Jump to content

sweep1

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    82
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

33 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. its a genuine registered company. The Director Nadeem ABBAS has registered multiple companys at different locations. His primary source of business seems to be his laundry business. He registered a new company last year in the business of car rental/leasing, it looks like he has registered this new business at his home address https://www.linkedin.com/in/nadeem-abbas-3a8763143/ https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09000483/officers https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/14991345/officers
  2. You may also be able to complain to the LGO about TFL handling of these charge notices. (However, penalties may be challenged for any other reasons – what we call ‘mitigating circumstances) /graphics/shortcut-icons/OGimageDefault.png Enforcement of road charging schemes (such as Transport for London’s Congestion Charge and Low Emission Zones) - Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman WWW.LGO.ORG.UK When you received the penalty notices, they normally contain a picture of the vehicle, have you checked with TFL to see if this vehicle is being used a taxi/private hire/uber /static/1/images/TFL_Linkinage01.png Licence checker - Transport for London TFL.GOV.UK Find out whether a private hire driver, vehicle or operating centre is licensed.
  3. The OP has stated in a previous post that they do indeed have a letter confirming that he was abroad for some time during some of the traffic offences. The SD approach is recommended by a number of solicitors during identity theft, as to if it works will largely depend on how councils/TEC/TFL choose to deal with it. I suspect that in this case the involvement of the local MP will be needed to force the issue. As to if a council will use CEO's to locate a vehicle, yes they can, a friend of mine who works as a CEO for a council near to me, he and his collegues were asked to look out for a vehicle which was collecting tickets, The vehicle had cloned plates and the innocent party was receiving demands for payment/bailiff action. The innocent party got the local MP involved, The Vehicle Reg got loaded onto police ANPR and the local CEO's were asked to keep a eye for it on their travels, they found it, got the vehicle towed back to the police compound and waited for the offender to get in touch. The Council rescinded the tickets. Hopefully, regulars of this forum who are more experienced in dealing with how to fight the tickets at this current stage will be able offer the OP more current advice, I hope my advice will prevent future problems
  4. This company AK Vehicle Management Limited looks like a shell company (One Company registered to another and then another, all hiding behind Virtual Office Address or Companys offering the address for business registrations). Their Websites(s) and Facebook page offer little else apart from a phone number and even then the person answering the phone will not give a real location. The directors of this and the associated companies are NOT registered with ICO, so that would explain a lack of response to a SAR. @BailiffAdvice is correct, it looks like a bulk of their business is supplying PCO ready vehicles. Do you have a Apple or Google Phone and is location turned on? How to see Apple Maps location history on iPhone/iPad - Mobile Internist How to Find Your Location on Google Maps on Android: 8 Steps If it is, are you able to tally up up the dates and times of the traffic offences? If yes to the above, I would strongly advise you make a statutory declaration using the information to hand to prove you were not present at the time the offences took place. A Full Guide to Statutory Declarations | Notary.co.uk.co.uk A shotgun approach would be to make a SD with this information and send that to all partys concerned. TEC, TFL, All London Councils. Whilst a drastic approach this may reduce or stop any more tickets coming your way. It may even trigger a response from some council who could ask their Civil Enforcement Officers to keep a lookout for the vehicle on their rounds. The sooner the fake driver can be stopped, the sooner you can stop any more tickets coming your way. In the meantime,I wish you luck with your local MP and getting him/her involved to resolve this matter
  5. As people of Identity Fraud quickly come to realise, Support for Victims is scarce at best. At the moment in English Law, a person whose Identity is stolen/used are not considered a victim. Your Bank/Credit Card have better protection in law than a person. The Police you spoke to are correct in directing you to Action Fraud as there is nothing to the Police can do help you until you suffer a financial loss (ie the fraudster obtains a loan in your name) But they can STOP the driver as I previously said. The driver is driving a vehicle under false pretences, Multiple offences : Obtaining Money/Goods or Services by deception, No insurance, He has given a false identity so NO insurance will be valid and if he is using the vehicle(s) in a private hire mode (Uber etc) that will just make things worse for him. Bailiffs are known to use ANPR, so they may come across the vehicle(s) on their travels Get in touch with your local MP and contact the Police again, The Link I gave in my previous post shows that the police can get involved if enough pressure is applied.
  6. Identity Theft is a real problem and more common place than people think, for those affected by Identity Theft it can take a long time to resolve. I would recommend you go to your local police station and ask to speak to a Detective, remember to take all your documents with you (proof of being out of the county etc) The person who is using your identity to hire vehicles is commiting acts of fraud and deception, additionally any vehicle being used that person will NOT be covered by insurance. The police can and should be able to notify London/Met Police who can enter the vehicle(s) registration number(s) onto their ANPR systems. The Police would have reasonable cause to stop and detain the driver until their identity can be fully established. Until the person using your ID is stopped, your unlikely to make any headway in resolving matters with bailiffs There was a similar case about a year ago and VCAS and the local MP stepped in to resolve it, this also involved a vehicle in London using cloned plates, Met Police used ANPR to stop and arrest the driver. https://victimcareandadviceservice.uk/another-post/
  7. Speaking of threatening bailiffs ,anybody remember Sean James the Repo Man from the Channel 4 Series of the same name?. He was not happy when a bailiff turned up at the house and was quite happy to make threats against the bailiff, although if you watch the video which Sean himself recorded, he was not happy about the way the bailiff had been towards his mother http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OafqV3djnLY&list=UUOGIDFz3b3HPRLxfvo2cl2A
  8. DVLA dont prosecute for "failure to update address", the police will and do report the offence of failure to update address details. The attached FOI request for example shows that in 2013 Police in Scotland recorded 1814 offences of failure to update address. Although slightly off topic, the further two FOI requests, Mellor and Brundell show that the DVLA receive a substantial amount of money from drivers for a variety of offences
  9. Interesting topic Enforcement of a debt against a unincorporated trustee body Interesting to see that HMRC consider "However, charity trustees (who may also be members) have a greater role and have a duty to act prudently in administering the affairs of the charity and are responsible for ensuring that a charity fulfils its legal obligations. As such, trustees can be held personally accountable for properly determined liabilities of a charitable trust in most instances." http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/dmbmanual/dmbm585220.htm It appears from a brief reading of this http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/detailed-guidance/protecting-your-charity/vicarious-liability-of-a-charity-or-its-trustees/ that trustee members could be held personally liable for the debts. I can`t understand why the solicitor has said the trustees cannot be held liable,my understanding is that if the body cannot meet its liabilities, the trustees at the time of the action can be sued and held liable. Any one or more of the trustees will hold legal title to any assets of the body https://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedKingdom/Local%20Assets/Documents/Industries/uk-charity-charitable-incorporated-organisations.pdf
  10. Under current regulations (for applications after 29 July 2013) The Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission (CMEC) for a single child will still use a "net calculation" for assesment. and as morally wrong as it may be,the ex -partner has used this to their advantage. The following links may be of interest http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed113401 http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed104950 On a personal note, the issue of person(s) being self-employed whilst working for a company is something I know HMRC have been known to take a dim view of (IR35) http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ir35/guidance.pdf
  11. Those of you with OLCI may be interested in the following announced today from the creditman website Pre pack deal saves jobs and protects courses at OLCI Construction Training May 6 2014 Allan Graham from KPMG Restructuring was appointed administrator of OLCI Construction Training on Tuesday 6th May. Immediately on appointment, the administrators sold the business to the group that includes Engineering Real Results Limited, which will deliver the ongoing training to students. All 77 employees transferred to the purchaser as part of the deal, which will also ensure that studies are not disrupted for over 3,000 current students enrolled on courses. OLCI Construction Training is a leading provider of plumbing, electrical, gas and green energy training, with 13 centres across the UK. Allan Graham, administrator and restructuring partner at KPMG said: “After suffering an extended period of financial losses, OLCI was unable to meet its commitments to creditors and in early April had a winding-up petition presented against it. The directors took the decision that insolvency was unavoidable and consulted KPMG to help find a solution that would best protect the interests of students, creditors and employees. KPMG conducted an accelerated sales and marketing campaign and the pre-pack sale secured ensures the best outcome for all parties.” The business was sold for an undisclosed sum. http://www.creditman.biz/uk/members/news-view.asp?newsviewID=19864
  12. An interesting topic. The current regulations are not as clear as they could be and could land someone with a large bill. What about those people who "rent" their driveway space, should the person renting the driveway to another be held liable to the rentee for the subsequent cost of the lost vehicle and the cost of court expenses. In this case, what level of proof would an EA accept that the vehicle parked on the debtors driveway is not the debtors but the third party? What about people who have a company car? These are often on lease via their employer, the employee is unlikely to have little more paperwork than an insurance certificate from the leasing company. The leasing agreement often stays at "Head Office" What about people who have cars on hire from a hire company? What about people who take "Chattel Mortgage" against their vehicle? (Logbook loans and the like) In the above cases, none of the above will be clear to anyone that the goods (vehicles) CLEARLY do not belong to the debtor. TCGR2013 appears to offer little cost effective protection to either the EA or the debtor should a "mistake" occur
  13. I suspect the programme in question will now be seriously "watered down" and simply an 30 min feature about the activitys of bailiffs and the new rules introduced on sunday. The company in question did this afternoon release a statement about tonights programme http://www.jbwgroup.co.uk/news/2014/jbw-statement/
  14. http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/enforcement-officers/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf The link will work if you hover your mouse over the link and wait briefly, then left click to view the pdf from the justice.gov.uk website or select the whole link below, copy and paste into the url bar http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/enforcement-officers/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf
  15. I have also read the website in question and its claims about "bogus" or "fake" warrants. I also have serious concerns over the advice given about paying fines at the court ATM after a bailiff has attended to enforce the distress warrant and then claiming that the fine is discharged ie No Enforcement fees payable. For those of you who would like a read of the current legislation the following links will be of interest. A Full list of Offences where fines can be issued by Magistrates http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/MCSG_Update9_October_2012.pdf Part 52 as in force of 27th October 2013 Enforcement of Fines and other orders for payment http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/criminal/docs/2012/crim-proc-rules-2013-part-52.pdf As you can see from Part 52, although a person can pay at the court under Part 52.3 "the fine", it makes no reference to a Court ATM as being a authorised person and as such if the fine has been issued to bailiffs enforcement costs become payable by the defendant.
×
×
  • Create New...