PCN enforcement - car clamped - Taking Control of Goods

[rippedoffagain]

When a car is clamped and control of the goods has been effected. Who owns or is responsible for the vehicle?

 

I have just had my car clamped for non payment of a parking ticket. My fault I know.

 

The car is worth much less than the amount I owe, and I don't mind them taking it.

 

It is now on a public highway. If I can't use the car, and they don't at this stage seem interested in taking it to auction. Why should I keep it insured?

[BankFodder]

Very funny question. Well done.

 

I suppose that the people who have taken control of it are responsible. However, I can imagine that they would be entitled to come to you for the associated costs.

On the other hand if it became involved in some offence - it became an obstruction or it rolled down a hill (I know it's clamped) than the liability would have to be with the person in control.

 

But this is all a guess.

[rippedoffagain]

If I cancel the insurance and report a vehicle being on the highway uninsured? It may well come to that. I need to buy another car to get me to work etc, I am not going to insure two cars.

[brassnecked]

Whilst you are the Registered Keeper, DVLA will come after you. or the authorities will if it does roll down the hill, unless you name the EA as the new keeper Bet he wouldn't believe his luck. He will however come after you for any shortfall in fees after the sale of the car. At which point you could say that the Control Order was on goods of insufficient value to even cover the fees possibly.

[rippedoffagain]

So I must transfer to the EA!

[brassnecked]

So I must transfer to the EA!

 

Not suggesting you do, just that whilst the vehicle is listed with you as RK, and you cancel the insurance, the DVLA and plod will have you for an uninsured vehicle.

 

I would try to make a payment agreement with the Ea at a rate you can afford, if they are stupid about imposing unaffordable payments complain to council or whoever issued the PCN, also telling them that the car isn't worth anywhere near the fees and PCN,

[rippedoffagain]

Whilst you are the Registered Keeper, DVLA will come after you. or the authorities will if it does roll down the hill, unless you name the EA as the new keeper Bet he wouldn't believe his luck. He will however come after you for any shortfall in fees after the sale of the car. At which point you could say that the Control Order was on goods of insufficient value to even cover the fees possibly.

 

The amount they are claiming is aprox £386. The car is a 2001 Vectra. The EA tried very hard to get me to hand over the keys and log book. He even tried to tell me that I was commiting an offence, and he would be back with the police to force entry into my house. But thats a seperate matter.

[brassnecked]

A 2001 Vectra wouldn't get more than a couple of ton or a carpet (£300) at auction if he was lucky, so wouldn't even cover the fees which with the £110 sale fee, towing as you didn't give him the keys, and storage at £20 or so a day, would soon reach around a grand, it would look rather silly.

 

Other Caggers will be along soon to help further, so could you give us a bit more background on the PCN and the history to date?

[DragonFly1967]

I know it's petty, and I'm not for a moment suggesting that you actually do it, but...

 

It would be an interesting experiment to name the EA as the new keeper and send the V5 to the DVLA. Wait a couple of days and then cancel the insurance and send off the tax disk for any refund. Then have the vehicle moved to your nearest major road in the dead of night and park it slap bang in the middle complete with the clamp.

[rippedoffagain]

i know it's petty, and i'm not for a moment suggesting that you actually do it, but...

 

It would be an interesting experiment to name the ea as the new keeper and send the v5 to the dvla. Wait a couple of days and then cancel the insurance and send off the tax disk for any refund. Then have the vehicle moved to your nearest major road in the dead of night and park it slap bang in the middle complete with the clamp.

 

lol

[rippedoffagain]

A 2001 Vectra wouldn't get more than a couple of ton or a carpet (£300) at auction if he was lucky, so wouldn't even cover the fees which with the £110 sale fee, towing as you didn't give him the keys, and storage at £20 or so a day, would soon reach around a grand, it would look rather silly.

 

Other Caggers will be along soon to help further, so could you give us a bit more background on the PCN and the history to date?

 

Parked in a council car park Dec last year. Forgot the pay and display. £25 ticket. I'm just bloody minded. The change of legislation re EA charges took me by surprise!

 

However the EA are Jacobs. I have complained to Jacobs and Newcastle City Council regarding his breach of the National Standards, Re section 20: Falsely implying etc.

 

I am vaguely aware about the goods having to be of sufficient value to cover the debt. I would be grateful if someone would help bring me up to speed on this.

 

Many thanks.

[brassnecked]

Ah all becomes clear, JACOBS nasty bunch clamp first including Motability cars, and ask questions later. Their MO is to clamp and apply pressure, they know that they would be silly to take and sell the car, they hope that clamping will force you to pay. They also have form for taking and selling third party cars, then having to get them back when the innocent threatens them with court etc

 

There seems merit and a perverse logic in dragonfly's suggestion as it is Jacobs.

 

Wonder what tomtubby and ploddertom will make of this one?

[rippedoffagain]

There seems merit and a perverse logic in dragonfly's suggestion as it is Jacobs.

 

Absolutely!

[DragonFly1967]

There seems merit and a perverse logic in dragonfly's suggestion as it is Jacobs.

Absolutely!

 

Please note that I did include a disclaimer

[brassnecked]

Jacobs tried to seize my car when I was parked up on the phone opposite a debtors house they were visiting, where they had already clamped a car

I detest Jacobs with a passion.

[rippedoffagain]

Jacobs tried to seize my car when I was parked up on the phone opposite a debtors house they were visiting, where they had already clamped a car

I detest Jacobs with a passion.

 

Tried to seize it?

 

Incidentally my daughter is at home visiting at the moment, and she has a hire car!

[brassnecked]

Tried to seize it?

 

Incidentally my daughter is at home visiting at the moment, and she has a hire car!

He came over and knocked on the window whilst i was on the phone as I has pulled up opposite the debtors house and parked to answer my phone.Noticed two of them in the garden opposite with clipboards, he came over and intimated that as he thought i was Mr xx of that address he was seizing my car. Told him no I am not but am on the phone to the local MP (I was) and that I was going to take his photo, he legged it, got into a Ford Fogey with his buddy drove off at high speed, turned round and drove back down at high speed and pretended to swerve at my car as he came down.

[Coughdrop]

Here's my thoughts assuming that the value of the goods covered the fine.

 

Controlled Goods are defined in paragraph 3(1) of Schedule 12 (general interpretation).

 

Paragraph 3(1) of Schedule 12 defines controlled goods as:

 

goods taken control of that—

 

(a) have not been sold or abandoned,

 

(b) if they have been removed, have not been returned to the debtor (unless subject to a controlled goods agreement), and

 

© if they are goods of another person, have not been returned to that person;

 

They do not define ownership as passing to the Enforcement Agent, in fact Part 2 Paragraph 4(1) of the Act states for the purposes of any enforcement power, the property in all goods of the debtor become bound in accordance with this paragraph (in English this means you're not allowed to give away or hide anything you own until the bailiff action has been completed).

 

You would thus remain liable for any offence.

[brassnecked]

I reckon you are correct Coughdrop, the only way to avoid any offences would be to sign the V5 over to the EA, and send it off, to DVLA as this is Jacobs they would clamp a pushbike or a mobility scooter (assuming they could get a clamp to fit it)if they thought it would get the debtor to pay. The fact that the Goods Taken Control of wouldn't even cover the fess matters not one jot to Jacobs.

[unclebulgaria67]

I think the legislation is only about taking control and not taking ownership. Therefore the registered keeper is still responsible for insurance and road tax. The EA would however be responsible for any accident events, as they have control over the vehicle. If the vehicle is on a highway is causing a hazard the EA will be responsible.

 

It would make an interesting case for an Insurance company, if the vehicle was now involved in an accident, after an EA had taken control. The Insurance company covering the vehicle would argue that they have no responsibility under Road Traffic Acts and the EA company should have appropriate insurance.

 

Just my opinion, without knowing of anything in the legislation about the responsibilities of EA company and registered keeper, after a vehicle is taken control over on a highway.

 

As has been said before, try to come to a payment arrangement. Point out that the cost incurred by Jacobs taking the car, would be more than the cars value.

[rippedoffagain]

 

The value of the goods wouldn't cover the penalty + costs.

[Coughdrop]

The thing is the vehicle is only one thing which the EA has taken control of. They are still entitled (and will I imagine will) to return to try to take control of other goods with a view to entering into an agreement or removing them for sale. If they can't find enough goods of value to cover the warrant, then it should be returned.

 

A fine is NOT a penalty, it is a fine. The ticket was a penalty (PENALTY Charge Notice) but ceased being a penalty when it went to the court.

[brassnecked]

Interesting UB, but if he handed V5 to EA and EA signed it, it would be down to EA to insure it from that moment imho, Can of worms clamping vehicles on the highway, as if plod say it is obstruction it would have to be the EA they go after as keeper cannot remove the obstruction due to EA's clamp.

 

OP should try to arrange an affordable agreement, sadly not easy with Jacobs.

[rippedoffagain]

I have not and will not allow them entry to my home. Even if I did, there is nothing of value to seize.

[unclebulgaria67]

Perhaps it would be worth speaking to the council concerned about this and to see if they can intervene to ensure that a sensible way forward is achieved. An affordable repayment arrangement, that does not lead to more unecessary costs being racked up.

 

I could see Jacobs just taking the car and then racking up loads of costs which they then go after the OP for. I think these are limited by the legislation, but a £25 parking ticket could become a even more silly amount.