Author Topic: *Bailiff* Westminster - Contravention12r - Now with Marstons - Wrong Address  (Read 633 times)

0 Members and 334 Guests are viewing this topic.

Westminster: WE52596990
The alleged contravention: 12r - Parked in a residents' or shared use parking place or zone without a valid virtual permit or clearly displaying a valid physical permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place where required, or without payment of the parking charge (residents’ bay)
Location
Examples: Wigmore Street F3


- EA visited old address not updated by DVLA (Currently fighting them on this) and then got mobile from new residents in my flat without my permission. Old neighbour was a pain in the ass and had multiple noise complaints against him, he may have given my phone number in breach of GDPR?

- Found out this has advanced to the baliff stage and now out for enforcement with Marstons who contacted and said they plan to visit on Friday, tomorrow.

- EA provided a screenshot of his system showing that the warrant or file is on a previous address. DVLA cocked up and didn't change my licence address and made that very difficult.

- EA claims they have my new address. No correspondence was received and PCN was not on my windscreen

- Photo evidence does not show notice sign with the vehicle, it's unclear if I am parked in a residents bay or not.  They could have faked this

I want to this fight and not pay.













PE2 and PE3 not yet submitted waiting for review here.


« Last Edit: June 20, 2024, 04:44:00 pm by JunotheCorso »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


DVLA cocked up and didn't change my licence address and made that very difficult.
A small but potentially very important detail - did you also update the address on the vehicle's V5C document? This is an entirely separate process to updating your licence, and changing one does not change the other.

DVLA cocked up and didn't change my licence address and made that very difficult.
A small but potentially very important detail - did you also update the address on the vehicle's V5C document? This is an entirely separate process to updating your licence, and changing one does not change the other.

I believe I did, but in that time period I also have several inquiries on-going with DVLA for other vehicles (purchasing and selling) many of which the V62's were lost on first submission and I believe that also happened with my personal vehicle when sending the V5C for this. I have various tracking numbers and receipts going to DVLA Swansea SA991BA

A bit of context about the inadequacy of DVLA:
For example, in early 2024 I had to complain to the DVLA executive that the CIO case worker unit did not process several V62's for purchasing of three vehicles from Auction. They lost the V62's from October 2023, I had to submit again in Decemer 2023, then complaint for about 3 months because they didn't look at the photo evidence sent to them via as requested and almost closed the V62 cases. DVLA executive apologised then stepped in, and still provided the log books late despite stating a date we would receive.

Someone internally in DVLA then went and looked up all of our company vehicles even going back to May 2023 and saw one vehicle which was untaxed but off the road and issued a fine for £300+, in a completely separate unrelated case to this. They also then issued fines for untaxed vehicles on all three of our new purchases stating they were untaxed in March 2024, in a malicious act. We received the logbooks in April 2024 and they issued untaxed vehicle fines for March 2024. The logbooks were issued by DVLA about 1-2 weeks before the April 2024 acc. They even couldn't adhere to the commitments made by the DVLA executive that stated which date out logbooks would be issued. We verified this by checking MOT status of the vehicle online which shows you when the last logbook was processed. So IF there were no postal issues, we had a two week time period to tax our untaxed new purchase or get fined. There is a stage 2 out of 3 complaint now with the DVLA for malicious retaliation and maladministration and misconduct.

(Note, we could not tax the vehicle, in the post office, online or via paper according to the CIO due to it being a casework investigation due to the value of the vehicles being high, which was my main gripe with them as we couldn't get the vehicles repaired and moving on.)

So that's a little background about DVLA being incompetent.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2024, 03:17:10 pm by JunotheCorso »

Put the other cars to one side for the moment. Do you have any evidence that shows you applied to the DVLA for a change of RK address on 74HT prior to the date of the contravention? Change of address can be done online, so maybe you have an email receipt?

One of the CEO's evidence photos appears to show a PCN envelope.

You appear to have the wrong forms. You've posted up Statutory Declaration forms. You need a TE7 Out of Time and a TE9 Witness statement.  You need to explain on the TE7 Out of Time application why you are late filing the Witness Statement and just stick to that.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2024, 03:47:30 pm by Enceladus »

The bailiff obtained your mobile number from DVLA, as you had provided it during your V5 application. They did not obtain it from a neighbour.

The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) will reject your TE9 based on the reasons you supplied. Instead, they will issue a new warrant using your updated address, allowing enforcement to proceed. Currently, the warrant lists your old address, rendering it defective and nullifying any enforcement actions taken under it. It is advisable to leave the defective Warrant of Control as it is. Correcting it is not your responsibility.

The bailiff obtained your mobile number from DVLA, as you had provided it during your V5 application. They did not obtain it from a neighbour.

The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) will reject your TE9 based on the reasons you supplied. Instead, they will issue a new warrant using your updated address, allowing enforcement to proceed. Currently, the warrant lists your old address, rendering it defective and nullifying any enforcement actions taken under it. It is advisable to leave the defective Warrant of Control as it is. Correcting it is not your responsibility.
Unless things have changed the VQ5 response from the DVLA does not include phone numbers. It's just the Registered Keeper's name and address.

The TEC will only re-seal the warrant when a request comes in from the Enforcement Authority. They won't do it automatically and nor can the bailiff request it. However the bailiff will be able to trace your current address if they want to. They'll inform the EA who can then request the re-seal on the warrant.

Not to mention the lack of an updated warrant won't stop them. If the car is parked in a public place and they find it, they'll just clamp it and threaten to tow it if you don't pay up. So I wouldn't park  it close to where you live, until this is resolved.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2024, 03:59:28 pm by Enceladus »

Put the other cars to one side for the moment. Do you have any evidence that shows you applied to the DVLA for a change of RK address on 74HT prior to the date of the contravention? Change of address can be done online, so maybe you have an email receipt?

One of the CEO's evidence photos appears to show a PCN envelope.

You appear to have the wrong forms. You've posted up Statutory Declaration forms. You need a TE7 Out of Time and a TE9 Witness statement.  You need to explain on the TE7 Out of Time application why you are late filing the Witness Statement and just stick to that.

I have screenshots from 2023 and recently showing that I could not successfully change my address online due to a mismatch in address. I tried every possible combination but nothing would work and it directed me to the paperwork.

I'll have to dig out an old receipt from royal mail going to DVLA and check

The bailiff obtained your mobile number from DVLA, as you had provided it during your V5 application. They did not obtain it from a neighbour.

The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) will reject your TE9 based on the reasons you supplied. Instead, they will issue a new warrant using your updated address, allowing enforcement to proceed. Currently, the warrant lists your old address, rendering it defective and nullifying any enforcement actions taken under it. It is advisable to leave the defective Warrant of Control as it is. Correcting it is not your responsibility.

DVLA doesn't have my mobile number I never include a mobile number or email address.

- If I submit the TE9, will they update my address but would the proceedings also reset and revert back to PCN stage?

- If I leave the defective warrant and they clamp my vehicle, as they have done so in the past, what remedy is there?

Sorry good spot, I actually did have the TE7 AND TE9 ready but uploaded the wrong forms.


Are you sure I don't need to submit a TE7 AND TE9 at the same time?

It is essential to recognise that submitting a TE9 with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is a critical measure. This action halts enforcement under paragraph 8.1 of Practice Direction 75. The TEC then assesses your TE9. If accepted, enforcement is suspended. Conversely, if rejected, enforcement will proceed.

If the authority obtains a new Warrant with your current address and the bailiff continues enforcement, this would constitute a breach, as the bailiff must issue a Notice of Enforcement (NOE) before taking control of goods. In such a scenario, you can file an N244 application under Civil Procedure Rule 84.13 to request the return of your vehicle and claim damages together with your legal costs.

Should you allow the warrant to remain defective and the bailiff locates your vehicle using an ANPR camera and removes it, your case would fall under Paragraph 66(6) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Often, with ANPR camera use, the bailiff acts on a defective instrument (warrant of control with an incorrect address), or the vehicle may not belong to the debtor.

In your situation, even if the warrant address is correct and a bailiff removes your vehicle, you should apply for its return and claim for damages and legal costs by completing an N244 application under Civil Procedure Rule 84.13. This is necessary because the bailiff breached regulations by failing to provide the debtor with an inventory when he removed the vehicle.

It is essential to recognise that submitting a TE9 with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is a critical measure. This action halts enforcement under paragraph 8.1 of Practice Direction 75. The TEC then assesses your TE9. If accepted, enforcement is suspended. Conversely, if rejected, enforcement will proceed.

If the authority obtains a new Warrant with your current address and the bailiff continues enforcement, this would constitute a breach, as the bailiff must issue a Notice of Enforcement (NOE) before taking control of goods. In such a scenario, you can file an N244 application under Civil Procedure Rule 84.13 to request the return of your vehicle and claim damages together with your legal costs.

Should you allow the warrant to remain defective and the bailiff locates your vehicle using an ANPR camera and removes it, your case would fall under Paragraph 66(6) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Often, with ANPR camera use, the bailiff acts on a defective instrument (warrant of control with an incorrect address), or the vehicle may not belong to the debtor.

In your situation, even if the warrant address is correct and a bailiff removes your vehicle, you should apply for its return and claim for damages and legal costs by completing an N244 application under Civil Procedure Rule 84.13. This is necessary because the bailiff breached regulations by failing to provide the debtor with an inventory when he removed the vehicle.

For the previous warrants which were defected with wrong address but paid do I need any specific reason on the form?

Does anyone have examples of individuals winning compensation and damages against a local authority or TFL when EA's have clamped/towed car with a defective warrant (wrong address).

This N244 form has been mentioned by a few people now but there doesnt seem to be any examples of wins that i can find?

Cases involving applications against enforcment using a defective instrument are typically unreported, as they are handled as "applications" under Civil Procedure Rule 84.13 rather than court claims. When applying for damages due to enforcement under a defective warrant, it is essential to provide evidence of the defect and quantify any special damages with supporting evidence. Failure to do so may result in the court awarding only nominal damages, such as £25 per day for the loss of a vehicle, as demonstrated in Burton v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWCA Civ 681.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2024, 01:57:46 pm by cp8759 »

OP, can we get back to what IMO is the central issue please which is what could you legitimately put in an OOT submission such as to give you the best chance of the OfR being revoked.

As a working hypothesis let's say that the council issued all necessary notices in a timely manner to the DVLA address. This then leaves you with why should the NTO be deemed not received by you?

Your claim, as with many we see here, is that the DVLA address was not your address for service; that you had notified DVLA of the change prior to the contravention; that there was no reason for you to access mail delivered to this address; that you were unaware that DVLA had not updated the change; and that you had done everything which could reasonably have been expected of you to rectify the situation with DVLA.

I've seen nothing in the form of hard proof which addresses the highlighted points. IMO, you* need to get back to these issues. You should pay the bailiff to cap your liability because all monies would be returned should your OOT and subsequent reps/appeal succeed.

It is the registered keeper's duty to maintain a current address for service. If an application is made in writing then the DVLA website gives the following:

If your new log book does not arrive
Contact DVLA if the new log book has not arrived after 4 weeks.

If you have not received your log book after 6 weeks and you have not notified DVLA, you’ll have to pay £25 to get a replacement.


*- your thread refers to a company in some posts, is the RK a person or corporation?


To answer two of the OP's questions.

Yes if you want to submit a Witness Statement that is late then you also need need to submit the associated Out of Time application at the same time. That seems to be the case here. You need to be very careful explaining why you are late else the council will likely object and the Court will likely refuse your application.

And yes you should put the correct current address on the OOT and WS. The Council well be informed of your application and will update the address on their system if it's different. A re-seal of the warrant with updated address will be requested from the TEC and the bailiff will also be informed.

The issue date on the V5c registration doc for your car is dated the 28th June 2022. That's prior to the date of the alleged contravention 17th Nov 2023.

So dig out your V5c. Is the name and address on it correct? IE you at the address where you actually live. Or is the car maybe registered to a company or a lease company? Don't assume anything, actually check the V5c.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2024, 12:32:32 pm by Enceladus »