Bristow & Sutor

[lamma]

post all the paperwork you have - suitably washed of your personal details of course ! you were lied to and cheated.

[devilzwishbone]

The lines certainly look very dodgy to me. Were there any signs?

 

Hopefully someone else may come in and offer an opinion but I reckon you still need to put up the PCN's.

 

No there wasnt any signs

[devilzwishbone]

I have paid Bristow and Suter a total of £500 for a parking fine in Tewkesbury. They sent a bailiff to my house whilst I was not at the property and told my mother that they would not leave untill a payment of £500 was made and for every half an hour they sat in the van they would add £25 to the debt. I was working in Canada and although I spoike to them over the phone the bailiff refused to wait untill I returned. My mother had to drive 4 miles into town to get the money from the bank and they added the extra charge for time waiting. These bailiffs are rude and completely ruthless. I have also had the same company harass me over a missunderstanding over my council tax. I had set up a system where my council tax was being paid directly out of my wages and have wage slips to prove this. I had a visit from the bailiff informing me it hadn't been paid which I knew was a mistake and I showed the bailiff my wage slip. She was rude and said she needed to come in and list my items for sale at action. I had contacted the cab for advise over the parking ticket situation previously and they told me to never let a bailiff into your property or sign papaerwork. When I said this to the bailiff she asked "are the cab going to pay your debts for you???no. so you had better let me in". I had my children in the house and said i wasn't going to let her in. She said she would return with a lock smith and the charges would be added. Luckily after contacting the accountant at work he sorted it all out. I have had no apology from Bristow and Sutor and am so angry that they think they are above the law. I wonder if they realise how much stress they cause to people who are struggling to pay their bills. Is there anything I can do??????

 

 

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.

[devilzwishbone]

post all the paperwork you have - suitably washed of your personal details of course ! you were lied to and cheated.

 

PCN Numbers:

[removed - dx]

I will have to scan the documents up and post it on here at a later stage

[68904]

What about a freedom of information request for these image.

[devilzwishbone]

Dont follow?

What you mean

Edited March 16, 2018 by dx100uk
quote

[lamma]

check out the 'tort of deceit'. PPCs commit it all the time and so do the leeches that feed off them

[devilzwishbone]

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

[sailor sam]

As far as I am aware they first need a court order.

Edited March 16, 2018 by dx100uk
quote

[devilzwishbone]

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)

Edited March 14, 2018 by DragonFly1967
Removed telephone number & bailiff name

[hallowitch]

you really must send a formal complaint to the council regarding your bailiffs fees

 

you also need to write to B&S for a screenshot of your accounts

 

bailiffs collecting parking tickets can only charge for 3 visits (regardless of how many tickets they are collecting)

they can charge a levy fee if they have levied goods (if they haven't been in your house then they may have a levy on your car )this is done on a form 7( Notice of seizure of goods and inventory ) however they cant levy your car for both parking tickets

 

I don't know if this will help you but i thought i would post it

PART 75 - TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT - Ministry of Justice

 

Warrant of execution

 

75.7

 

(1) An authority seeking the issue of a warrant of execution must file a request –

(a) certifying the amount remaining due under the order;

 

(b) specifying the date of service of the order on the respondent; and

 

© certifying that the relevant period has elapsed.

 

 

(2) The court will seal the request and return it to the authority.

 

(3) Within 7 days of the sealing of the request the authority must prepare the warrant in the appropriate form.

 

(4) No payment under a warrant will be made to the court.

 

(5) For the purposes of execution a warrant will be valid for 12 months beginning with the date of its issue.

 

(6) An authority may not renew a warrant issued in accordance with this Part beyond the 12 month validity period but, subject to paragraph (7), an authority may request the reissue of a warrant during the 12 month validity period.

 

(7) Where the address of the respondent has changed since the issue of the warrant, the authority may request the reissue of the warrant by filing a request –

(a) specifying the new address of the respondent;

 

(b) providing evidence that the new address for the respondent does relate to the respondent named in the order and against whom enforcement is sought; and

 

© certifying that the amount due under the order remains unpaid.

 

 

(8) Where the court is satisfied that the new address of the respondent given in the request for the reissue of the warrant relates to the respondent named in the order, it will seal the request and return it to the authority.

 

(9) The authority must prepare the reissued warrant in the appropriate form within 7 days of the sealing of the request to reissue.

 

(10) A reissued warrant will only be valid for the remainder of the 12 month period beginning with the date it was originally issued.

[lamma]

LIST OF PRESCRIBED BAILIFF FEES:

[devilzwishbone]

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

[lamma]

contact tomtubby

[devilzwishbone]

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...

[devilzwishbone]

>;

 

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...

1. Time taken on
   my part
   to Research and verify I am not liable to pay
   
   
2. 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:

>

>

[devilzwishbone]

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

[sailor sam]

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 would still do so.