PCN TFL

[ccharliee]

Hello,


Back again, fortunately it has been a while since I have had to deal with one of these matters, I will try to keep everything short and simple.


I received a PCN for parking on a red route about two years ago, this has been back and forward with TFL, TEC and myself, the images they used don't show my vehicle actually on the red lines and this is as they are badly damaged and I have had a few here, and they always get cancelled.

I received no letters from the company only the visit from the EA asking for his fees which looks to be something they cannot do? He also rung me on every bank holiday in May that we had are they allowed to contact outside of the Monday to Saturday 6-9 hours? Or are those hours just when they cannot visit?

My next step is to pay £100 for a review without a case or £250 with a court date to have this suspended and further looked into.

They are threatening to remove a vehicle, I have two currently, one being a van, this is in my name as the keeper but has the ltd company name in-front of mine its fully paid for and maintained by the company and is a work vehicle can they touch this? The value is very vague and could be open to opinion as its an insurance write off but relatively new but definitely would be over £2000.

My second vehicle to my knowledge when I bought this again through the company should have had the company name also, sadly the dealer must have made a mistake and not put this in-front of my name something I should have checked but must have overlooked at the time, everything is paid for via the company, bank loan for the vehicle, insurance, tax, fuel can they take this? Currently I have moved this away whilst I am sorting this out I hardly even use this vehicle as it is and its due to be sold.

If the answer to this is yes, I have a second company which I buy and sell vehicles am I legally allowed to register this and place it into no ones name (trade) my insurance is trade insurance. this would prevent them from touching it? This is going up for sale regardless anyway due to ULEZ changes.

Ideally I want to settle this with TFL there has never been any avoidance of making payment they were very fast to pass the debt on as usual. I get quite a lot of PCNs and sometimes they're unavoidable due to work and I see them as a business expense and pay them, this one is unjust, TFL will not take it back, the address they are sending EAs to isn't my property its a relatives I stay at sometimes I have no fixed address as I travel a lot for work.

From my understanding of reading legislation is that they cannot get locksmiths involved for PCNs and issues outside of court/magistrates fines/issues/charges but I spoke to one of those debt advice lines who agreed a locksmith cannot legally be used for this matter but the enforcement company will apply for a further warrant which will enable the use of force to gain entry I did not think this was allowed or that it happens for these minor matters, is this advice true and does it happen?

[Syd Snitkin]

I assume you've exhausted the council and TEC's appeal processes? If so, then the court hearing is, as you say, the final option. If you can clearly show that the red route wasn't properly marked or signed, then don't be afraid to ask for your costs.

With the car, you'd need to show that it has been purchased and is maintained using company funds. It doesn't really matter that you're named as the RK - it's not uncommon for the director of a company to be the RK on company vehicles. However, as the named RK you personally are responsible for any penalties. If the bailiff does remove the car, you (that is the company) can make a part 85 claim, which we can explain further if needed.

With enforcement action in place, goods are bound - as it's unclear on the status of the cars you'd be unwise to start changing ownership details.

There is absolutely no provision for forced entry for any type of traffic contravention, the legislation being The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, Schedule 12, p18A (1)(d): http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/15/schedule/12

[ccharliee]

TEC have advised me the next stage is to pay for a court hearing, the issue is not only with the fact it should not even be valid, it's also that I didn't and still have not seen the appeal refusal.

I assume I would need to prove this to the collection company? They will likely not accept anything nor would they stop, what is the best way to have this sent back to the creditor? Is this typical a time based thing or does it never go back unless theres a valid reason?

The vehicle in question due to my new insurance policy will need to be registered out of my name as I use a trade policy and only got given it back a few days ago, this also needs to be sold regardless of any outstanding debt, what would happen if I sold this, I have yet to even see a warrant or any paperwork regarding any of this other than being called by the company.

[Syd Snitkin]

If you decide on the appeal, whether with or without a hearing, you don't need to prove anything to the collection company - you just need to provide evidence to the judge. Are you 100% certain that the images clearly show the vehicle is not on a properly marked red route?

Can you clarify a few points - you say the bailiff is collecting just for his fees. How much is he asking? Did you pay anything to TfL before the visit?

[zeke]

Sorry for my late chiming in this thread.

Hello,


Back again, fortunately it has been a while since I have had to deal with one of these matters, I will try to keep everything short and simple.


I received a PCN for parking on a red route about two years ago, this has been back and forward with TFL, TEC and myself, the images they used don't show my vehicle actually on the red lines and this is as they are badly damaged and I have had a few here, and they always get cancelled.

If its the wrong vehicle in the photo then the appeal will be allowed.

Ive seen first-hand, bus lane appeals succeed because the photo did not show the contravention vehicle.

I received no letters from the company only the visit from the EA

That means the address for the vehicle with the DVLA is different to the address the bailiff turned up.

It also means the bailiff has been caught doing a drive-by enforcement event.

asking for his fees which looks to be something they cannot do?

Once the debt has been paid, the enforcement power ends. That doesn't mean you are off the hook with the fees, you still owe them because they are set in regulations, but the bailiff cannot take control of goods in respect of them.

You can solve this by applying to have a detailed assessment into the bailiff fees at the county court, and on those set of facts, the fees wqill be dismissed because the enforcement power ended before the bailiff took the money, took control of goods or is pestering someone for money without an enforcement power.

He also rung me on every bank holiday in May

Keep a copy of the phone call on your phone because contacting debtors on a bank holiday. It is not unlawful because regulations are silent on bailiffs contacting debtors by telephone.

that we had are they allowed to contact outside of the Monday to Saturday 6-9 hours? Or are those hours just when they cannot visit?

Bailiffs can only take control of goods between 6am and 9pm, regulations 13 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013but case law post-2014 has found that knocking doors at 6.05am is "unreasonable".

My next step is to pay £100 for a review without a case or £250 with a court date to have this suspended and further looked into.

Most reviews are unsuccessful because you cannot add new evidence that was not disclosed at your original appeal.

They are threatening to remove a vehicle, I have two currently, one being a van, this is in my name as the keeper but has the ltd company name in front of mine its fully paid for and maintained by the company and is a work vehicle can they touch this?

Bailiffs can only take control of goods if they belong to the debtor. Provision 10 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

The value is very vague and could be open to opinion as its an insurance write off but relatively new but definitely would be over £2000.

The value of controlled goods is always the AUCTION VALUE. Vinci vs Miller 2015, the solicitor for the bailif company persuaded the court the goods must be the auction value and a transcript of that proceeding is exhibited in CPR85 interpleader claims when a bailiffs clamps exempt trade vehicles. So if you search eBay sold listings for your vehicle like-for-like that have been sold in the last 30 days and the sale value if under £1350, then you can make an interpleader claim becuase it is exempt goods.

My second vehicle to my knowledge when I bought this again through the company should have had the company name also, sadly the dealer must have made a mistake and not put this in-front of my name something I should have checked but must have overlooked at the time, everything is paid for via the company, bank loan for the vehicle, insurance, tax, fuel can they take this? Currently I have moved this away whilst I am sorting this out I hardly even use this vehicle as it is and its due to be sold.

The law says the bailiff may only take control of goods only if they are the goods of the debtor. When proving ownership, then showing evidence of the flow of money is paramount. If you can show the company paid for the vehicle and the company is not the debtor, then you win.

If the answer to this is yes, I have a second company which I buy and sell vehicles am I legally allowed to register this and place it into no ones name (trade) my insurance is trade insurance. this would prevent them from touching it? This is going up for sale regardless anyway due to ULEZ changes.

Please don't truy selling vehicles to escape liability. Its been tried and it will never work. Goods are bound when the warrant is issued. There is a case where a car was sold and flow of money was proven, but a solicitor for the bailiff's company persuaded a deputy district judge at Croydon County Court, the sale of the car was a "sham" on the basis the buyer and seller knew each other. The solicitor for the bailiff company went to extreme length to prove his case.

Ideally I want to settle this with TFL there has never been any avoidance of making payment they were very fast to pass the debt on as usual. I get quite a lot of PCNs and sometimes they're unavoidable due to work and I see them as a business expense and pay them,

If you are exposed to an occupational hazard where PCN enforcement is a danger to the normal operation of the company, fleet managers hold vehicles in another company and lease them to the debtor company. If a bailiff interferes with the vehicle, the fleet manager instructs a solicitor to make a CPR 85 interpleader claim and follows it with a claim for damages by the user-company for deprivation of the use of the vehicle.

this one is unjust, TFL will not take it back, the address they are sending EAs to isn't my property its a relatives I stay at sometimes I have no fixed address as I travel a lot for work.

Then the wrong address proves you were not given the Notice to Owner or notice of enforcement. It also proves the bailiff may have committed an ANPR drive-by clamping event.

If you appeal because the address is wrong, then you must attach evidence of your current address, otherwise, your appeal will not be allowed. The court relies on section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 which states a document posted is a document served unless EVIDENCE to the contrary is proved.

If you did not attach evidence of your current address, in afraid your appeal and N244 review is a lost cause.

From my understanding of reading legislation is that they cannot get locksmiths involved for PCNs

That is correct.

and issues outside of court/magistrates fines/issues/charges

Since 2015, a bailiff cannot break entry to any domestic property to recover a county fine. The expression "locksmith" is a bailiff company parlance for forced entry. Regulations only provide for locksmith costs to be recovered when executing a warrant or writ of possession (eviction) at the demised premises.

There have never been any regulations enabling bailiffs to use a locksmith to interfere with locks on a dwellinghouse. The "locksmith" mythology is put around by bailiff companies.

but I spoke to one of those debt advice lines

They are "charities" sponsored by the taxpayer and their advice will always follow an agenda.

who agreed a locksmith cannot legally be used for this matter but the enforcement company will apply for a further warrant which will enable the use of force to gain entry

That is provision 15 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 which only provides for bailiffs to take control of goods at an address other than where he lives or trades. It is not authority to break entry.

I did not think this was allowed or that it happens for these minor matters, is this advice true and does it happen?

I've only seen a provision 15 warrant applied for once, and the bailiff took control of goods at the address specified on the warrant, but enforcement failed because the debtor had not been given notice because the address on the copy notice was wrong. Landed the bailiff company a humongous bill.

[zeke]

TEC have advised me the next stage is to pay for a court hearing, the issue is not only with the fact it should not even be valid, it's also that I didn't and still have not seen the appeal refusal.

From experience, a hearing is rarely successful. You cannot add fresh evidence not previously disclosed.

I assume I would need to prove this to the collection company?

You don't need to prove a contravention to a bailiff company. They cannot officiate over PCN disputes.

They will likely not accept anything nor would they stop, what is the best way to have this sent back to the creditor?

If the enforcement is unworkable, then it becomes a financial lemon to the bailiff company and they eventually give it back to the creditor.

Is this typical a time based thing or does it never go back unless theres a valid reason?

Contractual obligations on the bailiff company require the enforcement complete by 90 days, which can be extended on request to 180 days. After that, and no enforcement has been successful, the case dies.

If a bailiff finds the contravention vehicle using an ANPR van and does a drive-by clamping event, then the owner will have to make an interpleader claim.

The vehicle in question due to my new insurance policy will need to be registered out of my name

It makes no difference whose name the vehicle is registered to. Its who PAID or OWNS the vehicle that counts. That is why courier firms and transport companies create an in-house leasing company use their money to buy the vehicles.

as I use a trade policy and only got given it back a few days ago, this also needs to be sold regardless of any outstanding debt, what would happen if I sold this,

If the new owner gets it clamped, then he will need to make a CPR 85 interpleader claim. The new Owner must show the flow of money proving that he owns the vehicle. Other evidence such as V5, insurance, tax, carries little weight, but an advertisement for the sale of the vehicle seems to carry credence in interpleader claims.

I have yet to even see a warrant or any paperwork regarding any of this other than being called by the company.

That is because the address on the warrant is wrong.

Your entire appeal hinges on one thing only. Did you show evidence of your current address when you made your initial appeal?