Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1927 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

Hi all, first time poster so please bear with me and i will do my best to make sense.

 

I moved in to my current property in October,

in December I received two letters regrding non payment of council tax for my previous property informing me that a liability order had been made against me in June 2016 and June 2017 and that all their efforts including council enforcement officers had failed and they were looking at getting an attatchment of earnings.

I ignored the letters as i was happy for them to have an attatchment of earnings.

 

After speaking with my work I discovered that an atttchment of earnings for both the letters had been obtained (and sure enough money was deducted from January so all well and good I thought)

 

However when I returned home yesterday there was a "control of goods" letter through my door (the letter is dated a week agao)

- hand delivered (plese see attatchment)

 

I called the council and this is wht i have discovered

- I have 5 liability orders against me!

 

2014 (attatchment of earnings)

2015 (attachment of earnings)

2016 (set monthly plan up)

2017 (set monthly plan up)

2018 (Newlyns) liability order June 18

 

I am told for the Newlyns I have to deal with them directly.

After doing some reading I believe I should of received some form of correspndance from Newlyns before a control of goods letter ie notice of enforcement etc

 

obviously with the letter through my door it has more than doubled the amount of the originl debt.

 

I know not to let them in and they cant take anything etc

(Only have my partners car on the driveway which is registered and owned by her fathers business)

 

I am hoping for some advice on what to do now regarding the Newlys letter

 

Sorry it was long winded,

I was trying to give as much detail as I could

 

the debt is for a property I lived at on my own and I have only lived with my partner since November 2018 in a new property

- not sure if that is relevent but thought i best add it

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

as you've so many it might be a mute point but..

are the council aware of your correct address?

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

Newlyn posted the letter to my current address

 

the letter has my current address on it in the top left and the "property detials" for the debt are my previous address (which is where the debt is for)

Link to post
Share on other sites

would i be right in thinking that due to them tracing me to my new address tht that proves they havent given me notice of enforcement, as in, if they found out i hve new ddress then they cnt argue they unknowingly sent it to a previous address and tht notice of enforcement is still valid?

re they not in breach of the following?

 

 

Paragraph 7(1) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 states;

 

(1)An enforcement agent may not take control of goods unless the debtor has been given notice.

 

 

 

Regulation 6(1) of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 states;

 

 

 

Minimum period of notice

 

6.—(1) Subject to paragraph (3), notice of enforcement must be given to the debtor not less than 7 clear days before the enforcement agent takes control of the debtor’s goods

Link to post
Share on other sites

traced you afterwards when they got no response

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

should they not have sent a notice of enforcemnt or some other form of correspondance to my new address (which they clearly have) before just turning up with a control of goods letter?

 

whats my options regrding this

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they didn't know your new address than they are OK sending correspondence and bailiffs to your last known address.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eveidently they know my new address as they posted a control of goods letter through the door yesterday (dated 3/1/19)

So surely tracing me to my new residance means they have that address to send correspondence to given a lack of reply frok correspondence that may have sent to previous address.

Seems to me they've just rocked up and posted a control of goods letter through the door and that's all I have and the letter itself looks like a template I could knock up.

 

So I have no options as they've followed the correct procedures even though this is first contact I've had from them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the notice of enforcement is sent to the last known address that the council had for you.

that gives you 7 days to do 'something' else thre bailiffs think its £75 fee is added to the debt.

 

then without a response they will trace you and pers serve the above that costs £235 = total fees they can add is £310

I think they have to serve NOA to correct address?

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

The above info is incorrect.

 

The council are only obliged to send correspondance to your last known address.

 

However, the bailiff must send correspondance to your present address. Until they have served a NOE to your present address and given you seven clear days, they cannot move onto the enforcement stage.

 

Can you confirm whether a NOE letter with a £75 charge has ever been sent to your present address?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only correspondence I have had from Newyn is the control of goods letter through the door yesterday nothing else (except a text tonight saying "You IGNORED our Removal Notice the REMOVAL UNIT is operating in **** ***. Call NEWLYN NOW on 01604633001 to arrange. Ref: *******")

 

I had two letters in December to my present address from the council so they obviously have this address as my last known address.

 

The charges must total £353.43 as that is the difference between what the council told me the debt amount is and the total on the newlyn letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case the bailiff cannot charge the £235 enforcement fee. My suggestion is to get on to the council tomorrow, explain that the bailiff has added the enforcement stage fee without giving you a notice of enforcement. You suspect that they sent it to your previous address but legislation is clear in that it must be sent to your usual address. The legislation is the Taking Control of Goods Regulation 2013 part 8(1):

 

8.—(1) Notice of enforcement must be given—

 

(a) by post addressed to the debtor at the place, or one of the places, where the debtor usually lives or carries on a trade or business;

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, i will compose some dort of letter for the council.

I am however concerned this baliff will rock up when I am at work and my partne/kids are home.

 

Can i mke the baliffs bck off given the situation with the letters or lack of letters etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hide any car, keep all doors locked and tell your wife not to let the bailiff in he might claim he as a right to force entry, not so for Council Tax.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

From elsewhere:

Different enforcement address

 

If after an initial attendance, the debtor is found to have moved to a different address, enforcement can take place at that address, provided a new notice of enforcement (NoE) is sent to the debtor there.

 

If the creditor has reason to believe that the debtor may have moved, it may be worthwhile undertaking a trace before starting enforcement action, so that the NoE is sent to the correct address first time round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes..as I thought, thanks to RT

 

as I said..

 

With council tax enforcement, a local authority are required to use the 'last known' address.

Did you notify the local authority of your forwarding address when you moved in october?

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

the local authority which i assume is the council wrote to me at my current address at the beginnin of December.

Newlyns posted by hand a letter 8th January (dated 2nd january)

 

As i registred on the electrol role and registered the council tx for this property in October I assume that counts as informinmg them of my forwarding address.

 

I don't understand why they can claim its ok to post the NOE (IF THEY DID) to my previous address when it is clear they both have my bew address as they have both used it to deliver correspondance

Link to post
Share on other sites

good you have proof. [assuming current and then councils are the same?]

now use it to your advantage.

poss even a complaint straight to the council ceo if your council ctax dept is run by capita .

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

forgive my naivity but a complaint about what exactly?

tbh i thought i would need to contct newlyn as a priority given tht they have said they will return and i dont wnt the kids scaring etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...