Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • FTMDave
      Parking Eye ANPR PCN claimform - Lake Street Leighton Buzzard.

      By FTMDave · Posted

      Thanks for coming back and letting us know. Obviously we totally disagree with their decision.  Their remortgaging could only have gone wrong if they had ended up with a CCJ.  And how do you get a CCJ?  If you lose in court and then defy the court and don't pay.  Even if you lose in court, you don't get a CCJ as long as you pay within the 30 days ordered by the court.  Even had they lost in court the judge would have disallowed the interest and the £70 Unicorn Food Tax that PE made up.  There was no advantage whatsoever for giving in and paying now. But thanks to you for letting us know - a hell of a lot of users don't.
    • TiredDodo
      Caught using mother’s 60+ Oyster card - 50+ uses - SJPN Court

      By TiredDodo · Posted

      Hi everyone.   Before I say anything, TFL finally responded to the email I sent last week:   Thank you for your email, we acknowledge the signed documents you have returned in preparation for your hearing.   We note that this matter is causing you some stress and anxiety, however this is not a reason for TfL to discontinue proceedings. It is not unusual for passengers that have been summonsed to court to experience these symptoms, and we do have some empathy with your concerns.   However, as previously stated, TfL do not accept out of court settlements, and you will have the opportunity at your hearing, to provide your mitigation to the court prior to a decision being reached by them on how they intend to deal with this matter (usually a fine).   I am sorry that this decision is not more favourable.   Yours sincerely   James Vallis     At least he sounds more sympathetic in this email…   Only one week to go until the court hearing and I am so so nervous. I’ve prepared some questions and answers in preparation for what to say to the magistrate. It will help calm me down if I know roughly what to expect. If you could give feedback on it that would be great. If you have anything to add please do let me know.   As far as I know the court hearing will happen in these stages: Introduction and statement of facts Pleading guilty for the journeys I made with my mother’s card Penalty sentencing Appeal (if charged with a criminal record)   Am I guilty? Yes.   Why did I not pay the fare legally? Last year there was a lot going on in my life and I was struggling financially so to relieve some of this I used my mother’s Oyster card. I know it’s not an excuse and it’s still wrong.   Why do I not accept a criminal record? I really don’t want it to affect my chances of finding a job in the future. I will be the one earning money in my family so I am doing my best and studying hard to be able to get a good job. A criminal record would mean that regardless of how hard I’m working I won’t get the job I want after I graduate. This fills me with so much regret, sadness and disappointment in myself. I just want to be a good daughter for my mother because she’s already had to deal with many hardships in her life and I don’t want to make it any harder for her.
    • FTMDave
      Highview/DCB(L) ANPR PCN - Letter of Claim - Now Claimform - overstay - Riverside Retail Park in Norwich, Norfolk.

      By FTMDave · Posted

      So you need to get AOS done and a CPR request sent.
    • ChrisS1968
      Parking Eye ANPR PCN claimform - Lake Street Leighton Buzzard.

      By ChrisS1968 · Posted

      HI all, This is done now. My daughter and her fella are currently in the process of remortgaging so they just paid it out of panic. Thank you anyway DX
    • lolerz
      Brittania/DCBL ANPR PCN - PAPLOC - claimform - appeal refused - St Johns Road West Birmingham

      By lolerz · Posted

      MCOL will tell you once they've filed it with the courts so just check there. I'm sure the courts are massive fans of DCBL using official documents to harass and scare people (Not! ) Remember that the courts call the shots now, not the claimant.  

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Bailliff seized company car. Help!

kbdavies
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5163 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

kbdavies

kbdavies

Posted
Posted

Hello,

A car registered to a company of which i am the director was

recently towed away by a baillif over an unpaid PCN in Sept 09.

The vehicle has the company name as the registered keeper, and

my name as the contact. The PCN was in the name of the Company, but was incurred by

another employee.

The bailiff arrived early one morning showed me a Notice of Seizure, and demanded payment of the PCN.

 

I had not received anything before, and he had not visited the premises before, so I refused to pay,and eplained i needed to find out which employee got the PCN. He then attampted to clamp the car. When i resisted, he blocked the vehicle in the driveway, and called a tow truck, which removed the car.

 

As i was travelling that morning for 2mths, i instructed the company secretary to go and pick up the car.

The total amount paid for £700. The PCN was £110, Bailliff feed £355, and removal cost £175.

What are my rights, and can they do this?

 

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 159
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

gezwee

gezwee

Posted
Posted
In short, yes, they can do this.

 

However, you should have been aware of the PCN as various letters from the council would have been posted to registered address.

 

Curiously, you do say that the PCN was incured by another employee but then say you knew nothing about it???

 

Hi HCE

 

For the benefit of the OP and others please could you confirm if the charges levied appear correct?

 

Thanks

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites
High Court Enforcer

High Court Enforcer

Posted
Posted
Hi HCE, For the benefit of the OP and others please could you confirm if the charges levied appear correct? Thanks, Gez

 

Not sure if you're trying to catch me out here as I always get asked this...

 

Anyway, it has been several years since I was involved in Parking Enforcement. Having said that, the charges appear to be for more than one visit. At a guess, probably 2.

 

HCE

Link to post
Share on other sites
gezwee

gezwee

Posted
Posted
Not sure if you're trying to catch me out here as I always get asked this...

 

Anyway, it has been several years since I was involved in Parking Enforcement. Having said that, the charges appear to be for more than one visit. At a guess, probably 2.

 

HCE

 

Hi HCE

 

Nope, it was a genuine question....... seems to be a lot of opinion on here regarding what is or isnt correct or lawful. It'd be nice to get some clarity on the issue of fees levied.

 

The removal fee doesnt look improper (imho), just the visit fee/s (assume thats all the Bailiff is implying?) looks excessive and wondering if the OP has grounds to recover some of this sum?

 

Thanks

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites
kbdavies

kbdavies

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Up to 3 employees drive the vehicle, inc myself. As it wasn't me, it had to be one of the other employees.

I had been away for 2 mths, and this happened when i got back. We share the premises with other tenants, and we have had mail missing or not received before.

No one could confirm he had visited before, but i understand this does not mean he never visited.

I was unaware of OOT and Stat Decs, but also had a flight to catch that morning.

He initially asked for paymet, and when i refused, he tried to clamp, when i resisted, he called the tow truck. Im sure there is something illegal in his actions. All advice welcome

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
High Court Enforcer

High Court Enforcer

Posted
Posted

It doesnt sound like anything illegal to me, if you refused to pay he has a right to remove the vehicle.

 

Your gripe may be that you never received the letters or that he has charged for a visit not made. Many councils insist that the Bailiffs have trackers that corroberate visits these days.

 

I know I'd be looking at your colleagues and demanding to know who got the ticket!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
High Court Enforcer

High Court Enforcer

Posted
Posted
Hi HCE

 

Nope, it was a genuine question....... seems to be a lot of opinion on here regarding what is or isnt correct or lawful. It'd be nice to get some clarity on the issue of fees levied.

 

The removal fee doesnt look improper (imho), just the visit fee/s (assume thats all the Bailiff is implying?) looks excessive and wondering if the OP has grounds to recover some of this sum?

 

Thanks

 

Gez

 

I know that 7 years ago, on a £195 warrant, on a 1st visit the bailiff was looking for around £350, 2nd was around £570 and 3rd was around £800.

Link to post
Share on other sites
seanamarts

seanamarts

Posted
Posted

taken from Tom Tubbies site.

 

Original Parking Ticket: £100. If paid within the discounted period of 14 days: £50. If unpaid, original debt of £100 increases by 50% to: £150 Court Fee: £5 Warrant of Execution amount: £155 The amount of £155 is passed to the bailiff to collect. If you pay on receipt of a first letter you should pay: £168.16 If you pay when a first visit is made you should pay: £222.84 Original Parking Ticket: £80 If paid within the discounted period of 14 days: £40. If unpaid, original debt of £80 increases by 50% to: £120 Court Fee: £5 Warrant of Execution amount: £125 The amount of £125 is passed to the bailiff to collect. If you pay on receipt of a first letter you should pay: £138.16 If you pay when a first visit is made you should pay: £182.97 Original Parking Ticket: £60. If paid within the discounted period of 14 days: £30. If unpaid, original debt of £60 increases by 50% to: £90 Court Fee: £5 Warrant of Execution amount: £95 The amount of £95 is passed to the bailiff to collect. If you pay on receipt of a first letter you should pay: £106.20 If you pay when a first visit is made you should pay: £143.10 Original Parking Ticket: £40. If paid within the discounted period of 14 days: £20. If unpaid, original debt of £40 increases by 50% to: £60 Court Fee: £5 Warrant of Execution amount: £65 The amount of £65 is passed to the bailiff to collect. If you pay on receipt of a first letter you should pay: £78.16 If you pay when a first visit is made you should pay: £111.06

Link to post
Share on other sites
gezwee

gezwee

Posted
Posted
Ok. What do you mean by "tracker"? My wife(works with me) mentioned she had noticed the van lurking around a couple of days before.

 

I think (forgive me if i'm wrong) that HCE is inferring that Bailiffs carry vehicle trackers so that if their movements/visits are ever brought into question they can provide the court with evidence of services effected by time, date and location.

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites
High Court Enforcer

High Court Enforcer

Posted
Posted
I think (forgive me if i'm wrong) that HCE is inferring that Bailiffs carry vehicle trackers so that if their movements/visits are ever brought into question they can provide the court with evidence of services effected by time, date and location.

 

Gez

 

I know that many employed Bailiffs have trackers in their company vans and that TFL used to insist on tracker reports when cases went to court.

 

I also know of self employed Bailiffs that had to get trackers fitted before they could do TFL work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kbdavies

kbdavies

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks guys, this seems to be making sense now.

If my wife is correct in noticing the van couple of days before (she swears by this), then it means that the bailiff did indeed visist the location, but NEVER dropped a letter or knock on the premises.

Also, other employees confirm that no bailiff visited the premises, and no letter received.

Why would he do this? Is it to rack up the charges. He would have seen the vehicle there, as it was not being driven at this time. By visiting, but not knocking, he can then add charges for multiple visits to the total.

amount!

I may be getting ahead of myself here, but this seems to explain why no could confirm he had ever visited the property before that morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gezwee

gezwee

Posted
Posted
Thanks guys, this seems to be making sense now.

If my wife is correct in noticing the van couple of days before (she swears by this), then it means that the bailiff did indeed visist the location, but NEVER dropped a letter or knock on the premises.

Also, other employees confirm that no bailiff visited the premises, and no letter received.

Why would he do this? Is it to rack up the charges. He would have seen the vehicle there, as it was not being driven at this time. By visiting, but not knocking, he can then add charges for multiple visits to the total.

amount!

I may be getting ahead of myself here, but this seems to explain why no could confirm he had ever visited the property before that morning.

 

Hi kbd

 

I wouldnt get too far ahead of yourself with this.

 

Fees levied aside..........

 

I think the best course of action would be as follows:

 

1. Get the driver to put his/her hands up

 

2. Check their contract of employment (another bod on here should be able to help in the employment section) to see if monies recoverable. Seems very unfair I know but hey they've benefitted from what looks to be a pool car and dumped this mess on your desk.

 

3. Contact Bailiff co requesting breakdown of all charges and evidence/data held for any services effected in recovery.

 

If 1 & 2 are possible and leave you with no out of pocket expenses it saves the headache of 3

 

If you have been able to resolve with 1 & 2 leave it to the employee to deal with 3.

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites
hallowitch

hallowitch

Posted
Posted

NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR ENFORCEMENT AGENTS may 2002

List B

 

I'm sure this includes parking tickets

 

 

Such tools, books, vehicles and other items of equipment as are necessary for use personally by the tenant in their employment, business or vocation and such clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment and provisions are as necessary for satisfying the basic domestic needs of the debtor and his family

Link to post
Share on other sites
gezwee

gezwee

Posted
Posted
I assume as this is a company car it has business insurance

 

bailiffs cant levy or remove a work tool in this case the car

 

Hi Hallowitch

 

You wouldnt happen to have a link to the legislation for this would you please?

 

Is this for Ltd, Plc, sole traders or any?

 

Cheers

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites
gezwee

gezwee

Posted
Posted
NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR ENFORCEMENT AGENTS may 2002

List B

 

I'm sure this includes parking tickets

 

 

Such tools, books, vehicles and other items of equipment as are necessary for use personally by the tenant in their employment, business or vocation and such clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment and provisions are as necessary for satisfying the basic domestic needs of the debtor and his family

 

Crikey, posted before I'd finished typing....... musta had your crystal ball out :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
wonkeydonkey

wonkeydonkey

Posted
Posted
Thanks guys, this seems to be making sense now.

If my wife is correct in noticing the van couple of days before (she swears by this), then it means that the bailiff did indeed visist the location, but NEVER dropped a letter or knock on the premises.

Also, other employees confirm that no bailiff visited the premises, and no letter received.

Why would he do this? Is it to rack up the charges. He would have seen the vehicle there, as it was not being driven at this time. By visiting, but not knocking, he can then add charges for multiple visits to the total.

amount!

I may be getting ahead of myself here, but this seems to explain why no could confirm he had ever visited the property before that morning.

 

I don't think you are getting ahead of yourself I think you can make 2+2=4

Bailiff already close by..drives around ...tracker confirms

To cold to get out of car and deliver,knock,call etc..what the hell I can show I have been and thats what counts..

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...