Warrants of Control (Parking) Discussion thread

[Fair-Parking]

There is no warrant in this case - not even one yet unlawfully prepared by Marstons who no doubt produce something that looks like a warrant by using the commercial software template that they purchased from One Step Solutions.

 

Except that that bailiff companies have no legal authority to prepare warrants - which is not the same as copying one that has been already prepared lawfully by the local authority concerned. That IS allowed - but if the local authority ever prepared a genuine warrant in this case, I'll give you the money mesself.

 

The TEC authorisation almost certainly went to the local authority's back office agents who then passed an electronic transmission of the name of the person, the address and the registration number (and probably several hundred others ) to Marstons under what is known as a 'batch'. This operation almost certainly bypassed the local authority as well.

 

But passing on names. addresses and registrations by back office companies to bailiff companies is NOT the same as preparing a warrant which the back office companies also cannot legally prepare.

 

So I expect any 'warrant' that might appear here to come from Marstons no doubt with invented times of TEC authorisation and the passing on the 'enforcement agent' written into it.

 

If anybody doubts that Marstons and no other party will print the 'warrant' if the OP asks for one, then they need to ask themselves why Marstons and other bailiff companies purchase this software - if not to use it.

 

One Step Solutions will not doubt be at Parkex at the Ricoh Arena later this month with up to a dozen bailiff companies also in attendance

 

Go check them and their services out.

[Peterbard]

To the op please ignore the preceding post, it should really be in a discussion thread where unproven theories are examined. There is no evidence to support anything mentioned here.

[Fair-Parking]

I might have know DB would be the first to criticise. Only the ignorant who have no idea how PCN enforcement is carried out (even the Ministry of Justice admit that it relies on a 'presumption of guilt') would make a stupid comment like that. In the decade I have been helping the public I have seen hundreds of Marstons' 'warrants', but I have NEVER seen a local authority prepared one.

 

Indeed Marstons have stood up in court on more than one occasion and argued that they are entitled to issue warrants.

 

Incidentally I also have the High Court on my side having prepared a case in July 2012 whereby the same points were put forward and the case was won with the client who came to me being awarded over £4000 costs. It is rare indeed fro parking cases to go to the High Court -indeed the Judge summed the case up by adding that the local authority and their bailiffs were terrorising their own community The only difference here is that the bailiff company was not Marstons, but they used the same misguided principle.

 

Why don't you wait and see where this 'warrant' comes from before trying to belittle others when frankly you have no idea what you are talking about?

[Fair-Parking]

Had this Marstons bailiff had a 'warrant' with him then surely he would not have waltzed off with a van whose make and registration number would not have tallied with said 'warrant'.

 

Now why would any bailiff leave the one overwhelming legal document at home when its production at the scene would have given him (on the surface at least) the authority and credibility to effect a legal seizure?

 

As I said - there was no warrant.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Lol, you always make me laugh fair-parking.

In fairness, no, we don't carry warrants. We carry a facsimile of the electronic warrant. That's all we need to carry.

Is there authority to enforce? Yes.

Is there a real paper warrant? No.

Does there need to be? No.

 

 

Back to the op.

Can the van be taken? Yes. You will need a tools of the trade claim or a 3rd party claim. No need for formal interpleader, just a 3rd party claiming ownership in the correct format to marstons is usually enough.

 

Can the "sold" car be taken? Yes. If it was sold after becoming bound. If before, you will need to provide a receipt, proof of funds transfer and V5 in new keeper name.

 

Hiding it as DB has said can work, but in the age of anpr , not always does it work.

Beware of storing on third party property. An application can be made without notice to enter third party property so that wont work either.

[Fair-Parking]

The last poster appears to have little or no understanding of parking enforcement which aligns perfectly with the 'we've always done it this way, so it must be right' misnomer prevalent within the bailiff industry. Of course no matter how many you enforce unlawfully, it will never become lawful.

 

It helps to if you read my posts more carefully. I made it quite clear that if (and only if) a local authority and not its back office company or appointed bailiffs had prepared a warrant. then you most certainly can use a smart phone to show the COPY. However what I did make clear (twice) is that there was NO warrant in this case.Thus no copy.

 

As I say it will come from Marstons when it finally sees the light of day. The local authority will not be aware of its existence, which would be odd if it had prepared it.

 

Yes I suspect that there is an element of humour in all this for those making money out of not conforming with the law as it is written

[Bailiff Advice]

There is no warrant in this case - not even one yet unlawfully prepared by Marstons who no doubt produce something that looks like a warrant by using the commercial software template that they purchased from One Step Solutions.

 

Except that that bailiff companies have no legal authority to prepare warrants - which is not the same as copying one that has been already prepared lawfully by the local authority concerned. That IS allowed - but if the local authority ever prepared a genuine warrant in this case, I'll give you the money mesself..

 

Hi FP,

 

You and I have spoken on this subject on many occasions over the past 7 or 8 years.

 

This is a subject that you are very passionate about, and the level of research that you have undertaken over the years regarding the 'issuing' of warrants is really quite incredible. I think that it is fair to say, that the subject matter is one that we have already agreed to 'disagree' on.

 

PS: My Parkex badge arrived yesterday so I may see you there.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

The last poster appears to have little or no understanding of parking enforcement which aligns perfectly with the 'we've always done it this way, so it must be right' misnomer prevalent within the bailiff industry. Of course no matter how many you enforce unlawfully, it will never become lawful.

 

It helps to if you read my posts more carefully. I made it quite clear that if (and only if) a local authority and not its back office company or appointed bailiffs had prepared a warrant. then you most certainly can use a smart phone to show the COPY. However what I did make clear (twice) is that there was NO warrant in this case.Thus no copy.

 

As I say it will come from Marstons when it finally sees the light of day. The local authority will not be aware of its existence, which would be odd if it had prepared it.

 

Yes I suspect that there is an element of humour in all this for those making money out of not conforming with the law as it is written

 

FP, please show where it says that a warrant must be shown.

Please show where it says that a warrant must be in paper format.

 

As I said, the warrant is a digital instruction. Enforcement agents transfer that data onto a document that lists all the relevant details, and for the purpose of enforcement, becomes the warrant.

You keep saying that it cant be done, and yet it is.

Also, can you quote a single case where a judgment backs up what you claim? No? Thought not. And yet, if I could be bothered to, which I cant, I could produce cases that have been through court where it was found that the EA can enforce, and did enforce.

 

If you want to believe your own fairy stories, that's fine, but don't spout s***e if you cant back it up. All you will do is land debtors in more debt.

[brassnecked]

Lets assume I had a bailiff call today Grumpy, wrong street right number imagine I hit him with my walking stick and drove my car away as he tried to seize it, what are my odds of going to jail for obstruction as a third party, bearing in mind I threatened him with a tolchocking after he refused to show me the digital Cr@p warrant not in my name on his phone?

 

Assume I have cctv video and audio of it sent to police, and I am in Manchester now hours after the call 100 miles away from home on business?

[lookinforinfo]

FP,

can you quote a single case where a judgment backs up what you claim? No? Thought not.

 

I thought he did that on Post 8.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Lets assume I had a bailiff call today Grumpy, wrong street right number imagine I hit him with my walking stick and drove my car away as he tried to seize it, what are my odds of going to jail for obstruction as a third party, bearing in mind I threatened him with a tolchocking after he refused to show me the digital Cr@p warrant not in my name on his phone?

 

Assume I have cctv video and audio of it sent to police, and I am in Manchester now hours after the call 100 miles away from home on business?

 

What??

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

I thought he did that on Post 8.

 

No, he claimed to have won. But has supplied no case details or judgement to that effect.

[unclebulgaria67]

No, he claimed to have won. But has supplied no case details or judgement to that effect.

 

What are the legal rules on issuing a warrant ?

 

Surely a warrant must be issued by a legally authorised person ?

 

A warrant must be legally authorised, before any enforcement.

 

Once authorised it can be electronically held and a paper version need not be shown.

 

If it is found that enforcement activity is taking place without warrants or they are being issued afterwards, then presumably this would be illegal ?

[Fair-Parking]

Reverting to the use swear words and answering your own questions (before allowing any reply) are sure signs of a lack of co-ordination, but for the benefit of those who can't (or wont) read, the High Court case number was HX12X02808 and was heard before Justice Owen on 18 July 2012. The local authority appealed but without success.

 

Further the law that requires a local authority (and NO other party) to prepare a warrant is CPR 75.7.3.The rules requiring a bailiff to carry a warrant are Department of Transport statutory guide to local authorities 10.68. These points were accepted by Justice Owen.

 

All smart phone 'warrants' show is that the bailiff company sent it to the bailiff usually after rapidly printing one in its own office a few minutes earlier. A classic example of smoke and mirrors, because the thing that can never be shown is that the source of the 'warrant' lies with the local authority. The trail always goes cold in the bailiff company's office

[Fair-Parking]

And by the way - I did not claim to have 'won'. I merely prepared the case for others to argue in court and the judge accepted the arguments in what was a 49 paragraph submission.

[Bailiff Advice]

 

Further the law that requires a local authority (and NO other party) to prepare a warrant is CPR 75.7.3.

 

The rules requiring a bailiff to carry a warrant are Department of Transport statutory guide to local authorities 10.68. These points were accepted by Justice Owen.

 

And before anyone mocks FP, they should read CPR 75.7.3 for themselves. There is little doubt remaining. It is known that CPR 75 is to undergo amendments and I have little doubt that 7.3 will be amended in some way.

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part75#IDAGQ0HC

 

FP....The DfT guidance has changed so I will check to see if 10.68 is still applicable or whether it has been renumbered etc.

[Peterbard]

I was never under the impression that anyone else but the authority constructed the warrant, but they do so on instruction from the TEC.

 

I am unsure what difference this makes TBH.

[Fair-Parking]

As I have said in the past decade I have NEVER come across any local authorities who have prepared a warrant but have seen hundreds prepared by bailiff companies and presented as 'genuine'. Perhaps the comments of Lord McNally speaking in the House of Lords on 19th July 2011 might when added that as far as the preparation of warrants is concerned 'bailiffs are not applicants to the proceedings' - source Hansard 20th July 2011 might be considered.

 

In short they have no legal authority to prepare warrant and if they do it has no authority

[Peterbard]

I dont thnk thy will be prepared as a pice of paper FP it will be an eletronoic process, what is wrong with the bailiff printing the document as sent by the authority. Is this not a trivial point ?

[Fair-Parking]

Once again, people are not carefully reading what I have said. I have made no reference to paper warrants. I'm well aware that warrants can be prepared on computers and transferred electronically - my website has covered this point for years - but this does NOT happen and no completed warrant prepared by a local authority is ever transferred to a bailiff company and thus whatever appears on a smart phone is NOT a copy. It is document generated by bailiff companies and thus fails to comply with CPR 75 7 3, Lord McNally's comments and the judgment of Mr Justice Owen.

 

As I have said because bailiffs have always done it this way does not make this illegal procedure any more lawful.

[unclebulgaria67]

I dont thnk thy will be prepared as a pice of paper FP it will be an eletronoic process, what is wrong with the bailiff printing the document as sent by the authority. Is this not a trivial point ?

 

Can't be trivial, given that it authorises seizure of goods if payment is not made.

 

There has to be a proper legal procedure, where an employee authorised by a local authority has gone through a process of conducting relevant checks e.g has a complaint been received or payment been made. After checks are made, they then sign off on the warrant being issued, with date/time being recorded.

 

It can't just be an electronic process, with details added to a spreadsheet and sent out for enforcement. The council should have a separate record and be able to print off a copy of the warrant they authorised.

[Peterbard]

Just reading back . Also FP the statutory guidence mentioned is now obsolete, procedure for baiiffs enforcing penalties is now covered by the TCE 2007.

[Fair-Parking]

The department guide is the working document that allows TCE 2007 to applied

[Fair-Parking]

Sorry that should have read Traffic Management Act 2004. TCE 2007 and particularly Schedule 12 does not apply to parking enforcement with its reliance of a presumption of guilt. Thus the courts listed which are the High Court, the County Court and a Magistrates Court cannot and do not issue warrants for parking as this falls below their required legal minimum standard of proof which in the first two is 'on the balance of probabilities' and 'beyond all reasonable doubt t' in the latter. Presumptions of guilt by an administrative court (TEC) which does not issue any warrants simply do cut the mustard.

 

I have explained this before and like this thread none of protagonists have been able to produce any proof to the contrary, their comments being limited unsupported doubts and personal abuse. That is a compliment.

[brassnecked]

Can't be trivial, given that it authorises seizure of goods if payment is not made.

 

There has to be a proper legal procedure, where an employee authorised by a local authority has gone through a process of conducting relevant checks e.g has a complaint been received or payment been made. After checks are made, they then sign off on the warrant being issued, with date/time being recorded.

 

It can't just be an electronic process, with details added to a spreadsheet and sent out for enforcement. The council should have a separate record and be able to print off a copy of the warrant they authorised.

Where will this end, the bailiff sends a MMS with a jpeg of the warrant to the debtor?