pz619 wrote

Apples to Oranges. When was the last time you heard of one party suing another for window tint? Never?

How often do people get sued over privacy violation? All the time. Point is, if nothing is broken on the car then there isn't really any restitution here. Push too hard, the business might make an issue of the audio recording. Doubt it would go to any sort of litigation, but who wants the headache in the first place.

ShopVac wrote

Every dash cam I have (3 different brands over 5 cars) all have a shut off voltage for park mode recording. The camera will not drain the battery dead...but it sounds like I should thank him for thinking of my cars well fair

nyalpine90 wrote

Lets be real every1 records everything now a days. Its first thing people do when something goes down, cellphone and record button.

Yapakanichi wrote

I'd lawyer up too for damages (foot stomp) while the car was in their hands if they don't play nice. Maybe you have a case, maybe you don't. And if you're a lawyer, stomp em.

ShopVac wrote

F32Fleet wrote

They have every right to disconnect the camera.

Why in the fuck would that be? It's my personal property, part of my car.
Do they have the right to go through my glove box, centre console and trunk while there?

If the lot attendant raced my car around the lot and wrecked it...I have every right to know.

F32Fleet wrote

You can't force them to accept being recorded.

vreihen16 wrote

F32Fleet wrote

You can't force them to accept being recorded.

There are side window stickers for sale on Amazon and other sites for ride-share drivers who have passenger-facing cameras, cautioning passengers that there are cameras recording the inside of the vehicle and that entering the door is consent to being recorded. I wonder if that is enough to be considered consent to being recorded for valet purposes?

I live in New Yorkistan, and we are a single-party consent state for audio recordings. Even so, I have the audio recording function disabled on all of my vehicle dashcams, in case I ever have to turn the raw video files over in court.....

rlmesq wrote

Some people think every problem in life is a way to hit the lawsuit jackpot... but any lawyer knows this situation isn't worth the time and effort to sue anybody.

And no lawyer with half a brain would try to "stomp em" because the other side would file an anti-SLAPP action, and the lawyer would end up paying the parking lot's legal fees as well.

When people start threatening to call lawyers, most businesses just say, "fine, have your lawyer call our legal department" and stop trying to resolve the issue. That's because they know the customer will suffer sticker shock when they find out a lawyer wants a $5,000 retainer to take on their ten dollar dispute.

OkieSnuffBox wrote

My first job out of college was as a claim rep for State Farm. When someone threatened legal action............it was my favorite thing.

Once they threaten legal action, we informed them from this point forward we would no longer be communicating and all information would pass between their lawyer and our team of 800+ corporate lawyers.

Our03z4 wrote

Here is my guess. He unplugged it worried it would drain the battery. It was already parked when he saw the camera.

pz619 wrote

Worth noting that some states it’s illegal to record without consent, especially audio recordings. Not taking sides here, just advising caution as your videos contain audio and PA is a 2 party consent state (assuming that’s where the video was taken).

Yapakanichi wrote

This is going to be a big lesson hopefully learned. OP I say make it rain on his parade. I wouldn't allow that to happen.

I'd lawyer up too for damages (foot stomp) while the car was in their hands if they don't play nice. Maybe you have a case, maybe you don't. And if you're a lawyer, stomp em.

F32Fleet wrote

They have every right to disconnect the camera.

FuriouslyFast wrote

aka corporate america is going to screw you again b/c $

FuriouslyFast wrote

aka corporate america is going to screw you again b/c $

OkieSnuffBox wrote

My first job out of college was as a claim rep for State Farm. When someone threatened legal action............it was my favorite thing.

Once they threaten legal action, we informed them from this point forward we would no longer be communicating and all information would pass between their lawyer and our team of 800+ corporate lawyers.

OkieSnuffBox wrote

My first job out of college was as a claim rep for State Farm. When someone threatened legal action............it was my favorite thing.

Once they threaten legal action, we informed them from this point forward we would no longer be communicating and all information would pass between their lawyer and our team of 800+ corporate lawyers.

Ric in RVA wrote

Ha! You too?

"I am sorry I can't speak with you...since you are represented.....no you need to speak to your attorney and have them contact us......no I am hanging up now!"

Fire claims!! 28 years ago and an agent for 21 years.

Been a good run!

rlmesq wrote

Idiots who go around threatening to sue people don't need "corporate america" to screw them. They do it very nicely on their own, without help.

OkieSnuffBox wrote

It's really more the insured people are pissed they didn't read the contract and are pissed that everything isn't covered carte blanche.

So as always, RTFM.

FuriouslyFast wrote

Yes, THOSE idiots, but let's not act like insurance is not a giant scam to begin with so...

FuriouslyFast wrote

No one reads the fine print, man. The companies know this...

OkieSnuffBox wrote

How is it a scam? Haven't they come out recently and said like 50% of Americans would have a problem coming up with $1000 for an unexpected emergency.................how are those people going to pay for my car if they crash into it without insurance?



If you enter a contract, without reading the contract, whose fault is that?