Author Topic: BAILIFF - 7 Days. Warrington Borough Council, PCN Driving onto a Bus Only Road, Scotland Road - Warrington,  (Read 160 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

TheConfusedMotorist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Hi guys.

So, I received a Bailiff letter from Bristow & Suitor very recently over a PCN dated 11 June 2022.  It was sent to an old address and I was totally unaware I had this PCN. Now, I'm not sure if me or the wife even drove onto the bus lane its been so long.  I am unsure if we informed the DVLA when we moved out of the property in Feb 2022, I am sure we did.  Is there anything to do now? I rang the Bailiffs and they said I have 7 days from 08/Oct/24 to pay or an enforcement officer will come.  I got a number for The Traffic Enforcement Office and they emailed me a TE9 & TE7 form to return to them asap.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.




https://maps.app.goo.gl/5Yak6nAmEFacYPCx7



@cp8759 I apologise if there is no need to tag you - I'm just worried about the time I may have to reply/do something


Much appreciated
« Last Edit: October 11, 2024, 04:31:49 pm by TheConfusedMotorist »

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


stamfordman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
  • Karma: +16/-0
    • View Profile
What is the VRM (numberplate) of the car.

What address is on the V5C logbook.

Pressman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Alina Pressman
    • View Profile
The letter you have received is not an official enforcement notice. It is a preliminary attempt by Bristow and Sutor to verify addresses they believe are connected to the debtor.

This correspondence is to confirm your whereabouts, which would enable them to proceed with enforcement actions.

Contact the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) on 0200 123 1059, quoting the PCN number WI81858182. During the security check, provide the postcode linked to your previous address or the one on your vehicle's V5 registration document.

It is crucial to keep your current address private. Doing so would update the Warrant with this information, potentially leading to bailiffs turning up at your new residence.

If the TEC accepts your previous address, the Warrant is legally defective and unenforceable without liability on the council. Be sure to document the date you spoke to TEC, as this proves when the Warrant showed your old address, protecting you from tampering with the issue date should bailiffs attempt to act against you at your new address

In legal terms, Bristow and Sutor are not authorised as a company to collect money or enforce a Warrant of Control, as this power is strictly reserved for an individual enforcement agent with a valid certificate under section 63(6).

It appears Bristow and Sutor may be attempting to bypass paying the enforcement agent’s commission, profiting directly from fees and charges, which raises concerns about the integrity of their process.

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1693
  • Karma: +37/-27
    • View Profile
??

The letter says a NoE was sent on 26 Sept.


OP, addresses on letters and notices are vital, therefore 'I received' needs to be examined.

What you've posted is a reminder, it states clearly that a NoE was sent on 26 Sept.

The question is, to what address?

So OP, let's call your current address A and your previous one B(let's hope there isn't a C or D).

Which address is on the reminder dated 8 Oct, A or B?
To which address was the NoE sent? (presumably the same, but I'm asking nonetheless). If you don't know then phone and ask.

If neither is A, how did you get hold of the reminder?

Enceladus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 367
  • Karma: +8/-0
    • View Profile
What is the VRM (numberplate) of the car.

What address is on the V5C logbook.

Yes please. What is the reg of the car?

Is the name and address on the Bristow & Sutor letter your name & current address? We don't need to see it.

Did you receive the Notice of Enforcement allegedly sent on 26th Sept 2024, that's mentioned in the letter?

TheConfusedMotorist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Ok guys, thanks for your replies.


1. Yes please. What is the reg of the car?
- NL59 UBW

2. Is the name and address on the Bristow & Sutor letter your name & current address? We don't need to see it.
- Yes

3. Did you receive the Notice of Enforcement allegedly sent on 26th Sept 2024, that's mentioned in the letter?
- Yes and binned as spam I believe, I'll ask the wife. (Which I guess was quite a dumb thing to do)

4. Which address is on the reminder dated 8 Oct, A or B?
- A

5. Contact the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) on 0200 123 1059, quoting the PCN number WI81858182. During the security check, provide the postcode linked to your previous address or the one on your vehicle's V5 registration document?
- Vehicles address was my current one when it was sold 4-5 weeks ago.  I've already rang them quoting and gave my current address as its the one on the letter and which the V5 was registered.

6. It is crucial to keep your current address private. Doing so would update the Warrant with this information, potentially leading to bailiffs turning up at your new residence?
- They know my current address

I may have acted with naivety having never had a PCN before.  So Bristow & Sutor know my address as do TEC.  Is it easier to just pay it? - It rubs me the wrong way, as its from over 2 years ago and I was completely unaware  :-\

stamfordman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
  • Karma: +16/-0
    • View Profile
Who did you sell the car to - private or trade? Last logbook issued 13 September 2024 - a key is what date the logbook was changed before that but I'm not sure it's worth bothering as it's so long ago and that you didn't get the PCN and other letters probably means the V5C was wrong.

I think you should pay it to avoid a visit fee and try the out of time process.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2024, 07:32:41 pm by stamfordman »

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5209
  • Karma: +122/-4
    • View Profile
@TheConfusedMotorist it is crucial that you determine all the dates that are relevant. I suggest you make two subject access requests:

1) One to DVLA asking for your full address history, including the dates of any changes of address on the vehicle record, and
2) One to Warrington Borough Council, asking for a copy of all correspondence issued.

Once you have that information we can work out if it's all your fault, or whether there was some failure on the part of the council, and therefore whether it's worth exploring the Out of Time route.

In the meantime you may want to consider paying now to avoid any further charges, if your Out of Time application is successful you should get everything back.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor nor a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Pressman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Alina Pressman
    • View Profile
Others will provide input on addressing the traffic contravention directly.

From a legal enforcement perspective, it is important to note that any enforcement action concerning the vehicle is ineffective, as you have already sold it. Under paragraph 18(a)(1)(d) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, bailiffs are prohibited from using force to gain entry to a residential property when recovering unpaid traffic contravention debts.

It's important to be aware of a potential vulnerability. If you own another vehicle outright and park it outside your property, it could become an easy target for enforcement actions.

While this letter raises certain issues, it is not a statutory notice. Despite being contractually authorised to recover debts on behalf of the local authority, the company in question lacks the statutory power to enforce the warrant of control. Such authority is explicitly reserved for individuals holding an enforcement certificate, as section 63 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 outlines.

Technically speaking, the demand letter requests £190, which includes a £75 compliance fee. If you pay the £115 balance directly to the limited company, the enforcement power would no longer be exercisable under paragraph 6 of Schedule 12 of the same Act.

The bailiff company may misleadingly argue that they have a statutory right to allocate the payment between themselves and the council, citing regulation 13 of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014. However, this position is legally flawed.

By applying for a fee assessment under Civil Procedure Rule 84.16, you will clarify that Regulation 3 of the 2014 Fees Regulations exclusively reserves the statutory fee structure for enforcement agents. Importantly, such authority is granted solely to individuals certificated under section 63 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. This process ensures transparency and reinforces enforcement fees' legal boundaries, safeguarding your position while promoting accountability.


You can pay the £215 directly to the council and provide formal written notice to the limited company, confirming that the debt has been settled per the Warrant of Control. As per paragraph 59 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, the enforcement agent bears liability should they proceed with any enforcement action linked to a no longer enforceable Warrant. This approach safeguards your position and ensures compliance with the law, preventing unnecessary enforcement steps.

Enceladus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 367
  • Karma: +8/-0
    • View Profile
"23/07/2024 13:16   Exported to Enforcement Agent(Bristow & Sutor)
23/07/2024 13:13   Warrant Request Accepted
23/07/2024 08:45   Warrant Requested WWI000624 batch:59851
07/06/2024 14:29   Notice of Debt Registration Issued
07/06/2024 14:29   Debt Registration Accepted
20/07/2023 00:03   Off hold no compensate
06/07/2023 12:46   On Hold: PRE DEBT (20/07/2023)
08/09/2022 16:23   Charge Certificate Issued"


There are some anomolies in the case progression history on the Council's website.

The Charge Certificate was issued on the 8th Sep 2022. The case seems to have been put "On Hold" and came off hold on the 20th July 2023.

Regardless there was no progression to the next stage until 7th June 2024 when the charge (debt) was registered with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court.

The debt registration would have generated an Order for Recovery (Notice of Debt Registration) which would have been posted to the Registered Keeper address as originally provided by the DVLA.

However that's 21 months since the Charge Cert was posted. 21 months is surely an unacceptable delay even if it's legal?

On 23rd July 2024, so 6 weeks later after the OfR, a warrant was authorised and given to Bristow & Sutor to enforce. Bristow & Sutor sent a Notice of Enforcement on the 26th September 2024. That's very tardy and atypical at more than 9 weeks. The NoE's are normally dated and supposedly posted within a couple of days of the warrant.

It implies to me that B&S likely sent an NoE to the original RK address before the end of July 2024, the warrant couldn't be enforced and the bailiff tracked the OP to his current address, informed the Council who applied for the warrant to be re-sealed (re-issued) to the new address and then B&S sent a new NoE to the new address on 26th Sep 2024. Alas the OP destroyed that document as junkmail.

Your best option to minimise the potential damage to your wallet seems to be to pay the £195 and then submit an Out of Time application and Witness Statement. That's to avoid an additional bailiff charge of £235, assuming the bailiff has an enforceable warrant which I suggest they do have.

Your OOT will need to be clearly worded and factually accurate to stand any chance. So don't submit anything until you have all the facts nailed down and reviewed. But don't delay, else the Council will claim that you closed the case by paying the PCN.

If the TEC refuse your OOT then you would be in for a minimum of a further £119 to have the decision reviewed. £119 is more than the £75 enforcement fee included in the £195.

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1693
  • Karma: +37/-27
    • View Profile
@Enceladus,.. But don't delay, else the Council will claim that you closed the case by paying the PCN.

With respect, the council's view on this point is not relevant* as regards TEC who would decide upon any OOT on its own merits.

OP, cp is correct in that you must find out to which addresses the notices were sent AND the address on the present warrant which can be done by asking the council and/or B&S before you fire off an OOT.

You get one bite at this cherry, so get yourself informed. 



*- perhaps if they considered it closed they might not twig that they would need to object to an OOT application and thereby allow TEC to issue a revoking order by default!

@Pressman, From a legal enforcement perspective, it is important to note that any enforcement action concerning the vehicle is ineffective, as you have already sold it.

Sadly this could be a problem for the current owner unless the OP notifies and shows to B&S that they've disposed of the vehicle. Whether the OP wants to act on this is up to them. But just imagine if you'd just bought a vehicle from a private seller and then found it clamped outside your house a few weeks later with a bailiff's notice stuck on the windscreen!

OP, a vehicle is a means to an end, not the end itself. You can slip and slide, dodge and weave, batten down the hatches and try all sorts of peripheral avoidance measures, but unless you engage with the core issue it will not go away.

IMO, 4 players:
DVLA - when was your V5C updated to your current address?
Council- a SAR and who may or may not object to any OOT application to....
Traffic Enforcement Centre - who alone will decide upon your application; and
B&S - what notices have they sent in total and who you must avoid being permitted to add £235 to the debt.

You say that your V5C did have your current address when the vehicle was sold. It therefore must follow that unless this is address C or D then between when you moved last and the sale you must have updated it. IMO, at present your only chance to succeed at TEC and thereby revert the process back to the original PCN is to show that the V5C was updated soon after the contravention.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2024, 01:15:29 pm by H C Andersen »

TheConfusedMotorist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
I really do appreciate your replies lads.

I would suspect paying it is the only due course.

"You can pay the £215 directly to the council and provide formal written notice to the limited company, confirming that the debt has been settled per the Warrant of Control. As per paragraph 59 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, the enforcement agent bears liability should they proceed with any enforcement action linked to a no longer enforceable Warrant. This approach safeguards your position and ensures compliance with the law, preventing unnecessary enforcement steps."

I take this to mean, I contact the council and ask to pay what debt I owe to them without the added fee's from B&S?  Would they not just pull a wall up and say the debt has now been passed on? If they allow me to pay, should I email B&S with the payment confirmation and tell them in no other terms that I will no longer be corresponding with them over any charges they may deem fit As per paragraph 59 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007?


Thanks again all

Pressman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Alina Pressman
    • View Profile
If the council responds by directing you to "contact the bailiffs", their email constitutes clear evidence that you have acted in good faith to resolve the debt within the legal bounds of the enforcement process.


When notifying Bristow and Sutor of the payment, keep your communication brief and focused. Provide the PCN number and confirm that the debt has been fully paid. For your records, it is prudent to send yourself a copy to timestamp this correspondence.


By adhering to Paragraph 59 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, you have demonstrated your full compliance with the law.


From a legal standpoint, an enforcement agent has not yet been appointed to your case. If you choose to settle the debt as per the warrant, you are not liable for any additional fees.


The Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 stipulates that such fees are applicable only to certificated bailiffs. Bristow and Sutor, lacking the legal status of a certificated bailiff, are not entitled to recover these fees.


It's worth noting that bailiff companies often cultivate the misconception that they can act as bailiffs. However, this status is strictly reserved for individuals holding a valid certificate under Section 63 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1693
  • Karma: +37/-27
    • View Profile
Why would you want to pay £215, the debt is £190 until at least the 15 October this being 'within 7 days' of their letter dated 8 Oct??

And as the debt involved is the same whether you pay the council or the bailiff, then why not just pay the bailiff rather than unilaterally step outside the process, possibly miss the 15th and then get embroiled in complicated arguments and risk a breakdown in communications which results in a visit from the bailiffs. Be practical, would you rather have a visit or would you not? Why operate on the brink just for the hell of it when the risk is yours?