SIP Parking Notice - Help Please!

[AndyPr]

Hi,

 

We parked in an SIP car park in Manchester but, because we parked in a really narrow spot, I put the parking ticket in the back window (the one facing outwards) so the attendant would be able to see it properly but they gave me a PCN anyway and said it was because my ticket was not displayed. I wrote and complained that I had a valid ticket (which I sent them as proof) and that I had displayed it in the back of my car (and told them why) but they rejected my claims and still want me to pay the fine. What should I do? The PCN was also issued at 7.52pm and the car park became free at 8.00pm so a £100 fine seems a little extortionate too!

 

Thanks

[silverfox1961]

Hi and welcome to CAG.

 

I assume as you have contacted them, you have named yourself as the driver. Normally we would say to wait for the notice to keeper to arrive but that is unlikely to happen now.

 

By the way, this is NOT a fine. Just a speculative invoice.

 

In their rejection letter, did the give you a code to take this to a further appeal?

[AndyPr]

Thanks for helping,

 

I first wrote to them by hand saying I had a valid ticket but I can't remember if I identified the driver. Their letter response is at home so I can't remember how it is worded but when they denied my request to drop the matter, I sent them this email using an online template:

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

Ticket number: XXXXX

Vehicle registration number: XXXXXXX

 

You issued me with a parking ticket on 27/3/15 but I believe unfairly

issued. I decline to name the driver, which is not required of me as the

keeper of the vehicle. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the

following reasons:

 

1. The alleged contravention did not occur

Quite simply, the parking attendant got it wrong and the vehicle was not

parked inappropriately at the time the ticket was issued. This is due to the

fact the ticket was in fact displayed clearly in the back window. Because

the car was parked in such a tight spot (as you can see by your pictures),

we thought that if the ticket was on the dashboard, your attendant would not

have been able to get round the front to check. Unfortunately the picture

your parking attendant has taken of the back parcel shelf was particularly

fuzzy and badly taken otherwise you would be able to clearly see the ticket.

We have sent you the valid ticket in our first correspondence that clearly

shows that we paid for parking to cover the time that the ticket was issued.

 

2. The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of

loss

The amount you have charged is not based upon any genuine pre-estimate of

loss to your company or the landowner.

 

According to the Unfair Consumer Contract Regulations, parking charges on

private land must not exceed the cost to the landowner during the period the

motorist is parked there. In my case, the £100 charge you are asking for

far exceeds the cost to the landowner of the 8 minutes of parking before the

car park would become free at 8.00pm.

 

If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I will not enter into any

correspondence and this will be the only contact you will receive from me

until you answer the specific points raised in my email.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

A.P

 

 

They sent this email back in response:

 

Dear A,

 

As your appeal has already been refused, we are unable to accept further

dispute. If you wish to appeal this charge further please refer to the

reverse of the decision letter which has full details on the Independent

Adjudicator.

 

However please be aware that as you have already stated this is an agreed

contractual term, therefore loss is irrelevant. The signs make it clear that

any driver parking without clearly displaying a ticket in the windscreen or

other authority agrees to pay the charge. There is no reference to breach.

 

It is the price the driver has agreed to pay for not clearly displaying a

valid ticket on the dashboard. Once the driver has entered into an agreement

with the Operator to pay the parking charge the Operator does not have to

subsequently show that the amount they have charged is the amount lost.

 

Kind Regards,

 

SIP Car Parks.

[silverfox1961]

I have removed some personal details as they are not required and it also protects your anonymity.

 

You issued me with a parking ticket on 27/3/15 but I believe unfairly

issued. I decline to name the driver, which is not required of me as the

keeper of the vehicle. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the

 

Bit of a boo boo there. How can they give YOU a ticket then you not name the driver. Not to worry.

 

I would appeal to POPLA with the code they should have given you. If there is no number, complain again to SIP and also to the BPA.

 

There is an issue here of 'grace periods' which some companies use where they allow up to 10 minutes to read the signs, understand what you are agreeing to and paying.

 

You displayed a ticket (although at the back).

 

If you do have the POPLA code, appeal. Your grounds are

 

1 No grace period

2 You did buy a ticket

3 Inadequate signage (if that is the case)

4 Genuine Pre Estimate of Loss.

 

Even if you failed on appeal, they would have to take court action to enforce this invoice

[AndyPr]

Yeah, I may have worded things badly, I didn't really know that things would escalate so quickly! I thought they would just drop it when I produced a valid ticket and the fact that it was 8 mins before the car park charges wouldn't apply. I'll write to the appeal people and see where it goes, I can't believe that an actual business would threaten to take valid customers to court!

[ericsbrother]

The point is that you paid the prescribed fee and attached the ticket to the windscreen so it was visible. Therefore there has been no breach of contract. They may say that it is an agreed condition that you do certain things then how can they say that you owe an amout that is different for NOT breaching those terms.

Appeal to POPLA pointing out that the prescribed fee was paid and the ticket that proves that was displayed in the correct manner, there has been no breach of contract and the amount claimed by the company is not a contractual term as advertised or agreed to by your purchse of a ticket permitting you to park where you did.

[AndyPr]

Hi,

 

I got a parking ticket from an SIP car park for not having a valid ticket displayed. We bought a ticket at 7.46pm (even though the car park becomes free at 8.00pm) but because we were parked in a really tight spot and you couldn't easily get past the car, we put the ticket on the back parcel shelf to make it easier for the parking attendant to see. When we got back we'd received a ticket and told we had to pay £60 because we didn't have a ticket on display on the dashboard. I wrote to SIP and sent them the valid ticket (I took photos before I sent it) and asked them to drop the matter because we had a ticket.

 

They dismissed the appeal because they were issuing a ticket because it was not displayed correctly (on the dashboard) and not because we didn't have a valid ticket. I then appealed to the IPC for help using a template from a forum arguing that:

1. We had a valid ticket.

2. We tried to display it in a helpful way.

3. The fine (which had now risen to £100) was completely disproportionate for the short time they perceived the violation to have occurred.

 

My IAS appeal has just been rejected on the grounds that:

1. It doesn't matter if we had a valid ticket as that's not why we got a ticket.

2. We should have read the sign properly about how to display the ticket and we implicitly agreed to their conditions when we bought the ticket.

3. The amount of time for the violation doesn't matter.

 

What should I do?

 

Thanks!

[honeybee13]

Hi. I've merged your threads to keep the history together, it helps the advisers here.

 

I wouldn't worry unduly, we've seen this before. The guys will be along later with advice for you.

 

HB

[silverfox1961]

For SIP to do anything now, they would have to take court action and that is a damn sight harder to win there. They would have to 'prove on the balance of probabilities' that the charges were fair.

 

Last year SIP took a total of 54 cases to court. Not many is there. I have no information of how many were won or lost by them.

 

Expect letters from a debt collector soon.