Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
    • Steam is still needed in many industries, but much of it is still made with fossil fuels.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5581 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Helping a friend who has received a warrant of execution today from their local county court re a small claims case where they were the defendants (small business partnership - issued under company trading name). The decision was ruled in the claimants favour (rightly so) and instead of dealing with it last year, they did the ostrich impression. They do not dispute the amount and now they have a couple of days to repsond.

 

My thoughts are to advise them to complete a form N245 to apply to repay in instalments - it could be paid in full but they are a small business and it would cause them some considerable hardship to find it all in one go. They are thinking of repaying in two-weekly instalments over a period of 2 months. which I personally thought was quite reasonable.

 

Is the above advice correct? Do they have to approach the bailiffs direct (they are the court ones, not a private company fortunately) or can they deal directlywith the claimant, and copy in the bailiffs? (Payment options would be easier).

 

They're going to contact the bailiffs tomorrow morning, but I said I'd ask here first.

 

Many thanks, K

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again KJD,

 

If you're friend has every intention of paying contact bailiffs direct and straight away, you know they like to charge for everything:mad:

 

If its for a large amount then they will probably want to do a walkin possetion before agreeing to installments.

 

This is only what i've picked up from cag myself though

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, you can download the N245 here Her Majesty's Courts Service - Home. Select Forms and Guidance from the menu on the left hand side and enter N245 in the box. You can then go to the page to download the form. There is a fee of £35.00 when you put the application in at court.

 

If they complete the form tonight or tmorrow morning they can deliver it by hand to the local court where the bailiffs operate from. No further action by the bailiffs can take place while the N245 is at court awaiting consideration. If they intend to repay over two months they should have no trouble getting the judge to agree. There is no hearing to attend, the form will go in front of the judge, probably in the next week or so, and then the decision will be posted to them.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Ell-enn

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris - good to see you again!

 

And hi Ell-en.. (I see you've been getting even more great results recently :))

 

Thanks so much for your replies. Have sent that link to friend and given them a verbal 'kick up the proverbial'. I've even offered to drive them down to the court in the morning and walk them to the desk!

 

However I know what their next question will be... on the form it asks about employment details and then details of finances. How do they fill that in if the warrant is issued under the company name (partnership with a trading address)?

 

K

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm, I would say the income is the income from the business on a monthly basis - and the expenditure is what they have to pay out in bills for the business each month. Might be a good idea to ring the court first thing in the morning and ask - the staff are usually very helpful.

 

Ell-enn

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so with much trepidation, they called the court this morning. The number took them straight through to the bailiff office :eek:. However, the chap they spoke to, who is the bailiff dealing with their case, was extremely nice. He told them not to bother with a N245 as it would cost them more money. He was happy to accept a cheque for just under a quarter of the total to be sent out in the post today (I've recommended they deliver it in person tho) and the same figure in two weeks time, etc. He said that as long as it doesn't bounce, he is happy with that arrangement. He will not add any costs to the total and does not need to levy.

 

Okay, so fundamental rule broken (ie speaking to them on the phone) so I'm going to help friend to draw up a letter with full 'transcript' of conversation to accompany first cheque.

 

But friend will be able to sleep tonight (got several texts in to the wee hours from them!) and everything can eventually go back to normal.

 

I know their experience is different from those dealing with bailiffs for council tax arrears etc, but hope this might help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have come to an arrangement with the bailiffs to pay the warrant, and there are no good reasons to have the CCJ set aside, (given the fact that they didn't respond to the original claim) then I think they have got a reasonable deal without any further expense.

 

I think we just have to be realistic sometimes:)

 

Ell

  • Haha 1

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're right, Ell-enn. There are no real grounds for getting it set aside - don't think judges will accept 'I was being an ostrich' as a reasonable excuse. Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing?!

 

I've tried to stress to friend how seriously they must stick to the arrangement (have pointed them to this site and in particular this section to scare them in to it if nothing else!), and have made a note in my own diary of the dates the cheques must go out.

 

In this climate, I think they're going to come out of this fairly unscathed.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to know what I said about genuine county court bailiffs (in Detained by Police For Unpaid PCN) just yesterday proved to be correct. It just goes to show that those who do have authority are always far more reasonable than those that have little or none but who have to work on commissions for a living.

 

This story looks as if it will be resolved peacefully and sensibly.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

KJD, if you rang the court and ended up at the bailiff's office then bailiff is a County Court bailiff on a salary and not a certified (self-employed) bailiff on commission.

County Court bailiffs are several degrees more reasonable then certified bailiffs.

 

I would still get the agreement to repay in stages in writing.

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I thought too.

 

The cheque and letter to bailiff in one envelope, plus a copy of the letter to the bailiff (named) in a separate envleope both being delivered by hand to the courts this today - the first to the general office as instructed by the bailiff on the phone and the second direct to the bailiff's office. Friend has asked for confirmation of the agreement to be sent to them.

 

It does give you a bit of hope when the bailiff has been so agreeable on this occasion. Mind you, I expect he may be quite relieved this one has been sorted - imagine how many he'll be dealing with which aren't so forthcoming?!

 

Thanks again for everyone's support :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the main I have to agree that County Court Bailiffs are helpful and fairly reasonable to deal with. However, I had to help an employee of ours who was being scared stiff by a little Hitler from our local CC!!

 

He would turn up at her house banging (not knocking) on her door at between 6 and 7 o'clock in the morning, when she didn't answer the door he would bang on the front windows (scaring the old lady next door so much she needed a doctor to be called later) and then stood in the middle of the front lawn looking up at her bedroom window. All this was obviously done to cause maximum embarrasment and stress.

 

Found out later the little g*t was new to the job (suspect background as private bailiff! or henpecked somewhere else and now pushing his chest out with importance at his new "powers"). A stiff letter to the court from myself being the lady's employer and finding her distressed and unable to work kept him at bay until she could get payment made.

 

Made me mad that did:mad:

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...