Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi CAG,   First time poster here.   I would like to start off by saying that I've read through various threads and it's quite heartwarming to see the level of attention and support you give to people dealing with often stressful and anxiety inducing circumstances. I'll certainly be making a donation as this is truly a valuable resource.   I've read several similar threads to my own situation but I thought I'd seek your advice.   I opened a letter just a few hours ago from London Collection and Compliance Centre which is dated 11th January 2022 for an amount totalling £870.68. I'll attach a copy below. I can't quite remember the date of the initial offence. For context, I boarded a bus (I believe in 2018) and unbeknownst to me, my contactless card did not register correctly on the reader. I had my headphones in with music playing and was sat for my journey and then was approached by a ticket inspector who informed me that I did not tap and therefore was unable to provide proof of a valid ticket. Despite explaining the circumstances, I was asked for my details which I provided in full. I was honest and forthcoming with the ticket inspector but I wasn't aware this would amount to a fine as I was provided with a printed pass for the remainder of my journey. I accept liability for not being able to provide proof of a valid ticket and do not wish to dispute this regardless of intent.    I'm not entirely sure why I didn't pay the fine upon receipt of TfL's initial correspondence but I'm a long time sufferer of anxiety and depression which at times is so debilitating that I'm unable to make the best decisions or carry out simple actions. Some of which would mean I wouldn't need to make this post. I struggled financially at the time of receiving this letter and further correspondence which placed I did not deal with correctly because of the mental state I was in. I struggled to cope with and stupidly I neglected my responsibility and buried my head in the sand. I made an error in judgement that I wholeheartedly regret.   As of writing (early hours of 26th January 2022), the 10 working days given in the 'Further steps notice' has elapsed (25th January 2022). I rarely receive mail and therefore I don't regularly check my mailbox. However, I decided to take a look today as I suspected I missed a Royal Mail delivery. I intend on calling the number on the letter at the earliest appropriate time in the morning and dealing with this matter. I'm desperate to right my previous wrongs as I've worked hard to deal with my anxiety by beginning therapy. However, like many others in this thread, I'm worried about the prospect of having a criminal record. I'm 26 years only and I don't have any previous convictions nor have I had any trouble with the law. I have a real love for the service TfL provides and I'm capable of listing off an endless stream of related trivia. I have no previous run ins with TfL and regularly travel on the network and pay the correct, full fare each time.    I'm worried about how this will affect my future in regards to employment and my intention of naturalising as a British citizen (I've been in the UK for 20 years now).   I'll note my primary questions below and would truly appreciate your advice.   a) If I get in contact with the number on the letter as soon as possible, will that be too late despite the close proximity to the deadline?   b) What would be the best potential approach to resolving this issue? (I'm unable to pay the amount in as a lump sum.)   c) If I were successful in arranging a payment plan/somehow paying the amount in full, how would that affect the court proceedings? Would this still result in a criminal record?   d) I've seen other threads which mention OOC settlements with TfL, would this be an option despite receipt of a 'Further steps notice' letter?   e) Should I end up in court or have the opportunity to speak to someone over the phone - will I be able to explain my circumstance and plead for leniency?   f) What other general steps would you suggest I take at this stage to mitigate the consequences?   Apologies for this post being so long, I wanted to include as much relevant detail as possible and I'm more than happy to provide any that's missing. I don't want to make excuses for myself. I completely accept I'm in the wrong for allowing things to get to this stage, despite the difficulty I had with my mental state but I want to do right by myself and deal with this. I'll post regular updates and be sure to include a conclusion once I deal with the matter regardless of the outcome.   Thank you in advance for looking at this post, I really do appreciate what you do.   IMG_2609.pdf
    • The worrying aspect is that they could well run away ... then a few months down the line, knowing full well you'd moved, sue you at your old address, knowing you would lose by default.  Therefore I suggest sending the above letter off on Thursday if the other regulars don't disagree, then on Saturday another one to just UKPM     Dear UK Car Park Management Limited,   re: PCN no.XXXXX   please note that I no longer live at XXXXX but that my new address is XXXXX.   Yours,
    • How about -     Dear Will & John,   Re: your reference XXXXX, vehicle registration XXXXX   cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in mirth at the idea you thought I would actually take such bilge seriously and then cough up.   Now you know and I know and now you know that I know all the reasons why these residential parking claims are utter pants.   Your thicko client, UKPM, have been hammered in court so many times in these cases, but if they haven't learnt their lesson and want another thrashing, fine, bring it on.   I see the government this week dropped tests for fully-vaccinated travellers returning to the UK, so if your client is daft enough to take me to court then I will delight in tolchocking them, then obtaining an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g), spending it all on a foreign holiday, and then laughing at your client's expense while I down my aperitivi.   I look forward to your deafening silence.   COPIED TO UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LIMITED     Gladstone's and UKPM are well aware of where these letters originate from and that they would have a real battle on in court, so lately have always run away ... although of course there are no guarantees.   However, hang on through tomorrow and see what the other regulars think.
    • 'Walk the ice, take risks and do it quickly'View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

what do you think of this

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4158 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

i was having a google and came across this




i cant find a date for it so i don't know how old it is councils bloody Greedy edited you would have no chance if they were getting a % of the fees collected


In the last few years we have had to

consider the further eroding of our

monies with local authorities requiring

that their debt be cleared first before

our charges are paid. Initially it started

with the collection of RTA 91 debts but

it is now being requested by Revenue

Sections for Council Tax and Business

Rates. Some local authorities are also

requiring all monies collected by bailiff

companies to be paid into their own

bank account, where the fees are then

redistributed back to us in due course.

More recently local authorities are now

requiring in tenders for either, a

percentage of our fees collected, or a

lump sum per annum to be paid back

to them for the length of the contract.

It is appreciated that local authorities

are strapped for cash, but surely this is

not the way forward. In some ways this

request could be described as a bribe

and tenders could be won, not for

quality of service, but on financial


Steve Roberts

Managing Director Ross & Roberts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another article from the same news letter.


Know your Bailiff


How many Local Authorities put their trust in their bailiff provider, in the hope that the personnel who will be collecting their debts are as professional as the Company they work for?


Does the debtor really understand the process and the person who is knocking on their door?


How many bailiff firms employ the services of smart, presentable, certificated, well trained bailiffs who they THINK are doing their work and their work only?


We all think that we are getting a professional service, don’t we?


The truth is that there is a new bailiff culture developing out there that could quite easily bring the whole industry into disrepute! We’ve all heard of pyramid selling, but how about pyramid bailiffing? It works like this:-


Bailiff A is certificated, well trained and presentable and he works as a sole provider to Bailiff Company X. However, unbeknown to Bailiff Company X he is also selling his ‘sole services’ to companies Y & Z.


Now Bailiff A is receiving so much work that he cannot possibly deal with it himself so he furtively subcontracts his work to Bailiffs B, C & D. Now cunningly, Bailiffs B, C & D also get work sent to them from Bailiff E, (we haven’t met him yet, but he works for Company Y & Company Z). Overloaded with work, Bailiffs B, C & D forward their work on to Bailiffs F, G, H & I. Confused? Let me make it clearer.


If the work gets done and money is collected, should we be worried?


Yes we should be worried!


Who is controlling bailiffs F, G, H and I? The fact is that F, G, H and I are not actually bailiffs at all. It’s highly possible that neither are B, C & D! They are just collectors – uncertificated, unbonded, untrained, unreferenced and a totally uncontrolled disaster waiting to happen.


Of course we should be very worried!

The Solution


The immediate answer that springs to mind is to only use employed bailiffs. Well that does not and will not stop ‘pyramid bailiffing.’ There is a whole new breed out there that believes they can short cut the complex tender and vetting processes by setting themselves up as mini bailiff companies on the back of reputable firms. These people will go to any lengths to get work whether that means becoming an employee of a reputable firm or not.


Good audit procedures and the monitoring of personnel will help to ensure standards and professionalism within the industry is maintained, however, the only true solution is a ‘National Register of Bailiffs’. Such a register could be controlled by a professional body such as the Enforcement Services Association which would require every individual bailiff to be registered by the Company they work for or provide services to. The register must be accessible by the general public, making it easy to verify and check who is doing the Local Authority’s work and collecting from those debtors. Such a register would also ensure that the Local Authority and the Bailiff Company could check the credentials and tenability of all bailiffs collecting on their behalf.


We have to stop this growth in pyramid bailiffing before the pyramid undermines the whole process, leaving reputable firms and Local Authorities to pick up the pieces and ultimately destroying the profession altogether.


Do you know who your bailiffs are?


Julie Green-Jones

Managing Director Rossendales Ltd

How ironic that the M.D of Rossendales should be talking about standards and professionalism and being concerned about events that bring the industry into disrepute.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have made many Freedom of Information requests to local authorities for copies of Contracts with bailiffs and it is astonishing to see how many councils are demanding a "kick back" from the bailiff companies of a percentage of bailiff fees.


In effect this means that councils are making a PROFIT from enforcement. It is WRONG but with bailiff companies desperate for Contracts they will agree to anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If only people would NOT let the Bailiff's into their property in the first place then the entire system would crash (at least for Council Tax).


Now I'm not advocating that people AVOID paying what they are due but tax collection should be dealt with properly and attempting to collect it by brute force and sheer thuggery isn't appropriate in the 21st century.


In any case I actually wonder if Bailiff use actually reduces significantly Council Tax arrears any more than if other more suitable legal channels were used such as attachment of earnings, suspension of part of benefits etc etc.


In any case if the Bailiff CAN'T collect the matter MUST come back to the council whatever some of the front desk phone operators tell you "we can't do anything about this - you must speak to the Bailiff -- sheer LIES and POPPYCOCK.




Link to post
Share on other sites

I have made many Freedom of Information requests to local authorities for copies of Contracts with bailiffs and it is astonishing to see how many councils are demanding a "kick back" from the bailiff companies of a percentage of bailiff fees.


In effect this means that councils are making a PROFIT from enforcement. It is WRONG but with bailiff companies desperate for Contracts they will agree to anything.


I find this totally unacceptable and think it puts the debtor at a disadvantage when trying get unlawful fees removed from there account

no wonder councils always side with the bailiff company if they are getting a % of these fees

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...