Author Topic: Lewisham PCN - 622 (One or more wheels footpath) - bailiff stage very late  (Read 445 times)

0 Members and 95 Guests are viewing this topic.

I am seeking advice on how to handle a penalty charge notice (PCN) from Lewisham Council that has escalated to Newlyn bailiff enforcement. Here are the details:

Council Name: Lewisham Council
Alleged Contravention: Code 622 - Parked with one or more wheels on footpath...
Key Dates and Correspondence:

03/07/2023: Received parking ticket on car. [Image 1]
07/08/2023: Notice to owner received by post – fine was £110. [Couldn't find the copy, but was received]
11/09/2023: Charge certificate received by post – fine increased to £165 + £9 court fee. [Image 2]
12/02/2024: Newlyn debt enforcement letter by post – claims clamp was removed and states intention to file criminal damage claim, amount demanded was £484. [Image 3]
13/05/2024: Newlyn letter by post – still asking for £484. [Image 4]
31/05/2024: Newlyn letter by post – 'final notice - removal' stating an enforcement agent will remove goods from my home. [Image 5]

I regrettably forgot to appeal in time, and at this stage, I fully expect and am willing to pay the original fine as it is my fault for not paying in time. They claimed to have clamped my car but I have yet to see any clamp at all, or any warning that they would do so, yet they've added £310 to the fine. The additional fees from Newlyn enforcement agents are just extortionate, and I really don't have the means to pay them. I need to find some kind of defense against these additional charges, or a way to get the charge reverted back to a notice to owner and pay the council directly, through a complaint or however I can really.

[Edit: I looked at bailiffadviceonline.co.uk and found the section on fees, £75 of the increase should have been accompanied by a notice of enforcement letter, which should have been received 7 days before taking any action. This is the letter I didn't receive, through a postal error or their error I don't know but I definitely didn't receive this letter.]

So far my ideas for a defense are:
I did not receive any advance notification about the enforcement actions, including clamping, before the fee increased.
The first notice from Newlyn mentioned a clamping action and an increase in fees, but I had no knowledge of any clamp being placed or removed from my car.
I am a full-time university student with limited time and financial resources, which contributed to the delay in addressing this issue. Additionally, I felt harassed and overwhelmed by the significant increase in the fine amount.

I have been advised over the phone by lewisham to submit TE7 and TE9 forms to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to challenge the enforcement action and explain the delay in my response.
My draft for each of these is as follows:
TE7: "The delay in my action was due to several factors. As a full-time university student with limited time outside of my studies, I struggled to address this matter promptly. Additionally, I am not currently employed, which has limited my financial resources and ability to manage unexpected expenses. When I received the notice from Newlyn Enforcement Agents on 12/02/2024 alleging that my vehicle had been clamped and the fees had increased to £484, I felt harassed and overwhelmed by the substantial increase. I had a misguided belief that the fine would not be pursued due to its perceived low severity and did not fully understand the implications of the enforcement process until receiving the final notice. Upon realising the seriousness of the situation, I have acted promptly to resolve this issue fairly."

TE9: "I am contesting the enforcement action on the grounds that the enforcement agents did not follow proper procedures in notifying me of their intentions prior to clamping my vehicle and charging excessive fees. I did not receive any communication or warning regarding the alleged clamping and subsequent fee increases until I received the notice on 12/02/2024."

I also plan to formally complain to Lewisham Council about the procedural irregularities and the excessive fees charged by Newlyn. My general draft for this:
"I did not receive any prior communication or warning from the enforcement agents regarding the alleged clamping of my vehicle. The first notice I received from Newlyn stated the vehicle had been clamped and the fees increased to £484. Additionally, I dispute the claim that I removed the clamp from my vehicle as I had no knowledge of any clamping action being taken.

I am willing to pay the original fine amount but seek to dispute the additional enforcement fees due to the lack of proper notification and the questionable claim of clamp removal. I request that Lewisham Council review this matter and instruct Newlyn to provide evidence of their actions or adjust the fees accordingly."

I probably only get one chance to do this so, would really appreciate anyone who could give this a read through or give suggestions as to what I should do, or let me know if this isn't worth going through.

Thank you in advance!

Image 1:


Image 2:


Image 3:


Image 4:


Image 5:
« Last Edit: June 03, 2024, 06:43:42 pm by pcI01 »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Reading your narrative, it seems you did receive all the statutory documents but just ignored them; is this a correct summation ? If so, you really are on a very sticky wicket. Most problems like yours on this forum (and we see quite a lot), are due to the address on the V5 Registration Certificate for the vehicle being out-of-date.  The only avenue open to you is, as Lewisham have told you, to submit an Out-of-Time Witness Statement. However, being out-of-time, means Lewisham can object to it, and will do so and state that all the statutory documents were sent to the V5 address, but no response was received from the recipient.  TEC will then reject your OOT. You can then request a county court judge review, but this is not cost-free.

All the additions to the PCN penalty are statutory right up to the bailiff £75 fee, then there is a fixed visit fee, (not sure of the exact amount).  So complaining about amounts fixed in law will get you nowhere.

With the amount outstanding it seems to me you'd serve yourself best by contacting bailiffadviceonline and ask them for advice on whether you have a credible basis for the OOT WS.  They can assist with its preparation, for a small fee, but there is no guarantee of acceptance.  You are in a bad place, frankly.

The only positive thing is that if you pay the bailiffs now to avoid more costs, is that payment has no affect on your OOT WS.

Agree Agree x 1 View List

+1 @Incandescent


Here is the link to bailiff online: https://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/

Sorry, but IMO the OP cannot submit a WS, irrespective of whether it's late because they do not satisfy any of the permitted grounds for submission. OP, for your reference these are as follows(source Environment and Traffic Tribunal):

Where an Order for Recovery has been made, liability for the penalty can then only be challenged in the following circumstances:

You did not receive the postal Penalty Charge Notice or Notice to Owner in question; or
You made representations about the Penalty Charge Notice to the enforcement authority concerned but did not receive a Notice of Rejection from that authority; or
You appealed to the adjudicator against the rejection by the enforcement authority of your representations but had no response to the appeal; or
You had paid the penalty charge in full.
If, and only if, one of these applies, you may make a witness statement.


In your case, you admit that you received the NTO but did not make reps at all therefore none of the grounds applies in your case.

But so far you have not dealt with the following:

The Order for Recovery*;
The Notice of Enforcement**;
The notice informing you that you are now liable for the Enforcement Stage fee**.

*- from the council
**-from the bailiff.

But you received subsequent letters from the bailiff which suggests that their previous notices were addressed correctly.

Bailiffadvice is your need, not OOT WS.

I don't think you have any grounds to file a TE9, and there is nothing to defend because you've already lost. At most you have a customer service complaint against Newlyn for sending you an incorrect letter template, but if you've simply ignored all the statutory correspondence then you're just going to have to pay the charges including the charge certificate, the debt registration fee and most if not all of the bailiff fees. You don't get to pick and choose which bits you are willing to pay.

Being a full-time university student is neither here nor there, I was a full-time university student when I argued my first case and I mopped the floor with Bristol City Council.

Maybe you have grounds to make a complaint against Newlyn which might see some of their charges waived, @bailiffadviceonline will be able to advise you properly about that.
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 or 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 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

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