Baliffs Philips - PCN from city of westminster

[web2005]

Please keep us updated, If I come across any more info I'll be sure to post it

 

Thanks seanamarts. I will defenitely keep you guys updated with any progress. You guys have been of great help.

[RaeUK]

 

Information and confidentiality

 

 

• All information obtained during the administration and enforcement of warrants must be treated as confidential.
  
• Enforcement agents should, so far as it is practical, avoid disclosing the purpose of their visit to anyone other than the debtor. Where the debtor is not seen, the relevant documents must be left at the address in a sealed envelope addressed to the debtor.
  

Just wanted to highlight the above extract from seanamarts post as well as the line I put in bold.

This 'joint' excercise is not the same as the police responding to a call at a debtors door where a dispute is in progress or the police accompanying the bailiff who fears a violent confrontation.

Here, the police have no right to be given details of a debtors vehicle and pull them over - in my opinion - and are acting not only in collusion with the bailiff but, effectively, as a member of their company. They are not acting independently.

This type of behaviour has a rather malodorous whiff about it...

Rae.

Edited March 12, 2010 by RaeUK
What would Robert Peel say?

[regan11]

Don't want to appear cynical but you don't suppose the cops could have been 'moonlighting'.

[web2005]

Update:

 

Here is the latest email I received this morning from westminster council.

 

Dear Mr XXXX,

Thank you for contacting Westminster City Council in connection with your parking ticket, which has today been forwarded to the debt recovery dept to deal with.

It is anticipated that you should be responded to within a few working days.

You can phone them on 020 7641 1797, or alternatively;

Please call 020 7641 4567, or reply to [email protected], with your reference number if you have any further queries.

Alternatively please visit our website http://www.westminster.gov.uk/parking which may be of assistance with your enquiry

Parking Advisor

Parking Services

Westminster City Council

PO Box 396

Warrington

WA55 1EL

Telephone: 020 7823 4567

Fax: 019 2546 5088

e-mail: [email protected]

[web2005]

I have noticed from other threads here that cars on hire purchase can't be taken/towed by bailiffs. Can you please confirm this? My car is on hire purchase from welcome finance. 4 years agreement started in May 2007 till May 2011.

[seanamarts]

Taken from TT' site

 

 

A bailiff is not allowed to take a vehicle subject to hire purchase.. The vehicle is legally owned by the finance company until full payment is made.

Immediately you are aware that a bailiff could visit…..you must write to inform them that you do not own the vehicle. Our advice would be to send the letter by registered mail….an ensure that you keep a copy for your records.

Hire purchase means what it says….you are merely hiring the vehicle…..until the final payment has been made,

[tomtubby]

I have noticed from other threads here that cars on hire purchase can't be taken/towed by bailiffs. Can you please confirm this? My car is on hire purchase from welcome finance. 4 years agreement started in May 2007 till May 2011.

 

Exempt from seizure.

[web2005]

Update:

 

Here is the reply from Northampton County Court. According to them warrant was issued. I never received the warrant in post nor the bailiffs showed this to me when they stopped and collected money from me.

 

I emailed bailiffs last week but not reply from them yet. They still haven't provided me the breakdonw of the charges.

 

You guys think there is still chance I can recover mony paid to them?

 

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your email. In response please be advised that a Warrant of Execution was issued on the 26/8/09.

I would like to confirm that the bailiffs in this case are not County Court Bailiffs but Private Certified Bailiffs employed by the Local Authority. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is therefore unable to deal with your query / complaint.

If you have a complaint about the conduct of a private bailiff, you should ask the bailiff in question which court they are certificated by (this will probably be your local county court and NOT Northampton County Court). The bailiff must supply this information on request. You should then address your complaint to the Court Manager at the relevant county court. You may also wish to contact the Enforcement Services Agency on 0117 907 4771 for advice.

If you wish to recover money already paid to a bailiff, you should contact the bailiff in question in the first instance and/or the local authority, which issued the Penalty Charge. If you are unable to resolve the matter to your satisfaction, we would recommend that you seek qualified legal advice. The TEC cannot assist in this matter.

Regards

Mrs Kerrie Adams

Traffic Enforcement Centre

Administrative Officer

T: 0845 7045007

F: 0845 4085317

 

 

 

[RaeUK]

Well, that at least narrows the field of letter writing! You now know that it's the CEO of the relevant council that needs to receive a rebuking Formal Complaint...

Best wishes.

Rae.

[tomtubby]

I have noticed from other threads here that cars on hire purchase can't be taken/towed by bailiffs. Can you please confirm this? My car is on hire purchase from welcome finance. 4 years agreement started in May 2007 till May 2011.

 

I have not responded too much on this thread but I am watching WITH INTEREST.

 

We have a commercial company providing bailiff advice to the public and we have had so many complaints concerning these "West End Operations" and on behalf of one client we made a Formal Complaint to City of Westminster and I would be interested in the response that they provide to you.

 

These operations are VERY COMMON and frankly extremely worrying. A PCN is a CIVIL DEBT and NOT a criminal debt.

 

Can you imagine what would happen if the police pulled a vehicle over...checked the insurance and tax and then introduced you to a person who was the Collections Manager from Barclaycard or Egg Credit Card because you had a debt due on your credit card. There would be OUTRAGE !!!

 

And yet, this is exactly what is being done. It is a scandal !!

[noddyaccount]

I have not responded too much on this thread but I am watching WITH INTEREST.

 

We have a commercial company providing bailiff advice to the public and we have had so many complaints concerning these "West End Operations" and on behalf of one client we made a Formal Complaint to City of Westminster and I would be interested in the response that they provide to you.

 

These operations are VERY COMMON and frankly extremely worrying. A PCN is a CIVIL DEBT and NOT a criminal debt.

 

Can you imagine what would happen if the police pulled a vehicle over...checked the insurance and tax and then introduced you to a person who was the Collections Manager from Barclaycard or Egg Credit Card because you had a debt due on your credit card. There would be OUTRAGE !!!

 

And yet, this is exactly what is being done. It is a scandal !!

 

Was there not a very exhaustive thread on this same issue regarding JBW and Westminster and the roadblocks shown on The Bailliffs on BBC , I am no lawyer but it would seem to be a complete liberty for the Police to use their powers to aid and encourage private debt collectors , surely a civil suit was discussed or even a criminal one for some sort of false imprisonment /extortion or somesuch , this was discussed on the old thread . Anyway the figure of £689 sounds very beefed up , without proof of letters , removal vans or visits or the other favorite sundries that could not apply in this specific instance as they could not have known you would come driving by .

[regan11]

If bailiffs are only supposed to operate between 6am and 9pm then surely any transactions that take place at four in the morning would make the whole thing invalid. This is outrageous.

[tomtubby]

Was there not a very exhaustive thread on this same issue regarding JBW and Westminster and the roadblocks shown on The Bailliffs on BBC , I am no lawyer but it would seem to be a complete liberty for the Police to use their powers to aid and encourage private debt collectors , surely a civil suit was discussed or even a criminal one for some sort of false imprisonment /extortion or somesuch , this was discussed on the old thread . Anyway the figure of £689 sounds very beefed up , without proof of letters , removal vans or visits or the other favorite sundries that could not apply in this specific instance as they could not have known you would come driving by .

 

From recent correspondence provided by City of Westminster they have confirmed the following:

 

From the opinion of those involved in these ANPR operations, supported by the results achieved, a correlation exists between individuals who fail to pay PCN's on receipt and who ignore subsequent correspondence, and the following behaviours:

 

Failure to register a vehicle correctly with DVLA.

 

Have no insurance, no MOT/unroadworthy vehicle.

 

Stolen vehicle.

 

Operating as an unlicensed minicab driver.

 

Illegal immigrant.

 

Being in possessions of weapons/drugs.

In recent operations the Counter Terrorist representative have identified persons and vehicles of interest.

 

Arrests have been made under Section 56 of the Terrorism Act.

 

 

In other words...according to those involved (ie the bailiffs) the people stopped are CRIMINALS !!!

[noddyaccount]

From recent correspondence provided by City of Westminster they have confirmed the following:

 

From the opinion of those involved in these ANPR operations, supported by the results achieved, a correlation exists between individuals who fail to pay PCN's on receipt and who ignore subsequent correspondence, and the following behaviours:

 

Failure to register a vehicle correctly with DVLA.

 

Have no insurance, no MOT/unroadworthy vehicle.

 

Stolen vehicle.

 

Operating as an unlicensed minicab driver.

 

Illegal immigrant.

 

Being in possessions of weapons/drugs.

In recent operations the Counter Terrorist representative have identified persons and vehicles of interest.

 

Arrests have been made under Section 56 of the Terrorism Act.

 

 

In other words...according to those involved (ie the bailiffs) the people stopped are CRIMINALS !!!

 

So now we are being profiled I thought that wasn't allowed , It would seem the Councils want it both ways , Decriminalised parking ,with a lessened burden of proof ,as a revenue raiser to supplement their central funding and yet the criminal sanctions of arrest and ,well I've lived abroad , lets face it Its a third world shakedown .

I thought the European court told us to stop using the catch all justification of terrorism as an excuse to stop people , that's some shameful s*8T.

[tomtubby]

So now we are being profiled I thought that wasn't allowed , It would seem the Councils want it both ways , Decriminalised parking ,with a lessened burden of proof ,as a revenue raiser to supplement their central funding and yet the criminal sanctions of arrest and ,well I've lived abroad , lets face it Its a third world shakedown .

I thought the European court told us to stop using the catch all justification of terrorism as an excuse to stop people , that's some shameful s*8T.

 

Clearly Westminster are unaware ( or fail to abide by) the European Courts.

[web2005]

Update

 

Another message from customer relations department at Westminster council. Earlier message suggested my complaint was being sent to debt recoveries department but now seems this is back to customer relations department. Very confusing.....

 

I haven't heard anything back from bailiffs, Philips. Emailed my complaint to them last week but no reply as yet.

 

Dear XXXXX,

 

Thank you for contacting Westminster City Council in connection with the bailiffs which has today been forwarded to the Customer Relations Departmentto deal with.

 

It is anticipated that you should be responded to within a few working days.

 

Please call 020 7641 4567, or reply to [email protected],with your reference number if you have any further queries.

 

Alternatively please visit our website

http://www.westminster.gov.uk/parkingwhich may be of assistance with your enquiry.

 

 

Parking Advisor

Parking Services

Westminster City Council

PO Box 396

Warrington

WA55 1EL

Telephone: 020 7823 4567

Fax: 019 2546 5088

e-mail: [email protected]

www.westminster.gov.uk

 

[web2005]

Many thanks for the following contribution. I am still waiting to hear back from westminster council. I am very determined to take this matter further as not just the amount charged from me for single PCN is ridiculous but also how I was treated on the road was very insulting. Indeed it was if I was a criminal.

 

Can you please share what happened to the complaint you logged on bahalf of your customer to the westminster council? Do you think I would be able to get partial refund of the amount I was forced to pay?

 

 

I have not responded too much on this thread but I am watching WITH INTEREST.

 

We have a commercial company providing bailiff advice to the public and we have had so many complaints concerning these "West End Operations" and on behalf of one client we made a Formal Complaint to City of Westminster and I would be interested in the response that they provide to you.

 

These operations are VERY COMMON and frankly extremely worrying. A PCN is a CIVIL DEBT and NOT a criminal debt.

 

Can you imagine what would happen if the police pulled a vehicle over...checked the insurance and tax and then introduced you to a person who was the Collections Manager from Barclaycard or Egg Credit Card because you had a debt due on your credit card. There would be OUTRAGE !!!

 

And yet, this is exactly what is being done. It is a scandal !!

[JC101]

Philips are thieves - they said they had visited my house and hadn't, charged me excessive fees - and dropped it when I threataned legal action. I am currently awaiting a court date for compensation.

 

Westminster council did very little too - they backed up Philips even though I proved they were wrong. And they didnt get back to my formal complaint. You just need to keep hammering at them.

[web2005]

Philips are thieves - they said they had visited my house and hadn't, charged me excessive fees - and dropped it when I threataned legal action. I am currently awaiting a court date for compensation.

 

Westminster council did very little too - they backed up Philips even though I proved they were wrong. And they didnt get back to my formal complaint. You just need to keep hammering at them.

 

Indeed they are thieves. This morning I received email from them including breakdown of charges. They claim to visit my house back in 8 September 2009 and 18 September 2009. LIERS. They never visited my place if they did, they could have towed my car or clamped it. Another point is they claim to vist me on 8 and then 10 days after on 18 of September. After 18 of september they didn't do anything till 7 March 2010.

 

Here is the breakdown of charges. They are theft £400 from me claiming to vist while infact they didn't

 

1956279.pdf

 

 

Please suggest what I can do to recover £460 they charged illegaly by claiming they made 2 visits. Thanks.

[Fair-Parking]

Read this thread with interest. These joint police / private bailiff operations ARE illegal and for a variety of reasons. First the original obligation of police to assist bailiffs came under sections 85 and 86 of the County Court Acts 1984, but when decriminalised parking was introduced in 1991, under the next act of legislation - The Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts (Certificated Bailiffs) Regulations 1993 (you'll need to check version 2073 and not 2072) that obligation was revoked under section 6.

 

Thus the police shouldn't be there as Seanamarts alluded to in post 4 and which as she correctly pointed out is a civil matter - or at least until the moment the bailiff acts unlawfully by breaking a number of criminal laws. Which they did. What on earth are the police doing committing officers to civil matters?

 

Ah the warrant. That's a wonderfully evasive letter Web2005 (post 33) received from the Traffic Enforcement Centre, it reads as if the TEC has issued it, but read it again - slowly. It doesn't say that or who issued it. One thing is for sure, the TEC hasn't - though that's the impression the letter is meant to convey. The TEC knows damn well that it only authorises the issue of a warrant by the council under section 9.21 of it's Code of Practice to local authorities. This, the crux of the matter is simply avoided by the letter. Phone the TEC and ask them for a copy and wait for the silence.

 

You can guarantee that no warrant was ever issued and PC Plod who should be checking to see if bailiffs have them, stand by and assume that they exist when a simple question to the bailiff ie 'Can I see the warrant for this person?' would show otherwise. So the monetary demand was made without legal authority and processed on the basis that such authority did exist. That's fraud and PC Plod was an accessory, though he no more knows that an ant knows the world is round.

 

Although ANPR must have been used on this operation and by the bailiffs, another bit of common sense that was sorely missing was the blindingly obvious fact that as the purpose of ANPR is to detect vehicles by the random chance that they will pass by the detector van, the chances of having a valid warrant of execution already printed and waiting in the van for that particular car would vary between highly improbable to absolute zero. That is of course if Westminster Council ever printed one which again a quick phone call to them will cause severe obfuscation on their part.

 

And then there are the data protection issues. For the police to stop you, the bailiff must have passed on your personal data to them. It couldn't happen any other as the OP had committed no offences to be on the police computer. This, as the police keep saying, is a civil issue and thus the sharing of personal data even with them on this civil matter was illegal. The whole purpose of the Act is to prevent to random passing on people's details (as the Act says - information that indentifies the data subject).

 

It was this failure to observe the Data Protection Act 1998 that allowed myself to end a similar stop and detain (which is another illegality itself) joint action by Greater Manchester Police and Marstons in July 2008. What do these numbskulls think the data protection act is for if not to protect ordinary people's rights not to suffer interference by those who seek to deliberately damage the quality of their life and in this case, by being defrauding them as well.

 

This goes into even deeper water. The Council has no right to pass on your personal details to the bailiffs for the same reason, thus the bailiffs shouldn't have your personal details to be in any position to pass them on at all. Nor is Westminster Council entitled to administer and enforce parking as it hasn't registered to do so with the Information Commissioner's Office as required under the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

Neither have Phillips Bailiffs registered to enforce parking. Offences dalore here but not by the OP.

 

Yes the failures are that comprehensive - as are similar stop and detain exercises that Marstons still hold with the Met notably February 6 2009, September 30 2009, February 12 2010 and March 9 2010.

 

They even boast about them on the their vans!

[web2005]

Fair-Parking Thanks for very detailed reply. Very informative. Can you please guide me what should be the next steps for me? How can I challenge Council and bailiffs to recover the amount I was forced to pay. I am sure this will help many others who are fooled by these bailiffs. Thanks.

[Fair-Parking]

I take it that my observations fell into to line with what happened. Start with asking for copies of the warrant of executiion and when both the council and the bailiffs fail to produce it, tell them that you intend to start court proceedings against them for recovery and compensation.

 

Advise them that you intend to subject them to a pre litigation request through the court under rule 31.16 that will force them to either produce the warrant or admit that they they do not have one.

 

See what happens at that point

[tomtubby]

I take it that my observations fell into to line with what happened. Start with asking for copies of the warrant of executiion and when both the council and the bailiffs fail to produce it, tell them that you intend to start court proceedings against them for recovery and compensation.

 

Advise them that you intend to subject them to a pre litigation request through the court under rule 31.16 that will force them to either produce the warrant or admit that they they do not have one.

 

See what happens at that point

 

Good advice FP.

[web2005]

UPDATE

 

As I didn't get any response back from Westminster council and Philips, I sent them another email yesterday to get the progress. Here is what I have received from the council. Not very helpful.

 

Please contact our Debt Recovery Department on 020 7641 1797 (Mon-Fri, 8am - 6pm) to resolve this issue.

Parking Advisor

Parking Services

Westminster City Council

 

I was expecting at least some explaination in writing but now it seems I have to speak to them over the phone.

[Fair-Parking]

DEMAND to see a copy of the 'warrant'. That is the ONLY authority that these people can rely upon. No warrant, No enforcement.