this just happened to a friend.

.. warrant was issued 12 months ago to old address AFTER the new rules came into force.

the 12 month period has just elapsed,

my friend expecting that "it's safe to come out now" contacted the bailiffs by phone.

Note, my friend was found and contacted about a month ago only by email

and no evidence has been provided so far to confirm the debt was valid,

they sent each other a couple of emails mainly disagreeing with each other.

It turns out that one of the emails sent by the bailiff (2 days before 12 months passed) was their idea of a "payment agreement"..

. of course this was never acknowledged of agreed to by my friend and the exact wording I am waiting to find out,

can the bailiff simply create this payment agreement without agreement from the alleged debtor?

The result is that the bailiff has reset the 12 month clock with a simple email.

Please someone tell me this isn't right.

Thanks

whats the debt all about and for please?

dx

ah, ok, background:

PCN for loading bay (council)

CCTV so nothing attached to vehicle

moved house and sold car before anything came through the post, so unaware of it entirely

contacted by email by bailiff and then the above happened

Thee correct course of action if your friend genuinely knew nothing about this contravention would be for him to file an Out of Time witness statement with the Traffic Enforcement Centre. That is all that is needed.

I agree, the only reason she didn't do that originally was because she found out so close to the year anniversary that it seemed pointless (TEC had confirmed warrant would expire a week after her call).

I've just seen the communications and it would appear that she did, sort of, ask for help/offer to pay the PCN which they responded to with their offer. It is probably enough to count as an agreement

Do you have any advice as to exactly how to fill in the the out of time and stat dec? I know that it can make the difference between it being rejected or not. Also, she has't yet disclosed her new address... would you advise this or better to use another for the out-of-time? it would be tragic for the oot to be rejected and the bailiffs to come after her at the new address. hope this makes sense, any advice would be greatly appreciated

The problem with filing an OoT is that she would be required to provide her current address on the form. I would therefore suggest that she calls TEC on Monday to ask them the status of the warrant (whether it has now expired). If expired, then an Out of Time cannot be done in any event.

It has definitely expired according to TEC... what next then? Oh dear. Does the warrant really last forever?

BTW, the only thing they can do is nab her car, which is on lease purchase, so simply an inconvenience... She's anxious so I'm keen that she does what is best for her. Of course paying the £480 is totally wrong since she was never aware of the fine in the first place.

thankyou

Even is she is able to file an Out of Time Application she will be required to provide her current address.

This cannot be avoided.

Thanks for your advice - this is exactly what I thought... here's what happened though.

Warrant expired as confirmed by TEC. She wrote to council enclosing a postal order for the full amount (£82). they rejected it as it was still with the bailiffs, so postal order was collected in person yesterday.

Bailiffs confirmed yesterday that the warrant is still live (beyond it's expiration date) and a payment agreement was entered into a few days before the expiration date (very thin evidence for this - its debatable). They also said they can take a car via apnr This is the challenge we now face. Does your website not advise that since the new rules came into force the 1 year expiry thing no longer applies nor does the direct payment to the council. Am I missing something?

"the regulations specify that a bailiff has 12 months from the date of the Notice of Enforcement to either take control of goods belonging to the debtor or to obtain payment from the debtor. If he fails to do so, the warrant expires.

Most importantly, if a debtor enters into a payment agreement with the bailiff company and then defaults on the agreement, the 12 month period begins with the date of the default (and not from the date of the Notice of Enforcement)."

this is what I'm confused about:???:

Please note that TEC warrants no longer expire after 12 months (since 6 April 2014). All that the EA needs to do if they have indeed failed to take control of goods within 12 months is to start again at the compliance stage. Sadly TEC keep giving out the wrong advice. I'm not at work so can't give you the CPR amendment details.

Thanks Bazm, yes that seems to be the case. So what happens in a case such as this where an out of time can't be filed, but the warrant is kept alive when the poor person wasn't even aware of the fine in the first place? Is there no way to get bailiff action stopped in the same way an OOT would have done?

It sounds like the rules have changed in the favour of the bailiffs..... in time these guys will be driving their vans around with warrants that are years old picking up every car with a link to any old ticket irrespective of whether the driver has ever been informed of the PCN. *rant over*

This subject needs clarifying with TEC given that during this week I had an enquiry from a police officer who had attended a debtors property regarding bailiff enforcement of three road traffic debts and the police officer called TEC herself whilst at the debtors premises and was informed by the TEC officer that the warrant (which had been authorised by TEC on 27th April 2014) had expired and that accordingly, the bailiff was not allowed to enforce it.

To be fair though, they (tec) wouldn't have any idea what has gone on with the warrant after it was issued, its the council themselves and the enforcement company that would have access to the notes not tec, so they shouldnt be able to say whether it has expired based only on when they authorised the warrant

So if the bailiffs are allowed to revert to the compliance stage after a year does that mean that they don't even need to have a payment agreement in place? If they do I think we need to clarify exactly what constitutes a payment agreement. Especially if there is no other way of quashing the filthy thing.

Any thoughts?...

The warrant expires after 12 months if the enforcement agent is unable to take control of goods.

If the debtor has an agreement to pay and defaults then the 12 months starts again.

It is not up to the bailiff company to say well the 12 months has gone so lets start it again. The warrant expires and the fine goes back to the council. It is then up to the council whether they want to get the fine re-authorised by the tec and pay the fee again.

OK, I think this is where the confusion comes in. Josephbloggs is that by the new regs? If so, surely the debtor must agree to a payment arrangement.

The point is that someone hasn't got their facts straight (maybe us, maybe TEC, maybe council) and the bailiff is still acting on a warrant that is over 12 months old without ever having the agreement of the "debtor" to any arrangement - therefore defaulting is irrelevant.

How can this be stopped?

TEC today have advised;

"We are not legally trained and have not been advised of any changes to the procedure, therefore, as far as we're concerned the warrant has expired"

"You should still file the out of time and it will probably still be processed - if it's not then you will have evidence from us that the warrant has expired"

The plot thickens.

Could anyone help me with the best way to fill in the out of time and I'll keep you all posted on progress?

Thank you

Given that the warrant has expired then you cannot (and do not need to ) file an Out of Time witness statement. The local authority or enforcement agent would need to make an application to court (not the Traffic Enforcement Centre) to EXTEND the warrant. That has not been done and accordingly, the warrant cannot be enforced.

If that is the case then what are the bailiffs and council up to? And what happened to this idea of warrants no longer expiring after 12 months?

Also - the civil procedure rules (online version) show the 12 month restriction as crossed out. Suggests or reinforces the thought that the 12 month expiration is no longer the case

Can you provide the link.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part75

75.7 5

In relation to road traffic debts, if the bailiff has been unable to 'take control of goods' or enter into a payment arrangement with the debtor within 12 months of the date of the warrant then the warrant expires. This means that the warrant has 'ceased to have affect' (the legal terminology) and accordingly, the bailiff cannot enforce the debt. The warrant would need to be returned to the creditor (the local authority). The debt to the council is still legally owing but bailiff fees must be removed.

A warrant may be extended by a further 12 months. This is provided for in the regulations (in this case Regulation 9.4 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013) and the procedure is outlined in the Rules (not the regulations).

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/regulation/9/made?view=plain

The application to extend the warrant can be made by EITHER the local authority or the enforcement company. An application (to extend) may only be made ONCE. The Rules specifically provide that such an application must be made BEFORE the initial warrant expires.

According to the Traffic Enforcement Centre the warrant has expired and it would seem than no application to extend has been made. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the warrant has expired .

Thank bailifadvice. Do you have any thoughts on Bzam's comment or on the advice of the bailiff that the warrant is still live and they can take a car if they see one?