Jump to content


Eric Pickles seeking to amend the law to stop bailiffs collecting parking fines !!!!


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2295 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

"On Friday I was sent a copy of the "background" papers regarding these proposals"

 

Do these papers speak to the Statute of Marlborough ? Or is this law still 'invisible' when it gets in the way of councils.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the TCE Act the government are seeking to repeal many ancient laws and it is possible that this is one such case that could be disappear. There are some very interesting times ahead !!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Under the TCE Act the government are seeking to repeal many ancient laws and it is possible that this is one such case that could be disappear. There are some very interesting times ahead !!

 

Even more so as time is rapidly running away if they want to get this up & running for next April.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Under the TCE Act the government are seeking to repeal many ancient laws and it is possible that this is one such case that could be disappear. There are some very interesting times ahead !!

 

Until such event it is still in force.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"On Friday I was sent a copy of the "background" papers regarding these proposals"

 

Do these papers speak to the Statute of Marlborough ? Or is this law still 'invisible' when it gets in the way of councils.

 

Out of the original 29 chapters in the Statute of Marlborough all but 4 of them have been repealed already. Although I do concede that the one involving "taking distress on the Kings highway or the common street" is not one of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Out of the original 29 chapters in the Statute of Marlborough all but 4 of them have been repealed already. Although I do concede that the one involving "taking distress on the Kings highway or the common street" is not one of them.

One doesn't need to question why, if they repeal that one and implement something lacking, it would effectively abolish bailiffs as we know them, in all likelihood, and remove rights to distrain and take goods and chattels to sell off for debt if they are not careful. They woulddn't want that even though the late great former Master of the Rolls, Lord Denning would have loved bailiffs and distress to go the way of the dodo

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
  • 4 weeks later...

I'm in Scotland so this wouldn't affect me, but personally I'd like to campaing *for* a camera on a corner near where I live. Frequent selfish prats park on double yellows on a narrow street and in a bay clearly marked "Solo M/C Only" on the same corner. Thing is, that spot is deliberately smaller than a "proper" space, so they end up parked a foot or more out into the main road making the junction effectively blind if you're trying to pull out of the side road.

 

I would be *very* happy if someone leapt out from behind a dustbin or bus shelter and ticketed them the moment they switched the motor off. It's dangerous.

 

There's a line between parking selfishly and causing inconvenience for other road users, and causing no problem but being used to help make some jobsworth a few quid out of his "per offence" pay scheme.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did actually query it with the council who told me that double yellow lines and parking in "wrong" bays was the remit of their parking attendants (ah for the days when we called them "traffic wardens"!). Parking outside of a bay, double parking and so on is a criminal offence and - yes - police.

 

Either way, I'm convinced a CCTV camera focussed on that corner would pay for itself in a month.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is hoped that Eric Pickles and the Secretary of State will not only be seeking to ban CCTV but also the dreadful use of ANPR's equipped vehicles by bailiffs to enforce an unpaid PCN !!!

 

There is a lot going on 'in the background' and bailiff companies and local authorities are VERY WORRIED at the moment. From 'briefing papers' that I have seen.......they have EVERY RIGHT TO BE WORRIED !!!!!!

 

Theses are very interesting times.........

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is hoped that Eric Pickles and the Secretary of State will not only be seeking to ban CCTV but also the dreadful use of ANPR's equipped vehicles by bailiffs to enforce an unpaid PCN !!!

 

There is a lot going on 'in the background' and bailiff companies and local authorities are VERY WORRIED at the moment. From 'briefing papers' that I have seen.......they have EVERY RIGHT TO BE WORRIED !!!!!!

 

Theses are very interesting times.........

 

Can it be that those in the higher echelons of power have woke up to the widespread abuse of the system by greedy councils and bailiffs, and the overt fee fraud being uesd often against innocents in the case of say JBW and ANPR going kerching, with the bailiff seizing and towing the car 8 months after it has been sold on. and 12 after the PCN? Hopefully so, but I am in despair over the interpleader part of TCGA, as this will make the abuse much much worse, ANPR or not. If the innocent cannot afford the interpleader application, all the baaliff fees and the debt, then they will lose the car for certain, with no comeback or appeal; a win win for the bailiff

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 seen two cars clamped by Barstons in the space of two hundred yards in my area . So is this a coincidence or are they using anpr cams ?

ANPR quite probably

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

ANPR equipped vehicles being used to enforce unpaid road traffic debts should be stopped at the soonest opportunity and I made this clear today is a 6 page report in response to Eric Pickles's press release. Interesting times ahead...

Link to post
Share on other sites
ANPR equipped vehicles being used to enforce unpaid road traffic debts should be stopped at the soonest opportunity and I made this clear today is a 6 page report in response to Eric Pickles's press release. Interesting times ahead...

The "Enforcement Industry", although how it can be deemed an industry is beyond me as all it manufactures is misery and destitution, bailiffs and enforcement agencies seem to be living in the Wild West.

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
  • 1 month later...
Local authorities are aware that they are not allowed to use income from parking to "prop" up other departments and this is not being adhered to.

 

Bailiff companies have themselves to blame entirely if Eric Pickles amends the law to stop councils using bailiffs and I have said very often on this forum that bailiffs are "milking the cash cow until it turns sour" and it is absolutely dreadful that they can attempt to charge up to £1,000 ( and in many cases much more) for a parking ticket with "face value" of just £40-70. Greed on an unprecedented scale.

 

Everything to do with parking ticket enforcement went completely wrong when bailiffs had the idea of enforcing unpaid PCN's by way of ANPR vehicles.

 

Instead of visiting the property to seek payment the bailiff instead merely drives around the streets of London (and superstore outlets) looking for the registration number of a car that had been driven by the keeper on the day on which a contravention had occurred !!

 

In other words...the bailiff is NOT looking to collect payment from the person named on the warrant and instead....is looking to seize the vehicle involved in the contravention. How this can ever be deemed legal is simply beyond me !!

 

It is totally illegal and unlawful. Quote "No Government official or Agent shall seize anyones property without lawful judgement and if he does, that property shall be returned forthwith" (Magna Carta) and "Promises of grants, fines or forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void" (Bill of Rights) and lord Justice Laws in 2002 said these laws of special status cannot be repealed impliedly so still stand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE:

 

It would seem that both the DfT and DCLG have been VERY busy in the past 10 weeks since issuing their joint press release about parking !!!

 

At the time, the press release had come as a shock to local authorities and "parking operators" as it would seem that very few people had known of the proposals.

 

They were all in for a further BIG surprise on Friday afternoon when DfT and DCLG issued a public Consultation Paper (link below). There can be little doubt that the government are intent on BANNING the use of CCTV cameras for parking enforcement and there are other proposals as well that are of VERY SERIOUS concern. The 'private' parking operators will no doubt be next in the firing line.

 

I have been busy since since Friday compiling a Press article and I hope to provide a word copy once it is published in a few days time.

 

In the meantime, if anyone has any comments please post them here.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/local-authority-parking

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Tomtubby for posting the above URL-it certainly makes for interesting reading. If they do decide to investigate the surplus funds from parking and where they are allocated should concentrate the

minds of quite a few councils-Westminster in particular, followed by Kensington, Camden and Harrow. The latter borough motto appears to be if you are putting down one yellow line, it is almost as cheap to lay down double lines and look at the extra revenue it produces! I know that I stopped shopping in Harrow simply because of their draconian parking wardens in those days. In the end it more people stop shopping in area like that, shops close down because of the lack of business and the revenue to the Council drops after that. But some of these Councils appear too stupid to work that out. thank goodness fro Eric Pickles .

 

 

I think that Adjudicators should have more leeway in deciding appeals. After all they know how many people are caught out by poor signage within each borough and by allowing a driver's appeal early on

it should hopefully force Councils to amend pretty quickly their errant and confusing signs.

 

Of course CCTV should be banned in most places-most are only revenue raisers. How can it be fair that if you stop on a yellow line [because there are no spare meters] to pop in and buy a newspaper that a

camera picks that up and you get a fine of £60.

 

What should also be investigated is to see what the ratio is between the number of meters and the number of cars that require meters. And given the year on year increase in cars on the road whether Councils

increase the number of meters to reflect that traffic increase. Certainly in parts of London quite a lot of the traffic circulation is caused by cars driving around the same area looking to find an empty meter.

 

Have only just had a quick peek at the document but it makes a lot of sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks TT, the document is thorough and appear4s to be going in the right direction, most likely to the abject horror of councils and their bailiffs.

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
  • 6 months later...

UPDATE

 

I started a new thread yesterday to announce that CCTV and ANPR is finally to be banned. I am reposting this thread for background information.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...