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.
Hi
I know that there are topics about this company already, but just wanted to get as accurate answer as possible in this particular case.
Ok:
On the 25/07/2008 i received a letter from company CRS (Credit resource solutions) regarding muliple fines relating to my car (there is reg and make).
They wrote that they were instructed by BPM - CRS Ltd. They want £130 pounds. I don`t remember getting any fine recently in this car, besides if it was a normal ticet i`d get tfl letter or a reminder.
I phoned them and found out that it`s for parking on the disabled bay on 02/12/2006. That was 1.5 year ago , I have been in halfords in sutton number of times in the past. I remember parking for minute or two few times when the whole car park was empty ( i never took last disabled spot, there are 4) I never received a ticket there and never herad anything unitl now.
I also asked to send me a compoy of ticket,photo proof and copies of reminders from the past. Thay said that they will send me a copy of ticket, , but they have no photos and there was no other letter regarding this offence.
WHat now, I had nor ticket or reminder issued by parking company, I only recieved this letter 1.5 year later from debt collectors.
Here`s a copy of this ticket :
I cannot post it :/
img227.imageshack.us/img227/9062/13748901cq4.jpg
They are offering a a settlement but i have to phone them , shall I ?
That's unenforceable tat - don't pay. For a start, a blue badge is not required on private property.
Because you didn't pay, the company has probably put your case in a drawer and recently unearthed it and sent a bundle of tickets to a new debt collector.
i mean they will add more money on top of those £130 so there will be no way they can take those money of me ? Can they prove that i have been in halfords 1.5 year ago by checking cctv records ?
it is unenforceable tosh. stop worrying and just ignore them.
and no it won't affect your credit rating.
read the stickies and just some of the many threads here about PPCs.
Your credit rating would be affected IF they took you to court AND they won AND you refused to pay.
That'll never happen.
CCTV would only show some person driving a car. If they really really wanted to take you to court, their CCTV footage wouldn't be any help tracking down who the driver was and where they lived. They only have access to the registered keeper's address, who is under no obligation to tell them who was the driver. Not that anyone would expect you to even be able to remember who was driving on a day 2 years ago.
If they did, by some miracle, identify the driver and their address from some grainy CCTV footage and take you to court, they wouldn't have a hope in hell of winning because a) the £50 is a penalty. Private companies cannot issue penalties, only sue for actual losses they have suffered; and b) no court in the land would agree you are liable to pay anything because you didn't display a blue badge (which means sod all on private property).
It's a [problem]. Just ignore any letters you receive and they will go away again soon.
CCTV - from 1.5 years ago - it really is a long short isn't it, especially given that BPM actually went bust. CRS have not "been instructed" by BPM, rather they have bought the debt from the liquidator at say 3 pence to the £ and are now trying to make hay. I doubt very much that CRS have much in the way hard evidence to back up their outrageous statements.
Remember also that in most cases, the CCTV is owned by the landowner / retailer, not the PPC. Where PPCs do operate CCTV it is usually of the ANPR [automatic number plate recognition] - useless for identification of driver. Even where relevant CCTV does exist, the only chance the PPC would have of matching footage against the driver would be in the court room itself. Even there, if the defendant were not given prior sight, this "evidence" would be deemed inadmissible.
All this really is academic - CRS are just trying it on.
Andy Iroc, it may take some time to get your head around it, it did with me too, but the situation really is as simple as these guys have said.
Credit resource solutions
.
Reply With Quote
