Leakie
-
Posts
945 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by Leakie
-
My understanding is that the NoE needed to be renewed,as it had run it's 12 month course. and was not. I may be wrong and I freely admit my understanding is not as good as some. But if my understanding is correct, then the car should be returned, and the correct procedure followed. I agree the fee's are owed the TCE states this but the procedures set out are there for a reason.
-
Ok DB Yes the fee's are due to the EC but if they went out side of the Procedures they are meant to follow the car should be returned. If you owed me £310.00 and refused to pay me, and I walked in your house and took this amount from you, it would be theft because I did not go through the proper procedures to get the money owed, If the 12 months had expired and they had not renewed the NoE then what is the difference, they did not follow procedure. The rules are there for a reason. for The EC and the Debtor.
-
I do not disagree that in theory the fees are due. But one of the main part of the Op's question was whether they could legally take the car as it has been over 12 months from the NoE, If the EC have not enforced within this period then should they not have sent a new NoE, It is also unusual for an EC to hold on to the account for 12 months or more. In my case Newlyns held the account for 10 months before sending it back, with only one attempt, but they called at 5.00am that was the first and last I saw of them. He may have a valid reason to complain because of the time scales If Newlyns did not follow procedure then they are in the wrong, regardless if they are owed the fee's or not The procedures are there for a reason so if there is a dispute it can be sorted out, But unfortunately, the procedures are interpreted in different ways. I urge the OP to go down the section 85 route first, and it will have to be done soon, before taking the EC to court. if he has to follow this through to the end.
-
Total understand the above DB But the council have then mislead or misinformed the OP saying the LO is satisfied, and only the bailiff fees remain. And I also agree with the OP if the paper trail is not complete and they have not followed the correct procedure and Time scales, then the EC is also wrong, I guess we will have to wait and see what happens when the OP challenges the EC and Council
-
UB is better at explaining than myself I would follow UB's advise and wait for BA to get back, on the section 85
-
Was the car on your drive at the time they made there first visit (19-08-15) If it was then they may have seized it, but should have left paper work to state that. They do not have to clamp on the first visit, but normally do to put pressure on the debtor to contact them to come to some arrangement. If the car was not there then the ball may be it your court as such. When a Bailiff visits your property is defined as a Bailiff call.
-
Bru 911 What DB is asking is quite important As it will show if this was the first contact They may have levied on the car did newly signed leave any paper work to say this before the warrant expired Sorry cannot edit on iPad Did newlyns leave any paper work to say they had sized the car before the took it away, If they did was it before the warrant expired
-
That is great, I am not sure how a section 85 has to be set out, But good luck anyway
-
Well they are not taking you seriously I would just do a section 85, at this point as it is free of any charge, and when this is turned down go to court, You seem confident looking at the posts, Obviously still need it in writing of what the council have stated that the LO is paid. But now time is of the essence, Also I was of the understanding that the sale had to be no longer than 7 days so the charges do not rack up, this will be more than the value of what they will get at auction, with the £420 charges to date and just from today in storage it will be a further £680. so this will bring the total to £1000 as of today plus the storage up to today, I think you said the upper value was £1500. Good luck because if they have got this wrong it will cost them,
-
Agree with PT block the number, If it had been passed to the EA it would be a mobile number.
-
Well then DB You have answered the OP's question. If and it is only an if, they took the car, and the payment was made after the NOE had expired,and a new NoE had not been sent, The OP has a point, and Newlyns acted incorrectly,
-
Well DB we will find out if this is the case if the OP pursues this, and if the Judge agrees with his interpretation or Yours DB. And Hopefully comes back and informs us. No Need to insult the OP He has researched the rules and has come to a different posit of view, This it what the Forum was about a self help forum. I think UB has a point in post 61. At the end of the day it is down to interpretation and case law in a higher court. I hope he goes down the Section 85 route first, once he has confirmation in writing of what he has been told by he council.
-
Good luck but make sure you get it in writing as UB said, Then you can prove the council made the mistake not you. But I still think it will be a lost cause . establishment against you keep us updated please
-
Update Have another meeting at the school tomorrow, I think it will be under caution again. Still waiting to be assessed by the mental health team looks like it will be in the new year before being seen. Then if accepted another couple of months before he is helped. Looks like a fine is on it's way, It is something I will refuse to pay and take it though the system. School have been no help Will update again soon
-
That the trouble if you make the mistake they ramp up the fee's If they make the mistake they still expect you to cough up I will be honest I do not think you will get any where on this, and have to pay to get your car back , and the amount will have gone up by another £110 at least.
-
Bru911 DB is correct in saying the way it should happen is if you pay the council direct, and it is with an EC then the council should pass the payment on, too the EC. But in my opinion if you have it in writing that the LO is settled then it is between the council and the EC. The council has made the mistake not you. Also the council are responsible for the actions of the EC.
-
But I will be corrected if wrong, and I will apologies DB if I am incorrect.
-
I think it was you DB If the council had made a mistake, and not past the payment over it is hardly the OP fault. leakie
-
They do not always turn up, It is not the Bailiff who is txt you As you are in communication with the company, I would give them a call, Tell them you are doing your I &E and sending it in soon. Leakie
-
Just a normal I &E, example fuel for your car say you use £40.00 a week raise it to £50.00 there will be price rises in the near future. Car maintenance, over estimate not under, same with the grocery bill,etc I am not saying be dishonest be realistic. Leakie
-
Don't forget Council Tax is a priority debt they will want you yo pay this off before other debts!
-
Make sure your I&E is correct what I mean is do not understate your out goings and leave yourself short. allow for emergencies but in the other figures. Leakie
-
I had to deal with Newlyns Over a 10 month period, I had 1 visit, But I also had about 5 of the letters that you received. and not once did they turn up. not to say they will not. If you are not there there is not a lot they can do, and it does not look like they have allocated it to an EA yet as it is 01604 number. It may be worth ringing them again, to avoid the EA charge of £235 being added. and state this is all I can afford, take it or leave it. If you are not there what can they do. if they do not agree then you have 2 options, 1- pay what they demand, or 2- sit it out until it is handed back to the council and hope the next lot are more reasonable. It may be worth asking your council to email notifications as you work away. Leakie
-
Ok so the enforcement fee is justified. I would as said move the car away, and pay what you can reasonably afford. To a certain extent you are in control here as long as the car is away and you do not let him in. He want payment you are paying, Why did you not respond to the first letter? when the the debt would have only increased by £75? Leakie
-
Was the letter you received sent by post?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS