Marstons pulling a fast one.....

[monkeynuts]

Posting this on behalf of a friend... time lined for clarity of actions.

Situation is - unpaid MerseyFlow fine at £380 (went through NCC), Marstons attend and clamp car on the date shown on the letter below:

image1.jpeg

Also have photo of car with clamp attached on this date.

2/3/20 After some frantic checking it turns out the car is on finance and the finance is NOT in the debtors name, its in the mothers name and at different address and as a Brucey bonus they have a written agreement in place saying the daughter will pay back and once everything paid back she will then own the car (previous issues with the bank of mum!) so genuine proof of ownership of the car.

Inkedimage3_LI.jpg

2/3/20 Bailiff informed of this via text and asked to remove the clamp as per Para. 10 Schedule 12 TCE Act 2007. Informed him that if not removed by 12pm today will be removed and his property kept safe as unlawful clamping.

2/3/20 Formal complaint and LBA letter sent to creditor with details of law, proof of ownership evidence etc sent (and cc'd to Marstons)

3/3/20 Bailiff (as per usual) spat dummy out and asked for a v5 and insurance, he was politely reminded that there is a message written on the v5 by the DVLA that the v5 is NOT a proof of ownership nor is an insurance document, he was also informed that as per case law proof of ownership has been provided by the debtor as to the ownership of the vehicle and not only does he have a copy, so do the creditor and his head office.

Bailiff keeps his mantra of pay or I will remove and sell the car, yadda yadda yadda.

EAC2 form submitted to Middlesborough Court with all evidence

3/3/20 12pm today, clamp removed and car used for taking her son to his hospital appointment, clamp left in safe place as advised to the bailiff. Happy days....

3/3/20 5pm debtor returns home to find these beauties posted through the door....

Inkedimage6_LI.jpg

InkedImage7_LI.jpg

Both these new documents have been back dated to the 2/3/20..... Maybe Mr Becket is trying to cover something up!

3/3/20 530pm Mr Beckett takes a call asking him why he dropped of the documents off on the 3/3/20 saying he'd taken control of a vehicle on the 2/3/20 when he attended on the 1/3/20 and clamped it. He was reminded that there is a video of him attending on each occasion along with photos of the car with clamp taken 1/3/20. The line went suddenly dead after hearing that......

[Syd Snitkin]

Was it Rob Beckett?

230335643.jpg.gallery.jpg

[monkeynuts]

You know that's all I could think of when I kept writing his name on the letters and documents lol

Although this guys actions and responses could be classed as a joke!

[zeke]

It doesn't matter whose name the hire purchase is in, it's not the goods of the debtor.

The hirer, not necessarily the debtor can apply for an injunction.

The hirer must give a notice of intention to injunct before making the application.

If the clamp is still there 24 hours later, the hirer can injunct and the bailiff company pays the hirers costs and special damages.

There is a list of special damages a hirer can claim.

[monkeynuts]

No need for injunction.. He was given notice and didn't remove it so it was removed with lawful excuse.

He knows he's in the creek without a paddle. Have photo evidence of clamp on the 1/3 copies of documents with his name and signature posted on the 3/3 saying it was taken under control on the 2/3 , yet these where only posted to the client on the 3/3.

[zeke]

I notice more and more people are using a power drill over a form N16a to solve an illegal clamping event.

Form N16a court fee, £308.

B&Q power drill, £49.

A bailiff reporting a hirer to the police is like ringing the dinner bell to dish up a claim for deprivation of use of hired goods under the 1977 Torts Act.

[monkeynuts]

Oh this guys certainly walking a very very fine line! EAC2 went in yesterday, its being updated today given the extra evidence he has so willingly provided!

Rather than walking round with a wheel-clamp he has been walking round with a shovel, digging himself into a deeper hole!

He is the gift that keeps on giving!!!!

[monkeynuts]

The response from all the parties involved are coming in thick and fast now... Here is merseyflow's, kindly helping to dig the hole deeper, I have picked out two of the best bits!

To pursue recovery of unpaid road user charges, merseyflow will request from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), the name and address of the keeper of a vehicle at the date of event (KADOE)

Marston Holdings are our appointed debt enforcement partners. Marston Holdings is a UK-based company that enforces debt in accordance with the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007

So here is part of the reply to their response:

thank you for clarifying the following; “Marston Holdings are our appointed debt enforcement partners” and clarifying that they “enforce debt in accordance with the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007”.

May I draw your attention to Paragraph 10 Schedule 12 Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 which you clearly say Marstons Holdings, your partners abide by:

“An enforcement agent may take control of goods only if they are goods of the debtor.”

I draw your attention to the wording of the said law mentioned above that you have acknowledged Marstons enforce in accordance to. I also draw your attention to the evidence provided in the original letter, there is a copy of the finance agreement sent with that letter showing the owner is not the debtor nor do they reside at the debtors address. I also draw your attention to your reply in which you state KADOE requesting - “K” quite rightly being the keeper of a vehicle. Your agents Marstons Holding via their enforcement officer Mr Beckett took control of goods that do not belong to the debtor and are therefore in breach of this law as notice (of ownership) was given to your agents (proof attached to the original letter) on the 3/3/20.

As Marstons Holdings are acting as agents on the behalf of merseyflow, you are directly liable for their actions. For clarification on this I draw your attention to paragraph 7 of Taking Control of Goods: National Standards, if you are unable to access a copy, please feel free to use this link: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ndards.pdf

[monkeynuts]

Update:

Middlesbrough CC have acknowledged the complaint against Mr Beckett and hearing date set for 23rd April. We are just waiting to see how much deeper he digs the hole for himself in his written statement!