Police helping bailiffs with PCN stops

[unclebulgaria67]

 

Thought I would post this recent video that was added to Youtube.

 

Hounslow Police working with bailiffs to stop vehicles with outstanding PCN's.

 

I can understand that the Police have an interest in this, because they will be indirectly funded by revenues received from PCN collection. i.e the Police are funded by councils that issued the PCN's. However, I would question the legality of this. Although the Police have the legal right to stop vehicles, surely they are restricted as to the purpose of such stops ?

[bazm]

If its anything like here its an 'operation' that includes the Police, DWP, Border Agency, Trading Standards and bailiffs.

Vehicles are pulled for checking by the police and the agencies (who do not have the power to stop vehicles). Its a grey area but very effective in catching benefit fraudsters, unworthy vehicles and of course people owing on warrants.

[tomtubby]

These police and bailiff "Roadside Operations are very common indeed and have been ongoing almost monthly for nearly 10 years !!! In London they are a frequent event.

 

 

They are frankly a disgrace and in fact today, I started drafting a long (very long) report which is going to be sent to the DCLG, DfT and the Information Commissioners Office regarding this practice.

 

In London these "Roadside Operations" are run with the assistance of the Metropolitan Police and although LA's may claim that they are "multi agency" the reality is that they are NOT.

[tomtubby]

Although the following weblink is a couple of years old it nonetheless demonstrate just WHY these "Roadside Operations" cannot be legal.

 

I would be interested to see whether anyone can stop the mistake. Please post back if you notice.

 

 

http://www.jacobsbailiffs.co.uk/news/successfulanprpoliceroadblock/47

 

 

 

Dave Cornes (Partner) said

 

"By using the Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology we are able to identify vehicle registrations who have unpaid debts. Other agencies who took part in the exercise were DVLA, DWP and Immigration. and with the help of the Police we are able to discuss debts with motorists and, over the 2 days, we achieved good results."

[bazm]

Hi Tom Tubby

Why is it a disgrace? The vehicles are pulled by the police using police spotters. After being stopped the multi-agencies check the vehicles and drivers. You wouldn't believe how successful this is. Also, the bailiff function is very small compared to DWP at these events. Its not like the police have ANPR for warrants in their vehicles. Sometimes Tom Tubby you protest too much:wink:

[tomtubby]

Bazm

 

Let me assure you that I KNOW how successful these "Roadside Operations" are for BAILIFF COMPANIES.

 

Perhaps you would look at my last post and respond concerning the statement from Jacobs and the obvious error.

[unclebulgaria67]

Bazm

 

Let me assure you that I KNOW how successful these "Roadside Operations" are for BAILIFF COMPANIES.

 

Perhaps you would look at my last post and respond concerning the statement from Jacobs and the obvious error.

 

Obvious error ? Debt against registration plate. Debts are generally owed by a person and not the vehicle.

[brassnecked]

Obvious error ? Debt against registration plate. Debts are generally owed by a person and not the vehicle.

 

Exactly so, how would you like it Bazm, if you bought a car, and nine months or so later you were pulled in by one of these police multi agency operations, and JBW took your car for the previous owners PCN? The police would not help you.

 

"we are able to identify vehicle registrations who have unpaid debts."

 

MUPPETS a car cannot owe money......

[brassnecked]

Having seen the video, this operation is dodgy, and the coppers along with that arrogant bailiff need a slap from a judge.

[josephbloggs]

If they really are acting along with the police, it shouldn't be difficult to get them to quickly check dvla records, to identify if its still registered to the original offender or not. SURELY this is the massive upside to having the police there as opposed to the normal everyday anpr bailiffs.

Incidentally i understand that with the possible change in enforcement of parking fines and eric pickles recent proposal regarding outlawing anpr bailiffs, there has been a surge in bailiffs trying to get rid of there equipment

[unclebulgaria67]

If they really are acting along with the police, it shouldn't be difficult to get them to quickly check dvla records, to identify if its still registered to the original offender or not. SURELY this is the massive upside to having the police there as opposed to the normal everyday anpr bailiffs.

Incidentally i understand that with the possible change in enforcement of parking fines and eric pickles recent proposal regarding outlawing anpr bailiffs, there has been a surge in bailiffs trying to get rid of there equipment

 

I have no problems with the Police setting up such road blocks for various reasons. However, the correct legal basis for doing so should be advised to drivers as soon as they are stopped. The video shows the Police acting in a way that is a bit shady. They have an interest in the bailiffs collecting the PCN's because the Police are funded by local councils. As the PCN is a civil matter, as soon as a Police Officer confirms that this is the reason for the stop, if the driver of the vehicle does not want to speak to a bailiff, they should be allowed to drive on without any further hassle.

[brassnecked]

I have no problems with the Police setting up such road blocks for various reasons. However, the correct legal basis for doing so should be advised to drivers as soon as they are stopped. The video shows the Police acting in a way that is a bit shady. They have an interest in the bailiffs collecting the PCN's because the Police are funded by local councils. As the PCN is a civil matter, as soon as a Police Officer confirms that this is the reason for the stop, if the driver of the vehicle does not want to speak to a bailiff, they should be allowed to drive on without any further hassle.

 

If the "pull" by police was solely because the bailiff ANPR went kerching, and there was no Road traffic contravention, then I feel that the stop is ab initio, and inter alia, potentially unlawful from the point the police officer states it was at the request of the bailiff.

[tomtubby]

Does anyone know the bailiff company involved as it would appear that there is no signage on the white vehicle ( which I assume is the ANPR equipped vehicle).

[brassnecked]

Does anyone know the bailiff company involved as it would appear that there is no signage on the white vehicle ( which I assume is the ANPR equipped vehicle).

 

I think the bailiff gave their name on the video, but either way the whole process that the innocent victim who filmed it went through is obnoxious, at one stage there was the impression that the police officer was going to arrest him by the attitude he was taking.. Don't think it was JBW as they would likely have seized the car anyway, as that is their modus operandi, to claim the warrant is to that particular car, irrespective of any change of ownership, so owner must pay up or the car will be towed and sold!.

[tomtubby]

DCLG and DFT issued a Consultation paper on 6th December and from this it is clear that the use of CCTV is to be curbed or even BANNED.

 

Bailiff companies are very worried indeed as to what will be happening with the DfT and they have a right to worry given that DCLG and DfT are indeed looking at the "collection methods" used by bailiffs to enforce an unpaid PCN.

 

I will be responding to the Consultation and in doing so I will be providing many examples by way of evidence where new vehicle owners have been made to pay the previous owners debts because of these "Roadside Operations".

Edited December 17, 2013 by tomtubby

[brassnecked]

DCLG and DFT issued a Consultation paper on 6th December and from this it is clear that the use of CCTV is to be curbed or even BANNED.

 

Bailiff companies are very worried indeed as to what will be happening with the DfT and they have a right to worry given that DCLG and DfT are indeed looking at the "collection methods" used by bailiffs to enforce an unpaid PCN.

 

Have you watched that video TT, as it shows prima facie that you are right and the bailiff companies, and in the way they stop a car on the say so of bailiffs is wrong, the victim repeatedly asked why the police had stopped him on a civil matter, the policeman said he could stop whomsoever he wished at will (not quite correct), but evaded answering the question. I think bailiff companies will now actively lobby MOJ and DCLG Dft in a last ditch attempt to keep their little earner.

[lamma]

When you consider that the police will readily wash their hands when "Its a civil matter" but yet use their time and resources for this clearly civil matter there are very few reasonable conclusions that explain what motivates this in my opinion. For CPE the bailiff is of course, as we all know. only acting in the capacity of a private bailiff. Anyone can act in that capacity. It would be interesting to see the response from the police if, or better yet when, a member of the public acting in that capacity asked the police (in writing of course) to accompany them and stop a vehicle on their behalf.

[Fulhamboy]

This was not thought through , typical of the Met police . The attitude of the policeman " shut up or you will be arrested on a trumped up public order offence " I find it very worrying that the police have been manipulated by the bailiffs into helping them . Why involve them at all ,the police could stop you themselves and get you to pay the outstanding fine or have your car impounded . They dont because it is a civil matter . My neighbour owes me 20 quid can I get a polceman to knock on his door and get my money back ? If I promise to make him a cup of tea with a couple of digestives . I would be told to sod off .

[ericsbrother]

It used to be said down at the lodge that the met was the best police force money could buy. Bloody hell, its true then.

[tomtubby]

Hi Tom Tubby

 

Why is it a disgrace? The vehicles are pulled by the police using police spotters. After being stopped the multi-agencies check the vehicles and drivers. You wouldn't believe how successful this is. Also, the bailiff function is very small compared to DWP at these events. Its not like the police have ANPR for warrants in their vehicles. Sometimes Tom Tubby you protest too much:wink:

 

Thank goodness for the Freedom of Information Act because without it, I would not be able to obtain copies of bailiff contracts. Over the Christmas period I will be looking over 16 Contracts ( 11 of which relate to London Boroughs). In the meantime I had a brief glance at just ONE of the contracts last night and frankly, I am appalled at the level of sheer incomptedence displayed by LA's (and their legal teams) when tendering etc.

 

To prove my point the following is a clause provided in the Contract for one LARGE London Borough:

 

"The Contractor shall ensure that new cases are forwarded to the ANPR vehicle(s) no less than 48 hours after the dispatch of the letter of intended action for each batch of new Warrants of Execution"

 

Can you spot the obvious error with this appalling clause !!! Answers on a post card please.

 

Sorry.....slightly off the subject.....this particular contract outlines the PRE TEC requirements of the Contractor such as DVLA search. As a member of a DVLA Focus Group I can ASSURE you that this is ILLEGAL !!!!!!

[brassnecked]

"no less than 48 hours after the dispatch of the letter of intended action for each batch of new Warrants of Execution"

 

It is entirely possible the ANPR vehicle will have the details and be searchbing BEFORE any notices reach the owner, therefore this circumvents Due Process, Procedural Fairness, and possibly Article 6 European Convention on Human Rights besides being illegal most probably

[tomtubby]

Brassnecked

 

WELL DONE !!!

 

In other words, BEFORE the debtor has even been given an opportunity to make payment on receipt of the letter an ANPR equipped vehicle is able to seize your car in the street.

 

I cannot wait to read the other contracts.

[unclebulgaria67]

Brassnecked

 

WELL DONE !!!

 

In other words, BEFORE the debtor has even been given an opportunity to make payment on receipt of the letter an ANPR equipped vehicle is able to seize your car in the street.

 

I cannot wait to read the other contracts.

 

TT

 

Once you have read the contracts, what are you going to do with the information ?

 

I can't see these councils wanting to amend their contacts or way of operating, unless a government department tells them that they will have to do so.

 

Eric Pickles makes a lot of noise about this, but will he actually do anything ?

 

If I were looking into this type of issue, I think I would see what journalists on the broadsheets were interested in taking this up. The Telegraph would be a good choice, as they will often continue with a campaign and not just run one article.

[tomtubby]

Uncle Bulgaria.

 

In fact "behind the scenes" there is a fair amount being done. As you will have seen from an earlier thread of mine a joint DCLG and DfT Consultation Paper was released on 6th December ( which finishes on 14th February) and the matter of ANPR will almost certainly be put forward by quite a few "interested parties" ( including me).

 

Eric Pickles is doing a sterling job at DCLG and his department are indeed aware of the concerns regarding ANPR.

[tomtubby]

PS: If ANPR is curbed..or better still banned then the bailiff companies have only themselves to blame.

 

A lot of bailiff companies are refusing to adhere to section 75.7(7) of the Civil Procedure Rules regarding the strict warrant re-issue procedures.