Last week yet another debtor appeared in court for cutting off a wheel clamp. In this case, a bailiff from JBW Group applied a wheel clamp to the debtors car in relation to a debt for council tax. The debtor 'claimed' that he thought that the clamp had been left on his car by a friend as a joke and accordingly, he used an angle grinder to remove the clamp. Clearly the court did not believe his story and after admitting causing criminal damage the court ordered him to pay £435 which was made up of a fine of £250, costs of £85, compensation of £75 and victims surcharge of £25. http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Man-used-angle-grinder-cut-wheel-clamp-car/story-26547903-detail/story.html

G00gle are using surplus surveillance drones from the US military to develop a 3D StreetView. The idea is to have a drone follow each StreetView CCTV camera car at a height of 50 metres. Instead of the existing 2D images, the new service will capture 3D images using software developed jointly by G00gle and Caltech. This software is being installed in G00gle Glass, so that users can explore a 3D representation of any street they choose to download. It will appear to users that they are standing in the actual street. The 3D StreetView Privacy Impact Assessment appended to G00gle’s Privacy Policy recommends that the drones should not be silent but “should emit a sound like the low frequency buzz of a Doodlebug” - a reference to the V1 flying bomb . Doubtless they will be nicknamed “G00gleBugs”. Potential privacy issues are dismissed on the grounds that unlawful activity is being unmasked. For instance “addresses where grandparents have been reported missing to the police” and “where gardens ... clearly contain areas which have recently been dug over”. The Assessment notes that 3D StreetView would “revive the services offered by [the home security] sector as burglars are likely to become users of the 3D system”. PS - elsewhere, the Assessment deals with the inadvertent capturing of 3D images of adults engaging in nude sunbathing etc., in back gardens, indicating that applying the usual blurring algorithm just to the face of a sunbather “risks leaving other body parts exposed, in full 3D” - as recently discovered in Manchester's Temperance Street PPS - LAs will be able to explore the dimensions of extensions at the back of houses to check planning rules have not been violated PPPS - it is rumoured that "G00gle G0ggles" was originally considered as the name for G00gle Glass, to trade on the alliteration

Perhaps those more versed in law can decide on the legal aspects of the following question; A retailer advertises in the local rag making an offer, you then accept the offer by visiting the store and purchasing goods. I assume at that point that there is a contract in place as an offer was made and then accepted. The retailer has not attached any terms and conditions relating to parking on their private land. I would assume that the retailer is now the principle in the agreement or contract. However while parked on their land you are issued with a "ticket" by the PPC monitoring the parking area for the retailer because you overstayed by 20 minutes while concluding the contract. On entering the parking area although there are numerous signs at the entrance to parking area, you did not read the signs as nothing was mentioned in the offer about parking conditions. By the way how many reasonable people stop and read these signs fully? As you never read the sign technically you have not agreed to any contract or terms and conditions. Also the PPC is a sub-contractor to the retailer who made the offer and is not a principle in the original contract therefore I would assume that the first contract would over ride the second contract. Would you be able to use any of the above as part of a defence in case involving parking on private land?