PCN Debt and the EA. *success*

[mikeymack2002]

Sorry for the long read...

 

 

Over the past 9 months I have been involved with a debtor that had numerous debts including some that were with an enforcement agent. I have been able to arrange a number of the debts to be made part of a payment plan with the OC minus the EA fees and we have kept to the arrangement plan.

 

 

One of the debts with the EA was for a PCN, the debt was in excess of £440-00 including EA fees of £310. The warrant was issued last July and sent to enforcement on the 16/07/2015. As I have been dealing with this debtor for some time I knew there was just a small window of opportunity to get this debt added to the repayment plan.

 

 

BUT...

 

 

There is always a but with me, in this particular case I asked them to consider writing off this debt. I am very surprised to say they agreed with me and have since confirmed this on headed paper via email. Therefore by sitting it out this debtor saved a massive £440.... I had to keep an eye on this as there may have a chance it could have gone to a 2nd EA to deal with....

 

 

Suffice to say with each debtor this does get easier to deal with as each debtor is unique. Which is why I am still posting on CAG. Also that I enjoy what I do here.

 

 

Secondly:

 

It has been noted by myself that there have been posts stating that dealing with this type of debt and not dealing with it is called debt avoidance this is simply not true!! I see this method of dealing with the EA acceptable as if the debt is returned to the OC the fees of £310 are wiped out and it is possible to arrange a much more viable and manageable repayment plan with the OC or like in this case have the debt written off. The money saved by not paying the EA fees has always in my cases been used to clear the debts of the person I am helping,

 

 

Everyone has their own way of helping debtors, mine is to get the debts paid at a reasonable rate IF they are enforceable, or like the debt above dealing with the EA or not in this case. So 'sitting it out' as it is called by some is frowned upon it can have its benefits at times.

 

 

I have always found that talking to the OC is always best and can produce some great results, talking to the EA also has some results but normally they don't care and just want their fees regardless. Even if a debt is out for enforcement you don't always need to pay the high fees or face losing your person items.

 

 

Currently this debtor is very happy that another debt is gone for good and that the help they are getting is correct and very helpful. To coin a phrase 'it pays to talk'

 

 

 

 

Note to admin:

Although this debt was a PCN I have posted here because it was in the hands of an EA, please don't move it as it may be helpful to other readers /posters.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Looking forward to seeing you post the attachments showing the correspondence involved and their final write off letter.

[Coughdrop]

Looking forward to seeing you post the attachments showing the correspondence involved and their final write off letter.

 

Is that suggesting you don't believe what MM has stated? Obviously I have no way of knowing, but I'd be surprised if correspondence to a third party would be shared on here, even in a redacted form.

 

I see no reason to doubt this, anymore than we would doubt the claims of anyone else giving help on bailiff matters (yes, I've worded it carefully to keep it generic as intended, and avoid suggesting anyone in particular!)

[mikeymack2002]

It's ok CD I was expecting this anyways, GTSTL is an EA and would know from my wording what I have said is correct, I have no reason to lie because if other debtors follow this and are able to see what I said is true then that will suffice,

 

 

I did not want to put up any documents, firstly it would identify the town and the PC its a short thought to the EA company. After all it is possible to create a look-a-like redacted document is it not? That would be too much effort on my part just to post information on a forum, I see no point whatsoever.

 

 

This town also operates a different parking structure and they informed me that a disabled user can park in all zones except an X zone all day including 'residents only bays' providing that the badge and time clock are displayed correctly, then no PCN will be issued. Suffice to say when I passed on this information to the driver they have had no more PCN's because of overstaying the permitted 3 hours on lines and all day in certain car parks for free....

 

 

I can of course redact the payment plan document but until I get the original from the office I will refrain from posting the email version up. Then and only then if the debtor agrees...

 

 

I just wish that some would be happy but alas this is not to be, but given the information is now posted it will be up to each reader to draw their own conclusions from it! Good or bad....

[lookinforinfo]

Well done Mikey Mack -first for helping the debtor and then for saving them so much more than had they muddled through on their own. I have aired my views quite a few times on the Forum about the scale of fees charged by EAS. Also the punitive charges that are levied on PCNs including the original fine. These charges were brought out by politicians who have little or no concept of how the poorer people in this Country and to hit them with £45 if paid within two weeks when they do not have that money available is shameful.

perhaps Theresa May will adjust some of those outrageous costs as proof that she does understand that we are not all wealthy Etonians.

[Coughdrop]

Well done Mikey Mack -first for helping the debtor and then for saving them so much more than had they muddled through on their own. I have aired my views quite a few times on the Forum about the scale of fees charged by EAS. Also the punitive charges that are levied on PCNs including the original fine. These charges were brought out by politicians who have little or no concept of how the poorer people in this Country and to hit them with £45 if paid within two weeks when they do not have that money available is shameful.

perhaps Theresa May will adjust some of those outrageous costs as proof that she does understand that we are not all wealthy Etonians.

 

Hear! Hear!

 

Good post lfi!

[Peterbard]

The EA wrote the debt off, this seems a little odd as the debt was not his.

 

I remember something someone said about debt advisers being regulated, CCL and registered with the ICO etc.(, yes, I've worded it carefully to keep it generic as intended, and avoid suggesting anyone in particular!)

 

Still good story either way.

[mikeymack2002]

Well done Mikey Mack -first for helping the debtor and then for saving them so much more than had they muddled through on their own. I have aired my views quite a few times on the Forum about the scale of fees charged by EAS. Also the punitive charges that are levied on PCNs including the original fine. These charges were brought out by politicians who have little or no concept of how the poorer people in this Country and to hit them with £45 if paid within two weeks when they do not have that money available is shameful.

perhaps Theresa May will adjust some of those outrageous costs as proof that she does understand that we are not all wealthy Etonians.

 

 

Thx Lookin... Since my enrolment in CAG firstly for help, then once I was able to I then moved on as it was easy for me to do, mostly for myself then others. I don't often post successes here but this one was worth it, why? Because it covered so many recent threads involving sitting it out paying directly and so on. But in this case it worked and a great result. I am hoping that others may follow what I have done and talk to the OC and get things in order.

 

 

Next, the debtor was not aware of any real help being available last year but now they are getting to grips with it and becoming debt free within the next 18 months. (At very little or no cost to themselves postage envelopes) nothing for me as I don't charge)). (the odd 4 pack is gratefully accepted lol)

[Peterbard]

TBH i don not think you should be able to post"successes" on here without some kind of proof.

 

Nothing personal, but how are we to know ? Most of the successful actions on here involve other members and a historical record of some kind on the appropriate thread.

 

You are proposing a course of action and claiming it is successful without any supporting evidence, well of course we could ll do that, and many forums do, not this one generally though.

[Bailiff Advice]

 

One of the debts with the EA was for a PCN, the debt was in excess of £440-00 including EA fees of £310.

 

The warrant was issued last July and sent to enforcement on the 16/07/2015. As I have been dealing with this debtor for some time I knew there was just a small window of opportunity to get this debt added to the repayment plan.

 

in this particular case I asked them to consider writing off this debt. I am very surprised to say they agreed with me and have since confirmed this on headed paper via email. Therefore by sitting it out this debtor saved a massive £440

 

I see this method of dealing with the EA acceptable as if the debt is returned to the OC the fees of £310 are wiped out and it is possible to arrange a much more viable and manageable repayment plan with the OC or like in this case have the debt written off.

 

Everyone has their own way of helping debtors, mine is to get the debts paid at a reasonable rate IF they are enforceable, or like the debt above dealing with the EA or not in this case. So 'sitting it out' as it is called by some is frowned upon it can have its benefits at times.

 

Currently this debtor is very happy that another debt is gone for good and that the help they are getting is correct and very helpful. To coin a phrase 'it pays to talk'

 

Note to admin:

Although this debt was a PCN I have posted here because it was in the hands of an EA, please don't move it as it may be helpful to other readers /posters.

 

MM,

 

The last line of your post is important as you stress that this thread should remain on this section of the forum as it 'may be helpful to other readers'. In order to help others, you have not actually provided details of the advice that you gave to the debtor who you were assisting. Instead, you have merely stated that the enforcement company have agreed to write of their fees of £310...and strangely, to also write off the local authorities debt as well (which is something that I do not believe an EA can legally do??).

 

As this appears to be a road traffic warrant, it will have upon it, the VRM of the vehicle at the time of the contravention. Advising a debtor who is subject to a road traffic warrant to 'sit it out' is something that I would personally not feel happy with doing as it puts the vehicle at serious risk of being seized by ANPR etc.

 

Additionally, I would never ever advise a debtor who is subject to a magistrate court fine, to 'sit it out' as to do so, could lead to the enforcement agent forcing entry into their property (which of course the regulations permit).

 

In order to help other posters and visitors, could you please explain the reason why the enforcement agent wrote off all their fees...and most importantly, on what basis they were able to write off the local authorities debt as well.

 

PS: You should be congratulated for the help and support that you provide to debtors.

[mikeymack2002]

Although what you say DB is very much like you.we hear of lots of successes from regular posters. Some have a business nut I don't. I do this because I can and want too.

 

I've never heard you ask a certain poster for proof. Nor I. I tale them at their word, so should you. I have zero need to lie. It's pointless and irrelevant as far as I am concerned. But I challenge you to show us where with proof you have successfully helped a debtor save money.

 

I can if need be get testimonials from those I've helped, including this debtor. Bit as stated it could be deemed as a lie.

 

I wish that you would give what I did a try and see if you are as successful as I have been.

 

 

If you did then saving a debtor large amounts of money could make you feel great inside, just like I am feeling now. That can never be taken from me especially given my personal circumstances as you are well aware. So for me this thread will always be a monumental success. One of many to come I will say.... good luck DB with how you try to pull others down but for me the smile will last for a very long time take it from me it's a great feeling.....

[wonkeydonkey]

Thx Lookin... Since my enrolment in CAG firstly for help, then once I was able to I then moved on as it was easy for me to do, mostly for myself then others. I don't often post successes here but this one was worth it, why? Because it covered so many recent threads involving sitting it out paying directly and so on. But in this case it worked and a great result. I am hoping that others may follow what I have done and talk to the OC and get things in order.

 

Next, the debtor was not aware of any real help being available last year but now they are getting to grips with it and becoming debt free within the next 18 months. (At very little or no cost to themselves postage envelopes) nothing for me as I don't charge)). (the odd 4 pack is gratefully accepted lol)

Well done MM.

 

It has always been the case 'it is best to talk' to creditors and try to come to an agreement rather than take the ostrich approach. In this case 'sitting it out' appears to have worked and the fact the PCN was found to have been issued incorrectly certainly goes to show it can be worthwhile digging your heels in until someone starts listening.

[Peterbard]

Although what you say DB is very much like you.we hear of lots of successes from regular posters. Some have a business nut I don't. I do this because I can and want too.

 

I've never heard you ask a certain poster for proof. Nor I. I tale them at their word, so should you. I have zero need to lie. It's pointless and irrelevant as far as I am concerned. But I challenge you to show us where with proof you have successfully helped a debtor save money.

 

I can if need be get testimonials from those I've helped, including this debtor. Bit as stated it could be deemed as a lie.

 

I wish that you would give what I did a try and see if you are as successful as I have been.

 

 

If you did then saving a debtor large amounts of money could make you feel great inside, just like I am feeling now. That can never be taken from me especially given my personal circumstances as you are well aware. So for me this thread will always be a monumental success. One of many to come I will say.... good luck DB with how you try to pull others down but for me the smile will last for a very long time take it from me it's a great feeling.....

 

I dont need to show anything,because I'm not claiming anything. If others wish to encourage this then so be it. I am sure we will have many more similar success.

 

Sorry just before the edit, i dont usually ask other posters for proof MM because they generally are introduced to the case on here and the success and the path to it is documented.

[Peterbard]

. Also the punitive charges that are levied on PCNs including the original fine. These charges were brought out by politicians who have little or no concept of how the poorer people in this Country

 

Yet they seem to have cars ?

 

I have worked extensively with " the poorest in the community", and I can assure you the genuine poor do not drive tax and insure vehicles.

[AndyOrch]

Looking like another usual outcome for the Bailiff forums threads..this is getting too personal and intergating.

 

Keep it on topic and if nothing further to add please refrain from posting.

 

First and last warning..as you know what will happen

 

Andy

[Coughdrop]

The EA wrote the debt off, this seems a little odd as the debt was not his.

 

I remember something someone said about debt advisers being regulated, CCL and registered with the ICO etc.(, yes, I've worded it carefully to keep it generic as intended, and avoid suggesting anyone in particular!)

 

Still good story either way.

 

Apologies for my lack of knowledge, but what has debt advisers holding a Consumer Credit Licence got to do with this post?

 

You've lost me in your logic there DB. I'd have thought I'd have understood the connection, as once I held a Consumer Credit Licence and was registered with what was the OFT, running a highly successful charity as a debt adviser. If you remember, you were disbelieving, and extremely nasty to me about it until I told you the name of the charity, then you changed rather a lot when you realised it was true.

 

Had you targeted the post at me I'd have understood, but you make it very clear you did not, so perhaps you'd be kind enough to explain. If it was actually targeted at me, then thank you for mentioning something of which I am (rightly I think) very proud.

[Coughdrop]

Yet they seem to have cars ?

 

I have worked extensively with " the poorest in the community", and I can assure you the genuine poor do not drive tax and insure vehicles.

 

The difference between the comparative and the superlative DB - lookinforinfo's post makes total sense when you bear this grammatical point in mind.

[Bailiff Advice]

MM,

 

The last line of your post is important as you stress that this thread should remain on this section of the forum as it 'may be helpful to other readers'. In order to help others, you have not actually provided details of the advice that you gave to the debtor who you were assisting. Instead, you have merely stated that the enforcement company have agreed to write of their fees of £310...and strangely, to also write off the local authorities debt as well (which is something that I do not believe an EA can legally do??).

 

As this appears to be a road traffic warrant, it will have upon it, the VRM of the vehicle at the time of the contravention. Advising a debtor who is subject to a road traffic warrant to 'sit it out' is something that I would personally not feel happy with doing as it puts the vehicle at serious risk of being seized by ANPR etc.

 

Additionally, I would never ever advise a debtor who is subject to a magistrate court fine, to 'sit it out' as to do so, could lead to the enforcement agent forcing entry into their property (which of course the regulations permit).

 

In order to help other posters and visitors, could you please explain the reason why the enforcement agent wrote off all their fees...and most importantly, on what basis they were able to write off the local authorities debt as well.

 

PS: You should be congratulated for the help and support that you provide to debtors.

 

As MM stated earlier today, this thread and his advice may assist posters and all debtors. At present, it is not known why the fees were removed or why the enforcement company were able to write off a local authorities debt !! Hopefully this will be addressed when MM responds further.

[Coughdrop]

Yet they seem to have cars ?

 

I have worked extensively with " the poorest in the community", and I can assure you the genuine poor do not drive tax and insure vehicles.

 

Actually, a surprising number do drive cars, though not all tax and insure them (insurance being void if a car is untaxed anyway). This is, of course, by no means restricted to poorer, or the poorest people - plenty of people have untaxed, and thus uninsured cars.

 

A few years ago I was pulled over in an on the spot road check at a motorway services, with a joint-agency venture. I was fine, but in the 'tent' next to me was a Bentley which was seized. It can be surprising those who have cars illegally.

[Bailiff Advice]

Coughdrop....can you please keep this thread on topic !!!

[mikeymack2002]

Sorry I have not been back as had an awful episode and not back in good form.

 

 

Ok I'll try to explain the best I can under these circumstances.

 

 

Time line:

 

 

Early '15 the debtor was parking with a blue badge incorrectly and got some PCN's.

 

 

By March they had escalated to the higher amount due. Mid June '15 one had gone to the TEC but was appealed they won that one with help from the CAB I think. One was missed and enforcement commenced. We are now at 15/07/2015...

 

 

The others were paid and cleared and dealt with. Somehow a new batch of PCN's were issued and the debtor didn't appeal. By now we are in March '16 I was asked for help. I asked the PC to allow a payment plan and have the remaining 6 PCN's suspended from going to the TEC and included in the payment plan. This was agreed and payments have been made on time, as the plan is ongoing until 06/2017

 

 

Now the one that got away, this went to the EA and they attended and did the usual thing and called added fees but got nowhere for payment. As we all know a PNC debt is valid a year only. This expired on the 16/07/2016. I called the PC and asked for the debt to be written off as uncollectable due to the payment plan already in force, TBH I was expecting this one to be added to the plan as well, but to my surprise they wrote this one off, I think this was because of the arrangement plan and that payments were regular and on time and the age of this PCN may have been a deciding factor... So far payments for 4 months have been on time and at a little more than they were asking for by just £2.50pm... (showing willing to clear the debt)

 

 

Since I am still very groggy from my bad fit I hope I have covered the points I missed in my original post for this I am sorry, I think this was the build up to the fit when I started to post originally.

[mikeymack2002]

As MM stated earlier today, this thread and his advice may assist posters and all debtors. At present, it is not known why the fees were removed or why the enforcement company were able to write off a local authorities debt !! Hopefully this will be addressed when MM responds further.

 

 

As stated earlier this debt was returned because it was out of time, 1 year. Therefore the fees would automatically come off. I was unclear earlier in the day but have explained above. Once again I am sorry for the confusion but was over excited at sorting this debt out, a side effect of my condition I am afraid...

 

 

So sometimes you can save money by sitting it out and not facing the debt, the debtor has been lucky I think in this case due to my keeping an eye on the time limitis can conversing with the OC.... .

[mikeymack2002]

Also some extra history here >> http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?464374-Forced-entry-for-PCN

[mikeymack2002]

I also had started a topic re the CPR rules and a PCN this thread was moved and I have been unable to locate it. I have added the letter that was dated the 15/05/2016 and asked for advice but the thread disappeared so here as more history and a fully redacted PDF... This was the final contact letter from the EA in regards to this PCN.

 

 

The rest is listed above...

Doc1.pdf

[stu007]

Off Topic post Unapproved

 

Keep to the Topic of this thread