PCN - Sheffield City Council and Equita

[workingfornothing]

Has anyone had experience of paying the Council directly for PCN charges and having the payment returned? Will they really do that? They are saying they will... I'm in the middle of the complaint process with the council but they are flatly refusing to take back the debt from Equita meaning there are about £600 of charges alone - although I've not seen a bailiff at my address - they claim to have been round a number of times. Does the council have a vested interest in passing the debt on - I'm saying I will pay, but not £600 in costs when I can't see what the costs are for. Can I get the court involved prior to paying the bailiffs? I don't trust Equita after what I've read - they will try and trick me and I will end up paying even more. Feel like I'm being oppressed by these people - all for a couple of parking tickets its crazy!!

[ploddertom]

From memory Sheffield have outsourced to Capita who in turn also own Equita. The chances are you have not spoken to a Council employee & those from Capita are noted for being unhelpful.

 

Have you had a breakdown of the fees charged so far? How many PCN's do you have? Did you know about the original ticket(s)? Have you moved since they were issued?

[tomtubby]

Do you have a car that a bailiff can seize?

 

If so, how much roughly is it worth?

[workingfornothing]

From memory Sheffield have outsourced to Capita who in turn also own Equita. The chances are you have not spoken to a Council employee & those from Capita are noted for being unhelpful.

 

Have you had a breakdown of the fees charged so far? How many PCN's do you have? Did you know about the original ticket(s)? Have you moved since they were issued?

 

Hi I have 2 outstanding now. Both with equita. The council provided a breakdown as I havent been in touch with equita at all. Here you go: (both are identical) debt 112.00 letter 11.20 1st visit 35.00 2nd visit 45.00 attendance/enforcement charge 160.00 vat 50.24 total is 413.44 x 2 im not convinced they have visited me 4 or 6 times - i havent been living in the property for nearly 18 months anyway. Its my fault I didnt pay on the original tickets but seems pretty wrong to penalise me with £600 odd worth of fees for a couple of letters.

[workingfornothing]

Oh yes I have a car and its worth a lot more than the value of the tickets - not so much of an issue as I'm in London atm but planning to come back up over the Xmas holidays to do some decorating etc. Don't want to get clamped - I think somethings going on with my neighbours (they are very very nosey) as I popped up for one night a couple of weeks ago and Marstons were at my door at 6.30am. Wouldn't surprise me if the neighbours tipped them off tbh. Don't want the same thing happening again with Equita - just want to pay the council and get it out of the way. Don't mind paying fees as such but not £600 -havent got it anyway.

[workingfornothing]

Well I paid the pcn online and have now got confirmation (screenshot) that the debt is no longer outstanding. However the council replied to my level 2 complaint today to say the debt is still with equita and I must pay them £413.44 - the debt was £112. I've already written to Equita asking for a full breakdown and told them they cannot now use the warrant as the debt is paid. Why oh why are the council determined to fill Equitas pockets - I just dont get it. I mean where do Equita stop - what is reasonable? Can they keep adding 'removal' charges? Its absolutely crazy. The debt could run into thousands. I'm sure that because statute provides for some sort of removal charge the bailiff thinks they MUST add it on all occasions when I think personally that the law should be interpreted as such that if they bailiff attends with a REAL intention of removing goods they can charge for their time and effort.

 

In this and another situation where I have been charged this fee I'm sure there was absolutely no intention of removing anything, in fact I'm thinking the bailiff came in the same van etc as he had done on 'first visit' and only charged me the much smaller fee.

 

Is there any case law out there that I can look at?

 

Going through the complaints process has been pretty pointless to date as I'm just getting fobbed off.

[brassnecked]

Well I paid the pcn online and have now got confirmation (screenshot) that the debt is no longer outstanding. However the council replied to my level 2 complaint today to say the debt is still with equita and I must pay them £413.44 - the debt was £112. I've already written to Equita asking for a full breakdown and told them they cannot now use the warrant as the debt is paid. Why oh why are the council determined to fill Equitas pockets - I just dont get it. I mean where do Equita stop - what is reasonable? Can they keep adding 'removal' charges? Its absolutely crazy. The debt could run into thousands. I'm sure that because statute provides for some sort of removal charge the bailiff thinks they MUST add it on all occasions when I think personally that the law should be interpreted as such that if they bailiff attends with a REAL intention of removing goods they can charge for their time and effort.

 

In this and another situation where I have been charged this fee I'm sure there was absolutely no intention of removing anything, in fact I'm thinking the bailiff came in the same van etc as he had done on 'first visit' and only charged me the much smaller fee.

 

Is there any case law out there that I can look at?

 

Going through the complaints process has been pretty pointless to date as I'm just getting fobbed off.

Are you sure your complaint is with the council CEO and leader, as the response could indicate Capita have intercepted it and instructed you to pay their subsidiary company Equita

[workingfornothing]

was dealt with by head of parking services - he can't be too bothered as hes told me I can go to LGO...

 

I'm going to forward to whole lot to the CEO, MP and LGO for what good that will do.

[old bill]

All charges relating to PCNs MUST comply and be in accordance with the Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts (Certificated Bailiffs) Regulations 1993-2003. Anything that does not is illegal.If you were notified of the two PCNs together, the fees should be as follows -

 

2 x PCNs @ £112.00 each = £224.00

Letter Fee = £11.20*

1st Visit Fee = £57.32

2nd Visit Fee = £60.47

VAT @ 20% = £25.80

 

TOTAL = £379.79

LESS = £224.00

 

OWING = £169.55

 

* Can only be charged once.

 

If the PCNs were notified separately, the fees would be as follows -

 

PCN = £112.00

Letter Fee = £11.20

1st Visit Fee = £32.02

2nd Visit Fee = £46.50

VAT @ 20% = £17.94

TOTAL = £219.66

 

2 x £219.66 = £439.32

LESS £224.00

 

OWING = £215.32

 

The Enforcement Fee is not permitted or provided for under the relevant legislation.

 

Equita are already under investigation by Northamptonshire Trading Standards for this sort of thing and it appears they have pushed the self-destruct button. The bailiffs who drew up the fees could be looking at cancellation of their certificates if this were taken further. Could you please confirm if you were notified of both PCNs in the same letter?

Edited December 23, 2012 by old bill

[workingfornothing]

Hi there Equita did send different letters (that said hand delivered but were posted ???) for each pcn but the council are telling me they have made 6 visits to my property... erm ok.

 

Equita have sent me a letter with a breakdown of fees and it doesn't match what the council say - they have slotted in a levy fee - bit odd as its pretty difficult to levy on an empty property.

 

Sent more letters back to them and the council and trading standards.

[old bill]

Hi there Equita did send different letters (that said hand delivered but were posted ???) for each pcn but the council are telling me they have made 6 visits to my property... erm ok. Put them on notice to provide hard evidence of their visits.

 

Equita have sent me a letter with a breakdown of fees and it doesn't match what the council say - they have slotted in a levy fee - bit odd as its pretty difficult to levy on an empty property. Put Equita on notice that the account may be sent to the District Judge at the court which issued the bailiff's certificate and Northamptonshire Trading Standards. Make it clear any fee that is not in accordance with relevant legislation and cannot be substantiated will be regarded as evidence of false accounting. The bailiff could lose their certificate if it is found that blatant overcharging and/or fraud has taken place. However, this would depend on the level of overcharging or amount you stood to lose if the bailiff succeeded in defrauding you.

 

Sent more letters back to them and the council and trading standards.

 

Response in red text.

[workingfornothing]

Equita are so unprofessional and un-coperative. I wrote them an extensive letter asking for a further breakdown of their charges, dates, times bailiff details etc. I also asked them for warrants and a copy of an email they claim I sent them (never did, would't do anything via email) as the last letter was a bunch of numbers and made up labels e.g. levy fee when they have never been able to do a levy.

 

They sent me a letter back saying:

 

'there have been numerous visits made by our external team in the attempted collection of the debt. On each occasion where no contact has been established a letter would have been left'

 

Ohhhh so thats ok then.. no dates, copies of letters, reasons for crazy fees so I just pay up the £600 now yeah?

 

The only other line in the letter gave me the name of one bailiff - who they claim attended my property 6 times.

 

Getting increasingly tired of being fobbed off. They are obliged to provide the information and be open and transparent are they not...

 

Bottom of the letter contained another 'threat' saying I will incur extra fees (how, when the debt is paid and warrant dead). I asked them in the last letter to put a stop to these threats Guess my letter went in the bin.

[old bill]

I would be inclined to serve a FOIA request on the council involved specifically requesting them to disclose -

 

• if the department within the council that is responsible for pursuing unpaid PCNs has been outsourced and, if so, to whom; and
  
• when the outsourcing was effective from; and
  
• if the council's scrutiny committee permits any person not in the employment of the council to respond to queries relating to PCNs, by motorists, particularly where queries relate to the fees being charged by certificated bailiff collecting unpaid PCNs.
  

I have pitched these questions in the way I have in order to put the council on the spot. They will either throw a strop, sulk or their backsides will start playing tunes. The other thing it will do is make them feel uncomfortable.