Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Block and bounce back all emails.   Block any text messages  Ignore any letters unless it's: - a Statutory Demand - a Letter Of Claim - a Court Claimform via Northants bulk.  
    • Dave if I run you by a different analogy.  Imagine you are doing 45 mph down Park Lane and a police car has clocked you doing that. When you get the Notice of Intended Prosecution they claim you were speeding in Piccadilly. So although you were speeding you weren't speeding in Piccadilly. Result -case would be thrown out. Same thing here. The contract refers to an area in Ruislip with a postcode  of HA4 OFY. On every  pcn  they have put the car in HA4 OEY. I admit that they have the correct postcode on the claimform but the car cannot be in two places at once. By pursuing Rocky on the wrong postcode means they had no reasonable cause to ask the DVLA for his details.Met does not have a contract to issue PCNs in that postcode. It is not desperation though it would be embarrassing for Met in Court and the case should be thrown out. The NTD can say whatever it wants but the NTK fails to specify the parking period and fails to ask the driver to pay S9[2][b] so that PCN does not comply with the Act so only the driver liable. And times on the photographs on the PCN are just that. Times on a photograph not on the PCN as stated in the Act.   Your strongest point is the PCN [the NTK ] is not compliant and as you were not the driver you are not liable so should go first.  Not only is it not compliant but the postcode on the NTK is different from the one on the Claim form. If the one on the NTK was wrong then Met have breached Rocky's GDPR since they had no reasonable cause to contact the DVLA as they did not have a contract  that covered that postcode and so misled the DVLA. That should be sufficient to win.  With regards to their WS sometimes the rogues leave it till the last moment to send to prevent Defendants being able to respond to what has been said. So don't send your WS until the last day. If theirs hasn't arrived by then add to your WS that their WS not received and ask that it be ignored.If it does arrive in time, then you can still amend your WS to answer any of their spurious points. As a lay person you will be granted a days latitude at least. PS do not foret to include S9[2][b] in your WS
    • Quote of the day “Head in hands and reviewing how useful my contact book will be in five weeks' time.” a Tory lobbyist, who’s not doing so good - Marie Le Conte
    • Another email ( they are coming thick and fast now) - slightly more threatening, telling me how great they are for trying to help me find a solution and how bad i am for ignoring them.     
    • I also started getting OTPs to a mobile number that I since have had to change after 10 years in case it was compromised.  The only card that I had provided to Lyca was a virtual card that they had stored for payment processing.   TLDR - Lyca are claiming no breach, there is definitely a breach. ICO are useless and havent heard from Lyca.   
  • 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

Illegal to tow your car away? bailiffs for ctax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6589 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

The police can legally tow your car away (or at least find a legal reason to do so), that's a given.

 

But if bailiffs threaten to tow away your car because you haven't paid your council tax or a parking fine for example, is this legal? How about tow-away areas in town centres. Can they legally tow your car for parking on a double yellow line?

 

Well not according to your car insurance policy, which is a legal document because you are required to be insured by law. Your car insurance policy will state that if your car is taken without your permission it is classed as theft.

 

So you have a legal document which states that your car cannot be legally towed away. If it is, it has been taken without your permission; i.e. it has been stolen. Any thoughts on this?

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting dilemma - I would think that if your car was towed away by anyone with a court order allowing for this, then it would be legal, and would not be considered theft.

 

I think a similar situation applies when you are parked illegally on the public highway, such as double-yellow lines and council car parks, although there is debate on the legality of penalties (at least in terms of the wording)

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but even though a court order may effectively appear to make this legal in the eyes of the law, that may not actually the case as it contravenes the terms and conditions of the car insurance policy, which remember is a legal document.

 

It appears to be even less likely to be legal when a car is towed away because it's on double yellow lines etc. because this has been done simply as a result of a bye-law, not a court order.

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The car insurance contract is between you and the insurance company. Effectively you would have breached the contract by parking in such a place that has caused your car to be towed away - or your actions have caused a court order that has resulted in your car being towed away.

 

That would be my view.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but even though a court order may effectively appear to make this legal in the eyes of the law, that may not actually the case as it contravenes the terms and conditions of the car insurance policy, which remember is a legal document.
The document may well be a legal document, but so are the Ts&Cs you sign with the bank...it is only legal for as long as the court deems it so.

 

A court issued order/warrant for removal would certainly over-ride any contract between you and the insurers, although as Alan says, the insurers could take this as a breach initiated by you, and refuse to pay out.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really can't see where a car insurance policy comes into it. Its not a "legal" document in the sense you seem to mean - like an act of parliament or statutory regulations. Its simply the contract between the owner/driver and the insurance company as to the terms of the insurance. No way will it ever overule a Court order or have any influence on what bailiffs do.

 

The bailiffs can levy distress on your car if they have a warrant. This means they can take it off your drive or from outside your house. If they can't get in your house then they'll take what's outside so best park your car out of the way somewhere if you think its at risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bailiffs can levy distress on your car if they have a warrant. This means they can take it off your drive or from outside your house. If they can't get in your house then they'll take what's outside so best park your car out of the way somewhere if you think its at risk.

 

Well the bailiffs can't take my car even though it's parked on the street, but don't worry, the original question is theoretical.

 

However it is possible that your car cannot be towed BEFORE the people in question have a court order, which would generally be the case if your car was towed for being parked say in a car park and you hadn't paid the parking fee.

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

However it is possible that your car cannot be towed BEFORE the people in question have a court order, which would generally be the case if your car was towed for being parked say in a car park and you hadn't paid the parking fee.

 

There's no Court order needed. Its all been done away with now like a lot of other civil liberties that Tony Bliar and his lot have got rid of. Its virtually an administrative process in which there are limited grounds for appeal - most people don't appeal so all the more money in the Councils' and therefore the Government's cash registers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's no Court order needed. Its all been done away with now like a lot of other civil liberties.....

 

No it hasn't been "done away with", and that's what I'm getting at. Blair and co have introduced these so -called laws, but they may go against the constitution (Bill of Rights, Human Rights Act to name but two) and be illegal.

 

These acts were put in place to protect us specifically so that people like Blair couldn't do what they (think) they have done. The thing is that most people don't realise it and just pay up.

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it hasn't been "done away with", and that's what I'm getting at. Blair and co have introduced these so -called laws, but they may go against the constitution (Bill of Rights, Human Rights Act to name but two) and be illegal.

 

I have no idea what you're talking about, sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tha't's exactly why I started the thread, to establish how clued up people were on laws like this.

 

Just like bank charges are illegal, so are many bye-laws such as tow-away zones for cars. Local councils and the government have introduced many new laws, but many of them are not worth the paper they are written on. There are "higher" laws that overrule them.

 

For example, a bailiff cannot tow away your car if it is for business use. Given that parking laws are nowadays generally civil matters, it is unlikely that your car can be legally towed away as the council would have to determine in advance whether or not you car is for business or private use.

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it hasn't been "done away with", and that's what I'm getting at. Blair and co have introduced these so -called laws, but they may go against the constitution (Bill of Rights, Human Rights Act to name but two) and be illegal.

 

These acts were put in place to protect us specifically so that people like Blair couldn't do what they (think) they have done. The thing is that most people don't realise it and just pay up.

 

 

 

The Bill of Rights defence is used when whatever Act is being argued against (the favourites at the moment are the Road Traffic Act 1991, Road Traffic Act 1994, London Local Government Act 2000, etc] ) hasn't expressly repealed the Bill of Rights Act 1689 (enacted and formally entered into Statute following the Declaration of Rights 1689)

 

The acts in question are legal, they simply have mistakes in them (i.e they haven't expressley repealed the B.O.R)

 

So what's happening is that whilst an agency was intended to fine you, (i.e the CC) because of the ommision they are actually acting ultra vires.

If the name of the claim is blue and underlined, click it to see how I did it.

  • Halifax - 1st Request for £3748.80 sent 10/06 Settled in full and 5% donated


  • Goldfish - Unable to comment further, have a read


  • Lloyds - Data Protection Act sent 19/04 1st estimated request for £1500 sent15/08 LBA sent 08/09


  • Carphone Warehouse - Data Protection Act sent 19/04 Chased 04/07 ICO complaint 18/07


  • First National - 1st Request for £280 sent 05/05 Settled in full and 5% donated


  • Yes car credit - LBA sent 19/07 Court Action launched 26/09


  • HFC Bank - 1st Request for £100 sent 06/06 Settled in full and 5% donated


Like what I said? Hit the scales on the top right of my post. Cheers

 

Disclaimer - By giving advice, I am not putting myself across as a legal expert. Always seek professional advice.

Help the site, donate 5%, I have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did see something on TV very recently that stated it is illegal to tow a car whilst you are in it. So if anyone looks like getting their car towed, get in it, lock it and stay there!

Bank of Scotland: Claiming £699.47, SETTLED IN FULL at moneyclaim stage

Sisters NatWest - Claiming £1056 - SETTLED at AQ stage

Natwest CC - Claiming £804, SETTLED IN FULL at LBA stage

GF Natwest - claiming £749.33, moneyclaim filed - SETTLED IN FULL 04/08

MBNA: Claiming £150 - SETTLED IN FULL at LBA stage

HSBC: £1014 - SETTLED at LBA stage + pending charges removed

Sisters HSBC - £300 - SETTLED IN FULL at prelim stage

Yorkshire bank - claiming £496.68 - SETTLED IN FULL at court date stage.

Capital One - claiming £605.54 -SETTLED IN FULL

 

 

 

DON'T FORGET TO DONATE!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it against the law if your car is parked in a car park bay but the front tyre is just over the white line? and is it fair to be charged £120 on the spot to have the clamp removed just so your car dont get towed away...

 

i thought it would be more illegal to have 2 men demand you pay the money or have your car towed away and scraped... its almost a mugging

 

as far as im aware in the car park it said your car will be clamped & towed away if your car is parked illegally...

 

 

they need to make these laws clearer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Car parks - wheel clampers (or vehicle immobilisers as the industry calls them) have to be licensed under the 2001 Private Security Industry Act. If you are clamped on PRIVATE property then you should demand to see the clampers licence. If they refuse or don't have one - call the police as they are operating illegally. You can also report the matter to the SIA (Security Industry Authority) who operate the licensing of security operatives. Have a look at the SIA website for more info.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like bank charges are illegal, so are many bye-laws such as tow-away zones for cars. Local councils and the government have introduced many new laws, but many of them are not worth the paper they are written on. There are "higher" laws that overrule them.

 

There have certainly been attempts to argue these points as a defence. They have not succeeded so far. Maybe one day someone will get as far as the Court of Appeal or higher for a definitive judicial pronouncement of the constitutional law. Until then, long may the debate continue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is unlikely that your car can be legally towed away as the council would have to determine in advance whether or not you car is for business or private use.

 

Seylectric, is this because of the 'burden on business' statement found on Acts or is there some other reason that business/private would be discriminated?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in actual fact the council tried to tow away my car on Saturday after having given me three parking tickets in four days for not renewing my resident's permit.

 

More about my case on a seperate thread here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=5232

 

I was disgusted at this, I was late in renewing my permit because they misinformed me of the ticket office opening times, then they deliberately targeted me and treid to two my car DESPITE the fact that I wasn't causing an obstruction or anything like that. Seems crazy to me that they are allowed to block the road with their tow truck while they load up my car - and i'm not sure that they are, after all even the police are not supposed to park on double yellow lines while they book you so what gives the council these special powers?

 

Incidentally if this hasn't been mentioned yet, if you ever return to your car to find it being loaded onto a tow truck simply jump in the car, it's DEFINATELY illegal to tow or carry your car if you are sat in it!

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6589 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...