Jump to content

Bartok

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bartok

  1. The court has allowed me to make without a fee, an application to set aside the Order of July 15 and enclosed an N244.

     

    Set aside the Order of 15 July 2011

     

    because

     

    The Claimant did not receive a notice of the hearing from the court and not given a reasonable opportunity to represent her interests.

     

     

    Any Advantage/disadvantage in a telephone hearing or going without a hearing? Dont really want to commit any more time in attending.

     

    Any comments on my Q3 above?

  2. i also asked about a costs order to which i was told again to speak to the bailiff as it was in there hands.....

     

    That means the council has not obtained a costs order. Its only been through the Traffic Enforcement Centre for enforcement so only the statutory 28% enforcement charge on the fine is payable.

     

    Others on this forum may be better informed.

  3. If he returns to the property, do as police say, call 999 quoting the incident reference.

     

    If the council wont let your son pay the fine then he doesnt need to do anything.

     

    The enforcement fee on a parking fine is 28%. He doesnt have to pay the hundreds of pounds of costs the bailiff is asking for, unless a court has made a costs order. Only the council can answer that, so ring them again and ask them when the costs order was made and at which court.

     

    Others on here may be better informed.

  4. However, I will certainly look into this myself.

     

     

    Thats easy enough done:

     

    Just ask Lord Lucas: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/peer/lord_lucas

     

     

    Send a Question:

     

     

     

    Dear Lord Lucas,

     

    Unpaid magistrates court fines and prosecution costs that are means tested and not a statutory fixed penalty, are enforced by private certificated bailiffs, or Enforcement Officers working for a company under a contract with HMCS.

     

    Bailiffs, or Enforcement Officers, increase the amount the Defendant owes by charging "fees" without having obtained for a Costs Order, and while there are no regulations setting a statutory scale of enforcement fees payable by the Defendant.

     

    Can you tell me:

     

    1. (a) Is the Defendant liable to pay the Officers fees? And, (b) under what legislation sets the scale of statutory fees payable to the Officer by the Defendant?

     

    2. If the Defendant is not liable and the Officer misleads the Defendant either (a) he is liable, or (b) a costs order has been made against the Defendant to pay the Officers fees then:-

     

    Does the Officer commit an offence under Sections 1-5 of the Fraud Act 2006 and/or Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970?

     

    Yours Sincerely,

     

  5. Lord Lucas raised a PQ in the House of Lords.

     

    If you have the connections, then asking Lord Lucas to ask PQ on the legal position on defendants liabilities to pay enforcement fees on court fines without having a means tested costs order.

     

    Until that is cleared up, I think its best you refrain from giving advice that could mislead defendants they are liable to pay enforcement fees.

  6. I have spoken to someone who worked in government from 1992 to about 2000 and not subject to OSA, but I must emphasise this is all hearsay and I dont have any links to the source.

     

    The Lord Chancellors department received a complaint from HM Prison service that Magistrates were sending too many yobbos who were not paying their fines and asked for a solution to reduce taxpayer burden.

     

    Warrant officers attached to magistrates courts were responsible for service process and collecting unpaid fines, but their work didn't deal with the problem of serial non-payers because procedure returns the case to court and an arrest warrant issued.

     

    A few options were considered, namely to contract out enforcement to bailiffs similar to decriminalised traffic offences. Those regulations set out statutory bailiff's fees and fixed penalties are not means tested.

     

    Defendants receiving criminal fines were commonly on benefits and therefore their (non motoring) fines and prosecution costs orders were generally minimal, because these are means tested.

     

    Fixing a statutory scale of enforcement fees prescribing a Fees Order for unpaid means-tested fines contradicted means testing.

     

    Ordering £275 in costs for recovering an unpaid £45 public order fine from a defendant who is on jobseekers allowance contradicted the statutory poverty threshold. Only the maximum £5 a weeks could be deducted from benefits.

     

    The alterative is contractor asks the defendant to pay the fess (which are set in a contract between court and contractor), and if the defendant agrees to pay it then the bailiff gets his £275.

     

    If the defendant declined to pay – for which he is allowed – then he is only liable for paying the fine and nothing else. The bailiff deducts his fee from the amount collected.

     

    If a defendant has paid bailiffs fees on a court fine in the last six years, he can reclaim them if the bailiffs mislead the defendant he was liable to pay he fee, or indicate payment of his fee is a statutory obligation or said a court order had been made against the defendant. See section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 and Section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980.

  7. Hi,

    In need of advise if anyine able to spare 5 mins,ive been sent via post a enforecement officer form (ex345) from a company called HFO servicessaying all sorts of things about taken goods from the home can some one explain my rights or direct me to somewhere that has it.

    debt isaround 7-8 years old and from a bank in means of £2050

     

    If the debt was more than 6 years old when the case was brought to court then it is statute barred and is unrecoverable under Section 2 of the 1980 Limitation Act.

     

    Can this bailiff force entry?

     

    Whats the definition of "forced entry"? If you mean breaking and entereing then no he cant.

     

    if so can my partners things be taken and my car?

     

    No and yes, provided it is not on finance.

     

    could i just shut door not borther with them at all? and can entry be gain if im not there (if all doors windows are locked)

     

    Yes. and yes (they cant remove goods in yuor absence anyway)

     

    there comming as of tommorow so i need hold of till monday till i can get to court to try resolve the issue.

     

    Any help would be very greatful

     

    The probably wont turn up. Just leave him waiting outside but move your car.

     

    There is a good chance this is not a bailiff. its a debt collector, and if that is the case, then you should take the documents to a police station and make a complaint of fraud by false representation. (s2 fraud act)

  8. Speak to your MP and explain the above points of argument. See if he can get the official position whether a defendant has a statutory obligation for bailiffs fees without a magistrate odering costs against him.

     

    Meanwhile I'll ask if the information can be posted in a forum, it did come from up in the heirachy of MoJ several years ago when it was Lord Chancellors dept. I dont work for government so I am not bound by OSA 1989.

  9. BARTOK

     

    Philips have a Contract with City of Westminster to enforce unpaid PARKING TICKETS.

     

    and there is a schedule of statutory scale of bailiffs fees: 28% plus a letter fee about £12'ish.

     

    In addition, they ALSO have a Contract with HMCS to enforce unpaid Magistrate COURT FINES.

     

    Correct. Its a contract. There is no statutory Fees Order for bailiff fees payable by defendants.

     

    I am privvy to knowledge why HMCS will not prescribe a bailiffs Fees Order on court fines on the statute book. Long story, but HMCS favoured (for political reasons) setting a contract instead that allows bailiffs to ASK defendants to pay their fees.

  10. Do you actually read this stuff?

     

    Philips are employed by the courts to collect the fines

     

    which are handled by the magistrates court.

     

    bus lane contravention.

     

    Which is handled by TFL and it doesnt set a statutory Fees order.

     

    Since when has Philips been instructed by a court to collect parking tickets?

     

    Since 1992 its councils that instruct the bailiffs.

  11. You are right, conflicting evidence. Do you fancy being a Guinea Pig?

     

    Start the official court service complaints procedure: and read this taken from another post.

     

    This poster contacted the Magistrates court manager about a bailiff (Phillips) who charged her "fees" for collecing an unpaid fine - and if by magic, the fees disappeared,

    http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ml#post2547500

     

    This poster recovered his fees from the bailiffs for a Bus Lane fine after filing a Form N1 in the county courtlink3.gif naming the bailiffs as the defendant. The bailiffs refunded all the fees, but only on condition of NO ADVERSE PUBLICITY against them.

    http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...-action-2.html

     

×
×
  • Create New...