Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: kellydose on October 17, 2024, 02:47:10 pm
-
Unfortunately I have a lot of life admin and charges to sort out this month, so I’m a bit overwhelmed.
The date of rejection was 9th January.
Well noted on the what the District Judge can actually do here. Definitely an unfortunate circumstance, and I just can’t keep up now to be honest.
The debt is around £600 so I was only considering the possibility of the lower review fee.
Do you know if anything can be done to negotiate the debt with bailiffs?
Otherwise I will need a payment plan, and I assume this will affect my financial record which is not ideal for me professionally…
-
Why have you left this to the last day?
What date is on the rejection from the Traffic Enforcement Centre?
The only issue that the District Judge is allowed to consider is whether or not you had a valid reason for being late submitting your Witness Statement. The DJ cannot consider issues such as the clamping of the car, your Blue Badge and the merits or otherwise of the original PCN.
So given the constraint do you believe you can convince a judge that you have a good reason, given that the registered keeper address on the V5c was incorrect for three years, as opposed to being the author of your own misfortune?
Also the £119 is for a hearing on the papers, you'd maybe stand more chance if you asked for a hearing in person with a much higher fee at £303. And the fees are not normally recoverable.
-
Hi,
Happy new year -
I did complete an OOT form however this was rejected and after this, I reached out to the council to attempt to pay the fine directly to them but this was unsuccessful.
I have today (14th day post OOT rejection) to decide whether to apply for a District Judge review (£119) or pay up because the bailiffs are back.
Does anyone have any recommendations?
Kind regards
-
why does a claim have to have a monetary value?
While a legal process exists to assess a claim, delving into the specifics at this stage would be purely hypothetical.
-
The bailiff operates under the reasonable assumption that the goods belong to the debtor unless presented with contrary evidence. This assumption, however, only limits the bailiff's liability under Paragraph 66 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Importantly, the debtor always has a remedy against the creditor as outlined in the Rule 6 notice.
Moreover, the creditor can recoup their losses from the bailiff through insurance.
(I can't imagine what a judge would make of a claim which was predicated on the claimant ignoring a NoE)
Regarding your concerns, I recognise you may not have a legal background. It’s important to note that a judge cannot make assumptions unless substantiated by fact.
Consequently, “ignoring a Notice of Enforcement” does not constitute a valid defence against a breach of Paragraph 10 of Schedule 12. Such a stance could lead to an appeal, which may complicate matters for a judge who begins to stray from the claim’s scope and relevant legislation.
-
I think this is apparent from the thread.
IMO, if the bailiff removed the device promptly after carrying out their financial checks then the OP was surely lawfully denied the use of their vehicle. (I can't imagine what a judge would make of a claim which was predicated on the claimant ignoring a NoE)
OP, do you intend to submit an OOT and if so what reasoning [for late submission of your WS] would you put in your application?
-
why does a claim have to have a monetary value?
however if the OP was wrongfully deprived of the use of a car they were paying for then I don't see why compensation is not relevant.
The Agent was probably under "reasonable assumption" the vehivle was owned by the op. we need to hear exactly when in period of clamping the Agent was informed with proof that the vehicle was not owned by the OP.
-
Instead, pursue a claim for the days your hire purchase vehicle was unlawfully clamped; this may prompt the council and bailiff to take your situation more seriously.
Every narrative reference I can find to this issue suggests that clamping the car was not unlawful. What evidence is there other than a simple reference to the term 'belonging' which, like 'reasonable', appears to defy a unique definition.
Sorry, but IMO this is just another distraction. How exactly is the OP to 'pursue a claim' and what actual monetary damages have they suffered?
-
Maybe a letter of complaint to the authority highlighting the unlawful action of the Agent and the distress (emotional pain and suffering) the unlawful clamping has caused.
I advise against making a complaint, as they rarely yield results.
Instead, pursue a claim for the days your hire purchase vehicle was unlawfully clamped; this may prompt the council and bailiff to take your situation more seriously.
Adjusting the claim value is crucial and requires careful consideration beyond the technical scope of a public forum.
If you decide not to act now, it’s wise to await any response from the council, and then you can take appropriate action.
I acknowledge that the TE7 is the de facto advice on this forum, but it is unsuitable for cases involving an enforcement breach.
-
. duplicated
-
? The OP received and responded to the PCN, made no attempt to follow up when the council's reply wasn't received, received and ignored the NoE and let their V5C lapse by 3 years+.
OP, if all you have is 'game play' then you might as well go for it.
-
Maybe a letter of complaint to the authority highlighting the unlawful action of the Agent and the distress (emotional pain and suffering) the unlawful clamping has caused.
-
..but fails to address the issue which is that a surcharged penalty(plus registration fee) is owed. This could only delay the inevitable unless it's thought that possibly embarrassing the bailiff could cause the council to cancel their legitimate pursuit of a penalty.
I've seen nothing to suggest that this is a realistic or realisable end game.
-
While others may have differing views, you have effectively served the bailiff with a Rule 6 notice, removing the clamp.
The warrant, however, is defective, as it shows your previous address.
Completing a TE9 form might appear to be a solution but would not be in your best interest, as it primarily benefits the council. Moreover, there is no regulatory requirement for you to submit a TE9.
I recommend abstaining from making a TE9 because the warrant is unenforceable.
Filing a TE9 will only lead to a reissued warrant with your updated address, bringing you back to square one.
-
+1.
A WS does not require countersigning.
As posted earlier, the bailiff was acting wholly appropriately in clamping your car and then releasing after they had satisfied themselves as regards its finance situation.
They cannot seize goods in your house unless this address is specified on the warrant, but then getting this changed is simple and administrative and they would return.
They cannot have suspended action pursuant to an instruction from TEC that a procedurally valid OOT submission has been made because you haven't made one.
I can confirm I did not receive the NoR to my email so I’d like to resend the TEC forms on that basis.
This would be false, pl read the form.
The representations referred to are formal representations NOT a response to informal reps(which is what you made).
You did not make formal reps because, according to you, you didn't receive the NTO because it was sent to an out-of-date address.
Pl understand that you have to give TEC a valid and truthful reason why you did not receive the NTO. Based upon countless other threads with similar issues, IMO you do not have one.
IMO, all you could do legitimately is to put 'Did not receive NTO' in the witness statement(WS)(because this is correct) and then whatever you're happy to support with a statement of truth in the OOT which bears upon your WS grounds.
If this is accepted by TEC then the authority would reset the process to the NTO stage.
-
I can confirm I did not receive the NoR to my email so I’d like to resend the TEC forms on that basis.
This would still take 10 working days to process and I don’t know where I stand concerning the time that I have to act.
Where/how can I get a statutory declaration form/approved?
Should I pay?
I have sent a message to bailiff advice online too.
10 working days? That must be the delay in notifying the Enforcement Authority that a Witness Statement or Statutory declaration has been submitted. Prior to Covid this was done the same day if submitted before 4pm on a working day. The EA has to suspend the enforcement action when they are notified of the application.
An actual decision by the Traffic Enforcement Centre is likely to take 4-8 weeks at the moment.
Your application concerns a Witness Statement (form TE9) and an application to submit it Out of Time (form TE7) for a parking contravention. WS applications don't need to be witnessed.
However you need a good explantion as to why your address was not up to date.
-
Where/how can I get a statutory declaration form/approved?
Your local County Court can witness the forms without charge but you'd need to arrange an appointment. Solicitors will also witness the forms for a small charge, not sure how much but around £10-20 I think.
Should I pay?
Your decision, but the debt and the bailiffs haven't gone away. Have you told us what sum of money they are demanding ?
-
I can confirm I did not receive the NoR to my email so I’d like to resend the TEC forms on that basis.
This would still take 10 working days to process and I don’t know where I stand concerning the time that I have to act.
Where/how can I get a statutory declaration form/approved?
Should I pay?
I have sent a message to bailiff advice online too.
-
To tackle the fine from the council and bailiff, what are my next steps?
You still owe the money, and with your V5C apparently way out of date at the time of the contravention, an Out-of-Time submission about non-receipt of PCN is very unlikely to succeed. The bailiffs clamp cars, but their role is to collect the money, so even if you no longer had a car, the money remains owing unless you can get a Statutory Declaration accepted. Bailiffs can seize property not just cars.
-
@Pressman thank you for the private message.
I’ve just gone to my vehicle this morning and seen the clamp has been removed!
I sent the bailiff a text stating that the vehicle is under a PCP agreement on the morning of 17/10/24, and I believe they removed it on that basis yesterday/today. They haven’t communicated with me so I don’t have a response to share just yet.
To tackle the fine from the council and bailiff, what are my next steps?
I haven’t emailed the Council anything just yet.
-
You need to take a much firmer approach.
I’ve sent a private message containing legally sensitive details.
Forget the TE forms; you won't be needing them now.
Post back with the response and results.
-
I thought the TEC forms go hand in hand to pause the enforcement. Following that Marston would hand the case back to the Council and they could reset the pcn. Is this incorrect?
In emailing Kingston upon Thames and cc’ing the bailiffs, is this okay to send:
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to you regard PCN QT08212054 as vehicle registered as LP68UGM is not my property and is subject to an ongoing Personal Contract Purchase agreement. This vehicle has been illegally clamped on 17/10/2024 by Marston Recovery, your agents, acting on the your authority.
Please note that I am also a Blue Badge holder.
Evidence of these facts are attached
I demand the release of the vehicle on this basis.
I can confirm that the TEC have been contacted as the initial Notice of Rejection was not received to the email address provided. Marston Recovery were informed of this.
Sincerely,
kellydose
-
Bailiffs are prohibited from forcibly entering homes to recover unpaid traffic debts, as specified in paragraph 24(2) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
I recommend against using the TE7 form in its current format, as the bailiff's warrant is defective due to an incorrect address. There is no statutory requirement to file a TE7.
You can inform the bailiff and creditor that the clamped vehicle is under finance, prompting the removal of the clamp.
This action will restrict the bailiff's options to enforce the debt, presenting a considerable challenge for the creditor due to the bailiff's procedural missteps.
Authorities frequently outsource enforcement to private companies, relying on indemnity policies to protect against such losses before awarding enforcement contracts.
-
Okay.
My licence has had the correct address and I have corrected my V5C now.
That is correct - although I forgot due to timelines that - I did make representation. I hadn’t received the rejection notice via email, and all other letters they have sent were to the wrong address now. I can confirm this as I have requested to see the documents.
I will update my TEC from didn’t receive PCN to didn’t receive NoR.
Although, I really don’t know what to do now because my vehicle is still clamped and I’m worried it will be towed away any day now.
-
Even if these were signed, your application would be rejected because you have simply repeated your witness statement grounds.
Witness statement: What;
Out of time: Why.
If your V5C was, and maybe still is, 2/3 years out of date then IMO you don't have legitimate grounds for an OOT.
It is your legal duty to keep your DVLA details up to date.
You made reps against the original PCN and would have given an address, and yet you claim to have not received this nor did including this address trigger anything which caused you to check your V5C.
As regards the suggestion to place a BB in your car and send this to the council with, heaven forbid, a claim that it was in situ when the car was clamped I cannot agree because it's untrue.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/M77phX7/1xgxK5m.jpg) (http://[url=https://ibb.co/CQQvtrQ)
-
Sorry, I am really struggling to upload/embed photos.
The V5C hasn’t been updated.
On the Enforcement notice, I called Marston about my OOT application but I didn’t email so no proof apart from my call log.
I have attempted to attach the TEC forms and honestly one is unsigned, which is a mistake, and therefore I’ll expect this to be rejected.
I will email Kingston council this evening per @Enceladus message.
(https://i.ibb.co/6sm1qGT/LMvGQrC.jpg) (https://ibb.co/MNsGJKt)[/url]
(https://www.ftla.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F%5Burl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fibb.co%2FMNsGJKt%5D%5Bimg+width%3D640+height%3D1200%5Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2F6sm1qGT%2FLMvGQrC.jpg&hash=58ae9ab9e3fbdfd2d4471dc182c0347c0654ff14)
-
(https://www.ftla.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F%5Bimg%5Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2F6sm1qGT%2FLMvGQrC.jpg&hash=6e16478628d549688d85389f940a92d57323b471)[/url][/img]
-
OP, you posted:
I am the registered keeper and vehicle isn’t under Mobility.
Rejection letter wasn’t received. All NTO mailed to wrond address. Only the recovery noticed reached me.
However, for the VRM you provided gov.uk gives the following for the V5C for your Mercedes:
Date of last V5C (logbook) issued 27 April 2021
So either the V5C has been out of date for some time(contravention 2023) or it's correct.
You received the Notice of Enforcement but have not indicated that you dealt with this and in consequence your debt has more than doubled (£235 added) and bailiffs have clamped your car which they are entitled to do. They must also check its finance status.
All your communications must be in writing, not verbal, otherwise you do not have a record.
For me the two most urgent outstanding requests from previous posts are:
Does the V5C which you hold have your correct address or not and in either case when was it last amended?
If you have submitted an out-of-time application pl post this and the witness statement.
And in response to your question 'Does this leave me open to them trying to enter my home?'.
Yes. Whether the bailiffs have to unclamp your car doesn't make matters go away(although you could rattle the council's cage about wrongful actions etc. etc, I take no position on this because I don't think we have enough info)). While the warrant remains in force against your address then the bailiffs have a duty to try and execute.
-
The bailiff can't seize property that your don't own. Nor can the bailiff clamp or seize a car that has a Blue Badge displayed. As I understand your earlier post the BB was not on display when the car was clamped? Nonetheless I would be tempted to put your BB on display on the dashboard and take some pictures of it. See what others have to say about doing so.
Inform the Council that their agents, acting on the Council's authority, have illegally clamped a vehicle which is not your property and is subject to an ongoing Personal Contract Purchase agreement. Tell them that you are also a Blue Badge holder and include a copy of both sides of the badge and the PCP agreement. Demand that they release the vehicle. Copy Marstons if you wish.
The Order for Recovery is dated 22/04/2024, the warrant was authorised 05/06/2024 and we are now mid October. That suggests to me that the documents were posted to another address, Marstons found they couldn't enforce so they traced you to your current address. The should have informed the Council who would have applied to have the warrant re-sealed (reissued) to your current address.
The only issue the court will be concerned with on your Out of Time is why you are late with your Witness Statement. So please find the V5c for your car and check the address of the RK.
However neglecting to update the RK address is not going to cut it.
Have you submitted an Out Of Time application and Witness Statement to the TEC as yet?
And as per @stamfordman I suggest that you seek help from Bailiff Advice Online (https://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/).
-
@Pressman I look into those threads.
If they do cooperate under that basis, it’ll be some days and they’d still request payment right?
Does this leave me open to them trying to enter my home?
-
StamfordMan, your referral needs diligence.
??
-
Under the Personal Contract Purchase (PCP) agreement, the vehicle in question does not legally belong to you. This means you are not required to file a TE9 form.
You have the right to apply to the court for the vehicle's release, citing a breach of Paragraph 10, Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. This paragraph specifies that a bailiff may only take control of goods that belong to the debtor.
For further guidance, search online for "bailiffs clamped vehicle on finance" to explore available remedies.
StamfordMan, your referral needs diligence.
-
Hi both,
@stamfordman it’s a very bleak timeline at that :-\
I will have to check on the V5c. However I did receive the Enforcement notice to the correct address.
I don’t believe I have received an order of recovery. Just had the bailiff arrive spontaneously, I wasn’t expecting it.
The vehicle is on a PCP.
Do I have a case to get out of this at all?
-
What type of finance is the car on? Most lease contracts mean the lease company is the keeper.
If you have the V5C logbook go and look at the address on it now.
Here's the timeline of this sad story:
(https://i.imgur.com/r2ay20m.png)
-
Is the address on your V5c registration document correct and complete.? That's where the NTO would have been sent.
Did you receive a Notice of Enforcement from the bailiff. Is the address on that correct and current?
And did you receive an Order for Recovery (of unpaid penalty charge)? Is the address on that correct and current.
Your story suggests that the V5c address is out of date.
-
Hi all, thanks for the fast replies - I attempted to respond and attach letters but I can’t see this has fed through.
PCN: QT08212054
Reg: LP68UGM
The badge wasn’t on display as vehicle was parked overnight. The appeal was made on the basis that the driver couldn’t reach the vehicle in time (mobility).
I am the registered keeper and vehicle isn’t under Mobility.
Rejection letter wasn’t received. All NTO mailed to wrond address. Only the recovery noticed reached me
-
Was your Blue Badge on display in the car at the time it was clamped?
-
This may be best handled by https://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk
Is it a Mobility car?
Somewhere there is an address, contact detail mistake.
-
What's the PCN number and the reg of the car?
And are you the Registered Keeper of the car or is the RK a finance or lease company?
Post up the TE7 out of time. Just obscure your name and address and hold off submitting it until you have had it scrutinised first.
-
Hi all,
Bailiffs have clamped my vehicle on my drive following a PCN that was issued in 2023.
Contravention was that I had incorrectly parked in a Blue Badge zone. On FIFE ROAD, KT1 1SU. Code 40. There are no pictures given online.
My understanding was that didn’t received the PCN and I’m in the process of TEC reviewing a TEC 7 and TEC 9.
Turns out, I apparently responded to PCN in appeal, with evidence of my blue badge and this was rejected… I’m so confused by this all because I didn’t receive this rejection notice.
I have called the council to delay the enforcement as I have made application to the TEC and they have dismissed me for now. I’ve asked for a call back.
I’ve told Marstons Recovery that my vehicle is under a finance agreement and owned by the car company and they have responded with a payment link.
Please could someone advise me on what to do. This PCN is from a year ago.
@cp8759.
Bailiff PCN Kingston upon Thames