Please put me out of my misery...

mlang88

Hi all,

Just wanted to drop a message to all the regulars who have been a genuine, and invaluable help since I first posted about the above. I just got out of the rescheduled hearing, and I won! (We won).

My case was adjourned in August 2017, and SIP wanted this to be heard on the papers, which I declined and opted to go in again and I am so glad I did. Having a second chance to have a look at everything was really, really helpful as I noticed a few things this time around:

- I felt my 'silver bullet' argument that the terms of parking were in conflict with the landowners agreement was my strongest argument; however, I read about a case this morning where that was refuted.
- So, I built my verbal argument today on the shoddy quality of the pictures supplied by SIP. It was noted that the car park had changed from pay and display to permit only some time in 2016.
- SIP provided pictures which they felt adequately displayed that and sent them in two batches (one at my first hearing, a second, different set at my second hearing).
- The first set, which I'd never questioned before, showed my car but the signs were tiny and illegible in the background of the picture. The second set of pictures were taken a few months ago, and do not show my car on site. I noted that neither set of pictures were time stamped.

When summarising, I thought she was going the other way, but in the end ruled that SIP had done nowhere near enough to let motorists know of the change of usage, and that they'd provided poor quality pictures as evidence - their representative didn't even have colour pictures with him (one of his arguments were that the signs are very prominent). She also ruled that the very fact that I'd been allowed to park there 11 times prior AFTER the supposed change of use was unfair and almost signalled to me that it was ok to park there.

I am so relieved right now, and I can not thank you all enough. I am very grateful for all your advice. You clearly put countless hours into supporting this forum and I am so proud to say that we beat them!

One line that I used today, that I was quite proud of was: "this is a clear example of the vampiric pursuit of money on behalf of a large parking company. I chose to park here because I thought I could trust them, but I have now learnt my lesson."

THANK YOU

Coupon-mad

One line that I used today, that I was quite proud of was: "this is a clear example of the vampiric pursuit of money on behalf of a large parking company. I chose to park here because I thought I could trust them, but I have now learnt my lesson."

Hooray! Which court and which Judge, please?

Another one bites the dust!

WELL DONE!!

:T

mlang88

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Hooray! Which court and which Judge, please?

Another one bites the dust!

WELL DONE!!

:T

Thank you!

I am sorry, I can't remember her name - but it was at Manchester Civil Justice Centre.

Wasn't awarded any costs for days off work, which I was a bit surprised at, but I am just happy to get this off my back now! :beer:

System

Joanna Peters ?

nigelbb

mlang88 wrote: »

Thank you!

I am sorry, I can't remember her name - but it was at Manchester Civil Justice Centre.

Ironically enough this is adjacent to the ES Parking Enforcement honey trap on Gartside Street where they "fine" people for dropping off & picking up on double yellow lines as despite all appearances to the contrary it's a private road.

mlang88

IamEmanresu wrote: »

Joanna Peters ?

Yes - I have just Googled the name, it's her! She was great, immediately put the burden on the SIP representative and identified with me, as a motorist who is frustrated by these operators.