3. Messages

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Bailiff Advice

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL N244 Form from congestion Charge PCN
« on: May 13, 2026, 07:59:36 pm »
UPDATE:

Having now read all of the documents, I could see where there had been some confusion.

The OP's company had moved address and only became aware of PCN's in late May 2025 when contacted by occupiers at the previous address.

On 6th June 2025, The Director of the company (the OP making this thread), contacted TfL via their website to advise that they had moved address (new address also provided). TfL refer to this communication as being 'representation'. As the Director was not the Respondent, TfL sent a '3rd party authorisation to both the current and previous address. The Director responded on 1st July 2025 on company headed correspondence (carrying the current business address) stating again that they had moved address.

TfL confirmed receipt but then did something daft. They issued a Notice of Rejection to the 'representation' and sent this document to the PREVIOUS address.

Four months later, and despite being notified twice (on 6th June and 1st July) that the company had moved address, TfL progressed the matter to debt registration and the issue of Orders for Recovery followed by warrants of control....all to the previous address.

To be clear, the company had updated their Log Book shortly after being aware of the PCN's.

Correspondence was sent to TfL citing the landmark Court of Appeal case of Carr v Vehicle Control Services (2025). 

TfL have been exceptionally helpful and confirmed today that they had cancelled all the PCN's.

Bailiff Advice Online
   

2
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bristol CAZ - order for recovery appeal deadline incorrect on letter OR on TEC system.
« on: May 13, 2026, 07:10:35 pm »
Quote from: Faye G on May 12, 2026, 05:11:08 pm
Hi everyone - looking for some advice on whether I can claim back costs for a review of a decision by TEC.

Here's the relevant timeline

The Order for Recovery arrives 21 August with a date of 11 September by which I need to pay or appeal

I fill in the TE9 form sent by the council to TEC by post.


Refile a TE7 and a TE9 by email.

TE9 form from this address: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1094491/Parking_TE9.pdf

First mistake was in sending your Witness Statement (Form TE9)to TEC by POST. This is a 'time sensitive' document and should ALWAYS be sent to the Traffic Enforcement Centre by email. It would then have arrives at TEC 'within time'.

As difficult as it is to believe, the Traffic Enforcement Centre have TWO different forms TE9. One is referred to by TEC as being the 'short form' (in that it has 4 boxes), with the other TE9 (referred to a the long form) having 6 boxes.

For a Bristol CAZ, you should have used the TE9 with 6 boxes.

I receive many hundreds of enquiries about the wrong forms being used. ChatGPT, Claude etc, do not help as they continue to give out the wrong information on these forms.

Bailiff Advice Online

3
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bristol CAZ - order for recovery appeal deadline incorrect on letter OR on TEC system.
« on: May 13, 2026, 06:55:12 pm »
Quote from: Faye G on May 12, 2026, 05:11:08 pm
Hi everyone - looking for some advice on whether I can claim back costs for a review of a decision by TEC.

So the question is: given that the cost of the review is £313

The fee of £313 is for a hearing 'in person' in court. TEC are looking at removing this right so unsure whether it has taken effect yet. Almost certainly you should be considering an N244 Application to review WITHOUT a hearing. The court fee is £123.

From many years of knowledge of Out of Time and N244 Applications, I don't know of even ONE case where a claim for costs has been granted.

Bailiff Advice Online

4
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL N244 Form from congestion Charge PCN
« on: May 08, 2026, 10:31:24 am »
Quote from: stamfordman on May 08, 2026, 10:24:34 am
Escalating a complaint to TFL outside of the process could also be an option.

And that is exactly what I would be suggesting.

5
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL N244 Form from congestion Charge PCN
« on: May 08, 2026, 10:19:46 am »
Quote from: tedpower34 on May 07, 2026, 09:35:32 pm

I am going to proceed with the N244, I guess my main question now is can I recover the £939.00 this is going to cost to get an in-person hearing and can we claim for damages caused by this?

As I pointed out in my above post, you would need to ask the Traffic Enforcement Centre whether or not they are allowing 'in person' hearings. I personally would not suggest going that route.

Despite many requests on a N244 for the court to grant an order for return of the court fee, I have only ever seen one case where costs were granted. That led to the local authority appealing the order (they won the appeal).

Please do take advice before completing N244 Applications. I did send a PM to you yesterday.

Bailiff Advice Online

6
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL N244 Form from congestion Charge PCN
« on: May 07, 2026, 11:35:42 am »
Quote from: tedpower34 on May 06, 2026, 09:42:46 pm
Back in May 2025 we received 3 PCNs for failing to pay the congestion charge.

I gave the new address during the appeal process.

I promptly wrote back to TFL stating this was not an application for 3rd party representation and explaining that we have moved premises since the PCN were issued and can all correspondence go to the new address. I have proof of postage / tracking and a copy of this letter.

The vehicle address was updated with the DVLA. I heard nothing more about the PCN's until 12th January when a bailiff reached out to me at the correct address with a warrant of control.

We have now received a refusal on the 3 applications stating that we have not provided acceptable proof for why the statutory declaration was filed late and it looks like our next step is pay or file a N244 form.

It looks like the fee is £313 is this per form or can the 3 be grouped together and can I recoup this if I am successful?

I have highlighted above the most important points.

An N244 fee is either £123 for having the case reviewed by a District Judge WITHOUT you needing to attend the hearing. Alternatively, if you wished to attend a personal hearing, the fee is £313.Unfortunately, the fee is charged for EACH PCN number.

The Ministry of Justice are looking at removing the right for the motorist to elect for a personal hearing.

PS: Because you had contacted TFL and notified them that you were moving (and you provided them with your new address), you should have excellent grounds in which to seek a review. There has been a recent Court of Appeal case on this very point.

7
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TfL tunnel charge PCNs – bailiff stage – TE7/TE9 submitted – non-receipt due to address change
« on: May 06, 2026, 11:43:10 am »
Quote from: zerotonin on May 04, 2026, 11:13:50 pm

But the key point stands: out-of-time statutory declarations are about non-receipt of the PCN, not arguing the merits or blame of the contravention.

Not quite I'm afraid. With an unpaid PCN, a Witness Statement or Statutory Declaration should be sent to the Traffic Enforcement Centre within 21 days of an Order for Recovery being issued. If sent within that time frame, the Order for Recovery will automatically be revoked and the Charge Certificate cancelled. The local authority will then re-issue the PCN to you.

If you were unable to submit the witness statement within 21 days of the OfR being issued, (usually because of a change of address), legislation (Para 4.1 of CPR 75) allows you to make an application for a longer period than 21 days to be given for filing the witness statement. This is what is referred to as an Out of Time Witness Statement.

On the form PE2 or TE7 (Application to file witness statement 'out of time', you are specifically required to outline the REASON as to WHY you had been unable to file the witness statement within 21 days of the Order for Recovery being issued.

What is an Out of Time Witness Statement

Bailiff Advice Online

8
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bailiff for PCN that was sent to wrong address.
« on: January 21, 2026, 10:59:47 am »
Quote from: snikers on January 20, 2026, 11:39:51 am
Date on the V5C is 27/06/2024. Purchase was made few weeks before we received V5C. Date on the Notice of Enforcement is 17/07/2025 and in Spetember 2025 baillif arrived with Notice of Enforcement.

I'm slightly confused. You mention that the date of the Notice of Enforcement was 17th July and that the bailiff visited in September 2025 with a Notice of Enforcement.
 
 
What date was the Notice of Enforcement issued?

It should have included a PCN number and date of the contravention. What date was given for the contravention?

Bailiff Advice Online

9
News / Press Articles / Re: Traffic Enforcement Centre Consultation. Proposed changes that will affect Out of Time Applications and more
« on: January 21, 2026, 09:52:03 am »
Quote from: John U.K. on January 18, 2026, 05:15:40 pm
Thank you for posting this.
Would you have an idea how and when these changes will take effect?

The Traffic Enforcement Centre has already implemented the change that requires a brief REASON to be provided when an Out of Time application is rejected. That change has been in place for a few months now and I am aware of significant complaints being made to TEC.

At the Civil Procedure Rule Committee meeting in December, it was noted that the Committee had agreed to all the proposed amendments subject only to responses from the Consultation.

I will update this thread when further information is known.

https://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/

 

10
News / Press Articles / Re: Traffic Enforcement Centre Consultation. Proposed changes that will affect Out of Time Applications and more
« on: January 21, 2026, 09:35:47 am »
Quote from: Bailiff Advice on January 16, 2026, 11:41:13 am
Up until around November, if an Out of Time Application was rejected by TEC,  the motorist would receive a letter from the Traffic Enforcement Centre stating the date of rejection and that NO REASON IS GIVEN and supposedly, NO REASON IS ON THE COURT FILE. This will now change.

TEC are proposing that the TEC Court Officer should include REASONS and that this can include the following:

1. That the motorist had provided no explanation why he was submitting his Witness Statement late.

2. That the motorist had provided no explanation as to why he failed to notify DVLA of the change of address.

3. That the motorist failed to provide evidence or proof as to why they had been absent from his home when the Order for Recovery had been issued.

Reading back on my post, I realise that I had only provided 3 reasons that the Court Officer may use to reject an Out of Time Application. The 4th reason is this one:

4. That the motorist had not provided proof or explanation why the statutory declaration (or witness statement) was served late.

11
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Business chauffeur vehicle clamped for pcn judgement
« on: January 16, 2026, 03:38:55 pm »
Quote from: Jason9874 on January 16, 2026, 12:20:50 pm
My vehicle was clamped yesterday for a PCN judgement. The vehicle is a my business ltd vehicle. I have made a te9 and te7 application but been told it may take 2-4 weeks to 6 months. I can't earn etc with the vehicle mobilized.

As I had stated on your earlier thread, there is no judgment with a local authority issued PCN. As this ticket is for a parking contravention, it would be more difficult to get the application accepted given that you should have received the penalty charge notice on the windscreen of the car. Your comment on this post would assist. 

Currently, the Traffic Enforcement Centre are taking up to 4 WORKING DAYS to actually PROCESS Out of Time Applications and to instruct the local authority to place all enforcement on 'hold'. Once the LA are informed, the clamp will usually be removed. Given that today is Friday, you should expect for the clamp to be removed on either late Wednesday or Thursday at the latest. With current delays at TEC, it is taking approx 8-10 weeks for you to receive a decision on your application. 

If your Out of Time Application is accepted, then you would be entitled to a full refund of any payment made (including bailiff fess).

Bailiff Advice Online

 

12
News / Press Articles / Re: Traffic Enforcement Centre Consultation. Proposed changes that will affect Out of Time Applications and more
« on: January 16, 2026, 03:23:12 pm »
If anyone has any questions, please just ask. 

13
News / Press Articles / Re: Traffic Enforcement Centre Consultation. Proposed changes that will affect Out of Time Applications and more
« on: January 16, 2026, 01:25:06 pm »
In the response to the Traffic Enforcement Centre, Bailiff Advice Online provided the following additional information:

Reasons why mistakes can occur on the V5C (Log Book).

It is clear that the vast majority of vehicle owners update their driving licence when moving. However, most are unaware of the requirement to also update their V5C. When purchasing their road fund licence, the motorist is required to provide his current address to DVLA and when paying his road fund licence by direct debit, he also updates DVLA with his new address for the direct debit mandate.

When a traffic contravention occurs, the local authority is only allowed to make one search of the vehicle keeper records at DVLA. If a motorist moves address within a few days of the contravention and promptly updates his V5C, all statutory notices will continue to be sent to his previous address. There have been many cases where Out of Time Applications have been refused in such circumstances.

Mistakes by vehicle dealerships and hire companies at the time of purchase/hire is another fairly common reason for notices being wrongly addressed.

And finally, there is this comment from an enforcement company from a few years ago:

'Addresses should be simple, but in reality, they are a costly mistake. Experience has shown that with errors in DVLA input and variations in address fields by processing contractors, up to 20% of all warrants issued need their addresses cleansed’.

Failure to update Log Book (V5C) with DVLA when moving address.

There is reference to a fine of up to £1,000 being imposed on the registered keeper of the vehicle if he or she fails to update the V5C with DVLA when moving. However, despite at least 4 FOI requests that I have made over many years, I have been unable to find any evidence of such a fine actually being imposed. There is however reference on the GOV.UK website in May 2025 to DVLA issuing Out of Court letters (OCS) for various vehicle regulation offences(such as failure to notify DVLA of change of registered keeper). Currently, to avoid court action, payment is set at £55 reduced to £35 if paid within 17 days. If the amount remains unpaid, the case could be pursued through the magistrate’s court where a maximum fine of £1,000 can be imposed.

14
News / Press Articles / Re: Traffic Enforcement Centre Consultation. Proposed changes that will affect Out of Time Applications and more
« on: January 16, 2026, 12:20:36 pm »
TEC are seeking to amend CPR75.10 to allow them to transfer cases to the Insolvency Court. This would only apply to cases where there are MULTIPLE warrants and 'persistent evaders'

Response:

In cases where there may be multiple PCN’s that an enforcement agent has been unable to seek payment for, the present position (under CPR75.10) is that the local authority can make a request to TEC for the cases to be transferred to the County Court for further enforcement (an attachment of earnings order, charging order, order to obtain information, third party debt order).

The amendment being sought is to allow the authority to request for the transfer to the Insolvency Court (for bankruptcy proceedings) and that  local authorities may add all unpaid PCN’s together (multiple cases against the same defendants on a single application). I am unaware of the legal position regarding this proposal.

15
News / Press Articles / Re: Traffic Enforcement Centre Consultation. Proposed changes that will affect Out of Time Applications and more
« on: January 16, 2026, 12:13:42 pm »
TEC are seeking to be allowed to transfer multiple Orders for Recovery against a single motorist on a single form TE10.

Response:

It would seem that this question is relevant to Question 6. I do not know the legal position, but it is my view that as each Order for Recovery is a separate court order, that multiple Orders for Recovery should not be able to be added together for the purpose of ensuring that the overall debt meets the £5,000 threshold needed for bankruptcy proceedings to be instigated.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5