Philips bailiffs for late car tax

[Jabloom]

I've just received a letter from Philips bailiffs today saying I owe £80 for late taxing of my car. (I don't own the car anymore).

This is correct, my fault I had a baby when it was due and forgot to tax the car.

When I realised it, taxed it straight away.

I was sent a letter from dvla saying I had to pay a late tax charge.

I didn't pay it, I'm on maternity and didn't have the money.

I did the wrong thing and ignored it.

I can't afford to pay £80 in one go so I will need to pay in instalments,

do I just contact them and ask to set up a plan?

They say if I don't contact them I can end up with a ccj. or do I try and contact the dvla?

Just want a bit of advice of what to do, as I know bailiffs lie all the time and I just want to pay it and get it sorted.

Thanks

[Conniff]

If you have bailiffs at the door there must already be a CCJ, the DVLA can't send in bailiffs so it must be debt collectors.

[Jabloom]

No they haven't come to the door yet. I just received a first letter today in the post. It says on the letter, if I don't pay this could result in a ccj.

 

The letter says Philips bailiffs and debt collectors

[Conniff]

Because the company has bailiffs as well, they are trying to frighten you into paying.

 

Write to them by recorded letter and 'tell' them you can only afford xx and no more and if they wont accept that then they will have to take you to court. The court will give you time to pay and the payments will be a lot lower so they wont want to go that route.

 

You could go direct to the DVLA but they are so slow at things that you would have to tell the dca that you dispute the amount and are contacting the DVLA direct.

[ims21]

Two threads merged and tidied....please just keep to this one thread for this issue

[Jabloom]

even though they are threatening in their letter I could get a ccj, that won't happen, just scare tactics?

I'll write to them making an offer of what I can afford.

The amount they are asking is what the dvla asked for originally unless I paid within 14 days and they would have reduced it to £40.00.

I didn't have a spare forty pound at the time and just ignored it.

at the moment no additional charges to which I can be thankful.

Sorry about the two threads I posted it in the wrong place.

[renegadeimp]

You cant get a CCJ just because they say so. Infact, threatening one like that is a breach of their licence. Theres a lengthy court and legal process they would need to go through to obtain one with multiple opportunities along the way to tell the judge your side of the issue.

 

Then theres the issue of the DCA ( because thats what they actually are) mispresenting themselves and their authority. I would make full complaints and treat them just like any other DCA. You paid the tax and have a good defence. They know this and are simply trying, as another poster said, to threaten/scare you into paying it.

[Raykay]

The DCA may be misrepresenting themselves, but what the DVLA are claiming is the Late Licensing Penalty, which the OP was liable for.

It was not paid so DVLA have passed it to the DCA.

[renegadeimp]

Yes, i know, but im talking about the DCA's threats. Remember, there is no legal obligation for anyone to deal with a DCA unless the DCA holds the debt. Especially if the DCA demands you pay them and not the original creditor.

 

The issue of the LLP can be discussed and contested directly with the muppets... sorry i mean the dvla. The DCA can go play in a corner and stamp their feet.

[sgtbush]

any fines for car tax, comes thru mercia magistrates courts and is under warrant of distress, it is a criminal offence not to tax your car, they are acting as appointed bailiffs enforcing a warrant of distress, not debt collectors

 

Home / Offence Guides / No Road Tax

Guide to No Road Tax

 

The Offence

 

It is an offence to drive a vehicle or allow someone to drive a vehicle on a road without road tax or without displaying a valid tax disc. If you drive a vehicle declared SORN (Statutory Off-Road Notification) or having paid the wrong tax amount you will also be guilty of an offence.

Do I need an NIP (Notice of Intended Prosecution) for No Road Tax?

 

No, there is no requirement for an NIP for not having Road Tax.

Punishment

 

Driving Without Road Tax:

Fine up to £1,000 or 5 times the annual road tax fee, whichever is the greater amount. You may also be liable to pay back duty.

Causing or Permitting Someone to Drive Without Road Tax:

Fine to a maximum of £1,000 unless the vehicle can carry more than 8 passengers, when the fine rises to a maximum of £2,500.

Failure to Display Road Tax:

Fine up to £200.

Using a Vehicle When Declared SORN:

Fine up to £2,500

Using a Vehicle when Liable to Pay Road Tax at a Higher Rate:

Fine up to £1,000 or 5 times the difference between the tax rates calculated at the annual rate. You may also be liable to pay back duty.

 

 

 

Your vehicle doesn’t need to be seen on the road for an offence to have been committed. The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) carries out a check of its records each month to identify untaxed vehicles. DVLA has the authority to carry out enforcement action against you using the information held on its records.

As well as this, DVLA works in partnership with the police and local authorities in operating wheelclamping schemes. Using Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) they identify, clamp and tow away untaxed vehicles.

Members of the public can also report an untaxed vehicle online or by calling the national untaxed vehicles telephone hotline.

 

• Reporting an untaxed vehicle
  

What will happen if you don't make a SORN

 

If you don’t make a SORN or tax your vehicle you could be stopped by the police.

You’ll get an automatic penalty of £80, as well as paying for a new tax disc.

You could also get a County Court Judgment against you, and be fined a minimum of £1,000.

The maximum penalty for making a false SORN, when the vehicle is actually used or kept on a public road, is £5,000 and imprisonment.

Your vehicle could be clamped by one of DVLA's wheelclamping partners. You’ll need to pay to have your vehicle released as well as producing a valid tax disc or a surety fee if no disc is available. If you fail to pay, your vehicle will be impounded, incurring storage charges. If you don’t pay the release or storage fees, your vehicle could be crushed or sold.

[Raykay]

any fines for car tax, comes thru mercia magistrates courts and is under warrant of distress, it is a criminal offence not to tax your car, they are acting as appointed bailiffs enforcing a warrant of distress, not debt collectors /QUOTE]

 

The Late Licensing Penalty is treated as a debt due to the crown - s.7A (3) © Vehicles Excise & Registration Act 1994, and is dealt with in County Court, which is why Philips are acting as debt collectors and not bailiffs in the OP's case.

[renegadeimp]

Yep. If they were acting as full on bailiffs, they would have been all over them by now, adding on levy fees etc.

[sgtbush]

fine ok, i only work for west mercia magistrates courts, if u think your correct them please continue

Plus the OP has not said there has been a visit made, only a letter

PLEASE READ THE INFO BELOW, HIGHLIGHTED FOR YOU IS THE SECTION YOUR INTERESTED IN

its in great big purple letters and underlined

Bailiffs get involved with Magistrates’ Court fines when you have received a fine (usually for offences such as speeding, driving without road tax or insurance, not having a TV Licence and other criminal acts), and have failed to keep up payments on the fine.

If it remains unpaid, a ‘Distress Warrant’ may be issued which is then passed to one of four bailiff companies for enforcement. The companies are Swift, Marstons, Excel and Philips (see Clamping Orders below). The contracts with these companies state that all bailiffs executing Distress Warrants must be certificated. 

To check if a bailiff is certificated you can check here .

If the bailiff does not appear there, you should phone the Ministry of Justice on 020 3334 6355.

They will be able to tell you which court issued the original certificate and you can then call that court and check the details further.

However, please note that there may be administrative delays and if a search reveals that a bailiff is not listed as certificated then you should inform the bailiff that a search of the HMCS on-line Certificated Bailiff's Register does not include him.

You should then request a copy of his certificate, or have him confirm which Court granted his certificate and when. 

It is a criminal offence for a bailiff to collect a debt or to attempt to collect the above mentioned debts while in possession of an expired certificate or when they have never been in possession of one. It is known as “illegal distress” and the bailiff should be reported.

Magistrates’ Court fines must be treated as a priority debt. This is because you could be sent to prison if you default on repayments. 

Many Magistrates’ Courts also use the services of Private Bailiffs.

 Fees

Administration Fee £85.00 

Attendance Fee £215.00 (a one off fee) 

Other fees vary between the four companies, but they will include:

Clamping Fees (up to three of these)

Clamp Removal Fee

Removal to pound fee

Auction fee

Debit / Credit card fee

Dishonoured payment fee

Unauthorised removal of clamp fee

 

What If I Cannot Pay What the Bailiff is Demanding?

 Although this is covered below, it is worth mentioning here to avoid panic! In a Magistrates’ Court, there is no simple form for Stay of Execution or Variation of Terms of Agreement as there is in the civil courts. However, if a bailiff if visiting you (Stage 4 below) and demanding more than you can afford, you can, and should write to the Court, or even attend in person and ask for a Means Enquiry Hearing. It is entirely up to the court whether or not you are granted a hearing. You may need to ask several times, and there is still no guarantee of success at this stage. 

If there is any question of vulnerability with you, get a letter from a health professional to take with you, you are far more likely then to be granted the hearing. 

Eventually you will be offered one as part of the process anyway, but it is good if you can show your willingness and anxiety to settle the fine.

Bailiffs are not keen to accept instalments with Magistrates' Courts fines as they do not receive payment until the whole fine is settled. However, they cannot over-ride a court order. 

Procedure

The more straightforward aspect of Magistrates’ Court fines is that there is a very clear procedure set down which should always be followed:

 

1. After you have been fined, you will be sent notice of the fine and the repayment rate, if one has been set.

2. If payments are not made, or payments are missed, you will be sent a reminder (Further Steps Notice)

3. If you do not bring your repayments up to date, a court hearing will be arranged and you will be told the date.

4. If you do not attend the hearing, it is likely that a warrant will be issued for your arrest (with or without bail), and you will be brought back before the court. These are normally executed by Private Bailiffs.

5. If a suspended sentence warrant is already in place on the fine, a Committal Warrant will be issued to send you to prison.

6. If a Warrant has been issued, you must pay this. If you cannot pay, you should contact the Fines Office of the Court to arrange for a Means Enquiry Hearing. In this, you simply complete an Income and Expenditure sheet in order that the Magistrates can agree an affordable repayment level. It is critical that you are able to sustain this payment in the long term. Obviously it is in your interest to arrange this hearing as soon as possible. If you are in receipt of certain benefits, you can apply to have the fine paid directly from these at the rate of £5.00 per week.

 

What about people who are vulnerable?

The National Standards for Enforcement Agents define very clearly the groups of people who may be considered vulnerable.

 

Enforcement agents must withdraw from domestic premises if the only person present is, or appears to be, under the age of 18; they can ask when the debtor will be home - if appropriate.

 

Enforcement agents must withdraw without making enquiries if the only persons present are children who appear to be under the age of 12.

 

Wherever possible, enforcement agents should have arrangements in place for rapidly accessing translation services when these are needed, and provide on request information in large print or in Braille for debtors with impaired sight.

 

Those who might be potentially vulnerable include:

 

the elderly;

 

people with a disability;

 

the seriously ill;

 

the recently bereaved;

 

single parent families;

 

pregnant women;

 

unemployed people; and,

 

those who have obvious difficulty in understanding, speaking or reading English.

 

For the full text the National Standards for Enforcement Agents click here. Vulnerable situations are covered on page 9.

 

 

 

About Distress Warrants

Points mentioned here may seem fairly unimportant, but they can supply you with valuable evidence for a complaint.

 

Firstly, under Stage 2 of the procedure above, you can see a ‘Further Steps Notice’ should be sent out after a missed payment. Many companies do not do this and pass the account straight to bailiffs. If you did not receive this, you should contact the court and ask them if this was sent; if not, why not, and if not please will they call off the enforcement agents until such time as they follow the correct procedure.

 

If you have failed to pay, or missed a payment on a Magistrates’ Court fine, it is likely you will receive a visit from an enforcement officer enforcing the distress warrant. They must do this within 180 days of it being issued. You have rights here, and these should be exercised. You have the right to see the warrant as the person against whom it is levied. The enforcement officer does not have to have it on him, but he must tell you where and when you can see it.

 

He must tell you how much the levy is for, and why you have incurred it. He must also show proof of his identity.

 

Sadly many bailiffs refuse to show the Distress Warrant. It is hard to understand why they would do this if the Distress Warrant is valid.

 

Another important point for Distress Warrants and Financial Arrest Warrants is that if, on his first visit, the enforcement officer does not make contact with you, he must put through your letterbox a letter with the time and date of his visit, and include on this any specific identifying marks of your property, such as the colour of the door, the colour of the house, permanent garden features etc… This acts as proof of his visit, but is also invaluable later on when checking his fees, as obviously this visit is chargeable, even though you were not there.

 

If the bailiff fails to abide by any of the above points, you should complain to the Court Manager, ensuring you get at least Proof of Postage.

 

Clamping Orders

Bailiffs collecting Magistrates’ Court fines will be given a clamping order. This will specify the name and registration number of the car which he is permitted to clamp. They are not allowed to clamp a car displaying a Blue Badge (disabled badge).

 

Cars are very appealing to bailiffs as they do not have to gain entry to your property in order to levy on them. Armed with a clamping order, the first you may know about it is when you need your vehicle. Whatever the law states, many bailiffs tend to clamp first, then ask questions later. After 24 hours, the vehicle can be removed to a secure area. Charges for towing a vehicle and for storage are extremely high. If fees remain unpaid, your car will be sold.

 

Forced Entry

One of the most common worries about bailiffs is the claim they can force entry. With a Magistrates’ Court fine, if the bailiff is pursuing you for an unpaid fine for a criminal offence they do have the right to force entry. Usually this is used as a threat, but in these circumstances, the threat should never be taken lightly. The rules only apply to the Magistrates’ Court though, they do not cover things such as unpaid council tax, unpaid business rates, CSA arrears, parking fines and congestion charges and others

Edited August 26, 2012 by sgtbush

[Conniff]

I'm getting a bit lost now. The op says the letter tells her she will get a ccj if she don't pay it but says nothing about having had any previous letters from the court etc.

 

Bailiffs won't be sent in or warrants issued without notification of court proceedings surely ??

 

So is this letter for collection of a fine that has been issued and not paid ??

[Raykay]

The DVLA are claiming the Late Licensing Penalty from the OP, which is a civil debt and can end up in County Court, which is why, prior to court action, Philips are only acting as debt collectors.

Matters such as driving an unlicensed vehicle are criminal offences and are dealt with in Magistrates' Court.

None of your long post is relevant in the OP's case, County Courts are a different legal system to Magistrates' Courts.

It's not for an unpaid fine, it is a claim for the Late Licensing Penalty - a civil debt - which if not paid can end up CCJ, but there will be a County Court case first.

[Jabloom]

Thanks for your replies, I'm sorry but I started to get a bit lost.

 

I emailed them the other day and asked if I could pay in installments to them as I was on maternity and unable to pay the amount in full. They replied with a letter saying the dvla do not take installments but if I wanted to pay installments to them I could but it wouldnt stop letters and further correspondence with them. I presume that means they will start adding on charges until its paid in full? I guess they will also charge for visits as well? Not have any visits or any other further corospndence yet. Apart from the first original letter, I first mentioned and this follow up letter to my email.

 

Are they right in saying that dvla don't except installments? Do I pay them or save up and pay the dvla?

What should my next step be?

Also just to add, the letter they sent me doesn't mention any distress warrant it just says they have it because the dvla have past it to them and that I need to pay this £80 and pay my car tax (which was done a few months ago so they can only come after me for the £80). Apart from the letter head they don't mention bailiffs so I presume they are acting as debt collectors not bailiffs, although I should assume when it comes to these types of organisations.

 

Thanks

Edited August 30, 2012 by Jabloom

[nehpets]

Firstly, ignore that dude who claims to be from the Court system as he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

As Raykay has pointed out, what you have been issued with is an LLP (Late Licencing Penalty).

as far as I have been able to establish (going back four to five years over various cases) a LLP is not (in the eyes of the law) a legally enforceable debt.

If you read the LLP notice carefully you should be able to see this.

However, the DVLA do all they can (even down to some of the wording on the LLP) to make you believe that you have already been identified and 'convicted' of the alleged offence.

What the LLP actually is is an 'offer' by the DVLA to settle the alleged offence on an out-of-court basis (emphasis on the word 'offer'!)

In order for the 'offer' to become a 'debt' you would have to 'accept' the 'offer'.

You have stated that you ignored the initial letter from the DVLA and therefore, in law, you would be deemed (so far) as not to have 'accepted' the 'offer' from the DVLA of out-of-court-settlement.

I hope that you are following so far.

As you clearly have not accepted their offer no debt exists.

The DVLA do not have the power to make the LLP into a debt as they are not a judicial body, only a court of law can do that.

The DVLA consistently overstate their powers in this respect and because of this it is clear that may people simply pay up because they believe that they have been 'fined' in the same way that a court of law issues a fine.

This appears to be the situation in your case - you appear to believe that you already owe the £80?

At the moment, if all you have said is true and up to date, I would suggest that you actually owe nothing in terms of 'debt'. Even if you admit guilt there is nothing which binds you to accept the offer contained within the LLP.

When the DVLA informed a Debt Collecting Agent (that you owed a 'debt') the DVLA appear to have actually broken the law since technically no debt actually exists

- all that exists at this point are an 'allegation' (that you failed to tax your vehicle or SORN it) and an 'offer' from the DVLA to settle the allegation on an out-of-court-basis.

Again, the DVLA take this approach and blatantly flout the law because it pays them to do so.

It would appear to be all about results.

Many people see the letter marked 'Bailiff' or 'Debt Collector' and panic and thus the DVLA swiftly receive their payment because the letter moves many people well beyond their comfort zone.

My advice would be to save up (assuming that is only going to take a month or two) and then offer to pay the £80.

In the meantime you are within your rights to telephone the Debt Collection Agent and tell him that no debt exists since you have not accepted the DVLA's offer of an out-of-court-settlement.

You don't need to go into details with the DCA, simply tell them that they are acting illegally and specify that you will make a formal complaint to their regulator if they contact you again over the matter.

The DCA will run for the hills since they know that they are on very thin ice since they haven't bothered to correctly check the records to see if the debt is recorded against you (which I understand they must do before chasing you).

The DCA risks being investigated or struck off if you complain since they don't appear to be following the correct protocol - the DVLA cannot register the debt without taking the matter to court!

Put simply, it's highly unlikely that the DVLA will take you to court in the time it takes you to save up the £80.

Let us all know how you go.

[Raykay]

The Late Licensing Penalty is not an offence, it is a civil debt of £80, which is what the DVLA/Debt collectors are claiming at this stage.

 

According to s.7A (3) ©, Vehicles Excise & Registration Act 1994, the Late Licensing Penalty may be recovered as a debt due to the crown.

[nehpets]

I don't disgaree that the LLP is a civil debt but only when you (the accused) accept the terms of the out-of-court settlement contained within the LLP notice.

This is the aspect that the DVLA / DCA's try so hard to disguise.

Until acceptance has occurred the LLP is purely an offer of out-of-court settlement. At that point no debt exists.

It's no different to the situation contained within a Fixed Penalty Notice which the police might dish out for speeding, again a FPN is an 'offer' of out-of-court settlement for the alleged offence. You may accept, reject or ignore the 'offer' as you see fit.

In this instance the person in question has stated that she ignored the initial LLP so we can be 100% sure that she hasn't accepted the offer of out-of-court settlement.

The fact is this, if the DVLA wanted to issue legally enforceable fines / penalties (debts) against people then they would need judicial powers in order to do so.

Clearly they do not have those powers otherwise there would be no need to take people to Court on the grounds of 'Failing to maintain continuous registration', instead they'd take people to Court for an enforcement order to recover an already existing debt.

[Raykay]

Although it is treated as a civil debt, the LLP is a penalty set by legislation, which is due when a vehicle ceases to be covered by a vehicle excise licence. Unlike an out of court offer settlement offer for a criminal matter, which is 'cancelled' if the matter is dealt with at court, a LLP will be the subject of a county court court claim - which is what DVLA's next move often is.

[nehpets]

If you read through the various threads then you'll see that most of the cases reported go to a Magistrates Court (at least in the first instance).

This shows that the case against the motorist is unproven at that specific moment in time.

I don't think that a Magistrate can force you to pay the LLP, all he can do is find you guilty of not ensuring CR.

The Magistrate will then issue you with a fine.

Due legal process has now occurred and this fine is now technically a debt.

Under the Code of English Law you have the right to appear in court without the financial burden (aka the penalty / fine ) attached to you.

In other words, you cannot be deemed to owe the money until the case has been heard and the verdict delivered.

Obviously it gets complicated but, if an LLP was indeed a financial penalty placed against you prior to a judicial hearing then your rights under the English Bill of Rights would have been fairly clearly violated.

We know that in any such situation you are always afforded the right to a court hearing.

Therefore, based on that fact we also know that any fine or penalty issued before that point cannot be binding and as such an LLP, at the moment of issue by the DVLA, cannot be considered a debt.

For them to suggest that it is is a clear case of Ultra Vires.

[Raykay]

LLPs are not dealt with in Magistrates' courts, as they are treated as civil debts, and are dealt with in County court.

 

It is cases of failure to licence/SORN a vehicle etc., which is a criminal matter, that are dealt with in Magistrates' court, a completely different process.

[nehpets]

But my point is being missed.

It doesn't really matter whether it is Magistrates Court or County Court, your rights remain the same (ie those afforded under 'English Bill of Rights'.)

What does it say on the Summons Document with regard to the allegation against you? It's generally 'failure to ensure Continuous Registration'? As opposed to 'Failure to pay a Late Licensing Penalty'.

In other words, they're not taking you to court to 'recover a debt' as you are implying? Instead they're taking people to court to answer the allegation which lead to the LLP being dished out in the first place.

That's the critical point.

And this is why the LLP is nothing more than an offer of out-of-court settlement.

I understand the point which you are making but you seem to be overlooking the rights which the accused has to a fair trial.

[Raykay]

It is not 'generally failure to ensure continous registration', it is one or the other, either a claim for the Late Licensing Penalty - s.7A, V.E.R.A. 1994, or an out of court settlement offer/summons for the failure to licence a vehicle - s.29/31A, V.E.R.A. 1994.

 

In the OPs case it is the LLP.

 

It depends which one it is as to the action which needs to be taken - one is a civil matter, the other is criminal.

 

The LLP is a penalty set by legislation. If it is not paid, DVLA may take action in the County Court to recover it, ie. they will claim the £80 penalty plus costs etc. Their letters are giving people the chance to pay it before court action.

 

 

The failure to licence a vehicle is an offence, for which DVLA will usually make an out of court settlement offer, which is withdrawn if it is not paid and the case progresses to Magistrates' court.

 

You have the right to appear and contest the matter, at either County court - why you don't owe the £80, or Magistrates' court - why you are not guilty of the offence.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Raykay

[nehpets]

Sorry, been away for a few days.

 

This is certainly an interesting debate. I respect your views but, in my opinion, you seem reliant on the fact that the DVLA have the judicial power to find someone ‘guilty’ for the offence of ‘not procuring a vehicle licence’ (ie neither taxing or SORNing a vehicle at the correct time) or words to that effect.

 

In my particular case they sent me an LLP a couple of months after the previous SORN had run out. I’d sent the new SORN declaration by post around three weeks before the old SORN was due to run out. They still issued me with a LLP even though technically (according to the DVLA) I had neither valid tax nor SORN on the vehicle at that particular period of time. It was the LLP dropping through the letterbox which alerted me to the fact that something was wrong. SORN on that particular vehicle was only re-established when I wrote to the DVLA specifying that I had already made a SORN declaration which they seemed not to have acted on. Needless to say, I refused to pay the £80 fine. The DVLA used that particular letter as ‘SORN notification’ and issued me with the new SORN certificate. However, they maintained that I still owed the fine since I didn’t check with them after four weeks.

 

So my point is this; whatever way you dress it up, the DVLA, in effect, use whatever information they have at their disposal to spot when an alleged offence (breach of regulations) has taken place. Obviously, in doing this, they are assuming that their information is 100% correct and up to date at all times. Having spotted the alleged offence they instantaneously pronounce their ‘judgement’ on the matter and issue the LLP. In other words, the DVLA have, at that precise moment, turned an 'allegation’ into a ‘conviction’ (or words to that effect) and a fine / penalty is now due. I’m sure by now that you’re starting to understand my point. In order to turn an allegation into such a conviction you would need to have judicial powers. The DVLA are not afforded these powers, they are simply a government body like any other. Therefore, any fine or penalty issued by them cannot be deemed to be binding since they have not gone through due legal process in order to claim that a debt now exists.

Edited September 5, 2012 by nehpets