Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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
      • 160 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

Is my Form 4 complaint justified? **Result + Compo Award**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3845 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

To keep you guys up to date, I have received the courts reply with the response/statements of the bailiff and the company. basically admitting a mistake by the company and a load of old tosh from the bailiff. My measured response has been mailed and I now await the Judge's direction. I'll be back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hello everyone, I again thank you for all your comments.

This is a related item but will re-post if necessary.

Under the FOI act I asked my local authority for "A copy of the enforcement services contract in force with companies engaged in recovering unpaid Penalty Charge Notices". Their response was "I can confirm that Broxbourne Borough Council does not have any contracts with companies engaged in the recovery of PCNs"

This seems strange to me. "Contract" has quite a wide scope, and not to have "any contract" would seem irregular. Any comments would be appreciated, along with any info on where I can research this item.

This whole episode has really opened my eyes to the ways in which the bailiff industry is not controlled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't have any long standing contracts, but do so on an individual case basis when the need arises. With FOI's, they will only answer the question raised. If you had asked, 'Does Broxbourne Borough Council employ the services of private Bailiff companies in pursuit of PCN's and on what basis are these Bailiff companies employed ?

 

Or is it the case that the council have their own staff and use court bailiffs if it gets to the stage of needing them.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

ub67

They do use private bailiffs. I thought my question was broad enough. Their answer says that they have not got "any contracts" with companies. Surely they must have something, be it verbal or written. It seems that many local authorities do have such a document.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you possibly need is the Service Level Agreement (SLA).

 

Maybe you should have coached your questions in a different manner eg

1 - do the Council enlist the services of Bailiffs

a - if so for what purposes

b - the names of the companies involved

2 - does the Council have a Service level Agreement with these companies

a - if so what is it

b - if there is no SLA what does the Council do to check up on Bailiffs

etc etc

 

In other words split your original up into small segments so as to give them not a lot of wriggle room. Remember you asked specifically about Contracts, to which this may not apply.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you ploddertom. I will submit a more detailed request as suggested. I know I am being picky, but surely an agreement of any kind is a contract (little c).They said.

"I can confirm that Broxbourne Borough Council does not have any contracts with companies engaged in the recovery of PCNs"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you ploddertom. I will submit a more detailed request as suggested. I know I am being picky, but surely an agreement of any kind is a contract (little c).They said.

"I can confirm that Broxbourne Borough Council does not have any contracts with companies engaged in the recovery of PCNs"

 

Technically I suppose hey are correct as to recover an unpaid PCN they have to obtain a Court Order from the TEC which is then handed to the Bailiff.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I am back with news that the hearing date for my Form4 complaint has been set for Sept. A long trip up north. After all this time I still feel that my complaint is justified and still feel that the bailiff breached the POFA by clamping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going by the time mine was sent which was about 2 months. Plodders, Just wondering if they have a lot of form 4 there are having to process as all rossers bailiffs are certificated at that court.

 

lgwarren- the bailiff may also have a long trip as i have said above, all bailiffs, no matter where they reside, are certificated at the same court. I think this is si JGJ can keep an eye on her minions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seanamarts. If I remember rightly, your Form 4 complaint was a long time ago and since then, there have been dreadful cutbacks to the court service and a delay until September is about right.

With possible requests to adjourn from the bailiffs this will probably be heard next year

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

lgwarren

 

 

You have mentioned that the Form 4 complaint has been listed "up North" in September.

 

As you were the one making the complaint you can request that it is transferred to a court that is local to you . Page 8 of the Ministry of Justice Form EX345 explains more.

 

http://hmctscourtfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex345-eng.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've only just visited this thread for the first time.

 

I hope that your application succeeds - but my feeling is that it is unlikely to do so and I would not have advised you to begin it.

The reason is that a form 4 essentially deprives a person of their livelihood in that "profession" for the rest of their life. This is a hugely serious step and I think that the courts are very aware of the significance of their decisions and the responsibility which weighs with them.

 

I am sure that the episode which you are complaining about was a deliberate piece of misconduct but I am not at all sure that it is bad enough that a court will wish to accede to a form 4 application.

 

What worries me is that if your application is unsuccessful, that there could be an order for costs against you which would be very damaging as well as adding to your justifiable sense of hurt and anger.

 

I think that there is a better way to approach the question of form 4 applications.

 

To justify any form 4 application, there must have been some wrongdoing by the bailiff - amounting at least to a trespass.

 

It is much easier - and safer to bring a small claim for trespass in the county court.

If this succeeds, then one can go on to make a further decision as to whether or not to follow up with a form 4.

 

A small trespass action will have the merit of teasing out the evidence so that you have a much better idea of what the other side is going to say. You get a better idea of the strength of your case for a form 4 application - and also in a small trespass claim, you are unlikely to be faced with costs if you lose.

 

If you do lose, then you can be sure that you have no chance of a form 4. If you win, then you will have more confidence to consider your position.

 

In general, I would not advise any form 4 application without a "pathfinder" small claim in the county court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite agree with Bank Fodder.

 

I have now read through all pages to understand your complaint more clearly.

 

It is always the case that BEFORE considering a Form 4 Complaint that a formal Letter of Complaint is sent to the council and marked Stage One Complaint. A copy should be sent to the bailiff company.

 

If the complaint is rejected, a further Stage 2 Complaint should be sent to the council. It must be remembered that the LOCAL AUTHORITY are wholly responsible for the levy and fees charged by their agent. A Stage 2 complaint should not be addressed by the same person who responded to the Stage 1 Complaint. It should be addressed by somebody in a more senior position.

 

So many people are encouraged to make a Form 4 Complaint without understanding what Form 4 Complaints are.

 

Firstly, the courts list Form 4 as litigation. The purpose of a Form 4 Complaint is to persuade the District Judge that the bailiff is "not a fit and proper person to hold a certificate". These are the precise words from the Statutory Regulations.

 

If the Judge were to make such a finding, he will know that the bailiff's employment will cease that very day and with it, the bailiffs right to earn a living as a bailiff ever again. Taking away the bailiff's livelihood is a very serious matter for the Judge to consider and is one that he he or she will NOt take lightly.

 

As an example: In a Form 4 Hearing at Leicester County Court on 29th January 2010 District Judge Hampton stated the following:

 

 

"I have to consider whether to find that Mr xxx is not a fit and proper person (to hold a certificate).....this is......DRACONIAN"

 

 

She stated that the complaint was not sufficiently serious enough to revoke the bailiffs certificate.

 

On the matter of costs, the EX345 issued by the Ministry of Justice confirms that costs MAY be imposed on the complainant and in the case detailed above, District Judge Hampton ordered the complainant to pay costs of £750 to THE BAILIFF

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an example: In a Form 4 Hearing at Leicester County Court on 29th January 2010 District Judge Hampton stated the following:

 

 

"I have to consider whether to find that Mr xxx is not a fit and proper person (to hold a certificate).....this is......DRACONIAN"

 

 

This Judge was clearly off her head then. Though it's true they never tend to be in the real world do they.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Outlawla. District Judge Hampton is a very senior Judge with extensive knowledge of bailiff law and she has presided over many cases. She also works at Northampton County Court. In 2010, she would be hearing complaints in her courts against both Newlyn plc and Equita Ltd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If one of the criteria for being granted a bailiff certificate is "you are a fit and proper person", then, if the bailiff falling under scrutiny is not, a mistake must have been made by the County Court issuing the certificate.

 

Wouldn't it be reasonable that a district Judge having any amount of tolerance in determining a form 4 complaint should be put under scrutiny themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hello to you all,I am sitting on the train back to Euston having a beer.A little celebration.I won my case, the bailiffs certificate was taken from him, and I was awarded compensation.YAHOO!!I will get back to my beer, and to all you guys later. I have not finished with Jacobs yet.

Just to add, a form 4 can be entered for both reasons. i.e. to complain about the conduct of the bailiff "OR" to question his fitness to hold a certificate. The legislation says "OR".

Edited by lgwarren
more to add
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...