SIP Parking Manchester PCN, Advice needed please |
SIP Parking Manchester PCN, Advice needed please |
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 12:21
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 39 Joined: 11 Jun 2017 From: Manchester Member No.: 92,439 |
Hello all,
On 3/11/2018 I received a 'PCN' from SIP Manchester. I parked in their Charles Street car park and bought a ticket. The PCN stated the reason as 'insufficient fee paid'. I had paid the usual fee as I was parking a Ford Transit and the sign said 'Vehicles above M1 Classification' pay more. I didn't realise that my van is in fact N1 classification. I appealed, saying that I found the poster ambiguous and confusing. They wrote back immediately to say my appeal had been rejected and my fee had gone up from £35 to £60. I realise now that at this point I should have made an appeal to the IAS, but the 21 days has now lapsed. I have now received a Notice to Keeper. I understand from what I have read online the SIP is a really dodgy company and lots of people have had success in fighting these claims. I find the fact that my fee went up because I made an appeal particularly offensive and I don't really want to take this lying down. My fear is that if this does come to court, as I am self employed, I might need to be prepared to go to court on any day of the court's choosing, and this might mean that I won't be able to book any jobs over a long period of time for fear of having to let down a client. What are peoples' thoughts on this? Many thanks in advance for all your help. Elk |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 12:21
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 12:30
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
well you have some issues
Firstly, the charge never went up. It was £60, discounted to £35. Youre outside of the discount Secondly, the sign isnt that ambiguous, and as a van driver you MUST know your van is N1, as youre subject to the lower speed limits almost certainly. A transit VAN is also a VAN... Thirdly, you would NEVER have won an IAS appeal. so dont worry! Fourthly, you will be notified of the hearing date at least 2 months in adbance, and can put down dates you cant make. So, sit tight Come back if you get a LBA or court claim form. DO NOT ignore these, but ignore useless, toothless debt collectors. |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 12:35
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 564 Joined: 15 Nov 2017 Member No.: 95,103 |
If you havent given away the identiy of the driver to SIP then edit your post now so it referes to the driver and the keeper.
Vehicles above M1 classification - is that above M1 in the M class. Is it all vehicles? What makes an N1 above an M1? Surely A is above M being first in an alphabetical search. There is room for doubt there I would have said and if so the most favourable outcome to the consumer must be applied. |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 12:43
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Bearclaw - read the sign
VANS... |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 12:57
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 419 Joined: 22 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,530 |
Question please regulars, just out of interest: What about car derived vans (Ford transit connect or Peugeot Partner for example), where would they be classified?
|
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 13:01
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
As a Van, I would suggest
Even if M1. |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 13:06
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
Question please regulars, just out of interest: What about car derived vans (Ford transit connect or Peugeot Partner for example), where would they be classified?
Doesn't help the OP but the Consumer Rights Act 2015 S69(1) says that, where a term can have more than one meaning, the one most favourable to the consumer prevails |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 13:09
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Being a CDV would mean they were a van, derived from a car. It is still, legally, a van and is declared as such.
|
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 13:29
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
The issue is whether the sign can have two meanings :
(All) Vans/Minibuses/Motorhomes (including M1) and other vehicles above M1 or (Only) Vans/Minibuses/Motorhomes (that are above M1) and other vehicles above M1 |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 13:33
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 39 Joined: 11 Jun 2017 From: Manchester Member No.: 92,439 |
I read it as '(vans / minibus / motorhomes & vehicles) above M1 classification'.
I was of the understanding that the sign should state what the penalty for not buying a ticket is. Did I get that wrong? |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 13:43
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
I read it as A, purely from construction.
Yes the signs ust indicate any charge for failing Whats in the "important notice" in tiny lettering??? |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 13:54
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
I read it as '(vans / minibus / motorhomes & vehicles) above M1 classification'. I was of the understanding that the sign should state what the penalty for not buying a ticket is. Did I get that wrong? I read it as A, purely from construction That's the point It doesn't need any contortion of plain English to reach either conclusion |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 13:58
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Hence, its a terrible sign and cant bind anyone to the more restrictive interpretation?
A CRA 2015 argument would be an interesting one, and if made properly would be a bit of a nail I still want to see what is so IMPORTANT about that "important notice" that it is hidden at the bottom of the sign in a font size a tenth of the main elements... |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 18:29
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
QUOTE I realise now that at this point I should have made an appeal to the IAS, Nope, it's almost never worth trying that kangaroo court! Relax and come back at LBC stage (Gladstones). QUOTE My fear is that if this does come to court, as I am self employed, I might need to be prepared to go to court on any day of the court's choosing, Not necessarily - never fear! You can put down dates you are not available, in the DQ form after defending a claim, then when the date comes through you can then inform the court & Claimant that you will not be attending and wish the case to be heard on the papers (which will need to go in hard objecting to the £60 and £50 claim add-ons (in case you don't win, you need them kicked out at least because they invent those 'costs') and talking about the unlit and unclear signage and maybe with a photo of the PDT machine screen itself (bound to be unclear and defaulting to the low tariff and not giving you a clue to tick 'my vehicle is a van' on screen before committing to pay. You can pull out of a hearing & ask for it to be heard in your absence, as long as you give a couple of weeks' notice (in fact closer than that but I'm not typing that as an option here, due to human nature missing deadlines). IMHO what you do NOT do is give Gladstones a clue that you will agree to the case being heard on the papers, when they suggest it in their daft standard latter once your defence is in. You insist on an oral hearing right up to the wire, as Gs sometimes discontinue personal hearings. Don't let them know it's a paper hearing at all until 2 weeks before the hearing date. Having said that it is better to attend in person, so that's another reason to wait for a court date and only then decide if you can make it. BTW I do always wonder why on earth people use private car parks anyway. I almost never do unless it's attached to a store and is free. If it was at night (as per the photo?) what was wrong with on street parking after restricted hours, or was there literally nowhere to park? Never seek out a car park...unless you absolutely have to. Other options exist. This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 18:34 |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 20:23
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 39 Joined: 11 Jun 2017 From: Manchester Member No.: 92,439 |
Ok so if I am understanding correctly, I have a decent chance of defending this. What is my next step?
I parked there during the day because I was in a massive hurry, BTW. As a rule, I NEVER pay for parking if there is another option! I shall go back at some point and figure out what is at the bottom of that sign |
|
|
Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 23:11
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
I said what the next step is:
QUOTE Relax and come back at LBC stage (Gladstones). You could send a SAR by email to the PPC for all photos & all letters, using the contact email in their Data Privacy DPO page online. Always a good idea to do that, to see their hand. |
|
|
Mon, 14 Dec 2020 - 18:05
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 39 Joined: 11 Jun 2017 From: Manchester Member No.: 92,439 |
Hi,
I have received a letter before claim. I am told that I need to reply within 30 days if I feel that there is a valid reason for the charge(s) not being paid. nosferatu1001, please could you tell me a little more about a CRA 2015 argument? Any help on preparing a response would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance https://postimg.cc/06wRNF9Q https://postimg.cc/DmmQbTtB |
|
|
Mon, 14 Dec 2020 - 18:20
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
OMG - they've tried to justify the additional £60
23 pence to the IPC? Seriously... Any help on preparing a response would be greatly appreciated. The signage in the opening post makes no mention of the charge for alleged breach? You said £60 (£35 discounted) - but they claim £100 now? -------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Mon, 14 Dec 2020 - 18:24
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
They cannot claim the cost of running the business. Those costs would still be payable even if the driver had not parked. Beavis confirmed this.
As the keeper you can only be held liable for the amount on the original PCN, but do they know the driver, yes or no. This is an attempt at double recovery |
|
|
Mon, 14 Dec 2020 - 18:32
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Indeed, they are all costs that are to be included in the core charge... (Although the core charge doesn't seem clear?)
-------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 00:21 |