quote:

---

modestly good looking girl, stylishly dressed and a "nice" car...which in BSC can be a Mustang

---

It'll be good to work with Lar again.

Keegs, the goal isn't to confuse him. Its to give him an "easy" target

This is the most excitement the Aggieland board has had since junebug... or maybe sykes photography.

cannot believe this is still going lol

does IHOP or Schlotsky's have free wifi? You could just go hang out, watch & wait.

OK.. so I am new to the GB, but followed this on MYBCS and I now have an honest question to ask and get possibly a good legal answer on.

In this particular case, and considering all the information we have, I am making the assumption that the white S-10 was owned by the Schlotzky's female employee who exited the vehicle from the passenger side and entered her place of employment and completed a work shift. The driver of the white S-10 was the male who exited the vehicle and crossed the street to the A&M campus. The tow driver (A1) stated that the A1 spotter saw a male exit the vehicle and cross the street to campus. If this is actually correct and considering they did not have a "list" to know the vehicle was authorized parking, isn't A1 actually in the right to tow considering the driver of the vehicle went directly to the campus?

I am only curious to the legal aspect of the actual tow, not the public relations disaster that took effect afterwards.

Along with that question, here are others I have:
- If the female employee had been driving and exited the would that have changed the outcome or the legal grounds to tow or not to tow the vehicle?
- Is there any fault that the employee did not take the male to campus, drop him off and then go park at her employer's lot?
- If someone were to park their car at the business, and one person goes into the business for 50 min to 1 hour, work on their computer, have a couple glasses of tea, while another passenger goes to a 1 hour class would this be an authorized use of the parking lot or would this be a violation of the parking policy and require a tow? (This question is just a general question about patron usage of the lot)

I am inclined to think the tow might have actually been legal since the driver exited and went to campus and that the PR from A1 has been way less than would be expected by a business.

I do like the idea of parking tags for the employees, but that would not have any bearing on patron abuse of the system.

Just looking for some thoughts on this. I do realize this is the general board and I have heard all the good and bad about it, but I am asking in a tasteful and thoughtful manner and would greatly appreciate the same from any responses directly related to my questions. Thank you in advance.

Rho,

Exactly my thoughts on my previous post. There could be an extreme abuse of the parking privelage.

Not exactly in this particular case, but definately in the future.

unfortunately bradley, I don't think there is room in this thread for logical questions like yours.

Logic? Are you kidding me? CSis the only place on the planet that has this type of tow problem. You're actually trying to distinguish between a driver and passenger? List or no list, what if this was a customer?

quote:

---

OK.. so I am new to the GB, but followed this on MYBCS and I now have an honest question to ask and get possibly a good legal answer on.

In this particular case, and considering all the information we have, I am making the assumption that towing companies suck turkey balls and deserve all the grief we can dish out...

---

fixed.

[This message has been edited by BQ93 (edited 2/26/2011 9:38p).]

Someone from the vehicle went inside an establishment. The spotter missed this. Spotter at fault for calling tow. Thus, illegal tow.

Worth,

I am in fact distinguishing between a passenger and a driver, list or no list, based on how a court of law would evaluate a small claims suit against A1 Towing. Like I said, they were questions I personally had about the issue, without regard to emotion or opinion, but fact and law.

I apologize if I offended you with my post, but I was seeking a serious answer.

I was also looking to see if 2 friends, with different class schedules, could park at the lot for free rather than pay A&M for parking if one could sit and drink a $1.50 glass of tea for one hour and work on their computer while the other attended class and vice versa. I think it is a legitimate question to see if this would violate the policy and be grounds for a tow.

I think you should be ok if that were the case.

the kicker is that if you sue, you take it to a jury trial.


everyone hates tow trucks

Holy crap I need a semi-questionable tow situation just to take it to court. Picking from my peers who've been towed? Money.

Money spent makes a customer

ttt for the morning crowd

Bradly, no matter how much anyone tries to put the blame on the owner of the car, or the Schlotzky's manager, one simple fact remains:

The spotter is touted as the one who sees and documents everything. (in caps, as originally posted) The female employee did in fact, get out of the car and go to her place of employment. It is not like she was obligated to go knock on the spotter's window and let him know that. It's his job to SPOT. He failed.

Yes, the whole "list" issue could have changed everything, but, it does appear that multiple businesses have not provided/updated their lists. PLUS, the list issue begs the question - if the spotter sees my car there as a customer, but did not see me go into a place of business, could I not come outside to find my car gone?

Brad, this probably isn't the best place to asking those kinds of questions. People in general hate wrecker drivers, no matter if they are right or wrong. Everyone has their opinions about the towing profession because they don't understand the big picture, just what they want to understand. It could be the most repeatable business in the world, o'hare recovery service for example, but people are only going to see them as the Houston tow vultures that they are.

And Jaydub is A1's new name.

quote:

---

It could be the most repeatable business in the world

---

Freudian slip?

lol @ towing "profession"

Yeah gee I wonder how a company based on taking people's property against their will gets a bad rap?? Especially when they have a business model that makes money off of their mistakes and can blame the spotter instead of taking responsibility for making a mistake?

They didn't even blame the spotter. They blame the female for not being seen going into the business. - Oh yeah and the male for going to the university. It's really his fault.

[This message has been edited by OnlyANobody (edited 2/27/2011 11:25a).]

A1, you should have been more original with your new name. Isn't jw the start of that email you posted?

Yup

This thread.

quote:

---

A1, you should have been more original with your new name. Isn't jw the start of that email you posted?

---

I think someone stated that A1 would be outed in 6 posts when he returned. But outed in 1 post...damn that is some solid internet investigating.

just needed a morning chuckle

Hippie, stick around, Scimi is going to take his pants off, you can get a good belly laugh out of that.

i'd rather keep my breakfast down, thank you

Did A1 get banned?