Equita - Unknown Parking Ticket

[tomtubby]

Thank you for providing this additional info. Once again it would seem that another local authority are not being altogether truthful when submitting their application to TEC for permission to amend the address on the warrant!!!

 

When making such an applications the LA are required to CONFIRM IN WRITING that that address had changed AFTER the date of the warrant !!!

 

If fact I wrote to TEC on this VERY subject only this afternoon !!!!!!!!!

 

Hopefully they will address my questions by tomorrow.

 

The N244 needs to be filed within 14 days OF SERVICE of the letter from TEC advising you that your application has been rejected.

 

Once filed, all enforcement is on hold ( as provided for under Civil Procedure Rules 75 (8.1)

[chris223b]

Thanks for your advice tomtubby.

 

Today I've come home to a further Equita letter, a removal notice for the 2nd PCN. This is dated 30th November, the same date the OOTs were rejected.

 

Could you give me any advice on what 'angle' to use on my N244? My arguments were going to be basically the same as that on the OOT, with the added ammunition on the original PCN that TEC's own records confirm the warrant was sent to my old address and amended later but the LA's response said it was sent to the new address.

 

Is it better to stick with this or move the main argument to be around the LA and TEC breaching CPR rules?

 

Also, do you think I have a strong enough case to go for the 'paper only' option, or is it better to pay for the hearing anyway?

[chris223b]

Today I filed my N244's and am now £165 lighter once postage was included.

 

However, I've come home to another Equita letter. This time a 'warning notice' advising that their removal team was recently in the area, but were unable to meet with me and they will be back within 7 days. I am fully aware that this was another standard letter and a 'removal team' hasn't been anywhere near my house, but does anyone know the legal status with what the LA/Equita are doing in resuming enforcement action so quickly?

 

My understanding (although admittedly I don't know where I've got it from) is that when the OOT is refused and I have 14 days to file an N244, I am supposed to get those 14 days to do so without the LA being able to take any action during that time.

 

Yet this is not what is happening, today's letter and yesterday's letter are both dated 30 November, the same day the OOT's were refused. It would appear that straight away it went back to being an active case which they are pursuing without my getting any leave to consider my options. Surely this is wrong as I have felt pressured into quickly preparing an N244 under duress and getting it filed in order to get the action stopped again rather than being able to take my 14 days to consider my response and seek advice? I also think it's completely unjust that the bailiffs, who (in theory) are a 3rd party acting on behalf of the claimant, were aware of TEC's decision before me, the respondent who asked for the OOT, was!

 

I'm now turning towards my official complaints to TEC and the LA which it was suggested I make. Could the LA's decision to put Equita back on the case straight away be considered vexatious and worth including in the complaint? Also, whilst I'm completely up for complaining for the sake of righteousness, can I actually achieve anything by doing so being that I've had to file (and pay for) the N244 anyway?

 

PS. Is there a person/address to send official complaints to TEC and the LA (Plymouth City Council) to, or do I just send to the standard address and wait for it to filter through?

[chris223b]

The plot thickens...although N244 has now been filed and I have the letter from TEC confirming it has been transferred locally for a hearing I have received 2 further letters from Equita. I will be ringing the council tomorrow to complain about the action of their bailiffs.

 

Interestingly, this time they've actually specified an amount...and Equita only want £95.44 per ticket! That wouldn't even be enough to cover the order for recovery, which should be over £100. And that's before the bailiff's fees are added. What are they up to?

[wonkeydonkey]

Golden rule .....everything goes in writing to all parties and never rely on phone calls unless you can record them.

 

If you have grievances with your local authority you should be addressing them to the CEO and mark them formal complaint both inside the envelope and on the outside...always send recorded/signed for delivery...proof of posting is ok but it does not show it was delivered.

 

WD

[chris223b]

Tomorrow I have my N244 hearing for this case (I pay two fees for two reviews of two PCNs but only get one hearing...go figure!). I have my arguments prepared, but having never gone down this route before is there any advice anyone can give regarding how to handle one of these hearings? Specifically, I'm a bit worried about protocol in court (how to address the judge etc) and don't want to slip up!

[ploddertom]

Tomorrow I have my N244 hearing for this case (I pay two fees for two reviews of two PCNs but only get one hearing...go figure!). I have my arguments prepared, but having never gone down this route before is there any advice anyone can give regarding how to handle one of these hearings? Specifically, I'm a bit worried about protocol in court (how to address the judge etc) and don't want to slip up!

 

Dress conservatively but smart, make sure you arrive weel ahead of time and report your presence whereby you can be told where to sit. When called into Court - probably just a room and Judge probably in a suit be polite say good morning and above all do not interrupt. Judges are addressed as Sir or Ma'am depending on gender. If there is anything you do not understand then ask, at the end even if it goes against you thank the Judge for his time. Make sure you have read & understand what you have already submitted.

[tomtubby]

Chris,

 

You need to make clear that you moved in May and this was around the same time as notices had been issued. Do not confuse the matter about having access to the property in July. The main point is that you moved in May and that your car was disposed of a few weeks later.

 

The main point that you need to mention is that you are aware that the local authority unlawfully applied to reissue the warrant to you new address when such an application MUST ONLY be done if your address changed AFTER the date of the warrant. You address changed a few months BEFORE the date of the warrant.

 

Impress on the court that by the LA unlawfully applying to re-issue the warrant you have had to pay £165 and attend court and that if possible you would like to request that he orders that the LA must repay your fee.

 

Lastly, make it clear that this hearing should not even be taking place because when the local authority appeared to have not even bothered to read your OTT an instead, responded with a standard response.

 

PS>>>>Please post back and good luck.

[chris223b]

Well I've won...but it's far from the win I wanted.

 

I was well aware that the judge isn't going to consider the PCN itself, but I thought if accepting the reason for filing OOT they they would then go on to make a decision on the application which would lead to the warrant be revoked and the matter going back to NTO within the hearing?

 

This is not what happened. The judge's view was that the scope of the hearing was limited to deciding whether or not there was a valid reason for filing OOT. She agreed that I had a valid reason, but given her views on the scope of the case all she ordered was that I be given to leave to file out of time, which she then explained meant she was ordering TEC to accept the OOT filing, but it was still their decision as to whether or not to accept the application itself.

 

She refused to be drawn on the issue of the LA breaking CPR by getting the address changed, stating that it was not within the scope of her hearing to decide on the validity or not of the warrant, and that it was a matter for TEC to decide when considering the application.

 

On the issue of refunding my fees, she felt it was 'not proper' to order a refund when the matter of whether or not my application is valid has not yet been decided. If TEC find it is not and decline it anyway, then I had no business taking the matter to a hearing and so any fees incurred are my own fault!

 

In terms of what will happen now, I would have thought TEC will eventually accept the application on the basis that the form is filled out correctly, but without a judge ordering refund of the fees I don't know where I'll stand on getting them back.

[tomtubby]

VERY WELL DONE.

 

I will respond in full later on but in the meantime, I would advise you that the District Judge was WRONG when she said to you that TEC could still decide not to accept the application. This is complete nonsense!!!

 

Your application has been accepted and the TEC will in approx 2 weeks time send you notice that the Order for Recovery has been revoked. Bailiff enforcement is now finished and the LA can...if they wish, issue you with a new Notice to Owner.

[chris223b]

Thanks tomtubby. I found her a bit strange tbh...I expected her to be impartial, not on my side but not on theirs either. But she clearly seemed to be on the side of the council. She started by delaying the hearing for 30 minutes in case the LA decided to turn up. Then presumed to take everything they said by letter as an unquestionable account of what happened but challenged everything I said to her. And despite making a point that the PCN itself was not under consideration in the hearing, she then started asking questions about the parking violation itself.

 

Even when delivering her judgement that I be given leave to file out of time i.e. I had won, the tone of voice which went with it was one you'd expect to be used to deliver a judgement that I'd lost. Then between delivering the judgement and me leaving the court room, she specifically mentioned THREE TIMES, that her judgement may not make any difference to the the eventual outcome and I could still ultimately lose (which I suspected and you confirmed is not the case).

 

Anyway, without a specific order for my fees to be refunded, how do I go about getting them back? I assume that that if I nicely ask TEC to refund them they will tell me where to go - Is there any formal procedure to go down or action I can take to get them back? I was reading up on county court cases last night and kept drawing the conclusion that without any order to the contrary, the losing party is automatically liable for the winning party's costs. I can't see any grounds for TEC not to refund the fees...or is it different because they are a 'court' and not an individual?

[tomtubby]

Really pushed for time right now as I am still reading the Government's response to the Bailiff Consultation and I will look at this query again in a day or so.