty. Somehow I doubt that's the case though :roll:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

In fairness they dont look big enough to be disabled spots. IF it was a disabled driver then i wouldn't blame him for parking like that.


----------



## The Silver Surfer (May 14, 2002)

Toshiba said:


> In fairness they dont look big enough to be disabled spots.


WTF has the size of the spaces or 'spots' got to do with anything!? :?:

They are disabled spaces. End of!



Toshiba said:


> IF it was a disabled driver then i wouldn't blame him for parking like that.





John-H said:


> ...*No there wasn't any disabled sticker *:evil:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

The Silver Surfer said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > In fairness they dont look big enough to be disabled spots.
> ...


You are missing the context of what i said. I said 'IF'
Maybe the driver simply forgot to put the badge up - or maybe hes a cock, maybe another drivers parked too far over the line and has since left.


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Toshiba said:


> maybe hes a cock,


Don't think you need the maybe , he drives a Range Rover :wink: .


----------



## The Silver Surfer (May 14, 2002)

Toshiba said:


> ...maybe another drivers parked too far over the line and has since left.


Are you looking at the same picture? :roll:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Im playing devil advocate. I would have parked length ways and took up 3 spots. Hes clearly an amature at this parking lark.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

TT2BMW said:


> 'lean on it'? I would have introduced his f*cking paintwork to my keys!! :x


Wow, what a big man you are! I'm sure that would help the situation.

Providing you are being serious you're as bad as he is... in fact, you are worse than he is by a long mile if that's your attitude.


----------



## Duncdude (Feb 27, 2007)

Class example of a very emotive subject. This kind of parking/attitude p*sses me off to the point that i usually want to take some action.
I watched an ignorant Asian guy park his Toyota in a disabled bay at my local Asda. On his own and no sign of any disabled badge, i asked him if he had a badge to allow him to park there but unfortunately _he couldnt speak English_. Gave up the discussion after a few minutes cos i think to most people it just seemed like i was 'on one' and at worst was maybe displaying some undesireable social tendencies :? 
I couldnt condone damaging someones car over this sort of display of rudeness, but i'd challenge someone verbally again. Hopefully it might just embarrass them enough... But then again, probably not :x


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Duncdude said:


> Class example of a very emotive subject. This kind of parking/attitude p*sses me off to the point that i usually want to take some action.
> I watched an ignorant Asian guy park his Toyota in a disabled bay at my local Asda. On his own and no sign of any disabled badge, i asked him if he had a badge to allow him to park there but unfortunately _he couldnt speak English_. Gave up the discussion after a few minutes cos i think to most people it just seemed like i was 'on one' and at worst was maybe displaying some undesireable social tendencies :?
> I couldnt condone damaging someones car over this sort of display of rudeness, but i'd challenge someone verbally again. Hopefully it might just embarrass them enough... But then again, probably not :x


Fact is, you don't need a disabled badge to park in a 'disabled' bay at your local Asda.


----------



## Duncdude (Feb 27, 2007)

> Fact is, you don't need a disabled badge to park in a 'disabled' bay at your local Asda.


Well thats a surprise to me :? How does that work then?


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Duncdude said:


> > Fact is, you don't need a disabled badge to park in a 'disabled' bay at your local Asda.
> 
> 
> Well thats a surprise to me :? How does that work then?


It doesn't. Private parking is a world apart from council / warden / police enforced legislation.

There's no 'law' which allows for a disabled bay (or any other bay) on private property. Sure, they can issue you with a 'ticket' for contravening their 'rules', but it has no more legal authority than an invoice.


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

My local Sainsburys used to read out the registration numbers of cars parked in the disabled spaces and asked for them to be moved but they seem to have given up on that. Perhaps a large obvious sticker on the windscreen would provide enough embarrassment factor?


----------



## QuackingPlums (Mar 10, 2004)

jampott said:


> Private parking is a world apart from council / warden / police enforced legislation.
> 
> There's no 'law' which allows for a disabled bay (or any other bay) on private property. Sure, they can issue you with a 'ticket' for contravening their 'rules', but it has no more legal authority than an invoice.


So how does it work if there's a sign stating the terms and conditions (including the use of bays marked for disabled people/people with children) and that by parking here you accept the terms? Some supermarkets have clampers working in their carparks now and we all know how keen these cowboys are to clamp you! :?


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

QuackingPlums said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > Private parking is a world apart from council / warden / police enforced legislation.
> ...


Clamping is a bit different, it relies on the tort of trespass, whereas the 'tickets' are invoices in relation to an alleged 'contract'.

If you get a 'private' parking ticket, they'll contact the DVLA for your details and write to the Registered Keeper with an 'invoice'.

If there *was* an implied contract entered into, it is by the driver, not the registered keeper.

So, as the registered keeper, you can write back and tell them to send their invoice to the driver. As they've entered into a contract with the driver, presumably they have the driver's details? :lol: :lol: 8) Unlike a proper PCN or FPN, the registered keeper has no obligation to name the driver...

Once again, as a contract, they can only claim liquidated damages, even if its proven there IS a contract. You have to laugh at the 'free' car parks which suddenly charge you Â£75 if you overstay your 2 hours by 10 minutes. The opportunity cost of you taking that space is precisely Â£0. So their maximum damages claim is Â£0.

It doesn't take much effort to stitch these cowboys up like kippers.


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

jampott said:


> QuackingPlums said:
> 
> 
> > jampott said:
> ...


Well, even more so in Scotland, where you can put a notice in your window reserving the right to remove by force if necessary any wheel clamp that consequently is fitted to your car.

The point I was making was more a social one. Many times my parents who are both disabled are forced to park some distance from the supermarket entrance because the disabled spaces are full of lazy inconsiderate people who will only be "five minutes".


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

Even if we assume that this vehicle has been wilfully parked, as in the picture, this incident is essentially just a bit of trivia. However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.

Where there are consequences attached to a personâ€™s actions, there surely is the possibility that the perpetrator, having suffered those consequences, just might not do the same thing again.

As an example of being the nice guy I will leave it to others to decide what punishment the driver of the 4 x 4 vehicle should receive :wink:

Joe


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

TTCool said:


> Even if we assume that this vehicle has been wilfully parked, as in the picture, this incident is essentially just a bit of trivia. However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.
> 
> Where there are consequences attached to a personâ€™s actions, there surely is the possibility that the perpetrator, having suffered those consequences, just might not do the same thing again.
> 
> ...


Fancy bumping into you on the sidelines Joe :wink:


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

John-H said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > Even if we assume that this vehicle has been wilfully parked, as in the picture, this incident is essentially just a bit of trivia. However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.
> ...


Hi John

Have your knees recovered from Donington yet? I bet they were trembling twenty to the dozen :roll:

I usually read all the sections on this Forum, so don't think you can escape me so easily :lol:

Joe


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

TTCool said:


> Even if we assume that this vehicle has been wilfully parked, as in the picture, this incident is essentially just a bit of trivia. However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.
> 
> Where there are consequences attached to a personâ€™s actions, there surely is the possibility that the perpetrator, having suffered those consequences, just might not do the same thing again.
> 
> ...


Actually I disagree. Keeping your cool whilst those around you are losing theirs is, in my opinion, more the mark of a gentleman than wading in with retaliation. Ok, so a quiet word with whoever parked that car might be in order, but that in itself is NOT retaliation, but 'education'.

I'm getting a bit disturbed by the number of people, new and old, who think that retaliation is advisable and generally acceptable. Especially for incidents where no harm has been done, especially to the person considering the retaliation!


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

jampott said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > Even if we assume that this vehicle has been wilfully parked, as in the picture, this incident is essentially just a bit of trivia. However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.
> ...


Pot calling the kettle black. Is their a big difference between a Disabled Space & a Parent & Child space?? :wink: :wink: So hoped you'd wade into this one & i'm not totally blameless.

Anyway, back to the matter in hand. Is it really such a big deal that this muppet parked his Range Rover in 2 disabled spaces?? Yes he is thoughtless, but it's hardly the crime of the century & i think keying or damaging his car merely for poor parking is a tad excessive.

How often do we encounter a total knob jockey on the roads?? Fcuk me if i retaliated everytime i saw something than pi$$ed me off, i'd no doubt be well & truly banged up by now.

Flip side, if a saw an adult hit a child (i mean proper hit/beat, not smack) or probably a man hitting a woman, then i'd be the 1st to wade in, but some pi$$ poor parking would at best get me to mutter the words w4nker & little more than that TBH.


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

jampott said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > Even if we assume that this vehicle has been wilfully parked, as in the picture, this incident is essentially just a bit of trivia. However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.
> ...


Tim

I'm not entirely sure why you have quoted me here. Your worries should not involve me. I'm with you all the way. I made no reference to retaliation in the sense that damage to persons or property should be condoned. I said that people should not get away with their misdemeanours and that others should decide what action should be taken. Maybe that would involve the judiciary or the owners of the car park and their conditions of use. It would take an upstanding and possibly a brave man to have a word with this driver. I think it could easily degenerate into a case of verbal pugilism or worse. The problem is that slack discipline breeds anarchy and affords a belly laugh for the type who does this kind of thing. I said at the outset that the parking misdemeanour was just a bit of trivia, but it represents a widespread disregard for other people which is all too prevalent these days.

If the last parking spot were to be occupied by an able-bodied person, there is no reason why the disabled person could not park in an available space elsewhere, although there might not be quite as much room to manoeuvre.

Believe me I have seen plenty of able-bodied people using their granddadâ€™s parking disc in my time, so it can work both ways, but that's another story. I once asked one them what was wrong with him. He said "Oh it's OK the permit is my dad's". You have to laugh sometimes.

Anyway, Tim, not to worry, I'm the least of your concerns.

Joe


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

> However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.


If that statement DOESN'T mean that retaliation is the way forward, then it is very ambiguous...



> Anyway, Tim, not to worry, I'm the least of your concerns.


I'm not aware that I have any concerns... :wink:


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

W7 PMC said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > TTCool said:
> ...


So is it just a matter of degrees then? If the crime fits...

Joe


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

jampott said:


> > However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.
> 
> 
> If that statement DOESN'T mean that retaliation is the way forward, then it is very ambiguous...
> ...


Tim

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. If you want the last word type Q.E.D. now or if you prefer "quod erat demonstrandum".

Regards

Joe


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

TTCool said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > > However, the attitude of some people who say that retaliation is â€˜not onâ€™, is just a little disturbing. Being the nice guy is the easiest job in the world. It takes a man to sort out the indiscretions of the offending types.
> ...


I have to admit, apart from the Latin bits, I haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about.

Nothing to do with the 'last word', I just haven't got a fucking clue what you're trying to say.


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

jampott said:


> I haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about.
> 
> I just haven't got a fucking clue what you're trying to say.


The feeling is mutual.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

TTCool said:


> W7 PMC said:
> 
> 
> > jampott said:
> ...


Not so much degrees, more severity. If folk are out-raged more about a bit of dodgy parking than a child or woman being beaten, then fair enough, but as i said the latter would more provoke a muttered comment from me than any action, however the former would certainly provoke a reaction as has happened twice so far in my life.


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Well I just thought, in practical, as opposed to immaginary terms, it was worth a photograph for discussion, to see what people thought. It was a remarkable piece of parking.


----------



## sipajen (Nov 6, 2006)

Here's some Freudian logic applied to Parking Behaviour

Parking 101

The Psychology of Parking

:roll:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

John-H said:


> Well I just thought, in practical, as opposed to immaginary terms, it was worth a photograph for discussion, to see what people thought. It was a remarkable piece of parking.


Yeah, its a good one


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

W7 PMC said:


> Flip side, if a saw an adult hit a child (i mean proper hit/beat, not smack) or probably a man hitting a woman, then i'd be the 1st to wade in, but some pi$$ poor parking would at best get me to mutter the words w4nker & little more than that TBH.


So is it just a matter of degrees then? If the crime fits...

Joe[/quote]

Not so much degrees, more severity. If folk are out-raged more about a bit of dodgy parking than a child or woman being beaten, then fair enough, but as i said the latter would more provoke a muttered comment from me than any action, however the former would certainly provoke a reaction as has happened twice so far in my life.[/quote]

Good evening

How did you arrive at that conclusion? Also, I think you meant to say the 'former' not the 'latter' and the 'latter not the former' otherwise you have demolished your own argument. I can't see why you are quoting me, but anyway I want you to know, and I am making it crystal clear, that *I* for one DO NOT consider a bit if dodgy parking more serious than a child or a woman being beaten. I'm :? as to how you arrived at that conclusion with me in mind :roll: or were you generalising?

Oh yes, shouldn't you be educating the child or women beater by acting like a gentleman? :wink: rather than taking the law into your hands, not being a gentleman and bringing shame on yourself by lowering youself to the same level as the child beater.

This thread has evolved into a load of bollocks. Windup merchants' fodder if you ask me.

Have a good day

Joe


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

John-H said:


> Well I just thought, in practical, as opposed to immaginary terms, it was worth a photograph for discussion, to see what people thought. It was a remarkable piece of parking.


Hi John

There's no need to excuse yourself or try and calm the waters. You posted what you posted in good faith, but you know how it is sometimes on here. Some posts are best avoided.

Regards

Joe


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

TTCool said:


> John-H said:
> 
> 
> > Well I just thought, in practical, as opposed to immaginary terms, it was worth a photograph for discussion, to see what people thought. It was a remarkable piece of parking.
> ...


You just can't drop it, can you? :lol: :lol:


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

jampott said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > John-H said:
> ...


Wrong as usual, Tim.

John, in the past, has had the misfortune of having to write you a poem in response to one of your windup moments, which went right over your head by the way, and he happens to be a good friend of mine.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

TTCool said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > TTCool said:
> ...


My dearest Joe, nothing ever goes over my head I'm afraid.

I'd like a link to John's poem, though... sounds rather fun.

In any event, it wasn't your comments directly to John which I was referring to - more your comment that 'Some posts are best avoided' which certainly sounded like you carrying on your 'pop' at others... 

That's what I meant when I said you couldn't let it go...


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

jampott said:


> John-H said:
> 
> 
> > Well I just thought, in practical, as opposed to immaginary terms, it was worth a photograph for discussion, to see what people thought. It was a remarkable piece of parking.
> ...


It's sort of Cavalier in style and yet done in a Range Rover.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

garyc said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > John-H said:
> ...


Boom Boom.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

...aye but what about this poem we have been tantalised with?

Links please.


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

John-H said:


> Parking in two disabled spaces in a range rover!
> 
> I couldn't believe this jerk! No there wasn't any disabled sticker :evil:


Has that Jampott been letting his Lisa drive his motor again?


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

For what it's worth here's the poem :roll: :

http://www.********.co.uk/ttforumbbs/vi ... c&start=30


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

John-H said:


> For what it's worth here's the poem :roll: :
> 
> http://www.********.co.uk/ttforumbbs/vi ... c&start=30


I know that poem :wink: takes me back to primary school


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

John-H said:


> For what it's worth here's the poem :roll: :
> 
> http://www.********.co.uk/ttforumbbs/vi ... c&start=30


Hmmm.

I think the word 'write' would be a bit of an overstatement.

It didn't go over my head, either.

Good thread though. We *still* get 8 pages of wank about people parking next to each other.


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

We take the Aygo to the shops now fits the spaces much better than the TT ,if only there was space to get the shopping in :? :lol:


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

jampott said:


> John-H said:
> 
> 
> > For what it's worth here's the poem :roll: :
> ...


...but it's a better class of wank lately :wink:

Tim, I'll bet my shirt you had to Google the Latin :lol: :lol:


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

jampott said:


> John-H said:
> 
> 
> > For what it's worth here's the poem :roll: :
> ...


That's quite touching Tim - getting your own Forum poem dedicated to you - did you get a welling up of emotion, or were you merely touched?


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

TTCool said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > John-H said:
> ...


Joe,

I hope your shirt wasn't too expensive. You obviously missed a few threads over the years, including one recent one, where I openly admit to knowing a bit of Latin.

They included, but weren't limited to, etymology and the plural of CV.

I'm sure (if you know it!) if you search for the CORRECT plural of Curriculum Vitae within the pages of this forum, you'll find one of the threads to which I refer.

At school, I studied French, Russian and Latin. Not something I would boast about, but I hope that answers your Google bet.

Hell, I've probably even used 'QED' on this very forum. :lol:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

garyc said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > John-H said:
> ...


It has been a long time since I was touched by a man. 

That mushy crunching noise you can hear is Mr Dodgson spinnning in his grave.


----------



## sonicmonkey (Mar 20, 2004)

TTCool said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > John-H said:
> ...


Why is Latin a measuring stick for ones intelligence?

This was the grace read before dinner at my uni:

Oculi omnium spectant in te, Deus. Tu das illis escas tempore opportuno. Aperis manum tuam et imples omne animal tua benedictione. Mensae caelestis nos participes facias, Deus, rex aeternae gloriae. Amen.

Great.

Roughly translated:

Beans Beans the sweetest fruit, the more you eat the more you toot.

At least that what I think it means. I don't even know if it's Latin come to think of it. Nor do I care.


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

Tim

Relax, I like you but I wouldn't touch you :roll:

Joe


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

TTCool said:


> Tim
> 
> Relax, I like you but I wouldn't touch you :roll:
> 
> Joe


C'mon Joe, you do *know* the plural of Curriculum Vitae, without googling it, don't you?  :wink: :-*


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

jampott said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > Tim
> ...


This is a guess Tim; could it be Curricula Vitae? But why would you want the plural anyway. Surely everything should be on your Curriculum Vitae, otherwise you might be selling yourself short  I hope you are not one of those people who make up more than one and have to refer to them in the plural 

Love

Joe


----------

