Ticket Revoked, Bailiff refuses to refund £206.17 fees - Comments anyone?

[10110001]

Long story short:

1. Parking ticket issued but not fixed to the vehicle or handed to the driver in compliance to Section 66 of the Road Traffic Act & confirmed by photos.

2. Owner does not receive a Notice to Owner as far as they know.

3. Bailiff calls and recovers £301.17 from the Owner.

4. Owner makes a successful late statutory declaration revoking the ticket and Order for Recovery.

5. Council refunds £95 parking ticket and says the bailiff is responsible for refunding their £206.17 fees.

6. Bailiff contends (in their words) warrants cannot be unexecuted and refuses to refund £206.17 fees.


Where now?

[jampot]

Small Claims Court against the Council and (jointly) their agents (the DCA / Bailiff).

Regardless of whether or not "warrants cannot be unexcecuted" - if there was no basis for serving a warrant in the first place, you cannot be liable for their costs.

[10110001]

I wondered who would be the defendant in a MCOL case.

Thanks for that, I'm on the case now.

Does anyone know whom will be ordered to pay the refund of fees? surely this isn't the first time this has happened?

[jampot]

That's my interpretation, anyway... if the Council were wrong to issue (and enforce) a ticket in the first place, they are responsible for the costs.

I'm sure someone can confirm, prior to you beginning the MCOL case. I guess if you named them both jointly and the court didn't agree (when allocating the case) the case could still be amended at that point. But as both the Council and the Bailiff were acting together, and it was on the express wishes of the Council that the Bailiffs were involved, then they are (in my opinion) jointly liable.

[Howard0181]

The bailiffs were instructed in "good faith" by the local authority. They were asked to do work on behalf of their clients the local authority and I doubt that they have to give the local authority back the fee (unless its part of their conract).

If it was me I would issue a County Court Summons against the local authority.

I would write to the local authority (recorded delivery) stating that you are looking for them to repay you your loss within 14 days. Advise that if full payment is not recieved in 14 days that you will issue a County Court Summons for your loss plus Court Costs.

My guess is that if they dont pay within 14 days they will repay the entire claim at some stage after you have issued your Summons.

[xipetotec46]

I wondered who would be the defendant in a MCOL case.

Does anyone know whom will be ordered to pay the refund of fees? surely

It's the council who serve a warrant of execution at court it is the bailliffs who enforce it, so the claim goes to the council.
Do not use Money Claim On Line go through the Small track claim proper at your local county court, this situation you are in is more serious than a claim from a bank. Good Luck my guess is the council will pay you and claim it from the Bailiffs but the bailiffs are entitled to keep some for the work they have done for the council so far.

[10110001]

Originally Posted by jampot

it was on the express wishes of the Council that the Bailiffs were involved, then they are (in my opinion) jointly liable.

My thoughts likewise, but since neither council nor bailiff are willing to refund the fees; I seem to be the arbiter of a dispute between council and bailiff.

Originally Posted by Howard0181

If it was me I would issue a County Court Summons against the local authority.

Originally Posted by Howard0181

Im not expert but common sense agrees with you as the bailiff acted in good faith not knowing the ticket was invalid.

Originally Posted by xipetotec46

Do not use Money Claim On Line go through the Small track claim proper at your local county court,

I agree again, so the conclusion is:
---------------------------------

Its a Small Claims track case with the Council as the defendant, and the Council needs sort among itself with its bailiff how they share the refund of bailiff fees.

The question now is:
-------------------

Does anyone know how I can reclaim out of pocket expenses? Such as correspondence, travel costs etc., there’s a detailed list. I am assuming for the moment this would be added to the smal claim against the council.

There is new information:
------------------------

The Subject Access Request reveals the bailiff fees include earlier visits (attendance fees) on two specified dates and after scanning CCTV footage from our rooftop camera from 06:00 and 21:00, there have been no visitors to the property except the postman at 09:46 and 09:01 respectively which inmdicates these fees are for bogus visits. Its time-consuming copying hours of DVD video footage to give away as evidence.

[xipetotec46]

Does anyone know how I can reclaim out of pocket expenses? Such as correspondence, travel costs etc., there’s a detailed list. I am assuming for the moment this would be added to the smal claim against the council.

You are entitled to claim any out of pocket expenses and keep your labour cost below £9 per hour, include the costs in the Particulars of claim and include a detailed schedule mof the costs involved

there have been no visitors to the property except the postman at 09:46 and 09:01 respectively which inmdicates these fees are for bogus visits.

You have the Bailiffs by the short and curlies with this one, let them know you have evidence of them operating a scam and you will report them to the Police if they don't cough up, if they pay up report them anyway, you won't have to take the small claims track. if they don't pay up report them anyway. these B*!"*!D Bailiffs want exposing.

[10110001]

Originally Posted by xipetotec46

let them know you have evidence of them operating a scam and you will report them to the Police if they don't cough up, if they pay up report them anyway, you won't have to take the small claims track. if they don't pay up report them anyway. these B*!"*!D Bailiffs want exposing.

Disregarding what evidence is held. who carries the burden of proof whether a bailiff actially made an attendance giving rise to a fee thereto?

[xipetotec46]

You have the proof that no one called on the days you mentioned, if they did not call then they cannot have proof of this.. they cannot prove a negative. you could ask them before you reveal the CCTV proof if they can provide proof of their visits and see what Cock & Bull story they come up with... let them dig themselves a hole... they can only incriminate themsleves even more.

[dw190]

Originally Posted by xipetotec46

You are entitled to claim any out of pocket expenses and keep your labour cost below £9 per hour, .

There is a fixed rate in Civil Proceedings for a Litigant in Person of £9.25 per hour. The total amount of the claim for time spent must not exceed what a soloicitor would have charged for doing the same work. that means you cou spend 16 - 18 hours at £9.25 if a solicitor could do it in one hour.

Make sure you itemise all your out of pocket expenses and claim mileage and postages + the time it takes.

[10110001]

only postal correspondence is itemised but i'll get the mileage and other work itemised.

[dw190]

I think you may have concluded that the claimwould be better issued in your local CC rather than MCOL. Any defence would mean it was transferred to your local.

Also calim interest @ 8% on any amount from the date you paid up until the date repaid or judgement date.

I personally believe that its better to go for just the Council as they instructed the Bailiff who acted as the Councils Agent. Your claim should be worded "The claim relates to monies paid to the XXXCouncil and/or it's agents.


Don't address yourself as me or I on the claim for. Its reads more professional if you use the term "On ??/??/???? the Claimant paid the defendant through its agent the sum of £XX.XX". To date the Defendant has made a payment to the Claimant of £XX.XX in part payment of the amout due to him.