impark Parking Ticket

**OpenGambit** · 02-01-2012, 07:11 PM

Originally Posted by Rob MacLennan

I posit that force majeure cannot be in force if Impark has the capability of remedy, through their roving personnel, but fail to do so. Call it what you will but making little to no effort in order to remedy the situation does not absolve them. This is an ongoing issue with this company, and has been widely remarked upon.

When did I ever suggest at any point that impark is absolved of anything?
I am not calling it "whatever I want", I am calling it what it should be called, and if I am in the position of writing a letter to the company thats what I would be calling it.
if you don't think its helpful you don't have to use it, but don't talk to me like I am making it up.

**Rob MacLennan** · 02-01-2012, 07:13 PM

Sorry, please read my edit. I was hoping to get it in before your response.

*Another EDIT* I read back and saw the section, that I had previously missed, where you mentioned Force Majeure but also commented on additional clauses in the contract. It was the second part that I somehow missed, so now I understand where you're coming from. I still say that they have remedy, but fail to use it, as this is a major complaint with this particular company.

As to my use of the term "wilful negligence', it is not meant as a technical nor legal term. It is an expression that I use, as I also use the term "wilful ignorance', showing the fallacy of the person or organizations actions.

**OpenGambit** · 02-01-2012, 07:19 PM

Force majeure is a concept that says, even though a party is in technical breach of a contract, they are not subject, or should not be subject, to the penalty of that breach due to circumstances beyond their control.

While sometimes called an "act of god" clause, it applies to many situations beyond natural disasters/war/etc. and in modern contracts usually also includes within the definition circumstances not in the control of one party.
In the case of the person trying to buy a ticket, they are unable to furfil and obligation of the contract (payment) due to the actions of the other party. Many modern contracts would consider that to be not a "real" breach of contract, because the reason for your breach is circumstances beyond your control.
A similar situation would be to sell someone something internationally, not provide a bank account number or method of payment, and then sueing the non-paying party for breach.

The idea that they would leave the machines broken on purpose is not negligence - thats not harm caused by a breach of a standard of care, negligence is if the machine electrocuted you as you were buying the ticket.
Thats bad faith or willful misconduct.

**Rob MacLennan** · 02-01-2012, 07:22 PM

Please see above. I think that I have it straight now.

**moto22** · 02-23-2012, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Rob MacLennan

Please see above. I think that I have it straight now.

Curious Rob .. What was the outcome of these tickets ? I know some people have feared reprisals and paid, others think Impark tickets make great kindle for the fire place . "What was your experience like with them".

**Rob MacLennan** · 02-23-2012, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by moto22

Curious Rob .. What was the outcome of these tickets ? I know some people have feared reprisals and paid, others think Impark tickets make great kindle for the fire place . "What was your experience like with them".

Total of three tickets, to date. Two were cancelled by Impact, with just a phone call. The third one, at a different lot, took getting angry but was ultimately also cancelled. Fortunately I haven't had to go to the wall with them. Yet.