Let the Record Indicate This Guy is a Yammering Loon

[MadMike]

Before I even got to the part about the camera, I figured the guy was trying to get you to "admit" that he was paying the charges "under duress" so he could get them thrown out.

Just out of curiosity, wouldn't he have to turn off the camera if you asked him to?

[MoonCat]

I'd love to be the fly on the wall when the idiot's lawyer shows him the part in his lease where it reads something like "parking permit must be visible", and then points out the idiot's signature.

Of course, he'd probably say, "Well, I didn't see that part! If I didn't see it and I didn't read it, it's not binding!"

And the lawyer would laugh his ass off.

[Argabarga]

Before I even got to the part about the camera, I figured the guy was trying to get you to "admit" that he was paying the charges "under duress" so he could get them thrown out.

Just out of curiosity, wouldn't he have to turn off the camera if you asked him to?

I guess he would have, but then he'd probably say "make me" and then I'd have to ask him to leave, and then he'd refuse, and then the cops would show up, and I'd have to deal with this joker for about an hour longer than I really wanted to for the same result of him leaving....

I've found that the best thing to do in these situations is let them do pretty much whatever they want as long as they aren't harming anything, indifference to their "documenting" pisses them off more than you trying to stop it.

[Jester]

The only thing I hated more than that, during my years working for a parking company, was when, in a similar scenario, the SC would exclaim: "You have a problem!"

That reminds me of a situation yesterday. I was at the first bar of a pub crawl, and somehow I mentioned my older sister, and how unpleasant a person she can be. Well, this one woman was apparently unimpressed with my commentary, and said that I apparently had some issues. To which I shot back, "The only issue I have is that she's a raging bitch." And THAT pretty much shut her up.

[LillFilly]

What? You didn't use your magic super x-ray vision to read his upside-down buried permit?!?

Yeah, I've been expected to see permits in the glove box too!

[BroSCFischer]

I've mentioned it before, but, due to all the info we have to collect, both personal and vehicle, AND the fact that they're standing right under the security camera when "customers" pay for their cars, the chances of a successful chargeback is about nil.

Add to that the fact that this idiot recorded the transaction HIMSELF.

SC

[earl colby pottinger]

Recording

Add to that the fact that this idiot recorded the transaction HIMSELF.

SC

Well, I think it is a good thing that the office has it's own camera recording what happened there in-case the SC thinks to "edit" his video.

[PepperElf]

I've mentioned it before, but, due to all the info we have to collect, both personal and vehicle, AND the fact that they're standing right under the security camera when "customers" pay for their cars, the chances of a successful chargeback is about nil.

Many have tried

I know of none that managed to win

so basically your video recording of the event is going to trump his shaky one

I'd like to see what his attorney says when he calls up to whine.

[Syriilord]

Must be. The number of idiots who think they shouldn't be towed is approximately equal to the number of idiots who get towed, there's got to be at least a few that think they can do a charge back to get out of it <Snip>

Fixed that one for ya, buddy. No charge.

[malmalthekiller]

I would love to be in the office when he shows an attorney that video.

If the attorney even agrees to see him.

[taxguykarl]

I sure hope that lawyer isn't taking the case on a contingency fee. Also good luck disputing the charge.

OTOH, when we forgot to rehang Mrs. TGK's handicap placard, a seriously magnamous transit cop let us off with a warning because he spotted the placard on the dash...what a relief.

[Jester]

I would love to be in the office when he shows an attorney that video.

If the attorney even agrees to see him.

A lot of attorneys would agree to see him. At least, the ones that charge consultation fees. So the lawyer makes his money from Schmuck Monkey, realizes that Schmuck Monkey has no case, tells Schmuck Monkey that he has no case and not a legal leg to stand on, pockets Schmuck Monkey's consultation fee, and goes on to see the next client or potential client.

[Silvercat]

That reminds me of a situation yesterday. I was at the first bar of a pub crawl, and somehow I mentioned my older sister, and how unpleasant a person she can be. Well, this one woman was apparently unimpressed with my commentary, and said that I apparently had some issues. To which I shot back, "The only issue I have is that she's a raging bitch." And THAT pretty much shut her up.

Dammit, where's the like button?

[bankworking]

I wonder if the credit card companies have any special procedures for places with hig false chargeback rates (like calling the customer and saying 'are you sure? Because every other time we've tried this they've proved their case and we'd rather not do the paperwork if you're just an idiot')

Our department will call back the customer to ask 'are you sure?'. Happens all the time. Mostly for when customer disputes a charge that they see with "Parent Company" not realizing it was actually for "Local Store Under Parent Company". So our charge-back department calls to let them know the local company name to find out if they recognize the charge after all. Otherwise, we get a lot of disputes for "I signed up for it, but now I don't want it, but no I didn't cancel it". Those we don't have to even attempt the charge-back until the customer tries to resolve it with the company, because it IS an authorized transaction until they officially cancel that authorization (which, please note, is different from owing/not owing the money. You can cancel authorization to take payments from your account automatically, but that doesn't mean you don't still owe the company for whatever, just that they cannot continue to take automatic payments--unless they get a court order/garnishment).

Haven't personally run across a towing charge dispute. Should follow the normal procedures though. If the customer admits to us that they did authorize the transaction ("under duress"or not), we would tell them nothing we can do. If they lie and say it is unauthorized, then we have to do the charge-back, but as noted above, it will fail. We make them sign an affidavit on the dispute, which IS legally punishable as perjury if we can prove the customer lied. Doubt we would bother taking them to court though, more's the pity. More likely to drop them as a customer if they cost us too much money on false charge-backs.

[wolfie]

Just out of curiosity, wouldn't he have to turn off the camera if you asked him to?

I guess he would have, but then he'd probably say "make me" and then I'd have to ask him to leave, and then he'd refuse, and then the cops would show up, and I'd have to deal with this joker for about an hour longer than I really wanted to for the same result of him leaving....

Just out of curiosity, is there some requirement that the vehicle owner has to be the one to "bail it out" at the impound yard, and some provision (to keep "junkers" from filling up the lot) that vehicles unclaimed after a certain period can be sold? If both are true, it might be worth it to tell him to turn off the camera. If he refuses, and then refuses to leave, let him know that your recourse in this situation is to call the cops to remove him for trespassing, and then ban him from the property - which would make it impossible for him to get his car back, but the "sale of abandoned vehicles" clock would still be ticking.