Hey, there! Log in / Register
City cracking down on lazy valets who clog streets instead of bringing cars to garages, lots
By adamg on Tue, 05/11/2010 - 12:10pm
The Mistral customer was upset, Sgt. Robert Mulvey said. He'd paid extra to have a valet park his brand new BMW X5 SUV in a garage. Instead, he came out around 9 p.m. on March 15 to find the car damaged and the interior in disarray from where a woman had been rummaging around it - as it sat untended on Stanhope Street.
The Boston Licensing Board today heard reports on incidents at three separate Back Bay restaurants in which valets working for Ultimate Valet left cars on the street, in violation of city regulations that require them to move the vehicles to off-street facilities.
In the Mistral case, the customer had every right to be upset, board Chairman Daniel Pokaski said. "He paid for a valet, he paid for it to go into a secure spot, not for it going into the street."
Joshua Lemay of Ultimate agreed - especially since the garage used by Mistral valets is just an easy walk away. "For the record, there is no excuse whatsoever, sheer laziness is the culprit."
Mulvey said on March 11, an Ultimate valet at Stephanie's on Newbury Street left two cars parked out front for almost 40 minutes - city regulations require them to be moved within 10. The worker claimed he didn't know about the requirement. The day before, he said, a valet at Grille 23 on Stuart Street simply moved a car to an open space across the street, which is also against regulation. Mulvey said the valet - who has worked for Ultimate for 12 years - he did so because "it's a legal space" and a shorter walk than the garage.
Lemay said the company held a seminar for all its managers and employees last month to re-educate them on city valet laws. City officials and police were among the presenters.
Pokaski warned restaurant owners that if the board levies punishments, it will be their licenses that are affected, not the valet companies. He told one restaurant manager he should be having his workers check outside periodically to ensure the valets are doing their jobs. It's especially vital, he said, in a congested area like the Back Bay, he said.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
"Sheer laziness is the
"Sheer laziness is the culprit."
If it weren't for sheer laziness, we wouldn't have valet parking to begin with.
How long ago was it that every expensive restaurant suddenly felt the need to provide valet parking, and the city started giving them exclusive use of curb space?
Seriously
There are already parking placards for people who've demonstrated a legitimate need for door-to-door transportation. The city should encourage everyone else to walk and/or use public transit.
Agreed.
Agreed.
"Clogging"
Clogs are not only over, they were lame to begin with, plus there's all the noise they make. Effing hipsters. Put on some normal shoes, take a shower, and get a job.
Awful. Need another coffee
Awful. Need another coffee now.
Heard about Mistral valets in the past..
....breaking parking meters in the area so that the cars they stuck in metered spots wouldn't get ticketed for nonpayment of meters.
I've only used a valet service once in town. Had no idea where they parked my car, as there was no garage in the vicinity. and I admit, I didn't want to know.
I know where valets take them.....
easy solution to this
You're only allowed to park where a broken meter is for so long- half an hour to an hour, I think? So why don't BTD meter maids ticket people whose cars are there longer?
Also: imagine how fast they'd stop purposefully disabling the meters if any disabled meter stayed out of service for a week with a "NO PARKING, METER OUT OF SERVICE" sign.
at the time, it was 2 hours
Back when I first read the story, I believe it was two hours at a broken meter. This was one of the reasons they changed it to one hour.
this is NO surprise to anyone
this is NO surprise to anyone who lives in the city......the Valet game works like this: Restaurants pay their valet a set fee to cover fixed expenses (the valets) and then pay an additional fee per vehicle.....the valet co. works out an arrangement with a local garage for each car parked and then adds whatever 5 on top as their profit......BUT the real profit comes when the "lazy" valets rotate cars on the street (to avoid paying a garage) or find metered spots which are much cheaper......If the Licensing Board believes that it's the valets fault then they are overlooking the bosses who "train" them......the winners are the valets co. and the restaurants whose guests cars are closer and of course the losers are us idiots who circle our neighborhood looking for a resident or metered spot....the licensing police and the Fire Dept inspectors are great at hassling bar/restaurant owners for minor violations but here is one that clogs the city streets and disturb residents
A few years ago I had to
A few years ago I had to unexpectedly pick up my dad from a local dealership at 1am.
Earlier that night, he had dinner at Via Matta and the valet parked his car in an illegal metered space. When the valet went to get his car, the nitwit managed to somehow break the key off in the ignition, rendering the car useless. Naturally, he was parked in tightly on both ends. In the process of having the car extracted from the space, bumper and fender damage resulted.
The valet company was less than helpful. They did reimburse him for the towing charge but refused to pay for anything else, including the broken key which was one of those expensive chipped keys. Ultimately, the restaurant stepped up and he got a few free dinners which probably ended up being close in total cost to the repairs.
I never, ever use a valet service. I've heard enough stories from friends that worked as valets to know better.
WTF?
I noticed recently that nearly every square inch of curb space seems to have been handed over to restaurants for expensive and profitable parking.
Question is WHY?
Is the city making money here when they give away space that should belong to everybody? Are friends of connected people making money when they give away space that should belong to everybody? It seems like a total racket to me, unless the city is making a lot of money and doing regular inspections to prevent the noted problems - like, say, valet services that do not have adequate garage space for vehicles.
Valet companies pay the city for spots...
They figure out the meter coin cost and pay the city for those spots.
Proably a lot of politics as to who gets to do that or not though.
Meter Coin Cost?
You have to be joking - that can't even begin to cover the cost of enforcing - let alone the cost of a public resource being reserved for excessive private profit!
This being Boston - Land of Governance by Ass Kissing, I'd bet there is massive patronage involved here - all of it off the books, of course.
As for lazy valets, has anybody checked the garage spaces? I bet they are full and the valets are being told to take street spots. How convenient to devolve all responsibility to low-level employees. Yup. Lazy guys, right, um, don't go count cars in the garage oh no it's empty, oh yeah ... Any valets on UHub to confirm?
Wouldn't it save money on enforcement?
If a restuarant buys meter time for 5 meters from 4pm-8pm they give the city 20 hours worth of coins up front and meter maids know they don't have to go near them because they are already paid. There might be other fees Im not sure but I know they at least pay the meter spaces plus an hour or something.
I don't mind the valet thing so much since the spots they take are (or should be) for people trying to come in and shop and spend money in Boston. I know it doesn't work out that way but at least you know you can drive into the city and pay someone to park your car for you instead of wasting time and clogging the streets with your car trying to find a spot with the hundreds of other idiots finding spots.....well I guess the valets are in that category too though.
I dunno, the theory of valets make sense to me. Enforcement is another issue.
They have to enforce when a
They have to enforce when a non-valet parks in the space, I suppose.
Yea but...
the space is already paid for so the City doesn't lose out there, and they would make money if they got towed.
True enough. Not actually
True enough.
Not actually contributing to the point, but I bet they have to break up some arguments/fisticuffs.
Space hogging
I worked on Columbus Ave for 8 years. Valet people from a certain restaurant named in this article would fill as many metered spaces as they could up and down the street. At first you could follow a walking valet guy and take the spot he moved out of.. but once they figured out that trick, they started using two people to fetch each car. One to actually get the car, and one to double park right next to it and block anybody from taking the spot, slipping right in behind the car pulling out.
My money is for cocktails.. not for garage parking because some lazy valet dude took all the street parking!
The solution to this is very
The solution to this is very straightforward: Require that valets provide a timestamped garage receipt to patrons.
I was a valet for 5 years and worked for Ultimate...
... The comments about the valets parking on the street to avoid garage costs are true. Also, another reason valets park on the street is so they can resell a valet ticket and park on the street (not incurring garage fee) thereby erasing all record of ever accepting the car 'off the books'.
When I worked there, valets used to be encouraged by the management to park on the street if the spaces were available. Enforcement by the city wasn't strict at that time if existent at all.
I do have to say that from what I've heard from people who still work there, these practices are not taken kindly by management anymore.
Regardless, after 7pm in Boston... from a parking perspective the valets run Boston. And Ultimate has got to be the biggest valet company in town.
Sucks but true....
I have many different points
I have many different points of view on this subject. First and foremost, a valet parking cars on the street that should be in a "secure" location is doing the owner of the car a huge disservice, especially when those cars are worth 80k plus. Street spots are constantly bumped and minor scratches add up quickly. However, lets be honest, a valet who gets my car in two minutes rather than the ten it takes to get out of the garage is going to get a better tip, so I certainly don't blame them. Second, I know Sgt. Mulvey personally, and I must say he is a complete D-Bag. As a traffic enforcement officer, he is way overpaid as a glorified meter-maid. I have heard him brag about getting paid to drive around the city and "bust" valets, as well as livery drivers, and does little to nothing else. How about the BPD stops wasting our money and finds something for this D-Bag to do that is actually worthwhile. And lastly, about the valet zone. Again I need to side with the valets. If an individual pays to have his car left out front, don't they mean "Leave my car in the valet zone."? Anyone who gets mad at a valet leaving a car in their zone for more than 10 minutes is mad at the wrong person. So yes, a valet who parks in a meter spot is wrong, but who is to blame? I think its us who valet who are acting as enablers, myself included.
Specialized Patrols
Busting livery drivers and valets? That actually is this guy's job. When I have had problems with cab drivers in Cambridge and in Boston parking in bike lanes and bus stops, I've always been directed to a specific division that does that specific thing. A regular patrol cop doesn't seem to have the authority to do that specific enforcement job.
Weird as it may seem, that's the sort of pigeonholing you get in older cities like Boston, Philly, NYC, Chicago, etc. where every last task is sorted out and comes with a special title or pay rate.
We are supposed to accept that?
I can't believe that anyone could even want to reason about the validity of this man's job. Yes, a valet is a job based around a restaurant goers laziness, and that certainly isn't a prestigious job. But a highly paid Boston Police Sergeant, whose only job is to drive around and enforce traffic laws? Thats a joke. This man is a joke. A civilian has enough authority to do this, let alone a law inforcement officer, even the "lowly" patrolman. If Boston thinks this is a good way to spend its tax payers money, then I hate to say I'm ashamed to be paying my taxes.
The Traffic Sergeant.
Has many jobs. Enforcing Valet issues is probably 5% of his job. He follows up on stolen car reports, malacious damage reports, valet joyriding reports, tow company violations, hackney issues in his area that the hackney division doesn't get to, crash recon, crash reports, hit and runs etc. Basically these guys make money. I think everyone would be 100% suprised as to how many tickets these Boston traffic division officers make under the supervision of these traffic sergeants. Its not a fun job but some of these guys love doing it.
These are the guys that actually do something. Don't even mention paying taxes and these guys in the same sentence. These guys keep your taxes lower anon.