SIP Parking Ltd Manchester

greentree75

Also, I applied to MCR Council for details of Rate Payer. These didn't come back in time for my hearing, but I will gladly let you know the details when I hear back.

As for the case in pepipoo link, they won today.

Seems like the judges aren't going for this new scam of targeting vans and minibuses..

Fight_the_good_fight

Firstly thank you green tree 75 for the heads up re the contract of land ownership

Even to my untrained eye that is one dodgy self proclaiming document that the landlord is acting as the owner :eek:

Maybe I could submit documents claiming I am acting on behalf of Father Christmas :rotfl::rotfl:

HeatonGuy

To be fair, in strictly legal terms, the Landlord is, essentially the owner. Or to be more technical about it, the best title holder.

When a Landlord offers a lease (including a tenancy) to anyone, whether a person, a company, whatever, they are essentially offering possession of the property in return for compliance with the contractual terms. The main term being payment of rent of some kind.

That agreement nearly always given the Tenant/Lesee the right to exclude everyone from the property at his whim, including the owner.

Certainly, the property I live is is owned by one company, mortgaged by another, leased by a third and rented by me. I have best title, and can exclude all of the companies up the chain (other than my landlord in emergencies) from my property, and they would all be trespassing if they entered my bit of land and home without my consent.

Moreover, unless my tenancy agreement excluded it (which it does ) I could rent out my parking spaces on the driveway outside my garage, and employ a PPC to police them for me, and would have every right to do so.

System

The issue with SIP is not necessarily title but a form of Schrodinger's Cat argument.

At one point (at County Court) one of the SIP group companies claim to be occupiers while at the Rates Tribunal they claim to be suppliers to the actual "best title" holders.

This is why checking who pays Non-Domestic Rates should be done before checking the Land Registry as you do not know how many steps there are between the owner (LR) and the supposed occupier (NDR)

greentree75

Another thing to note is, that the contract I received between landlord and agent, with SIP companies' was a bit dubious. It was signed by Christopher Marsden on behalf of SIP Parking Ltd and was dated 2014, but he didn't become director of this company until this year. I didn't have chance to bring this up in court, so don;t know the relevance, but it may be an avenue worth pursuing if you receive the same contract.

Fight_the_good_fight

@Heaton guy I as a lay person accept your reply in relation to a landlord being best placed etc but surely a self proclaiming document stating they are acting as landlord without evidencing where or by whom they have derived this authority from is at the very least dubious .

We all know how PPCs will resort to incredible low levels of depravity to dupe motorists and surely they would need/require a contract to state they have the authority to act as landlord?

willcrook

the exact same thing happened to me at this car park, SIP are scammers deliberately not adjusting their signs

I went to a big effort with my appeal to I-AS including a map of where the machines are located, proof of purchase, several photos from many angles, a diagram showing the route the engineer entered the car parking to illustrate how the 'tariff' board easily be missed, etc

still lost the appeal, the decision was as follows:

"It is important that the Appellant understands that the adjudicator is not in a position to give his legal advice. The adjudicator's role is to look at whether the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each particular case. The adjudicator's decision is not legally binding on the Appellant (it is intended to be a guide) and they are free to obtain independent legal advice if they so wish. However, the adjudicator is legally qualified (a barrister or solicitor) and decides the appeal according to their understanding of the law and legal principles.

The terms of this appeal are that I am only allowed to consider the charge being appealed and not the circumstances of other drivers or other parking events. The guidance to this appeal also makes it clear that I am bound by the law of contract and can only consider legal challenges not mistakes or extenuating circumstances. While noting the Appellant's comments, the Operator’s signage, which was on display throughout the site, makes it sufficiently clear that the terms and conditions of parking are in force at all times and that a PCN will be issued to drivers who fail to comply with the terms and conditions of parking, regardless of a driver’s reasons for being on site. I am satisfied that the signage is neither misleading nor unfair. It is clear from the evidence provided to this appeal that the Appellant did indeed park otherwise than in accordance with the displayed terms as they have not ensured that the correct payment was made for the vehicle they were driving.

I am satisfied that the Operator has proven their prima facie case. Whilst having some sympathy with the Appellant’s circumstances, once liability has been established, only the Operator has the discretion to vary or cancel the parking charge based on mitigating circumstances. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed.
"


here is a photo of the sign outside our van and the sign at the otherside of the car park.

nosferatu1001

Of course you lost at the IAS. You and 83% of all people lose.

beamerguy

willcrook wrote: »

Accordingly this appeal is dismissed.
"

The IAS stands for ..
INTERNATIONAL ACCREDITED SCAM

Government still allowing this scam to continue

No worries, it is always difficult to appeal to the brain dead

Fortunately real judges do not belong to the scam and
as the scam was invented by Gladstones Solicitors,
real courts (not stupid kangaroo courts) are used to
the very incompetent Gladstones

greentree75

So, SIP have until 4pm on Monday to pay costs, I'm guessing that isn't going to happen. Can anyone advise what I would do if they don't pay up?