Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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
      • 161 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

PCN - expired? warrant - Can a bailiff invent a "payment agreement" to extend it?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3220 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

this just happened to a friend.

.. warrant was issued 12 months ago to old address AFTER the new rules came into force.

 

 

the 12 month period has just elapsed,

 

 

my friend expecting that "it's safe to come out now" contacted the bailiffs by phone.

Note, my friend was found and contacted about a month ago only by email

and no evidence has been provided so far to confirm the debt was valid,

they sent each other a couple of emails mainly disagreeing with each other.

 

It turns out that one of the emails sent by the bailiff (2 days before 12 months passed) was their idea of a "payment agreement"..

. of course this was never acknowledged of agreed to by my friend and the exact wording I am waiting to find out,

 

 

can the bailiff simply create this payment agreement without agreement from the alleged debtor?

 

 

The result is that the bailiff has reset the 12 month clock with a simple email.

 

 

Please someone tell me this isn't right.

 

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

whats the debt all about and for please?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah, ok, background:

 

PCN for loading bay (council)

CCTV so nothing attached to vehicle

moved house and sold car before anything came through the post, so unaware of it entirely

contacted by email by bailiff and then the above happened

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, the only reason she didn't do that originally was because she found out so close to the year anniversary that it seemed pointless (TEC had confirmed warrant would expire a week after her call).

 

I've just seen the communications and it would appear that she did, sort of, ask for help/offer to pay the PCN which they responded to with their offer. It is probably enough to count as an agreement :(

 

Do you have any advice as to exactly how to fill in the the out of time and stat dec? I know that it can make the difference between it being rejected or not. Also, she has't yet disclosed her new address... would you advise this or better to use another for the out-of-time? it would be tragic for the oot to be rejected and the bailiffs to come after her at the new address. hope this makes sense, any advice would be greatly appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with filing an OoT is that she would be required to provide her current address on the form. I would therefore suggest that she calls TEC on Monday to ask them the status of the warrant (whether it has now expired). If expired, then an Out of Time cannot be done in any event.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has definitely expired according to TEC... what next then? Oh dear. Does the warrant really last forever?

 

BTW, the only thing they can do is nab her car, which is on lease purchase, so simply an inconvenience... She's anxious so I'm keen that she does what is best for her. Of course paying the £480 is totally wrong since she was never aware of the fine in the first place.

 

thankyou :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your advice - this is exactly what I thought... here's what happened though.

 

Warrant expired as confirmed by TEC. She wrote to council enclosing a postal order for the full amount (£82). they rejected it as it was still with the bailiffs, so postal order was collected in person yesterday.

 

Bailiffs confirmed yesterday that the warrant is still live (beyond it's expiration date) and a payment agreement was entered into a few days before the expiration date (very thin evidence for this - its debatable). They also said they can take a car via apnr This is the challenge we now face. Does your website not advise that since the new rules came into force the 1 year expiry thing no longer applies nor does the direct payment to the council. Am I missing something?

Link to post
Share on other sites

"the regulations specify that a bailiff has 12 months from the date of the Notice of Enforcement to either take control of goods belonging to the debtor or to obtain payment from the debtor. If he fails to do so, the warrant expires.

 

Most importantly, if a debtor enters into a payment agreement with the bailiff company and then defaults on the agreement, the 12 month period begins with the date of the default (and not from the date of the Notice of Enforcement)."

 

this is what I'm confused about:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that TEC warrants no longer expire after 12 months (since 6 April 2014). All that the EA needs to do if they have indeed failed to take control of goods within 12 months is to start again at the compliance stage. Sadly TEC keep giving out the wrong advice. I'm not at work so can't give you the CPR amendment details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bazm, yes that seems to be the case. So what happens in a case such as this where an out of time can't be filed, but the warrant is kept alive when the poor person wasn't even aware of the fine in the first place? Is there no way to get bailiff action stopped in the same way an OOT would have done?

 

It sounds like the rules have changed in the favour of the bailiffs..... in time these guys will be driving their vans around with warrants that are years old picking up every car with a link to any old ticket irrespective of whether the driver has ever been informed of the PCN. *rant over*

 

:!:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This subject needs clarifying with TEC given that during this week I had an enquiry from a police officer who had attended a debtors property regarding bailiff enforcement of three road traffic debts and the police officer called TEC herself whilst at the debtors premises and was informed by the TEC officer that the warrant (which had been authorised by TEC on 27th April 2014) had expired and that accordingly, the bailiff was not allowed to enforce it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair though, they (tec) wouldn't have any idea what has gone on with the warrant after it was issued, its the council themselves and the enforcement company that would have access to the notes not tec, so they shouldnt be able to say whether it has expired based only on when they authorised the warrant

None of the beliefs held by "Freemen on the land" have ever been supported by any judgments or verdicts in any criminal or civil court cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if the bailiffs are allowed to revert to the compliance stage after a year does that mean that they don't even need to have a payment agreement in place? If they do I think we need to clarify exactly what constitutes a payment agreement. Especially if there is no other way of quashing the filthy thing.

 

Any thoughts?...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The warrant expires after 12 months if the enforcement agent is unable to take control of goods.

 

If the debtor has an agreement to pay and defaults then the 12 months starts again.

 

It is not up to the bailiff company to say well the 12 months has gone so lets start it again. The warrant expires and the fine goes back to the council. It is then up to the council whether they want to get the fine re-authorised by the tec and pay the fee again.

None of the beliefs held by "Freemen on the land" have ever been supported by any judgments or verdicts in any criminal or civil court cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I think this is where the confusion comes in. Josephbloggs is that by the new regs? If so, surely the debtor must agree to a payment arrangement.

 

The point is that someone hasn't got their facts straight (maybe us, maybe TEC, maybe council) and the bailiff is still acting on a warrant that is over 12 months old without ever having the agreement of the "debtor" to any arrangement - therefore defaulting is irrelevant.

 

How can this be stopped?

Link to post
Share on other sites

TEC today have advised;

 

"We are not legally trained and have not been advised of any changes to the procedure, therefore, as far as we're concerned the warrant has expired"

 

"You should still file the out of time and it will probably still be processed - if it's not then you will have evidence from us that the warrant has expired"

 

The plot thickens.

 

Could anyone help me with the best way to fill in the out of time and I'll keep you all posted on progress?

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that the warrant has expired then you cannot (and do not need to ) file an Out of Time witness statement. The local authority or enforcement agent would need to make an application to court (not the Traffic Enforcement Centre) to EXTEND the warrant. That has not been done and accordingly, the warrant cannot be enforced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In relation to road traffic debts, if the bailiff has been unable to 'take control of goods' or enter into a payment arrangement with the debtor within 12 months of the date of the warrant then the warrant expires. This means that the warrant has 'ceased to have affect' (the legal terminology) and accordingly, the bailiff cannot enforce the debt. The warrant would need to be returned to the creditor (the local authority). The debt to the council is still legally owing but bailiff fees must be removed.

 

A warrant may be extended by a further 12 months. This is provided for in the regulations (in this case Regulation 9.4 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013) and the procedure is outlined in the Rules (not the regulations).

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/regulation/9/made?view=plain

 

The application to extend the warrant can be made by EITHER the local authority or the enforcement company. An application (to extend) may only be made ONCE. The Rules specifically provide that such an application must be made BEFORE the initial warrant expires.

 

According to the Traffic Enforcement Centre the warrant has expired and it would seem than no application to extend has been made. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the warrant has expired .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...