Exceeded Time by 11 minutes

Gr1pr

Going forward…...

I have a golden rule and always apply it, plus i tell friends and family to apply it too,

Never enter or park in a SIP controlled car park ( regardless of the circumstances )

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82016567#Comment_82016567

Indeed a few in Birmingham to avoid

Nellymoser

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82016283#Comment_82016283

The Govt need to acknowledge the parking operators are the ones lying and misinforming motorists in their written correspondence. Said so in my evidenced CoP consultation response and suggested those guilty PPCs need to be sanctioned for it.

smp67

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82016332#Comment_82016332

Screenshots as requested. Many thanks.

Also the car was on a street not in a car park - so couldn't have been seen 'in the premises' - not that I expect you'll say that makes any difference as to how to proceed with this.

Coupon-mad

Not a professional rejection email, eh @Kaizen2024? SIP can't even spell the word 'to' at the end! Laughable stuff.

This is going to the MHCLG this month. Never mind that SIP can't spell a 2 letter word.

Not only does it:

• unlawfully threaten what they paint as immediate legal proceedings and 'seizing goods' … for not responding to their stupid template rejection letter(!) but also
• laughably restricts complaints to two random scenarios only, one of which is harassment in person or by telephone (not misleading people in reply emails, then…) and
• SIP continue to use "an outdated Template" rejection that "still states 21 days to appeal rather than 28". I'm quoting there from the IPC's Annual Report which identifies that as 'Code non-compliance' (see page 13 here):
  https://irp.cdn-website.com/262226a6/files/uploaded/IPC+Annual+Report+2025.pdf

I think you should:

• wait until day 22 or 23 then see if you can appeal to the IAS (NB do NOT use the one that costs £15).

If you can, then appeal to the IAS pointing out the above three issues and linking the IAS Annual Report and pointing out this is something that SIP should have complied with by now.

If you can't appeal to the IAS free of charge on day 22 or 23, put in a formal complaint to SIP, pointing out the above three issues and linking the IAS Annual Report and pointing out this is something that SIP should have complied with by now.

😎

smp67

Appealed. Hopefully I've covered the points suggested.

The driver was unexpectedly delayed returning to the car. They checked but there was no way to pay the extra due. This shortfall of £2.50 was paid online on 21/5. 

Appeal to SIP was rejected mentioning 'signage situated at the car park' and 'your vehicle was still seen in the premises' - it was not a car park, it was on street parking. 

excerpts from the email:

"Your vehicle was parked in a manner other than in accordance with the signage situated at the car park.
For this reason the parking charge was issued correctly and the charge now stands at £60.00 to be paid within 14 days. After this time the charge will increase and additional charges may be incurred.
Our customer service agent's clarification:
Please note that the charge was issued at 22:22, while the parking session ended at 22:11, over 11 minutes later. We allow a 10-minute consideration period during which drivers may return to their vehicles and exit or arrange payment for an extension. As this period was exceeded and your vehicle was still seen in the premises after the charge had already been issued, the PCN will remain in place."

-------

it also included the following:

"Why should I act upon this letter?
If you fail to respond to this letter, legal proceedings may be issued against you in the County Courts/Sheriffs Court. This may result in:
You may have to pay more in the end because of court costs
A court judgment/decree
Your possessions being seized"

The letter they sent unlawfully threaten what they paint as immediate legal proceedings and 'seizing goods' 

-----
It restricts complaints to two random scenarios only, one of which is harassment in person or by telephone:

"COMPLAINTS

You may lodge an official complaint if you can prove

That we have used the information for purposes other than dealing with a parking charge notice; or
That you have been subjected to unreasonable behaviour or harassment either in person or by telephone by our employees."

-------
SIP continue to use "an outdated Template" rejection that "still states 21 days to appeal rather than 28". I'm quoting there from the IPC's Annual Report which identifies that as 'Code non-compliance'

link - https://theias.org/ias-report-2024-2025
------

If the driver is expected to pay in advance for parking, surely there should be a way to pay for any additional time needed should they return later than anticipated. 

I feel that the charge is unfair as they do not offer the driver any way of paying the additional fee due and their response was not appropriate, did not follow guidelines and came across as unnecessarily threatening,

Coupon-mad

I doubt that'll win as it could have been written more compellingly but let's see.

You'll never pay anyway, regardless of IAS.

smp67

Got a response to my appeal this morning.

Thanks for the help and support particularly from @Coupon-mad - much appreciated.

—————

Dear XXXXX,

Thank you for your appeal. Due to further information SiP Parking Limited has confirmed they will no longer be pursuing the matter and the parking charge has been cancelled.

Parking Charge Number (PCN): XXXXXXXX
Vehicle Registration: XXXXX
Date Issued:

Yours Sincerely,
The Independent Appeals Service

Jame4ters

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82033705#Comment_82033705

I wonder if someone from SiP read this forum!,

kryten3000

Consider yourself lucky, you're one of the 4% who win an IAS appeal. :)