Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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 they! 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
    • There is no evidence that I was issued a PCN that was placed on the car and removed. It seems that I was issued a £60 PCN on the 8th of March (the parking date) but it was never placed on my car, instead,  they allege that they posted the PCN on the 13th of March and deemed delivered on the 15th. I never got this 1st £60 PCN demand. I only know about all of this through the SAR. I only received the second PCN demanding £100, which was deemed delivered on 16/04/2024 - that is 39 days after the parking incident.  I did a little research and "Legislation states that postal PCNs must be sent within 28 days, unless otherwise stated in the Regulations." as per London Councils Code of Practice on Civil Parking Enforcement.  The main issue is that I was not aware of the 1st £60 PCN as I didn't receive it - I'm not sure how this relates to the 28-day rule because that rule applies to the initial £60 PCN. PCM could say that "we sent him the letter by post and it was deemed delivered on the 15th of March" therefore the 28-day rule does not apply.  As regards the safety of the parking attendant, that is clearly something he chose to feel and he made the decision that his safety was threatened - I didn't even see him or had any interaction with him. I'm nearly 50 and I definitely don't look aggressive 😊  
    • okay will do. I'll let you know if anything transpires but once again - many thanks
    • Personally I would strongly suggest not risking going there with debts. Very possible you wont get back out again. And I know many in that position. Not jailed just unable to leave. the stories of Interpol in other countries sounds far fetched but in and out of Dubai is not a good idea. only two weeks ago a mate got stopped albeit a govt debt.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Marstons fees for council PCN - not a decrimalised area


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4788 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

Adam Gretton Market town leaders in south Norfolk called for a lowering of car parking charges after it emerged that the district council made more than £140,000 profit in fees and fines.

 

 

 

 

 

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

 

 

Market town leaders in south Norfolk called for a lowering of car parking charges after it emerged that the district council made more than £140,000 profit in fees and fines.

A controversial new pay and display system was introduced at 13 off-street car parks in Wymondham, Diss, and Loddon two years ago.

Business and town leaders yesterday called on South Norfolk Council to change its fees and extend its free parking time limit from one hour to two.

The plea comes after figures obtained by the EDP under a Freedom of Information request shows that the local authority received more than £240,000 in charges and fines over the last year and only spent £99,000 on car park maintenance and resurfacing.

South Norfolk Council leaders said the authority's car parking system was not profiteering and aimed to pay for car park improvements.

Diss mayor Jane Trippett-Jones said the surplus made on parking in the town should be re-invested to help local residents. She added that long-stay car parking in Bury St Edmunds was cheaper than Diss.

“I am unhappy with the car parking situation in Diss. In my opinion the free hour does not encourage people to stay and spend their money in the town and people are in a hurry to get back to their car. There is a balance to be made and two hours free parking would be much better,” she said.

The £140,000 excess between April 2009 and April 2010 compares to an £88,000 surplus in 2008/09 where £169,000 was invested in car park improvements, according to South Norfolk Council.

Dan Gavrovski , of the Wymondham Business Group, said the figures showed that South Norfolk's parking charges were “not realistic.” He added that a recent request to make the first two hours of parking free had been declined by the council.

“It has killed the town. If you have to pay 50p an hour you might as well go to Norwich because the fees are similar. If you go to a car park where the first hour is free, you are literally clock watching and if you want to go for a meal or hair cut it is simply not viable. It used to be thriving here, but shoppers are trying to get out of town as quickly as possible,” he said.

John Fuller, leader of South Norfolk Council, said the introduction of parking charges had helped shopkeepers by discouraging drivers from blocking spaces all day.

“We spent a substantial sum of money upgrading the car parks two years ago to address a £2m maintenance backlog to bring them up to standard. We addressed that when the economic situation was better and it does need to be paid back. Unlike some of the councils in London who make millions in surplus, our car park charges are meant to break even,” he said.

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The Council manages 30 car parks in the district and operates a variable charging system, further information and clarification, including locations, is also available to download here - Where to Park in North Norfolk 2010 (pdf, 604Kb) or the leaflet can be picked up from the Council Offices or local Tourist Information Centres. Regular uses may like to consider a Season Ticket - further details are given below. Please note: The car parks at Horning, Beach Road, Sea Palling and Coast Road, Bacton are no longer part of NNDC's remit.

Car Parking Charges

These car parking charges come into effect 1 April 2010.

Parking charges apply daily between 8am and 6pm.

Daily charges are as follows:

 

  • Standard Car Parks - £1 per hour for first two hours, there after 70p per hour, 8am to 6pm.
  • Mini-Stay (at some Coastal Short-Stay Car Parks and Standard Car Parks) - 10p for 20 minutes maximum.
  • Coastal Long-Stay Car Parks - £1.10 per hour, maximum £5 charge - tickets are transferable between long-stay car parks.
  • Coastal Short-Stay Car Parks - £1 per hour, maximum stay 3 hours.

Please see below for Season Ticket charges.

Please note:

Disabled Blue Badge holders are not exempt from charges.

More information about Blue Badges is available via Norfolk County Council.

 

But as these are obviously decriminalised parking enforcement they are fundamentally civil in their jurisprudence, ie legal standing, it follows therefore that

 

75 compensation

15 Victim service

65 costs

175 fine. total 330...........

 

is wrong and SHOULD be challenged

 

Complaint to Council CEO, Council Leader Parking Manager, councillor and MP marked Formal Complaint would be a reasonable course of action.

 

You need to determine where Marstons have managed to add "CRIMINAL" penalties to a CIVIL PCN.

 

there is NO means for a council to add a "Victims Surcharge" to a civil penalty imho.

 

Others will know more

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

Hi Dougal,

 

Thanks again as always for your help.........

 

Checked onthe web site and posted the above. those are/were the charges as of April last year.....

 

I will today write to the council asking for a copy of the ticket.......and will phone them and ask when they changed........ as I said it is not a town I vist regularly.... hence not checkign the sign!!!!!!! my mistake......

 

I will also take a letter into the bank today, although my concern obvioosuly is the Marstons return and add yet a further £200 to this......

 

Despite some alluding to the ticket being for somethign else.... it is not.... hard though it may be to understand and grasp............. it was for parking in a South Norfolk Car Park......... I have already psoted the details of the car park!!!!

 

The Chargin Info was given to me by the Magistrates Court.......how they work the charges out I do not know..... but that is what happened...on phone to council now.....

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right just spoke ot a nice lady at parking services...... and all council car pakrs are patrolled by council employees....and not the POLICE.......

 

 

They changed policy in August 2008........ so my fault for not actually checking the mahooooosive large parking sign.......but it is not some wher eI go regularly......

 

she could not expalin the fine........... have to go to the court for that....... now going to pohne them

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The break down of the fine information is what was given to me by the court.................I did say this....

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right just spoke ot a nice lady at parking services...... and all council car pakrs are patrolled by council employees....and not the POLICE.......

 

 

They changed policy in August 2008........ so my fault for not actually checking the mahooooosive large parking sign.......but it is not some wher eI go regularly......

 

she could not expalin the fine........... have to go to the court for that....... now going to pohne them

 

So you have contacted the WRONG court possibly, as this would never have been dealt with by magistrates.

 

at the least the council should call off Marstons whilst this is sorted, however I'm not holding my breath as to whether they will.

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

No I did not ocntact the wrong court.....lol. I contactacted the right one.......... it was the lady there on Monday who told me the breakdown the £75 comp this £15 victim service charge costs of 65 and a fine fee of 175,,,,,,

 

I did email them on Friday asking for detailes but thus far nothing!!!! am I surprised NO. its Norfolk County Council......

 

I am getting the impression you seem to think they have treated this as a criminal offence? am I right?

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I knew how to post the letter from Marstons I would... the wording is very clear........

 

We are in possession of a Magistrates Court Order as a consequence of non payment of the above amount.... above the figuer is has Offence Excess Parking.........

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

H Jacui,

 

This is getting better.

 

Firstly it is therefore NOT an offence. It is a Civil Matter. The Court cannot n my humble opinion add Victim and Compensation fees - why not? you ask.

 

It is very straightforward:

 

1.There has been no 'Victim' or if the Council believe there has, request that they explain who is the Victim and how they believe that to be the case. It is up to them to prove there was, not for you to prove there was not!

 

2.No-one is entitled to compensation or if the Council believe there is someone entitled, request that they explain who it is and how they believe that to be the case. It is up to them to prove there wis, not for you to prove there iss not!

 

I really do think you should get some legal advice under the free legal aid scheme....but do it NOW

 

Looking forward to hearing what the Council say...and seeing what 'evidence' they produce. I am also minded to suggest initiating a small claim for a fixed amount. Please PM me and I will explain further.

 

Best wishes to all

 

Dougal

Link to post
Share on other sites

H Jacui,

 

This is getting better.

 

Firstly it is therefore NOT an offence. It is a Civil Matter. The Court cannot n my humble opinion add Victim and Compensation fees - why not? you ask.

 

It is very straightforward:

 

1.There has been no 'Victim' or if the Council believe there has, request that they explain who is the Victim and how they believe that to be the case. It is up to them to prove there was, not for you to prove there was not!

 

2.No-one is entitled to compensation or if the Council believe there is someone entitled, request that they explain who it is and how they believe that to be the case. It is up to them to prove there wis, not for you to prove there iss not!

 

I really do think you should get some legal advice under the free legal aid scheme....but do it NOW

 

Looking forward to hearing what the Council say...and seeing what 'evidence' they produce. I am also minded to suggest initiating a small claim for a fixed amount. Please PM me and I will explain further.

 

Best wishes to all

 

Dougal

 

 

I can only agree with Dougal16T, as a Council has no power to add a Victims surcharge to a CIVIL parking penalty, in fact it would be illegal to do so.Just as it is dubious for a Private Parking Company to put a huge penalty where there is a consequential loss of pennies or nothing for overstaying in a supermarket car park.

They are ultra vires (acting beyond and outside) their authority. Perhaps a FOI request as to how much they have spent on Common Purpose training is in order LOL.

 

There is also the question of Marstons fees, ie how much are they actually allowed to charge, and how much is pure fabrication?

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

I have followed this thread but not admittedly that closely as these things are not quite my forte. However I have to say I am puzzled by events.

 

Was the "offence" committed prior to the Council decriminalising parking offences or after. If before then yes the Magistrates Court route would be true. If after then it would go through the TEC at Northampton instead, if Magistrates are still involved then it has to be for another offence such as failing to disclose the drivers details or similar. Something here does not sound correct and until the original offence is tracked down there is not much anyone can do or help with.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have followed this thread but not admittedly that closely as these things are not quite my forte. However I have to say I am puzzled by events.

 

Was the "offence" committed prior to the Council decriminalising parking offences or after. If before then yes the Magistrates Court route would be true. If after then it would go through the TEC at Northampton instead, if Magistrates are still involved then it has to be for another offence such as failing to disclose the drivers details or similar. Something here does not sound correct and until the original offence is tracked down there is not much anyone can do or help with.

 

PT

 

Agreed PT, there is a confusion here, and until we are sure which jurisdiction is involved the best way forward for jaqui_o will not be clear.

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

Tec could not helpthey need a penalty charge number which I do not have. am on to borough dustnow trying .....

 

right this is it so far It is a privately owned car park by Gt Yarmouth borough council......... and they set they're own fees...........

 

They gave me the ticket no............ this is of no use to TEC as the number they need has 2 letters in front of it.........

 

Sp[oke ot the courts. and according to them. they set fees with Marstons. and Marstons can charge £200 for calling to levy..........

 

this £15 victim service charge is levied against anything that goes through the magistrates court!

 

 

all the court would say was that is was a distress warrant........the details fron Gt Yarmouth Mag court were not passed over.......

 

I am even more confused that when I started........

 

Man At Norwich Mag court said they agreed fees with Marstons and that the £200 for calling to levy would be accurate then.!!!!!

 

ok so do I just pay it and bit the bullet....

 

warning to all............ gt yarmouth borough just told meathat all council are changing the blue badge free parking. even with that. you will now have ot pay...... so please please check....

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not pay this if anything i would file a statutory declaration with the court saying you have no knowledge of a magistrate court fine http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?165753-MAGISTRATE-COURT-FINES.-Template-of-a-Statutory-Declaration.

 

 

They gave me the ticket no............ this is of no use to TEC as the number they need has 2 letters in front of it.........

 

i think this is correct i am sure i read a post by tomtubby saying it has 2 letters and 8 numbers

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh yeah and as if that is not enough..... court have told me they will nto cancel the war until Marstons pay them. Now they got this money last week ( except they're 200) and as yet have stillnto passed it over tothe courts.......

 

apparently the war will ntobe cancelled till they do..... andget this. for example it took them a year to send it. this war woudl still belive. despite it being paid and me having the receipt.!!!!!!!!!!

 

surely that is not right??????

 

what is the best way forward???? adn how long can Marstons hold up passing the money before I can do something?

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

letter to MP PDQ also, as this is a right cock-up, and may well be the status quo in the area for all we know, as not everyone who is fined will know about CAG

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

Hi Jacqui,

 

This is still not right...will someone please tell me EXACTLY where it says that the Magistrates Court will levy a Victim Surcharge (on their own initiative) on ALL cases, and what part of our legislation this is derived from??

 

Kind regards to all

 

Dougal

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Afternoon all

 

BUT see the attached:

 

There was widespread support for the proposal to raise money for more and

better services for victims and witnesses by adding a surcharge to criminal

convictions and penalty notices for disorder. But there was opposition to levying

the surcharge on fixed penalty notices for road traffic offences as well: this was

seen as further penalising motorists. The Government accordingly made provision

in the 2004 Act to require courts to impose a surcharge on convictions (section 14)

and power to impose a surcharge on penalty notices for disorderly behaviour

(section 15). The power to impose a surcharge in relation to fixed penalty notices

for road traffic offences would only apply where the offences were ‘persistent and serious’ (section 16 of the 2004 Act).

 

Jacqui you need to make a statutory declaration to get Marstons stopped in their tracks. No matter what do not pay anything else to anyone!

 

Best wishes to all

 

Dougal

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as i can see this was started in 2007 and all magistrate court fines are subject to this

 

there was some talk in 2010 about applying it to parking tickets but cant find out if this was implemented

having said that most local authority parking are now civil so cant see how it would/could be charged

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8437440.stm

 

100/% agree with the statutory declaration we are all assuming that its a local authority parking tickets and it could be something else also it may not even be the OPs fine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for all this help...... but according to the council. they are a borough council and notthe county council and their tickes are called excess fines adn not parking tickets. as they are operating as a private company..... ( council said this)

 

How and wehre od I get the staturory decloration? and was wondering if it might be worht starting a small claim again Marstons fornot passing onthe fine payment. there surely has ot be a time limit..........on how logn they can hold the moeny without passingit over.....

 

Yes I am going ot contact my MP immediately.....

 

The first I was aware of this was in June last year. 1st letter actually received. hponed and set up the payment via card........ and then after new year forgot about it......got new purse chaged things over but obviously not the card. hence why Marstons have got it.......

 

I am also goign to make a comp to the OFT that a week after collecting the fine and fee they have still ntopassed it to the council........

 

WILLSAY AGAIN IT IS NTO ALOCAL AUTHORITY ONE. I RHOUGHT IT WAS........THE BOROUGH COUNCIL HAVE CONFIRMED THEY ARE A PRIVATE ORGANISATION AND ALL MONIES RAISED BY THEM THIS WAY STAYS IN THE BOROUGH AND GOES NO WHERE ELSE...THEY SET THEIR OWN FEES

 

So I apologise for the orgiinal confusion........

 

The magistrates court in Gt Yarmouth did not auto transfer everything over to Norwich...... Nor have only the basic of details....

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the parking scheme is compliant with the correct legislation then, in terms of signage, and how it is operated.

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

H Jacqui and all,

 

This is getting sillier by the minute. (No offence - pardon the pun) The council are saying that they are a Borough Council and not the County Council, so what difference does this make? Answer= none.

 

They can call their tickets 'raffle tickets' if it makes them feel better they are however Penalty Charge Notices which state that a penalty has been imposed by the Borough Council for a breach of the regulations made by the Borough Council under delegated powers from Central Government via the County Council. They are not a 'private organisation', and never could be as they are funded by the Ta payer via Council Tax and also receive funds from Central Government, again via the County Council.

 

 

THIS NEEDS IMMEDIATE ATTENTION: (PLEASE....)

 

Template of a Statutory Declaration. with thanks to tomtubby.....

Only 3 companies can enforce these fines; Marston Group, Philips and Swift (Wales).

 

The problem that is occuring very often is that many of these FINES have been issued in somebody's absence long after that person has moved home and the first time that they know of the offence was when they have received a visit from a bailiff.

 

In the main these FINES are commonly for the following:

 

Using a TV without a Licence.

 

Driving without valid insurance

 

Driving without valid Road Fund Licence.

 

Failure to provide driver details

 

Driving whilst using a mobile phone.

 

......................... ......

 

If you were unaware of the fine being issued or correspondence had gone to a previous address, then the ONLY way to get this debt away from the bailiff and returned to the court is by way of a Statutory Declaration.

 

This will need to be sworn in front of a solicitor and this should cost just £5. The Statutory Declaration must then be either faxed to the Magistrates Court where the fine originated from or taken there in person.

 

The bailiff MUST then withdraw all enforcement.

 

The following is a template Statutory Declaration.

 

 

I:

Ms Smith of: 1, The Street, Anytown, Anywhere. Post Code.

 

DO SOLEMNLY AND SINCERELY DECLARE THAT:

 

I had no prior knowledge of any correspondence from xxxx Magistrates Court following an offence on (enter date) for (enter offence ie; exceeding the speed limit). From information provided to me today by the Magistrates Court I am informed that a hearing for this matter was held in my absence where I was fined (enter amount) with costs of (enter amount) and that (ie; my licence was endorsed with three points).The reference number for this case is: (enter case number)

 

AND THAT:

 

Notification of this fine first came to my attention on (enter date) when a bailiff from Martson Group Ltd came to my home and gave a letter to my mother. This letter stated that he was in possession of a distress Warrant dated (enter date) and that he required a sum of (enter amount) within 3 days failing which he would return with a locksmith.

 

I would like to advise the Court that I am suffering from (enter health problems if any). In addition, I am receiving medication for ie; (severe depression etc) and have been under the care of a counsellor.

 

My financial position is that I am in arrears with my mortgage and I am in discussions with my electricity and gas provider as I am currently facing disconnection. I also have arrears with credit cards and loans.

 

I genuinely do not remember receiving documentation concerning this fine.

 

I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835.

 

DECLARED AT:

 

SIGNED:

 

DATE:

 

Before me:

 

 

Solicitor/Commissioner for Oaths:

 

This should stop Marstons and may bring the Council to its senses!

 

Best wishes to all

 

Dougal

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...