Marston Group enforcing "Fine"

[infiniteseeker]

Hi there, this is my first post as something serious has come along and I simply cannot discern the best way of dealing with it, please help. I was given a penalty fare on the trains about 6months ago, during the interview I gave the PF Enforcement officer my family's address as I was in the process of an incredibly stressful move and unsure whether it would go through, I was staying at my parents house and my friends houses as the new place was totally unfurnished and un-inhabitable, and thought it a more reliable option to give my family address.

 

Now I have just been to visit my family this last week and some mail arrived for me while I was there from Marston Group (joy of joys), informing me I have committed an Offence of AVOID FARE on 15/09/09, this is not the date i was apprehended on the trains.

 

The letter follows on that a Magistrates order has been obtained to collect the overdue sum of around £570 and that the Baillifs are en route to my families house to "levy distress" (What does that mean?) Now I am sure this is not the first letter regarding this case that my mother has received, but according to her she has taken to just throwing my junk mail in the bin, various mail order companies and employment agencies etc still mail that address so I can see why she does so.

 

As I am on breadline and survive on Benefit payments I cannot in any way shape or form pay this whole sum as the Marston group seems to want, I have emailed them stating I want this issue resolved and will pay them a fortnightly sum of around £5-£10 but have been looking over this forum and found something called a Statutory Declaration which it appears I might be able to use, as this is the first and only mail I have received, however I believe some mistakes have been made which may result in that being the wrong course of action:

 

Mistake#1 Giving my parents address in the first place

(honest)Mistake#2 My mum disposing of mail

 

I do not want my mother to have to endure any further harassment on my behalf so would it be better not to bother with a Statutory declaration and contact Marston group with my new address, or are these mistakes honest transgressions that will have no repurcussion?

 

Any help would be really appreciated, I cannot sleep and my stomach is literally sick with worry that some jack boot thugs are going to descend upon my mother and try and "Levy Distress"; from her.

Kind regards

Edited December 16, 2009 by infiniteseeker

[Bazooka Boo]

Debt Basics - Bailiff Guide - know your rights

 

I would read the above link, Quite how this has ballooned to over 500 quid, I'll never know?

 

However their website can be found here.Marston Group - High Court Enforcement Officers and Certificated Bailiffs, civil enforcement and recovery solutions

 

Department for Constitutional Affairs - Enforcement - National Standards for Enforcement Agents

[infiniteseeker]

All bailiff fees (with the exception of magistrates' court bailiffs) can be looked at by the county court to see if they are reasonable or excessive.

It appears this is from a Magistrates court, and according to some CAB advisors is most likely not a Civil case but a more serious matter which may culminate in a warrant for my arrest being issued>?

 

Also it is not my address they are sending correspondence to but my mothers', as mentioned above she has just disposed of my "junk mail" instead of returning to sender, I guess they will attend my mother's house but be unable to collect as nothing there is mine, still I don't doubt they will try and intimidate her, I am so angry with myself for subjecting her to this stress, I just want it to end.

 

Interesting name they use these Magi---strates, are they Magic?

[42man]

Hello IS....i'll move this thread initially to the bailiff section where you should get some more help /advice. I realise it could also have some relevance in this forum too, but please give me a shout if you want it moving...

[infiniteseeker]

Thankyou 42 man, I just need any input really, please move it to wherever you think this will be seen and responded to.

[infiniteseeker]

If i put on the Statutory Declaration that my Mother just disposed of any mail for me, will she be found to have transgressed the Postal Act statute?

 

84 Interfering with the mail: general

 

(1) A person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, he—

(a) intentionally delays or opens a postal packet in the course of its transmission by post, or

(b) intentionally opens a mail-bag.

(2) Subsections (2) to (5) of section 83 apply to subsection (1) above as they apply to subsection (1) of that section.

(3) A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse, he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him.

(4) Subsections (2) and (3) of section 83 (so far as they relate to the opening of postal packets) apply to subsection (3) above as they apply to subsection (1) of that section.

(5) A person who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (3) shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to both.

 

It seems not from reading the Statute, so I think I will push on and fill out a statutory declaration.

 

 

But will I then get into trouble for initially giving my parents address which is not where I live?

[2ltr16valve]

I would just simply say, that no court paperwork was received... This is not a lie, as you do not know if it was or was not. As it was not passed to you, you can assume it never arrived. I would not mention it was possibly thrown away.

 

As for the address, I would say no as you were not certain of your address status and gave a contact address where you could be contacted.

[infiniteseeker]

I would just simply say, that no court paperwork was received... This is not a lie, as you do not know if it was or was not. As it was not passed to you, you can assume it never arrived. I would not mention it was possibly thrown away.

 

As for the address, I would say no as you were not certain of your address status and gave a contact address where you could be contacted.

 

Thanks thats given me some hope the statutory declaration route is viable, i hope this can return to the court and they can just take whatever they want from my JSA.

 

kind regards

[RaeUK]

...my JSA...

 

Hi infinite, you are on JSA and can therefore be considered as vulnerable. The list from the national Guidelines for Bailiffs is as follows:

 

 

Those who might be considered vulnerable include the following:

the elderly;

people with a disability;

the seriously ill;

the recently bereaved;

single parent families;

pregnant women;

unemployed people; and,

those who have obvious difficulty in understanding, speaking or reading English.

 

You would need to write to the appropriate magistrates Court and apply for a re-hearing. Attend the hearing and you should be able to arrange an affordable payment plan direct with the court. You would not face further bailiff action. You should also copy initial correspondence to the bailiff company so they are aware of your vulnerable situation.

 

Regarding your SD, I'll leave that to others to advise!

 

Good luck

 

Rae

Edited December 15, 2009 by RaeUK
typoo

[infiniteseeker]

Fines office who i spoke to were adamant that simply being unemployed does not put one in the Vulnerable category for future reference, I guess one has to have health issues.

Edited December 16, 2009 by infiniteseeker
trimmed as question was answered in previous post.

[infiniteseeker]

hmmm

Department for Constitutional Affairs - Enforcement - National Standards for Enforcement Agents

This national guidance does not replace local agreements, existing agency codes of practice or legislation; rather it sets out what the Department, those in the industry and some major users regard as minimum standards.

We recognise this document is not legally binding, but offer it as a helpful tool for the industry and for creditors which, it is hoped, will inform their own arrangements and against which they may benchmark their professional standards.

[RaeUK]

The vulnerable category is also recognised by the Magistrates Courts. All court websites I have visited carry the same information from the Guidelines as I gave you.

 

It is also recognised by the Ministry of Justice, for example:

 

Quote from Karen Buck MP 02/06/09 making the Bailiffs (Repeal and Amendments) first reading:

 

"...Some bailiffs and courts rely on case law, which holds that a distress warrant cannot be withdrawn once it has been issued. That directly contradicts the national standards for enforcement agents, which suggests a procedure enabling the bailiff to return cases of vulnerable fine defaulters to the court. The procedure to bypass this anomaly recommended by the Ministry of Justice is to write a letter to the court asking for a re-hearing of the case. In practice, however, neither bailiffs nor fine defaulters seem to know this..."

 

 

Sometimes you have to stop infinitely seeking. You will just find infinite conundrums!

 

 

 

Rae

[infiniteseeker]

Fines office who i spoke to were adamant that simply being unemployed does not put one in the Vulnerable category for future reference, I guess one has to have health issues.

[RaeUK]

Then your fines office are wrong. I have provided information for you it is up to you how far you wish to follow it. As mentioned before, this status is recognised by the Ministry of Justice and the Houses of Parliament - those pesky folk who make our laws...

My next suggestion would be the involvement of your MP.

Rae

[ploddertom]

Fines office who i spoke to were adamant that simply being unemployed does not put one in the Vulnerable category for future reference, I guess one has to have health issues.

 

Kelcou is correct.

 

You need to see someone more senior at the Court - try the Court Manager. On my email system at present I have been handed documentation from another bailiff company and there is a box on there which reads:

Benefits & Status

Vulnerable

Within the vulnerable area it lists in particular:

JSA

On I/S

amongst others

 

PT

[RaeUK]

Thankyou PT, kind of you to say.

Having just re-read my post, infinate, it does sound a little curt for which I apologise. I do hope you pursue this because - as you have found - it has been a protection offered to people that seems to be misunderstood or ignored.

Good luck

Rae

[twonames]

Being unemployed does not necesarily make you vulnerable, you may have taken redundency or have no job, but have several cars and a house full of luxury items, probably not likely but that is how the courts look at it.

[infiniteseeker]

Thanks for Clarification!

[RaeUK]

Twonames, nobodies disputing that which is why the word 'might' is used in the qoutations. However, those who have a reasonable claim to the category should write to the Magistrates Court for a re-hearing and an assessment accordingly.

I do agree with you in part. My interest is in those existing solely on benefits, struggling and under pressure. As opposed to the better off chaser of employment...

Rae