By Jorge Casuso

March 2, 2012 -- The Santa Monica City Council jumped the gun Tuesday when it voted to settle a lawsuit charging that the City failed to explain why appeals of parking citations are denied, the plaintiff's said.

Under the settlement agreement unanimously approved by the council, plaintiffs Stanley and Harriet Epstein and their attorney would receive $65,000 from the City and $12,500 from ACS, its parking contractor.

The City, which made no admission of liability, would also send letters to those whose appeals were denied giving more information about the decision. A chance to fight the tickets also would be given.

But on the morning after the vote, the Epsteins sent out a "press advisory" informing the local media that "there is NO settlement at this point."

"Although the parties have been negotiating for four months, several important points remain to be worked out before completion," the advisory said.

The Epsteins filed the suit after Harriett was issued a $64 citation last February when she left her car at a park to run errands. The plaintiffs charged the City was violating a 2009 amendment to the California Motor Vehicle Code that requires an explanation when a contested citation is ruled valid.

Shortly before the suit was filed, City officials announced they had changed Santa Monica's policy after receiving a number of complaints that letters from the City do not tell appellants why their challenge has been turned down, only that they have to pay the ticket.

“Although the letters provide the minimum information required by law, the City believes that providing additional details with these letters would improve customer service,” City police and finance officials stated.

City officials said that the enhanced letters were part of a year-long effort at City Hall to review and improve the way Santa Monica’s parking citations and parking permits are handled.

On one thing both parties in the lawsuit seem to agree.

"If and when the parties resolve all outstanding issues, the settlement document must be approved by a Superior Court judge," the Epstein's wrote. "Following that, the media will be sent a joint press release."