Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi T911 and welcome to CAG. As you say, an interesting screw up. So much for quality control! Anyway, our regular advice is to ignore all of their increasingly threatening missives... UNLESS you get a letter of claim, then come back here and we'll help you write a "snotty letter" to help them decide whether to take it any further with their stoopid pics. If you get mail you're unsure of, just upload it for the team to have a look.
    • Thanks @lolerzthat's an extremely helpful post. There is no mention of a permit scheme in the lease and likewise, no variation was made to bring this system in. I recall seeing something like a quiet enjoyment clause, but will need to re-read it and confirm. VERY interesting point on the 1987 Act. There hasn't been an AGM in years and I've tried to get one to start to no avail. However, I'll aim to find out more about how the PPC was brought in and revert. Can I test with you and others on the logic of not parking for a few months? I'm ready to fight OPS, so if they go nuclear on me then surely it doesn't matter? I assume that I will keep getting PCNs as long as I live here, so it doesn't make sense for me to change the way that I park?  Unless... You are suggesting that having 5 or so outstanding PCNs, will negatively affect any court case e.g. through bad optics? Or are we trying to force their hand to go to court with only 2 outstanding PCNs?
    • That is so very tempting.   They are doing my annual review as we speak and I'm waiting for their response once I have it I will consider my next steps.    The debt camel website mentioned above is amzing and helping to. Education me alot    
    • Sending you a big hug. I’m sorry your going through this. The letters they send sound aweful, and the waiting game for them to stop. But these guys seem so knowledgable and these letters should stop. Hang in there, and keep in touch. Don’t feel alone 
    • In my time I've never seen a payout/commission from a PPC to a landlord/MA. Normally the installation of all the cameras/payment of warden patrols etc is free but PPCs keep 100% of the ticket revenue. Not saying it doesn't happen mind. I've done some more digging on this: Remember, what your lease doesn't say is just as important as what it does say. If your lease doesn't mention a parking scheme/employment of a PPC/Paying PCNs etc you're under no legal obligation to play along to the PPC's or the MA's "Terms and conditions". I highly doubt your lease had a variation in place to bring in this permit system. Your lease will likely have a "quiet enjoyment" clause for your demised space and the common areas and having to fight a PPC/MA just to park would breach that. Your lease has supremacy of contract, but I do agree it's worth keeping cool and not parking there (and hence getting PCNs) for a couple months just so that the PPC doesn't get blinded by greed and go nuclear on you if you have 4 or 5 PCNs outstanding. At your next AGM, bring it up that the parking controls need to be removed and mention the legal reasons why. One reason is that under S37(5b) Landlord and Tenant Act 1987,  more than 75% of leaseholders and/or the landlord would have needed to agree, and less than 10% opposed, for the variation to take place. I highly doubt a ballot even happened before the PPC was bought in so OPS even being there is unlawful, breaching the terms of your lease. In this legal sense,  the communal vote of the "directors" of the freehold company would have counted for ONE vote of however many flats there are (leases/tenants) + 1 (landlord). It's going to be interesting to see where this goes.  
  • 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 5288 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

I'm basically telling you my plan of action to see if I've understood the dos and don'ts from browsing these forums for a while, please respond if I'm missing anything.

 

OK they've had their 2nd visit and say they're coming round to levy goods within 5 days. I believe they can't break and enter as if they did they'd be breaking the law. We have had no correspondence with them, ignoring the door on both times. This is correct right?

 

I plan to send the bailiffs a letter telling them that I know my rights and that I am commencing payments of £25 a month to the council tax offices, but not to them. I do not want to pay bailiffs any money, but do want to settle the £580 debt with the council tax office instead (which works out at £25 a month over 2 years).

 

This isn't my debt, it is my mother's which I had no idea about until we started getting bailiff visits.

 

But yeah I'd like to know if this is a sound plan, I'm trying to get the bailiffs off my back and hand the account back to the council tax office, I know they can't break and enter even though they're threatening to levy goods, and I am not refusing to pay the debt in more than two years to the council tax offices.

 

Anything I'm missing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

 

Anything I'm missing?

 

 

If this your mums liability why is she not paying it? Are you deputising, or acting under a power of attorney?

 

If you have received no correspondence from the council until you received a bailiff then you have lots of recourse. The law requires the council to send you a "final Notice" at your current address or your last known address before instructing a bailiff. If the council fails to comply with the law you can ask the council to take the case back into town hall administration and no bailiffs fees are lawfully due.

 

Regulation 33(1) of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992

 

 

33.—(1) Subject to paragraph (3), before a billing authority applies for a liability order it shall serve on the person against whom the application is to be made a notice ("final notice"), which is to be in addition to any notice required to be served under Part V, and which is to state every amount in respect of which the authority is to make the application.

 

 

Regulation 34 of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992

 

 

(2) The application is to be instituted by making complaint to a justice of the peace, and requesting the issue of a summons directed to that person to appear before the court to show why he has not paid the sum which is outstanding.

 

 

The law - Section 7 of the Interpretation Act says

 

 

Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then,unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

 

 

That evidence to the contrary mentioned in the Act is the fact you did not receive a final notice or a summons at your correct address. Instead the council chose to skip over Regulation 33(1) completely and jumped straight to enforcement by instructing a bailiff to attend your mums current address.

 

If you are still fobbed off with excuses by the council, then contact the Local Government Ombudsman. Currently they award £150 as compensation for receiving a bailiff under these exact circumstances. (tweak this as needed for your mum)

 

 

Head of Revenue

Borough Council

Address 1

Address 2

Address 3

Postcode

 

[DATE]

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Re: Council tax arrears and your bailiff

 

I write understanding you have instructed a bailiff to collect unpaid council tax from me.

 

Regulations require the council to send me a "final Notice" at my current address or last known address before applying for a liability order and instructing a bailiff. When the council discovers it has failed to comply with the law, it must revoke the liability order and rescind all enforcement action.

 

As you have been able to instruct a bailiff at my current address, this proves the council was aware my last known address and my current address is the same, yet failed to properly comply with Regulations 33(1) and 34(2) of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 by sending a final notice and a summons to appear before the court.

 

The law is designed to give the taxpayer an opportunity to pay before the council instructs a bailiff making the taxpayer liable for bailiffs fees prescribed under the Regulations.

 

As the council is now aware of this mistake, I now ask the council resolves this matter straight away by taking the case back into town hall administration immediately, stopping all enforcement action and cancelling all fees charged, and confirm in writing this has been done within seven days of the date of this letter.

 

If the council fails to comply with the above, I will automatically file a written complaint addressed to the Local Government Ombudsman and ask the Local Commissioner to intervene under Section 26 of the Local Government Act 1974 and revoke the liability order and all enforcement action be rescinded. The Local Commission may also ask the Council to pay me compensation.

 

If you may wish to launch an "investigation", this does not delay the complaint being escalated.

 

This letter is delivered by Royal Mail and deem it good service upon you by the ordinary course of post under Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978. It now is your responsibility and in your best interests they are handed to the relevant person within your organisation.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

 

[YOUR NAME]

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good to me HC, as usual.

 

Jamhead,

 

My first thoughts (like HC) relate to the fact that you are dealing with this on behalf of your mother. Is your Mum sick? If so, she may be classed as a vulnerable person, and in which case, it should be very easy to get it brought back under town hall administration.

 

FX

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm simply mediating for my mother. She is not really computer literate and has had no experience and no confidence in dealing with bailiffs, so I'm basically handling the administration side for her to make sure everything is in order.

 

Thanks for the comprehensive reply, Happy Contrails, unfortunately they had sent my mother the final notice and court summons as they should but she ignored these with the excuse that she is planning to get a Debt Relief Order. If I had known of this I would have intervened a lot sooner to try and sort out a 2 year payment plan with the CTax offices as opposed to letting it get this far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After ignoring Bailiffs for about 4 months, I have just had my CT returned to the Council, and now I am paying them direct.

 

Are you familiar with the best ways of dodging Bailiffs? Doors and windows locked, don't leave things in the garden, or a car registered to your mum outside etc etc. If not holler.

 

They may try illegal charges, and when they do, that should be enough to get it back to Town Hall Admin - what have they charged you so far?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I've had experiences with bailiffs before, I know they're pretty powerless as long as they can't get into your property (which they certainly wont!)

 

So far they've charged me around £35 for two visits, the second one obviously to tell me that they'll be coming to levy my goods, so it seems they've been within the guidelines with their charges. They'll probably add a charge again when they come knocking next week to levy :/ but yeah we had no communication with them, as in we ignored the two letters they put through the door for each visit, the only contact we'll be having with the bailiffs is the letter I'm sending tomorrow telling them we'll deal with the debt with the CTax office and not them.

 

Anyway, I'm off to put £1.50 on the Euro lottery to see if I can win that £90,000,000. That would sharp sort out any council tax arrears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without any Levy, the law states they are entitles to £24.50 first visit costs, and £18.00 for second visit.

 

If they do not obtain a levy, and try to charge you anything above the 24.50+18.00, then they are possibly committing an offence under S2 or s4 of the Fraud Act 2006.

 

If they charge you anything above the above charges, I would venture that you have grounds for a serious complaint to your Council for the way their sub-contractors are behaving - and the Council are always responsible for the action of the Bailiffs. Threaten them with LGO and MP and what not, and hopefully you will be able to send the Bailiffs packing and start payign what your mum can afford.

 

Let us know if they try charging you anything - it can be dealt with.

 

Blurred:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...