Fraud, Unduly Extortion
CityParking (the "Company") has a warning in its parking lot that By leaving the car in the Company's car park, the consumer must agree to the terms of the Company's contract, even though the Company's car park is not available and its terms are not valid. they do not know how the consumer does not have the opportunity to negotiate and / or agree the terms of the contract with the Company. Subsequently, the Company's employees affix receipts to the car window for violating the terms of the contract, although no violation is often allowed. In addition, consumer submissions sent to the Company in the form of e-documents, with a secure electronic signature and a time stamp, with agreements to explain the existence of a possible violation. in the opinion of the Company, answers that have legal force (in accordance with Section 4, Paragraph one, Clause 3 of the Law on Legal Validity of Documents, Section 3, Paragraph one of the Electronic Documents Law) are not provided . The Company then applies psychological pressure to send anonymous alerts which have no legal force and which, by their very nature, are inheritance, which must be reported to the State Police. We believe that CityParking should be required to provide a receipt for the receipt of the receipt, the person to be appointed to the post and the credentials, as well as an official response - with the signatures of CityParking officials, as all their documents to discuss and / or coordinate with the Company in accordance with Section 4, Paragraph one, Clause 3 of the Legal Validity of Documents Law and often the legal force of Section 3, Paragraph one of the Electronic Documents Law. As well as complaints to the CRPC - about the violation of consumer rights and to the State Police - about the landlord. Write [hide] @ yahoo.com with your phone number, first name, last name, and the circumstances of the event - we'll send a joint complaint.
Read more...
