Equita and old council PCN - help

[new-me2010]

My son had a parking fine and like the majority put head in sand and its gone expensive.

 

Had a letter from Equita saying that an Enforcement Officer has attended. Gave us a date

 

!. We were home all day

 

2. No paperwork left to say he had been.

 

I've emailed to get proof but how should i proceed.

[Coughdrop]

This is the procedure that should have been followed.

 

He should have had a notice on the car allowing payment at a 50% discount.

 

After this a Notice to Owner is issued and at this stage your son could have appealed the PCN.

If payment is still not received, the debt increases,

a Charge Certificate is issued advising that if the debt is still not paid it will be registered with the County Court.

 

Failure to do anything at this stage results in yet another notice being sent called an Order for Recovery

- this is the stage to appeal and will advise the debt is now registered and a warrant will be issued.

 

One final chance is given with the Notice of Enforcement being sent by the bailiff company - was this received?

 

At this stage a repayment proposal can still be put forward.

If your son has failed to engage at any of the previous stages with the LA or the enforcement company,

then it's considered by the EA that he is not likely to want to pay, so they try to take control of goods.

 

If none of the above has been received, it's likely there's been a move of property.

 

To be honest, if your son has ignored all the above stages,

he needs to contact the enforcement company and arrange payment.

 

He will find it hard to get a payment arrangement in place now given the number of chances he's already had, but it can happen.

Ignoring it will not make it go away.

The fine will already have increased by £310.

If the process has been followed correctly as per above, then it's a case of getting it paid before anything further happens.

 

Does your son own the car or is it on finance?

 

Is it kept at your address?

 

You need to keep it on private ground not belonging to you, or in a locked garage if possible so they don't clamp it.

 

(Sorry about text - it's gone mad!)

[new-me2010]

Thanks coughdrop

 

He owns the car .......... its his only way of getting to work

 

Its at the end stage and wil be sorting it

 

But Equita said that the enforcement officer has visited our house ................... as I stated the family was home ALL day

 

Shouldn't the eO leave some paperwork here when he visits?, because nothing has been received.

 

That is the question I would like answering

[Coughdrop]

Glad to hear you'll be sorting it. At this stage there is no statutory obligation to leave any note. I think most companies should be able to provide GPS co-ordinates of the bailiff being at your property and I see no reason why this shouldn't be shared with you as a form of proof, otherwise there's nothing to stop them saying they attended, thus incurring you an extra £235, when you know they didn't.

 

As I said, there's nothing in the legislation which states a note of visit must be left if nothing was taken under control (as always happy to be corrected on this). If a car had been clamped or something, then there would need to be paperwork left. I assume nothing like this happened?

 

Unfortunately, even if no NOE was received giving seven days notice of a visit, it is likely a court would side with the bailiff company given the amount of previous correspondence which had been ignored. It does make it look like your son was trying to avoid paying the fine - possibly an expensive lesson I'm afraid.

[ploddertom]

 

I think most companies should be able to provide GPS co-ordinates of the bailiff being at your property and I see no reason why this shouldn't be shared with you as a form of proof, otherwise there's nothing to stop them saying they attended, thus incurring you an extra £235, when you know they didn't.

 

 

I have a problem with them doing this as any Tom, Dick or Harry can drive round the streets and claim to have visited x number of doors.

[brassnecked]

I have a problem with them doing this as any Tom, Dick or Harry can drive round the streets and claim to have visited x number of doors.

Have to agree with PT GPS data can be spoofed

[Coughdrop]

I have a problem with them doing this as any Tom, Dick or Harry can drive round the streets and claim to have visited x number of doors.

 

Have to agree with PT GPS data can be spoofed

 

I don't disagree. However, as far as I'm aware the legislation does not specify that any form of proof needs to be left. I'm more than happy to be corrected if this is incorrect. If it isn't, regardless of whether or not we have problems with it, it's how things are. Possibly something which should be addressed in the review?

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Anything can be spoofed and we often get claims that we haven't called. However, its only on 1 in 1000 cases we here this. Its actually very very rare.

 

No, there is no requirement to leave a letter. We are not the posties and we are not there to say hello. We are there to find, seize and sell your assets. That said, most companies do leave letters.

 

And why would we spoof gps data? Surely if the gps has hit the address, then its not exactly alot of work tl knock the door? I'm sorry but the idea of spoofing gps data is flawed and doesn't make sense. We would end up with a complaint on all cases, and not just the odd case.

[ploddertom]

My original thoughts on this still stand firm. One of the reasons for saying this is that in recent times Equita have been found to be using old stationery, thinking the 7 clear days did not apply to them etc etc. If any one company needs to be put to strict proof of anything they have done it is Equita - just because they are owned by Capita does not give them the right to run roughshod over anyone.

[mikeymack2002]

No one has asked if this is a Council ticket or a Private land ticket?

[ploddertom]

No one has asked if this is a Council ticket or a Private land ticket?

 

Granted no one has directly but Equita don't chase private ones.

[Coughdrop]

My original thoughts on this still stand firm. One of the reasons for saying this is that in recent times Equita have been found to be using old stationery, thinking the 7 clear days did not apply to them etc etc. If any one company needs to be put to strict proof of anything they have done it is Equita - just because they are owned by Capita does not give them the right to run roughshod over anyone.

 

I agree with you totally. The problem is there is no legal requirement for them to do this. It may be common practice by most companies, but it's not compulsory, whether or not we like it. I also think there should be a proof of visit, and hope this is addressed in the review, along with a few other things.

 

No one has asked if this is a Council ticket or a Private land ticket?

 

Mikey, the OP seems pretty sure it's for the ticket. PPC's don't involve bailiff companies, though they could if a default judgment was gained, in which case enforcement would be an option anyway.

 

In my first reply I outlined in detail the procedure for a PCN and implied clearly the OP should make sure everything had been followed. There was no indication that it hadn't, so IMO it's a fair assumption. It did cross my mind when making my first response, but I felt, given the nature of my response, it was unnecessary.

Edited May 23, 2015 by Coughdrop
typo corrections