Outcome of this post: Bristow and Suttor stopped trying to claim for the amounts Reason: Dudley Council had not filed for the amounts correctly and had never been passed on to the courts to grant bailiff action resulting in Britow and Suttor harrassing some one for money they arent legally entitled to claim for Further more they knew I had CCTV evidance prooving they did not visit the property and [causing problems] people out of money for "Elegid visits" and was prepared to go to the Bailiff Regulators

>; I am writing to you in reference to the above Parking fines over the double yellow lines issued during November 2008 and February 2009. As per the letter received recently from the Bailiff firm Bristow & Suttor (Ref > & >), It has been brought to my attention that the Bailiffs shall be returning the "warrant" having been unsuccessful at obtaining the funds your chasing. The reason I am writing to you is to come to a satisfactory agreement concerning this penalty charge, in which I believe full charges should be dropped. The reason I believe that this should be done are on the following grounds... Harassment Under the protection against harassment act 1997 I feel you have deliberately caused harassment by sending bailiffs to pursue a debt with additional call out charges that are not legally enforceable, with threats to levy goods from my property. Despite my requests for you to withdraw the bailiffs, you had on numerous occasions upon speaking with you declined to withdraw the bailiffs and persisted to allow the bailiffs to continue causing alarm and distress (Anxiety). Its my full understanding that you have bypassed the courts and have had no "order for recovery" issued, thus the involvement of bailiffs has been an attempt to use unnecessary force & charges which have caused caused alarm and distress (Anxiety). Unnecessary Delays: I feel Dudley Council have caused unnecessary delays in the concept that... a) Initial form of contact was restricted b) Lack of competence, your staff have stated I am liable to pay a fine and making references to a guide (The Highway Code), this did not challenge the legal references I had proposed to the council ( See legality / Validity below ) c) Appeals, My appeal was late for 2 reasons... Time taken on my part to Research and verify I am not liable to pay Delay in documents being sent out on your part , which were during a postal strike and sent on the 31st December 2008 (New Years Eve). Despite my appeal was ignored by the adjudicators, no efforts were made by Dudley Council to make me aware of the TEC and Northampton County Court, regardless of further communication with Dudley Council, In fact my rights were reminded to me by PATAS (Parking and Traffic Appeals Services) in London. Legality / Validity: As per my reason for appealing I am disputing the legal validity of the fines enforcement. It is my understanding that you are arguing, I am familiar with the highway code thus I am familiar not to be parking on Double Yellow lines. My argument: The high way code is a reference / guide to conduct on the road that is backed up by legal acts. However there are exceptions to this rule and this being as stated in the Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions Act 2002, which is an act that sets our regulations of road markings and other traffic signalling. Diagram 1018.1 (Page 172) If Dudley Council have failed to maintain these lines in accordance with the regulations act, how can Dudley council expect to maintain the penalty. Since my penalty the double yellow lines outside > (2nd Penalty out of the two in February 2009), the lines have been repainted. Therefore if the lines were legally enforceable, why did Dudley council feel the necessity to repaint the lines when Dudley Council were claiming that they were perfectly legal before hand? Bailiff Inappropriate Conduct Fraud: Bristow & Suttor have claimed to been to my property on 5 occasions to levy the goods / make an agreement. Each visit has encured further charges mounting to a total 922.00. I have been in on 4 occasions out of 5, due to my current unemployment status, in which I know categorically they had not visited the property, I live in a block of flats which contains CCTV equipment on the landings, foyee, car park. The main security door contains 4 CCTV cameras pointing at them, there is no way of approaching the building without being caught on CCTV. Upon verifying with the concierge on duty, the CCTV footage revealed no attempts by any bailiff firm to establish contact with me on these days. Invalidating their alleged charges, Despite my complaints they have persisted to charge. This is a direct attempt to obtain funds by form of deception (Fraud). CCTV Footage has been stored to disk by Dudley Council in which a solicitor will obtaining a warrant for this data. Breach of Data Protection Act 1998: Bristow & Suttor have claimed they are excluded from the Data Protection Act however this is a false statement, this was stated to my self, upon my neighbours telling me on the 1 day I was not at the property out of the 5 alleged visits the bailiffs had been around to collect funds for my parking tickets. This is a direct disclosure of personal circumstances and data, devolving personal debts, resulting in a breach of data protection. Harassment : Bristow & Sutor have made false claims on having a warrant to gain forced entry / use a locksmith to gain access to the property and seize goods, they have added funds fraudulently and attempted to obtain them by deliberately giving false information in order to attempt to obtain a "Walk in passage". In making false allegations they have caused alarm and distress (Worry & Anxiety). Bailiff firm Bristow & Sutor was made aware not to visit the property as no access will be given, they ignored all response to my letters I have written to them in an attempt to resolve this matter and continued to use mental bullying tactics . Amendment to first email: Please note I am fully aware that warrants must be obtained from the Magistrate Courts or Crown Courts. Civil Courts are not empowered to issue warrents. A parking fine is a civil dispute and that under the Traffic Management Act 2004 it no longer consist as a criminal offence. Verbal Threats: I have been given verbal threats by a bailiff, even though this has not personally bothered me in any way since I have given them as good as they can give and it has only been telephone threats. However it still looks highly unprofessional and unethical for Dudley Council to employ this kind of firm, specially since this firm has visited a friend of mine whom is female and has 2 children. Of which Bristow & Sutor have tried defraud her with the same tactics regarding the "Not at home" scenario. Payments / Fine: I have agreed to pay the fine as long as are able to provide legal evidence that directly contradicts my argument. I have always maintained this. I would have thought this should have been an easy thing for you to do. Why are we having a year and a quarters delay? I have in the past offered to make payments to your selves in which you have directly refused to set up a payment arrangement whilst I dispute these charges, However, since this offer it has been brought to my attention that by doing so prior to my appeal being heard it would deem me as guilty / accepting i'm in the wrong, thus until proven with legal references that I am wrong, No offer or payment shall be made. Based on the above however I would seriously consider if any payments should be awarded at all. Reminder: I would like to remind you >, You was made aware of this situation on the phone concerning the bailiffs conduct and yet you still choose to pursue action via Bristow & Sutor, whom are to be representing their client (DUDLEY COUNCIL), A complaint will be raised via Dudley Council and via Bristow & Sutor. Because of them being known to have used the same tactics with friends of mine, some of which are single mothers, who have been through the same but didn't have CCTV to back up their claims, I believe the media and the local government onbudsman may be interested in taking a closer look at this situation, something which will not look good on Dudley Council. I look forwards to hearing from you. From now forth I will only accept written responses, either to Email: > Address: > >

Sinse my complaint being put in place to the bailiff pver the phone and Bristow & Sutor directly they have written to me last week to say they have passed the "warrent" back to my council See the following reply for the letter sent to dudley council and see if you think this was innapropiate of me Since I have recently found out further malpractice...

Ok people I need proper sound advise on this one.... Baiscs: 2 Fines 25.00 Lines in poor condition (as photographed) Appealed to Council Appeal rejected Appealed to Ajudicators but arrived outside the 28 days *Just a reminder there was postal strikes around that time* Arrived slightly out of time, appeal wasnt looked at only reply to state out of time. Complained to council No joy Passed to bailiffs Complained to bailiffs they stated take it up with their client (Dudley Council) Complained to Dudley Council who said bailiff now deals with this Spoken to CAB who advise of Out oF Time Appeals (6 months later) Applied to Northampton County County court of which they didnt even look at it because didnt quality as 1 of their 4 reasons for it being late CAB offered repayments of 1.00 pound a month, was refused Bailiffs showed up on 1/5 visits charges applied 3 More letters arrived of elledged visits but I was in and CCTV footage provided evidence that they didnt attempt to knock the door Upon complaining a 5th Visit arrived Stating a warrent has been obtained Spoken to community legal advise who confirmed they couldnt possibly have a warrent because it is a civil matter not a magistrates court matter therefore civil courts dont issue warrents as they dont have the power to do so Upon stating this to B&S they suddenly changed their tune to listen to me Bailiff offered to chase up the matter with Dudley Council but not heard back from him. Ive paid B&S 10.00 to obtain a copy of my notes, since before they had said no they dont issue copies of notes Spoken to my local council councellor who stated because the appeal failed due to out of time I might end up having to pay the amounts after all This is now sitting at 922.27 fine What help and advise can be given to resolve this

The letter is worded as "Important Notice" To: (My name) Re: Parking Penalty Due to: Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council A bailiff removal team visited today to remove your goods for sale by public auction The initial charge for todays visit amounted to 223.25 NB additional charges could be incurred if we re-attend to remove. The total now due and payable is 922.72 In order to prevent the removal of your goods you must contact the bailiff immediatly on 07XXXXXXXX4 Today Ay this stage only payment in a guaranteed form acceptable. Payments must be made by Cash, Postal Order, Bankers Draft, Debit Card or Credit card, Note: Card payments are subject to a surcharge If you fail to pay the sum due today, your goods may be removed in your absence. You will be responsible for the payments of the cost of the removal and sale of your goods. These costs are payable in accordance with the law and will be substantial Bailiffs Name [Removed] signed Date (Today) Time of Visit (Time of visit) Your reference number (Ref no 1 and ref no 2)

HELP! Things are getting way way way beyond a joke Today I came back home to find a letter from B&S saying Important notice and they send people around to remove goods and the charges are now 922.72 for the 2 parking tickets I need to start taking action but I need as much support as possible

Dont follow? What you mean

PCN Numbers: [removed - dx] I will have to scan the documents up and post it on here at a later stage

Bristow and Sutor have told me that they are excluding from the Protection Against Harrasment act 1997 yet when they quoted a part of the Protection against harrasment, it did state that they are NOT excluded from it. They also seem to think that they are excluded from the Data Protection Act also since they are within their rights to go to your neighbours and discuss / disclose they are bailiff out to reposses items due to X Y Z reasons. Ive filed for a complaint form and they are in for a shock because I have CCTV footage as evidence no one came to my property Therefore if they are trying to charge me for this, I will make a small payment by which if they accept it, they have obtained money by form of deception therefore commited fraud.

No there wasnt any signs

I just had them check the CCTV, at the time they said they visited 10:19am on the 22nd December no body came from B&S I even asked them to give 1 hr scope, no body except for a Dudley Council engineer attended the property in which at aprox 10:19 had wedged the door open so for them to write to me and say they had no access to the property to post a leter or even knock the door is a load of tosh The only problem I got is that the CCTV equipment is owned by the council, who is Bristow & Sutors client, so the concirerge said technically the council could refuse to hand over to a solicitor the CCTV Evidence Isnt this obstructing justice / breach of Data Protection Act 1998 (as its recorded visual data)

Ive seen them once He wrote a statement for both tickets but that was the first visit in which it was just the amounts the council passed to them Since then they claim to have visited on two occasions the 2nd time they came I got seperate invoice for the newly amounts due for both tickets The 3rd Time (22nd December) they have sent a new invoice for 1 tickte not the two, but I was at home that day all day and no body came and I am going to ask the concierge to check the CCTV footage now

Conditions of double yellow lines on ticket no 2 Access road to Baptist End Rd/ Swan Street I have images but they have my car and other peoples cars on it

Ill upload the access to baptist end road pictures when I find the email with the attatchments on be around about february 2009 I need to look back. Its been an ongoing battle with them Any one else know if there excempt from the protection against harrasment act 1997

Seriously? Because they have been they have been treating each one on its own individual merrit

Gads Lane - Dudley (ticket no1)

Photo evidence supplied by Dudley Council, taken on the day of the contravention for Gads lane - Ticket no1

Ticket No 2 This is further on down were road markings are more visible however if you focus towards the back end of the lines you see how that rapidly start to fade and more importantly how the T junction markings are missing due to road works, failed ot be maintained / repainted

Road sign coupled with poor condition of road markings, incase they tried saying its another road

One of Dudley councils excuses was that Double yellow lines are there to prevent obstruction to emergency services such as police, fire brigade and ambulances, other services such as electricians, waste collection etc Here you can see were my car was parked and how access to the barrier to job centre car park was clear and rear of courts was clear Clearly no obstruction or poor attitude or consideration for others

Conditions of double yellow lines Gads Lane Dudley (Ticket no 1)

Example of no correct end markings on the double yellow lines due to road works

How do I upload pictures on here

There is 3 type of restrictions they use... 1) NPD which stands for Non Paid Disconnect Pretty self explanatory and doesnt relate to this query, only when a person fails to pay their bill 2) Abuse Virgin Media as the ISP have an obligality to respond to any reports of abusive behaviour online, bullying, hacking, virus spreading etc It is written in the T&C you shall not use the services for these purposes and that they have the right to suspend or disconnect your services In this case the Internet Abuse team apply a restriction to the account stopping internet access this can be from 1 month to 3 months ive seen. This can happen without notice, but they will keep details to provide evidence as to why the services were restricted / shut off 3) High Usage If a customer is abusing the service lets say throtelling downloads from peer to peer websites and copying software, movies and music illegally VM have the facility to see were the data source if coming from and if your using the services in excess to the "Average" user which is calculated with the Mean (Being mathematical term and not mean as in nasty), the mean value of customers download usage If your exceeding the average usage between all virgin media customers then it is considered as above fair usage and therefore reserve the rigfht to slow your internet connection down (in some instances even restrict access to the net down to dial up speeds) Other factors involved... Water in cabling outside can cause problems to both CATV and BBI (Cable Television and Broadband Internet) N2R, Noise to Ratio, which if in a block of flats / row of houses were the feed goes through a main cable, you can get people using old equipment. Old TVs or VCRs which return noise levels back down the cabling distorting the signal Damaged cabling as little as peeled cable can cause loss of signal power which can reduce signal speeds Finally, Spyware, this can dissable your computer from accessing the net all together so always make sure u got a valid and up to date antivirus. DONT USE PCGUARD I think its a pile of crap and I used to work for them and use it, I installed it when it was a trial back in 2007, when I uninstalled it for PC Tools antivirus is found over 1000 threads on my computer and it was PC Tools that resolved my issues for me. Unless your using their software any spyware issues is classified as problems with your own equipment not the equipment that they supply or their lines therefore they are not liable or responsible to fix it. If there is a signal getting to the modem and back to them, they are supplying the service to your address and regardless of your computer not wanting to conect to the net your still liable to pay them for supplying the service to yoru household Think of it as your TV Only because you might not watch the TV stations or happy with 1-5 doesnt mean you dont pay for Virgin Media sending the signal to your house for the remainder 30+ stations

For obvious reasons I am a bit reluctant to give out a PNC number as its linked to my details and wondering how me giving this info can help But as for streets Gads Lane - Dudley (dy1) Access road from Baptist End Rd / Swan Street (By flats) (dy2)