Parking ticket, Southwark Council, car taken by bailiff

[High Court Enforcer]

High Court Enforcer. These vehicles - the ones you say are the only 'asset' - do they include the ones snatched off the street by ANPR equipped vehicles and without warrants or any attempt to contact the owners which would determine just what 'assets' they have?

 

As for sale value. Tom Tubby is right. Perhaps that is because the only auctioneers who would sell cars without log books or keys are those who most of us would view with great suspicion, but who may have an 'understanding' with those bailiff companies trying to make money from their illegal actions.

 

Oh and finally and before I forget - do you think it might be possible to show just ONE instance wherein a bailiff has returned one penny to the owner after the vehicle has been sold at auction without his/her knowledge?

 

Only for some unfathomable reason, I can't find one.

 

You must have the proof there somewhere.

 

FP, firstly, you may well be right about the ANPR but they would not remove a car if they didnt have a warrant to do so.

 

Secondly, I generally use the nearest auction to where the goods have been removed from. This includes some of the large auctioneers who are more than happy to sell vehicles without keys/docs. I have also used eBay. Oh, and they are not 'illegal actions' either.

 

Thirdly, I know of many debtors that have had money returned from a sale of goods. In fact this week we are due to pay over £1000 to a debtor whose vehicle was sold at auction but realised more than the sums due.

[High Court Enforcer]

As somebody within the industry, you will know that most bailiff companies do not sell vehicles by way of a "traditional" auction such as British Car Auction (to name a good example) but instead, most rely upon auction house that either use a website that is only available by way of subscription

or to use auctions that are not available to the public.

 

Name a company that does this. I have worked for many over the years and have never heard of it.

[Fair-Parking]

I AM right about ANPR. I get them reported to me every day. Favourites are Marstons, Newlyn, JBW, Phillips and Whyte & Co. Not one of these companies has ever had a warrant when using ANPR and it doesn't take an experienced bailiff like yourself to work out why.

 

Nor has any of them ever returned a penny to the owners - not even when they took a car after it had been sold to a new owner completely unconnected with the original PCN (s)

 

Thanks for letting us know that we should believe that you are different without supplying the proof.

 

In what way are they not illegal? Are you au fait with the Data Protection Act 1998? - and even that is being generous in assuming that you have 'warrants' yourselves.

 

Where do your 'warrants' come from?

 

Debtors? No - no court has listened to them for anybody to assume that any more than an allegation has been made against them, let alone case proven in court.

 

Presumption of guilt does not make anybody a 'debtor'.

[High Court Enforcer]

FP, you really are talking rubbish. Are you aware that the ANPR vehicles work off of a computer database that the 'warrants' are loaded onto? The warrants are issued by the Bulk Centre in Northampton.

 

So, are you really suggesting that all those companies you name operate without these?...

Edited March 6, 2010 by High Court Enforcer

[Fair-Parking]

Oh boy - another bailiff that finally cracks and shows that he doesn't know the procedure. First the Bulk Centre is Northampton County Court and that Court does not involve itself in parking at all. It's the Traffic Enforcement Centre that deals with parking - Phone them up and listen to their message that tells you NOT to speak to Northampton County Court about parking.

 

Further the the TEC does NOT issue 'warrants', it merely authorises their issue under 9.21 of their Code of Practice and 10.67 of the Department of Transport's Operational Guide to Local Authorities. Thus if you believe that the Northampton County Court actually issues 'warrants' you clearly have never seen one and that strongly indicates that you are 'enforcing' without one.

 

It is hardly surprising that this complete breakdown in legal authority occurs daily as the bodies which should issue warrants never do, so yes I am saying that bailiffs and particularly those I have listed do NOT have warrants when they clamp and tow after detection by ANPR.

 

Tell me HCE what exactly is the official court form number written on a warrant of execution, for if you have them they must be scattered around your office with their ID number staring at you?

 

Now about answering all those points that you haven't addressed from my previous post?

[welsh1]

Hope this clears things up,

The traffic enforcement centre is part of Northampton county court bulk centre,and as it shows on their site they issue warrants.

 

Info about - County Court Bulk Centre - Traffic Enforcement Centre

 

Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC)

 

 

Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), is a registration point for Local Authorities (LA’s) that have de-criminalised on-street parking charges.

 

Vehicle Emmision penalties, London Road User Charging (Congestion Charging) and Bus Lane Encroachment penalties for London Boroughs are also recovered through TEC.

 

Local Authorities send registration data by either floppy disk or via a modem and receive the guarantee that, following computer validation, the registration will be effected on the day of receipt. Authority to produce the Order for Recovery is given the same day to the LA.

 

Our staff involvement is split between two areas; The first is dealing with calls via our dedicated telephone helpdesk, assisting respondents with TEC procedures and where necessary sending relevant forms. The second area is the processing of the relevant Statutory Declarations and applications to file the Statutory Declaration out of time.

 

Enforcement is undertaken by the pursuing Authority by way of warrant of execution. Local Authorities use private bailiffs to execute the warrant.

 

TEC processed some 1.2 million registrations during 2006/07, and a further million April 2007 to December 2007.

[Fair-Parking]

The TEC does not issue warrants.

 

It might have a nice friendly website to relax all the concerns of the general public but it's 91 page Code of Conduct issued to local authorities tells a very different story. Of course that document isn't readily available to the public and neither is the Department of Transport's Operational Guide to Local Authorities which contains some very nasty assumptions about having the 'right' to place charges against your property for what they consider to be the crime of parking.

 

For instance the TEC doesn't admit to the public that it never inspects any of the charge certificates sent to it and therefore is never in a position to make any considered judgment about the people listed or their alleged contraventions. Nor can the TEC refuse any request from a local authority for registration.

 

The TEC merely deals with requests from LA's in bulk. Page 15 Section 9 para 16 is very revealing 'A sealed authority to prepare warrant of execution shall be produced by the TEC for all warrants of executions received by data communications links, floppy disk or electronic transfer. These will be processed and faxed to the Local Authority within two working days of receipt'.

 

To achieve this 100% guarantee of success for all PCNs it has issued, the local authority simply has to submit an advice note to the TEC. This needs to consist of an authority identifier, batch identifer, total number or registrations, production date and total fees. It won't list the names and the alleged wrongdoings of those included on the list.

 

To translate what the TEC is saying, is that it deals with these requests electronically in large batches, never knowing the actual identity of any the persons who they then authorise warrants to be issued against. Whatever these anonymous people have alleged to have done is of no concern to the TEC. That's why it is called an enforcement CENTRE and not the Traffic Enforcement COURT which it likes to be referred to by the unsuspecting public who correctly but ultimately naively put their trust into it in the hopeless belief that the TEC has integrity and justice within its capacity. It doesn't.

 

To put it simply, this 'court' authorises the issue of warrants of execution by local authorities without even knowing the identity of those who they have just condemned.

 

So please don't be surprised when nice freindly websites that are designed to fool you are exposed for the fraud that they are.

 

It's a House of Cards waiting to fall

[welsh1]

Fair-Parking,

I can see your point about them not knowing each individual case,but i thought this was just the next step in the process ie

You park on yellow lines and get a parking ticket.

You ignore the request on the ticket for payment in 14 days,and the cost then increases.

You continue to ignore it so the LA have to then recover the money.

They apply to the Tec,you are one of thousands that the LA have submitted.

The TEC issue a warrant against you,because the LA are stating that they have lawfully issued a ticket and you have not complied with the lawful request for payment.So a warrant is issued.The LA then use a bailiff to enforce the warrant.

 

I understand that the process may have its flaws,but that is the system that is in place,and when mistakes are made it is up to us to bring them to task,i know it is not the best system,but what is the alternative?

[Fair-Parking]

Alternative? Being honest with people and allowing them the opportunity to appeal through a real court.

 

The law is not best served by an adminstration centre masquerading as a 'court', finding against people without knowing who they are or what they have supposed to have done wrong.

 

That's a presumption of guilt.

 

Any alternative would be better

[welsh1]

Alternative? Being honest with people and allowing them the opportunity to appeal through a real court.

 

The law is not best served by an adminstration centre masquerading as a 'court', finding against people without knowing who they are or what they have supposed to have done wrong.

 

That's a presumption of guilt.

 

Any alternative would be better

 

 

I understand what you are saying,but the large majority of people that knowingly ignore the parking ticket,bus lane etc are "guilty", unfortunately the genuine cases that should not be paying because the ticket was issued wrongly, illegally etc,also get dragged into a system that is not that flexible,that is why forums like this exist,to point out these mistakes,and hopefully rectify them.

But what is the alternative?

The system exists it seems for the majority,and it is this majority that chose to ignore traffic violations,thus they create a system that penalises the genuine cases.

I think the only way the system will end is when everyone pays when fined,but that will never happen,the system may morph over the years,but it will in effect remain the same.All we can do is help genuine cases to plough through the appeals system.

[tomtubby]

Fair-Parking,

I can see your point about them not knowing each individual case,but i thought this was just the next step in the process ie

You park on yellow lines and get a parking ticket.

You ignore the request on the ticket for payment in 14 days,and the cost then increases.

You continue to ignore it so the LA have to then recover the money.

They apply to the Tec,you are one of thousands that the LA have submitted.

The TEC issue a warrant against you,because the LA are stating that they have lawfully issued a ticket and you have not complied with the lawful request for payment.So a warrant is issued.The LA then use a bailiff to enforce the warrant.

 

I understand that the process may have its flaws,but that is the system that is in place,and when mistakes are made it is up to us to bring them to task,i know it is not the best system,but what is the alternative?

 

 

Sorry, Welsh 1 but this post of yours has really made me MAD!!

 

Bailiff companies and local authorities are constantly coming out with this NONSENSE that motorist's REFUSE to pay a parking ticket and that there is no alternative other than to apply for a Warrant of Execution.

 

There will always be cases where a motorist will not pay and there are many genuine cases where a motorist simply cannot afford to pay.

 

However, from the vast number of cases that I have personally come across a motorist was unaware of the PCN until such time as a bailiff visit and in particular when the PCN has been by camera enforcement.

 

Where there is a massive problem is when a motorist moves address and even if he advises DVLA almost immediately, all statutory notices will be sent to the address identified by DVLA on the day that he received the PCN.

 

A paper was provided at an IRRV Conference where it states the following:

"The industry estimates that around 40% of all warrants bear the WRONG ADDRESS...and in some categories this figure is MUCH HIGHER!!!

 

There is an urgent need to have a CHANGE made to the TMA whereby a warrants SHOULD NOT be authorised UNLESS a further DVLA check is made BEFORE warrant stage.

 

Bailiff companies are making a killing from incorrect address records of that there is NO DOUBT.

 

I have sent an FOI to one local authority in the past few days regarding their bailiff contract for PCN enforcement where the following clause is provided under the hearing of TRACING:

 

"If a manual trace is required this would be charged at £15 plus vat for each successful case and be charged to xxxx(local authority). In order to alleviate the council of "tracing fees" , xxxx (bailiff company) would then charge a fee of £45 plus vat to the customer and if payment is collected in full..to repay xxxx(local authority) a fee of £45 !!!

 

Not only is there no legal authority whatsoever in the statutory fee scale to charge a "tracing fee" to a debtor, there is the serious matter of a local authority receiving a payment from a bailiff company !!!

[welsh1]

Tomtubby,

I think you have got me wrong,or i am not putting myself across right.

I said it is the majority that do not pay,and that remains the case,i also said that the system will morph over the years,ie change within itself,the points you raise will probably in time get incorporated in one form or another.

 

The point about the wrong address is a good one,i agree that further checks should be done to confirm the correct address,but this brings us to another can of worms the DVLA,it is up to them to supply the correct information,but all you have to do is look around the forums to see that they seem to get a lot wrong.

I would also like to see statistically how many of the people that never received the pcn had informed the DVLA of a change of address(i was guilty of this for a year)it is one of the things easily forgotten.And royal mail is a disaster for getting things to the correct place these days.

 

I think we should have a system like some Scandinavian countries,they have one central agency that issues the number plate,that plate is sent to the address where that person is registered it will not be delivered to any other address,the plate carries the insurance payment tag,and the "road tax" equivalent for that country.This means you must give the right address,as you will not get your plate issued for that year,it also means that at a glance the police can see you have tax and insurance.

 

I am confused about the motorists that cannot afford to pay,a tank of fuel is now about £50.00,and while i can understand the disabled,with motability cars struggling,this bit is going to sound callous,if joe public can afford to run a car and he gets a genuine parking ticket,then he can afford to pay,i know i will get slated for that statement but that is how i feel.

 

The trouble in this country is we have multiple agencies supplying information,they have all created little empires and will resist change till their last breath,but when it comes to motoring there should be one accountable body responsible for the whole process,see the Scandinavian plan above.

 

Warmest regards welsh1

[tomtubby]

Tomtubby,

I think you have got me wrong,or i am not putting myself across right.

I said it is the majority that do not pay,and that remains the case,i also said that the system will morph over the years,ie change within itself,the points you raise will probably in time get incorporated in one form or another.

 

The point about the wrong address is a good one,i agree that further checks should be done to confirm the correct address,but this brings us to another can of worms the DVLA,it is up to them to supply the correct information,but all you have to do is look around the forums to see that they seem to get a lot wrong.

I would also like to see statistically how many of the people that never received the pcn had informed the DVLA of a change of address(i was guilty of this for a year)it is one of the things easily forgotten.And royal mail is a disaster for getting things to the correct place these days.

 

I think we should have a system like some Scandinavian countries,they have one central agency that issues the number plate,that plate is sent to the address where that person is registered it will not be delivered to any other address,the plate carries the insurance payment tag,and the "road tax" equivalent for that country.This means you must give the right address,as you will not get your plate issued for that year,it also means that at a glance the police can see you have tax and insurance.

 

I am confused about the motorists that cannot afford to pay,a tank of fuel is now about £50.00,and while i can understand the disabled,with motability cars struggling,this bit is going to sound callous,if joe public can afford to run a car and he gets a genuine parking ticket,then he can afford to pay,i know i will get slated for that statement but that is how i feel.

 

The trouble in this country is we have multiple agencies supplying information,they have all created little empires and will resist change till their last breath,but when it comes to motoring there should be one accountable body responsible for the whole process,see the Scandinavian plan above.

 

Warmest regards welsh1

 

 

 

Thank you for such a good response.

 

My reference to being unable to afford a pay PCN is mainly to do with TfL where if you forget to pay the charge at £8 you can be faced with having to pay £100 almost overnight !!!

Edited March 7, 2010 by tomtubby

[welsh1]

Thank you for such a good response.

 

My reference to being unable to afford a pay PCN is mainly to do with TfL where if you forget to pay at £8 can almost overnight reach £100!!!

 

 

Ah TFL a tax raised against the motorist who already pays road tax,and is only charged against people in london,totally unjust,and is quite simply a revenue raising exercise.

I would go on but i can feel a vein rising in my neck:eek:time for a glass of red and a "little"bar of chocolate:D

[pamanar]

Wow...I come back to find battle as broken out on this thread!

I totally agree with tomtubby here...if notices are being sent to a different address, the person committing the parking offence doesn't have a chance in hell of trying to pay their dues.

 

In my case, (getting technical here), the bailiffs apparantly sent everything to our old address, car registration was updated with DVLA within a few weeks of miving to new address. Their claim was that they have to send things to the address that is on the original parking ticket...which then carries on to the warrant when issued. So...that means that they seized a car that was not registered at the address they had on the warrant. They found it probably with one of those ANPR cameras...and took it. WRONG

 

I want my £700 back from these m- f-.

[tomtubby]

Wow...I come back to find battle as broken out on this thread!

I totally agree with tomtubby here...if notices are being sent to a different address, the person committing the parking offence doesn't have a chance in hell of trying to pay their dues.

 

In my case, (getting technical here), the bailiffs apparantly sent everything to our old address, car registration was updated with DVLA within a few weeks of miving to new address. Their claim was that they have to send things to the address that is on the original parking ticket...which then carries on to the warrant when issued. So...that means that they seized a car that was not registered at the address they had on the warrant. They found it probably with one of those ANPR cameras...and took it. WRONG

 

I want my £700 back from these m- f-.

 

Unless the local authority are to volunteer to pay you back(which will NOT happen) then the ONLY way of getting your money back is to file an N244 to have the "Court Officers decision to reject your Out of Time reviewed" .

 

I did mention this in a earlier thread and I also asked whether you had written to Tessa Jowell MP ?

 

Have you requested or received a copy of the Statement of Truth from "Southwark". This is SO important because we have seen many such Statement that have been signed by the BAILIFF COMPANY !!!

 

Please post back with any enquiries.

[pamanar]

Hi tomtubby, how do I obtain a Statement of Truth?

 

I did write to Tessa Jowell, and she in turn said she'd forwarded my email on to the Head of Parking at Southwark but I have not heard anything further.

 

I do plan to file a N244, but it's Sunday today, I'll get on it first thing this week.

[tomtubby]

Hi tomtubby, how do I obtain a Statement of Truth?

 

I did write to Tessa Jowell, and she in turn said she'd forwarded my email on to the Head of Parking at Southwark but I have not heard anything further.

 

I do plan to file a N244, but it's Sunday today, I'll get on it first thing this week.

 

The statement of truth is VITAL!!

 

Write an immediate e-mail to the Head of Parking at Southwark and I would strongly suggest that you also write an e-mail today to TEC using their customer service e-mail address.

 

Have you considered asking Tessa Jowell to forward a copy of your complaint to Lord Lucas !!!!!! If not, you should do.

 

He is Chair of the Enforcement Law Reform Group seeking better regulation of bailiffs and in addition......he is Chair of the London Motorist Action Group !!!!

[tomtubby]

Bailiff companies have been getting away with this for YEARS and are making a FORTUNE!!!

 

London Borough of Southwark use both JBW and Davies Enforcement for their PCN recovery.

 

You might find this rather long speech from Austin Mitchell MP of interest. This speech is commonly referred to as his "witching hour speech". You will see why when you read it!!!!!!!

 

Road Traffic Debts: 27 Mar 2007: House of Commons debates (TheyWorkForYou.com)

[Barbarawoo]

 

Have you requested or received a copy of the Statement of Truth from "Southwark". This is SO important because we have seen many such Statement that have been signed by the BAILIFF COMPANY !!!

 

Please post back with any enquiries.

 

Sorry, just to clarify, a statement of truth has to come frome the bailiff and be signed by the bailiff? When I requested it from the bailiff company they sent me a drawn out letter saying that their bailiff was indeed correct in all his under takings, signed by the Bailiff manager of the comnpany, not the bailiff.?