Hello, in 2016 I got a PCN from a parking firm. The only reason I parked there was because the car park had poor signs, had I seen the sign, I would never have parked. I have asked UK CPM to provide proof of the signs they had in that car park in August 2016 (as they seem to have changed signs since), but they haven't done so. They keep talking about that one sign, which wasn't visible to everyone.
Gladstones Solicitors now want 170 pounds. They sent an email yesterday saying
"In the event payment is not made in full or we do not receive an offer of repayment within the time scale specified, our Client may elect to issue legal proceedings without further recourse to you and additional costs will be sought".
What additional costs would these be and how much? I have asked UK CPM to take this to Court if they believe they are correct as I believe I can prove to anyone honest that the signs were inadequate at that time, but they refuse, and I am struggling financially and maybe if I make an offer of 40 pounds they will accept it, it's wrong, but at least they can't keep increasing the price.
Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Just tell them the claim will be vigourously defended.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Thanks zeke. So a private company won't be able to send bailiffs around, and it goes straight to Court, yes?
Also, what if a council issues a PCN and you dispute it but were late to do so. You can't do a TE7 and TE9 because TE9 only allows certain options like you didn't get Notice to Owner ... can you ask for that to go to Court as well, or not?
Also, what if a council issues a PCN and you dispute it but were late to do so. You can't do a TE7 and TE9 because TE9 only allows certain options like you didn't get Notice to Owner ... can you ask for that to go to Court as well, or not?
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
A private company can send bailiffs, but for a debt under £600, they are not the kind of bailiffs that take aggressive action against debtors.
Our position is the TE and PE forms are witness statements and an application for more time.
History has taught us from the list of 5 options printed on the form is because the debtor didn't get a document through the post at some point during the administration process.
The burden of proof is with the debtor. He must prove that the council did not make service of the document on the debtor at his current address.
The only way debtors can do that is to show evidence of their new address with the date they left the warrant address.
Even with that evidence filed at the TEC, the TEC refuses applications and the bailiffs continue with enforcement at the new address.
Therefore, we no longer recommend filing TE and PE forms.
If the enforcement address on the warrant is wrong. The enforcement provisions class the warrant to be a "defective instrument".
When bailiffs take an enforcement step, such as clamping a car, under a defective instrument, the owner of the car can sue the council for damages and exhibit evidence of the warrant showing the wrong address. Paragraph 66 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
The council is liable for complying with CPR 75.7(7) which states:
(7) Where the address of the respondent has changed since the issue of the warrant, the authority may request the reissue of the warrant by filing a request –
If bailiffs take an enforcement step at the debtor's new address with a warrant showing the debtor's previous address, the debtor can sue for damages.
That is where we step in.
It is not the debtor's job to tell the council their bailiff has a defective instrument.
The bailiff is responsible.
Before taking an enforcement step at the debtor's new address, the bailiff must tell the council that the debtor's address on the warrant is not current.
Therefore, we don't make TE and PE forms.
The bailiff is at fault for acting under a warrant knowing it is a defective instrument.
Our position is the TE and PE forms are witness statements and an application for more time.
History has taught us from the list of 5 options printed on the form is because the debtor didn't get a document through the post at some point during the administration process.
The burden of proof is with the debtor. He must prove that the council did not make service of the document on the debtor at his current address.
The only way debtors can do that is to show evidence of their new address with the date they left the warrant address.
Even with that evidence filed at the TEC, the TEC refuses applications and the bailiffs continue with enforcement at the new address.
Therefore, we no longer recommend filing TE and PE forms.
If the enforcement address on the warrant is wrong. The enforcement provisions class the warrant to be a "defective instrument".
When bailiffs take an enforcement step, such as clamping a car, under a defective instrument, the owner of the car can sue the council for damages and exhibit evidence of the warrant showing the wrong address. Paragraph 66 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
The council is liable for complying with CPR 75.7(7) which states:
(7) Where the address of the respondent has changed since the issue of the warrant, the authority may request the reissue of the warrant by filing a request –
If bailiffs take an enforcement step at the debtor's new address with a warrant showing the debtor's previous address, the debtor can sue for damages.
That is where we step in.
It is not the debtor's job to tell the council their bailiff has a defective instrument.
The bailiff is responsible.
Before taking an enforcement step at the debtor's new address, the bailiff must tell the council that the debtor's address on the warrant is not current.
Therefore, we don't make TE and PE forms.
The bailiff is at fault for acting under a warrant knowing it is a defective instrument.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Thanks so much for the detailed reply, zeke. I have now found out that as the PCN was issued more than 6 years anyway they cannot take it to Court.
Can I ask just one more question please regarding TE7 and TE9. A council issued a PCN. I have mental health problems that affect my life with a debilitating effect - I am a university educated professional who has been signed off sick due to these problems, that's just how bad they are. Because I was unwell when the Notice of Enforcement was sent, I was unable to reply. The Council claim a Charge Certificate was also sent, I do not recall, but believe them, my health was bad, and I wasn't coping with everyday life. Anyway, as I did not reply to that as well, they registered it at Northampton County Court. The Council now seem to agree that mitigating circumstances mean the PCN should be cancelled. However, they say they cannot do anything as it has been sent to Northampton County Court, and that my only option is to send the TE7 and TE9. But these would obviously be rejected, as being late due to health problems isn't a valid reason for the forms. So is it true that the Council cannot do anything once it has been sent to Northampton County Court? Surely as the debt is being pursued by the Council, they can at any time decide they want to cancel it should they wish. But the Council are saying that the Traffic Management Act doesn't allow them to do this, that once it is registered at Northampton County Court, they cannot cancel the PCN unless TE7 and TE9 are submitted and accepted.
Can I ask just one more question please regarding TE7 and TE9. A council issued a PCN. I have mental health problems that affect my life with a debilitating effect - I am a university educated professional who has been signed off sick due to these problems, that's just how bad they are. Because I was unwell when the Notice of Enforcement was sent, I was unable to reply. The Council claim a Charge Certificate was also sent, I do not recall, but believe them, my health was bad, and I wasn't coping with everyday life. Anyway, as I did not reply to that as well, they registered it at Northampton County Court. The Council now seem to agree that mitigating circumstances mean the PCN should be cancelled. However, they say they cannot do anything as it has been sent to Northampton County Court, and that my only option is to send the TE7 and TE9. But these would obviously be rejected, as being late due to health problems isn't a valid reason for the forms. So is it true that the Council cannot do anything once it has been sent to Northampton County Court? Surely as the debt is being pursued by the Council, they can at any time decide they want to cancel it should they wish. But the Council are saying that the Traffic Management Act doesn't allow them to do this, that once it is registered at Northampton County Court, they cannot cancel the PCN unless TE7 and TE9 are submitted and accepted.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
To clarify the previous post, do the Council or the Court decide whether the TE7 and TE9 are accepted?
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
The court. The council can only make objections.
You might be a vulnerable person for the purpose of civil enforcement.
That only gets you off the enforcement stage fees if the bailiff does not give you adequate time to get advice in relation to the enforcement power.
A client of mine succeeded in getting the enforcement fees scrubbed in a detailed assessment because he was vulnerable and the bailiff disregarded it and continued with the enforcement.
The case became known as Progressive Property Ventures Llp v Mrozinski: QBD 24 May 2022.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2022/1256.html
My client was Mrozinski.
You cannot apply for a detailed assessment on a form TE PE.
I dont do them anyway because the TEC refuses them. Appealing is very expensive and the TEC does not award costs.
Instead, I do a CPR 84.16 application. The client gets costs paid on the indemnity basis because it's a breach of enforcement regulations.
If the warrant is a defective instrument, there is no need for you to cancel it.
The council is well protected because the bailiff company lodges a £10M indemnity policy for breaches of enforcement provisions.
You might be a vulnerable person for the purpose of civil enforcement.
That only gets you off the enforcement stage fees if the bailiff does not give you adequate time to get advice in relation to the enforcement power.
A client of mine succeeded in getting the enforcement fees scrubbed in a detailed assessment because he was vulnerable and the bailiff disregarded it and continued with the enforcement.
The case became known as Progressive Property Ventures Llp v Mrozinski: QBD 24 May 2022.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2022/1256.html
My client was Mrozinski.
You cannot apply for a detailed assessment on a form TE PE.
I dont do them anyway because the TEC refuses them. Appealing is very expensive and the TEC does not award costs.
Instead, I do a CPR 84.16 application. The client gets costs paid on the indemnity basis because it's a breach of enforcement regulations.
If the warrant is a defective instrument, there is no need for you to cancel it.
The council is well protected because the bailiff company lodges a £10M indemnity policy for breaches of enforcement provisions.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Thanks for that, it is great you won a case for that guy who was vulnerable.
Last question though please, say if you borrow 150 pounds, and we sign a contract that you will pay me back next month. But you're financially struggling, and cannot pay me back. Now legally you have to, but I also have complete discretion on whether I want you to. So I can say to you I have written it off? Similarly, legally the process might be that I have to do the TE7 and TE9 ... but if the Council wants to cancel it at their own discretion, can they? Is it possible for the Council to say "we registered this at the Court, but we do not want to proceed, so you do not have to send the TE7 and TE9 because we have decided to write off the PCN"?
Last question though please, say if you borrow 150 pounds, and we sign a contract that you will pay me back next month. But you're financially struggling, and cannot pay me back. Now legally you have to, but I also have complete discretion on whether I want you to. So I can say to you I have written it off? Similarly, legally the process might be that I have to do the TE7 and TE9 ... but if the Council wants to cancel it at their own discretion, can they? Is it possible for the Council to say "we registered this at the Court, but we do not want to proceed, so you do not have to send the TE7 and TE9 because we have decided to write off the PCN"?
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
There is no relation between a contractual debt between to people and a statutory debt a traffic contravention debt.
The council can cancel a traffic contravention debt at their discretion.
They don't have to enforce a warrant just because they got one from the TEC
If that happens, there is no need for a TE or PE application.
The council can cancel a traffic contravention debt at their discretion.
They don't have to enforce a warrant just because they got one from the TEC
If that happens, there is no need for a TE or PE application.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Thanks for that.
The Council however are saying they cannot do anything until there is a warrant. They seem to agree that mitigating circumstances apply and the PCN should be cancelled, but they're saying they can't apply mitigating circumstances because they can't cancel it at their discretion because the law prohibits them from doing so. This is what they have written
"The process for a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) is set in the Traffic Management Act and we cannot go outside of that ... what we can’t do is go outside of those processes set in legislation ... So, if you want to appeal the issuing of the PCN, the notice is not at the right stage for you to be able to do so. You will need to file the late witness statement. If that is accepted, the notice will go back to Notice to Owner stage and you will have 28 days to submit your appeal ..."
But the late witness statement won't be accepted because health problems isn't a valid reason and I got the Notice of Enforcement and didn't appeal in the timeframe. So should I go to the council and say the law doesn't stop them from applying mitigating circumstances even though a warrant has been issued?
The Council however are saying they cannot do anything until there is a warrant. They seem to agree that mitigating circumstances apply and the PCN should be cancelled, but they're saying they can't apply mitigating circumstances because they can't cancel it at their discretion because the law prohibits them from doing so. This is what they have written
"The process for a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) is set in the Traffic Management Act and we cannot go outside of that ... what we can’t do is go outside of those processes set in legislation ... So, if you want to appeal the issuing of the PCN, the notice is not at the right stage for you to be able to do so. You will need to file the late witness statement. If that is accepted, the notice will go back to Notice to Owner stage and you will have 28 days to submit your appeal ..."
But the late witness statement won't be accepted because health problems isn't a valid reason and I got the Notice of Enforcement and didn't appeal in the timeframe. So should I go to the council and say the law doesn't stop them from applying mitigating circumstances even though a warrant has been issued?
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
I'm going to be brutal.
If the council shirks then take no further action.
Bailiffs cannot break and enter for recovering traffic debts.
They can take your car, provided it's not in finance, but if the car is not available, the bailiff is only left with using harsh language.
If you have grounds, by all means, do TE9/TE7.
If the address on the warrant is wrong, then park it.
Fixing the warrant address is not your problem.
Otherwise, run this checklist:
https://stopthebailiffs.uk/stop-parking ... yflow.html
If none of the above applies, then this applies.
https://stopthebailiffs.uk/ignore-parki ... -next.html
If the council shirks then take no further action.
Bailiffs cannot break and enter for recovering traffic debts.
They can take your car, provided it's not in finance, but if the car is not available, the bailiff is only left with using harsh language.
If you have grounds, by all means, do TE9/TE7.
If the address on the warrant is wrong, then park it.
Fixing the warrant address is not your problem.
Otherwise, run this checklist:
https://stopthebailiffs.uk/stop-parking ... yflow.html
If none of the above applies, then this applies.
https://stopthebailiffs.uk/ignore-parki ... -next.html
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Thanks zeke, but wouldn't the bailiffs keep visiting and then putting up the charge? At the moment I live in a studio room in a HMO, I have no possessions apart from laptop which they cannot take away as my job is a Software Developer and whilst I am signed off sick at the moment, when I am better then hopefully I will go back to it. What worries me is that each time they visit they will increase the charge as they visited, and then take me to Court and I will get a CCJ.
As an example, last year I was in Brighton, and by mistake went in a bus lane. I go Brighton about once a year and that road wasn't a bus lane before, they changed it, and I never realised, and got a 60 pound fine. So I wanted to appeal and ask if they can reduce it to 50% ... again, I can prove I was unwell that day and was only in Brighton in an emergency as someone was ill. But they messed up and didn't reply to me. By the time they did, I was very unwell and wasn't able to operate for a few months, and so was late. So it went to the Enforcement Agency, I told them I need some time, but they only gave me a week. And then the bailiff visited and now a 60 pound fine is 490 pounds.
My worry is the Councils will ultimately take it to Court and I will get a CCJ on the record, which I do not want as that might affect my life should I get better.
As an example, last year I was in Brighton, and by mistake went in a bus lane. I go Brighton about once a year and that road wasn't a bus lane before, they changed it, and I never realised, and got a 60 pound fine. So I wanted to appeal and ask if they can reduce it to 50% ... again, I can prove I was unwell that day and was only in Brighton in an emergency as someone was ill. But they messed up and didn't reply to me. By the time they did, I was very unwell and wasn't able to operate for a few months, and so was late. So it went to the Enforcement Agency, I told them I need some time, but they only gave me a week. And then the bailiff visited and now a 60 pound fine is 490 pounds.
My worry is the Councils will ultimately take it to Court and I will get a CCJ on the record, which I do not want as that might affect my life should I get better.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Council traffic debts are not recorded as a CCJ.
There is no breach of a credit agreement. Traffic contravention debts are statutory debts.
There is no breach of a credit agreement. Traffic contravention debts are statutory debts.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Thanks Zeke,
One council that I had a PCN with has applied discretion this week and cancelled it. The other hasn't.
BTW, I was once told when appealing a PCN by someone from Customer Services that
"appeals for the EA charges can only be made with the TEC. For any charges that have gone above £108.00, you will need to make a witness statement. You can make a witness statement using form TE9".
So the question is, once a council cancels a PCN after the Enforcement Agent has the warrant, do you still owe the Enforcement Agent money? If not, they have made a loss.
One council that I had a PCN with has applied discretion this week and cancelled it. The other hasn't.
BTW, I was once told when appealing a PCN by someone from Customer Services that
"appeals for the EA charges can only be made with the TEC. For any charges that have gone above £108.00, you will need to make a witness statement. You can make a witness statement using form TE9".
So the question is, once a council cancels a PCN after the Enforcement Agent has the warrant, do you still owe the Enforcement Agent money? If not, they have made a loss.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
It's the council's discretion whether they pursue the original traffic debt.
Some do, others don't.
If the council does choose to pursue it, then you can appeal the original contravention if you have grounds.
From my own experience. Earlier this year, I was nabbed by TFL for driving in a bus lane. It was after 7 pm and I thought bus lanes were not operational. I overturned it because the photograph TFL sent showed someone else's car. TFL decided not to pursue it.
Some do, others don't.
If the council does choose to pursue it, then you can appeal the original contravention if you have grounds.
From my own experience. Earlier this year, I was nabbed by TFL for driving in a bus lane. It was after 7 pm and I thought bus lanes were not operational. I overturned it because the photograph TFL sent showed someone else's car. TFL decided not to pursue it.
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
Hello zeke, I had a PCN with TfL over congestion charge, they accepted the appeal so it is thankfully sorted, but before they accepted it Bristow and Sutor had been sending me texts and emails and calls, and they had written
"it is our intention to recommend to our client this case be reviewed for legal action, and you could get a CCJ".
You had said council debts are not recorded as CCJ, but how about TfL debts, they are not a council, can they be recorded as a CCJ?
"it is our intention to recommend to our client this case be reviewed for legal action, and you could get a CCJ".
You had said council debts are not recorded as CCJ, but how about TfL debts, they are not a council, can they be recorded as a CCJ?
Re: Gladstone Solicitors talk of more charges
You can block the nuisance text messages by following this article.
https://dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk/Baili ... xtSMS.html
I have never known a traffic contravention debt to be claimed using a part 7 money claim.
In fact, I am not sure it can even be done because a defendant can defend such a claim by applying to strike out the claim as an abuse of the court's process under CPR 3.4.
Parking tickets on private land can be claimed using a part 7 money claim and most are undefended. Those that are successfully defended are on the defence the claimant is unable to show they have been assigned the right to bring the claim on the landowner's behalf (deed of assignment).
This is not really my forte I'm afraid.
https://dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk/Baili ... xtSMS.html
I have never known a traffic contravention debt to be claimed using a part 7 money claim.
In fact, I am not sure it can even be done because a defendant can defend such a claim by applying to strike out the claim as an abuse of the court's process under CPR 3.4.
Parking tickets on private land can be claimed using a part 7 money claim and most are undefended. Those that are successfully defended are on the defence the claimant is unable to show they have been assigned the right to bring the claim on the landowner's behalf (deed of assignment).
This is not really my forte I'm afraid.