Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I found that the parkin attended has a car with CCTV camera on it, however as I stated earlier, it seems that he did not take video of my car otherwise they would have stated so in the SAR. parking car .pdf
    • The rules state that "approved devices may only be used in limited circumstances"  I was not a threat. I was not present. I did not drive away. I think he has not fulfilled the necessary requirements justifying issuing me a PCN by post therefore the PCN was issued incorrectly and not valid.  What are your thoughts?  
    • I have also found this:  D.2 Service of a PCN by post: 54) There are some circumstances in which a PCN (under Regulation 10) may be served by post: 1) where the contravention has been detected on the basis of evidence from an approved device (approved devices may only be used in limited circumstances) 2) if the CEO has been prevented, for example by force, threats of force, obstruction or violence, from serving the PCN either by affixing it to the vehicle or by giving it to the person who appears to be in charge of that vehicle 3) if the CEO had started to issue the PCN but did not have enough time to finish or serve it before the vehicle was driven away and would otherwise have to write off or cancel the PCN 55) In any of these circumstances a PCN is served by post to the owner and also acts as the NtO. The Secretary of State recommends that postal PCNs should be sent within 14 days of the contravention. Legislation states that postal PCNs must be sent within 28 days, unless otherwise stated in the Regulations. This from London Councils Code of Practice on Civil Parking Enforcement.  The question is what is an approved device? Certainly, he had the opportunity to place the ticket on my car and I didn't drive away.  I looked further and it seems that an approved device is a CCTV camera - It seems that the photos taken were not actual film but images and it is not clear if they are taken from a video or are stills. I'm guessing if it was moving images then the SAR would have stated this.    From the Borough of Hounslow website: "There are two types of PCN issued under the Traffic Management Act 2004, which governs parking contraventions. The first is served on-street by a Civil Enforcement Officer, who will observe a vehicle and collect evidence before serving the PCN either by placing it in a plastic wallet under the windscreen wiper, or by handing it to the driver. The second is a PCN served by post, based on CCTV footage taken by an approved device, which has been reviewed by a trained CCTV Operator."   From Legislation.gov.uk regarding approved devices: Approved Devices 4.  A device is an approved device for the purposes of these Regulations if it is of a type which has been certified by the Secretary of State as one which meets requirements specified in Schedule 1. SCHEDULE 1Specified requirements for approved devices 1.  The device must include a camera which is— (a)securely mounted on a vehicle, a building, a post or other structure, (b)mounted in such a position that vehicles in relation to which relevant road traffic contraventions are being committed can be surveyed by it, (c)connected by secure data links to a recording system, and (d)capable of producing in one or more pictures, a legible image or images of the vehicle in relation to which a relevant road traffic contravention was committed which show its registration mark and enough of its location to show the circumstances of the contravention. 2.  The device must include a recording system in which— (a)recordings are made automatically of the output from the camera or cameras surveying the vehicle and the place where a contravention is occurring, (b)there is used a secure and reliable recording method that records at a minimum rate of 5 frames per second, (c)each frame of all captured images is timed (in hours, minutes and seconds), dated and sequentially numbered automatically by means of a visual counter, and (d)where the device does not occupy a fixed location, it records the location from which it is being operated. 3.  The device and visual counter must— (a)be synchronised with a suitably independent national standard clock; and (b)be accurate within plus or minus 10 seconds over a 14-day period and re-synchronised to the suitably independent national standard clock at least once during that period. 4.  Where the device includes a facility to print a still image, that image when printed must be endorsed with the time and date when the frame was captured and its unique number. 5.  Where the device can record spoken words or other audio data simultaneously with visual images, the device must include a means of verifying that, in any recording produced by it, the sound track is correctly synchronised with the visual image.
    • Hearing took place today.  Case dismissed with costs awarded. Neither UKPC or a representative turned up.  Apparently they messaged the court on 7 May asking for their case to be considered on paper.  Never informed me, which was criticised by the judge as not following procedure.  I was really annoyed as I would have preferred for the case to be thrown out before the hearing, or at least face them in court and see them squeal.   They are just playing a numbers game and hope you blink 1st!   Ended up having to change my flight, but  the costs awarded softens the blow. Was asked to confirm it was my signature on both the witness statement and supplementary statement.  Wasn't asked to read them, said she could see my arguments made and the signs were insufficient and no contract formed. Took maybe 10 mins in total.  Judge did most of the talking and was best for me just to keep quiet or confirm any statements made. Happy to have won as a matter of principle and have costs awarded. Maybe not worth all the time and hassle for any newbies or the technologically challenged.  But if you are stubborn like me and willing to put in the time and effort, you can beat these vultures! I big shout out to everyone who helped on the thread with their advice and guidance, special mention to FTMDave, thank you sir!  Really appreciate everyone's efforts. All the best!
    • I plan to be honest to avoid any further trouble, tell them that the name should be changed to my official name
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • 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
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4720 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

cant use the LO - so he's stuffed!

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

If that's true that's good news as I keep worrying he is gonna take my car as it's vital to my family wellbeing they don't take it

 

 

if he does then there will be templates here to complain to the correct authority, the way these bailiffs act ultra vires, it seems they have all had Common Purpose training.

 

He would be extremely foolish to use the defunct LO to levy for his fees alone imho

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

It's started again after a few months not hearing from them. My lawyer could not help each letter she sent they sent one back saying are fees are with the law and that the 110 pound fee was for attendance now and not a van. He has been around twice now in a week first letter 48 hour notice to remove goods even if we are not in. And today 24 hour notice to remove even if we are not in. It's upset my wife so much she packed a bag and took our kids to her mums as he keeps trying to get in and she is scared as he comes when I'm not in. Not sure what to do council say I'm paid nothing to do with them. Lawyer can't seem to help. Any ideas

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone as he is coming tomorrow and I am trying to work out the best course of action as I feel his fees are way over the top and he doesnt and says tough how do I get them to take me to court over this which they wont do, oh and i dont have 218 anyhow as im on job seekers

Link to post
Share on other sites

all threats

he cannot use the LO to take his unlawful fees.

 

he wont show.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

His fees are wrong anyway. !st & 2nd Visit may well be correct total £42-50, his levy fee of £41 is also correct according to my calculations meaning you would owe only £83-50, he cannot charge an attendance fee at the same time as his levy is made + his Header H fee is out of order as no goods had ever been removed. In the meantime did you ever get an acknowledgment from the Council that all was paid and the LO settled in full, if so dangle it in front of him and utter those wonderful Anglo Saxon words to him and ask him to take you to the Small Claims Court for his fees.

 

The Council may well have said they want nothing to do with all of this but it is them that employed the Bailiff in the first place. They should also have spotted his fees were wrong which just goes to show how much they do not know. A further complaint should be made about the conduct of the Council officials who have quoted incorrectly what the bailiff is trying to charge + the ongoing conduct of their contractors.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

His fees are wrong anyway. !st & 2nd Visit may well be correct total £42-50, his levy fee of £41 is also correct according to my calculations meaning you would owe only £83-50, he cannot charge an attendance fee at the same time as his levy is made + his Header H fee is out of order as no goods had ever been removed. In the meantime did you ever get an acknowledgment from the Council that all was paid and the LO settled in full, if so dangle it in front of him and utter those wonderful Anglo Saxon words to him and ask him to take you to the Small Claims Court for his fees.

 

The Council may well have said they want nothing to do with all of this but it is them that employed the Bailiff in the first place. They should also have spotted his fees were wrong which just goes to show how much they do not know. A further complaint should be made about the conduct of the Council officials who have quoted incorrectly what the bailiff is trying to charge + the ongoing conduct of their contractors.

 

PT

 

I only got a receipt from the council showing balance nil no LO as they are useless. They are still saying it's out of there hands I have paid them. I just don't want him taking the car with the baby seats in it

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 hour letter what a crock he never turns up when he says he is going to. Last week it was 48 hours and we are taking your stuff now its 24 hours and we are taking your stuff but he didnt show he does tend to come a day or 2 later then what he says.

 

Question can he break into my house while im out if no one is in, he has never been in my house before

Link to post
Share on other sites

NO HE CANNOT

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 hour letter what a crock he never turns up when he says he is going to. Last week it was 48 hours and we are taking your stuff now its 24 hours and we are taking your stuff but he didnt show he does tend to come a day or 2 later then what he says. - Buy him a new watch & calendar when you get paid.

 

Question can he break into my house while im out if no one is in, he has never been in my house before

 

To be able to force entry to your home he needs the following:

1 - he must have gained previous peaceful entry and made a valid levy on goods, and

2 - next time he calls you must have denied him entry following a default on a payment due, and

3 - he must get the approval of the Council to apply for a forced entry, and if they agree

4 - he must apply to the Magistrates Court for an Order allowing him to force entry - very rarely given, and if they agree

5 - he must write to you giving you a date and time of when he is coming, and

6 - if you are then not in he may make a forced entry

So you are a long, long way from this happening - not that it will, and as you have paid up to date minus his fees then no application to force entry will succeed.

 

Any hassles with the Bailiff do no disappear overnight and it does take a long time to resolve. As said previously the Council cannot wash their hands of this and if they insist they can do nothing then they leave themselves wide open. As you no longer reside within the same authority then you must complain at the highest level ie the CEO. It would do no harm to also inform the Leader of the Council and his opposite number of what is going on also. As for the Bailiff themselves you must also challenge the fees they are trying to claim. As you paid after the levy was made you may indeed be liable for some fees but definitely not what they are claiming.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...