Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Hello I am new to this forum and just had a problem with ukcps far parking in a dsabled bay outside curries. I am not disabled but I was giving a lift to a 78 year old nieghbour of mine.
He had dropped his blue badge on the way over and we had only discovered it when in town. So avoiding town (no badge) we went to curries to sort out a radio for him. Now I parked as close as possible thinking I was not in a disabled bay.
When I came back I had a ticket.
Now going back and checking there are some 4 inch by 18 inch or so orange signs on the wall over three spaces. Two to the right(were I was) one to the far left with about four spaces in between.
The disabled image on the floor is very worn and almost complatly invisible from certain angles(This is what I normally look far)
There are thre signs with parking terms on the wall. All thre are virtually the same but slightly different.
the one to the far left has a notice about disabled badges the on to the far right has the same but on a completly different line and the one in the middle (or to my left as I helped my passanger into his wheelchair) has no such notice.
now the sum is 75 pounds payable in 10 days or extortionate charges apply 3 pound a day. I need to pay before appealing or I am liable (is that legal) and the post address is a po box.
the phone is an expensive 0870 number and all you get is a rude Yorkshire man who tells you to writ in.
it takes them up to 14 days to respond but you have to pay in 10.
now I dont no if i should pay. There is no insentive for prompt payment and from what i can gather they have no leagl right to ask for money.
They claim they can demand money of me by the administration of justice act which I dont know if it applies.
THey say they will obtain my dvla records and refuse to allow me to give them the pertinant information so they dont have to go behind my back.
they will not allow me to pay in person only by postal order cheque or paypall.
I dont want to get find a lot of money and lose my house its all i have.
But I hate bullys.
I rang them to get information but they told me to %%%$ off and put the phone down.
as a side note I found what might be their real address
1st floor standard house george st huddersfield west yorkshire
There are a couple of threads specifically about them which I will post up.
Big thing to remember, DON'T PAY, these are just unsolicited invoices, unenforceable penalties, call them what you want. UKCPS will continue to write to you, chasing payment at every turn. Don't be intimidated by that £3 / day. It is just pure BS. The first thing a judge would do is strike out that element of claim, the second thing he'd [or she] would do is
strike out the rest of their claim.
[DON'T BE CONCERNED - CHANCE OF COURT IS LESS THAN 1 IN 1000. THE PPCs DON'T LIKE GOING TO COURT BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY WOULD LOSE]
The usual advice from this forum is to use the template letters. However, with this shower, as with UK PAO [hiya Steve ] , given the outrageous £3 / day, I'd blank them completely. When you get a letter purporting to be from a debt collector, write back to them saying the debt is in dispute, refer back to UKCPS.
A 27-year-old Staffordshire woman who ran a car clamping operation which extorted thousands of pounds from drivers has been warned she faces jail.
Rebecca Meakin, of Millers Vale, Heath Hayes, was convicted of conspiracy to blackmail motorists by charging up to £300 to get their vehicles back.
Car parks in Cannock and Worcester were among those where her firm, Rowencroft Immobilisers, was operating.
She was remanded on bail for reports at Stafford Crown Court.
Judge Simon Tonking said those who commit offences of blackmail or conspiracy to blackmail are likely to receive a custodial sentence. He added that is "certainly the sentence which is on the cards in this case".