This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

CHICAGO —  A North Side tow truck service that lost its license amid accusations of predatory practices got a big win in court Wednesday.

Wednesday’s ruling by a judge said mistakes were made administratively in the process to pull the company’s business license.

In a reversal of fortune Lincoln Towing Service is off the hook — at least for now.

The controversial towing service has been in business 60 years, and for decades the company has been accused of moving cars in places it shouldn’t and causing high dollar damage to some vehicles in the process.

In September 2018, the Illinois Commerce Commission revoked Lincoln Towing’s license after its investigation found hundreds of improper or illegal tows in a nearly eight month period.

They labeled Lincoln Towing “incompetent and unworthy to hold a relocator’s license.”

But months later, an administrative law judge disagreed. This finding obtained by WGN investigates found fault with the work of an ICC investigator.

The judge wrote staff’s claims that Lincoln towing committed 831 violations is not supported by the record.

The judge found only 21 violations in The same eight month period which equals violations on less than 1% of all tows conducted

On Wednesday, Cook County Circuit Judge Neil Cohen said the Illinois Commerce Commission “violated fundamental fairness and … due process rights” by failing to advise Lincoln Towing that it could lose its license as a result of the hearing process.

The attorney for Lincoln Towing has told us before the company’s record is a good one!

“How many tows we do a year and how few violations we have? It’s like point 003 percent of 1. That’s a pretty good record,” Allen Perl, attorney, said.

The Illinois Commerce Commission through a spokesman said, “We are disappointed in the ruling and are exploring all of our options with our legal counsel, the Attorney General’s Office, representing us in this case.”