I've been sent an 'enforcement letter' from Bristow & Sutor who are demanding over £400 for a fine I knew nothing about. I called them and they said the car was registered to my old address so all the letters went there, and said my time to appeal had expired, even though it's the first I've heard of it
Where do I stand with this? I can't work out why they want so much money as it says the fine was only £98. I've attached the letter I received.
Any help would be massively appreciated. Thank you
They have front loaded the enforcement stage fee. Has the bailiff ever visited your current address? If not, then you owe just £173. Contact them ASAP to confirm this is what is owed.
Can you clarify the date they say it must be paid?
Former General Manager of a nursing home, trained in music and classical guitar, MBA in contract law, expert legal commentator on bailiff law. enjoys PG tips. No not me, some screwball elsewhere
I've been sent an 'enforcement letter' from Bristow & Sutor who are demanding over £400 for a fine I knew nothing about. I called them and they said the car was registered to my old address so all the letters went there, and said my time to appeal had expired, even though it's the first I've heard of it
Where do I stand with this? I can't work out why they want so much money as it says the fine was only £98. I've attached the letter I received.
Any help would be massively appreciated. Thank you
£98 + £75 doesn't equal £408.
The date on the Notice of enforcement is 25 July so enforcement can't legally start until 5 August assuming 1st class post was used.
If everything went to your old address, then you can appeal "out of time" and that suspends enforcement.
It looks like the bailiff company has traced you to your current address and give the notice of enforcement to see if it gets a reaction. Do not contact the bailiff company.
Remember to attach evidence of the date you moved when you email your appeal forms to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC). That'll put the mockers on the bailiffs and their fees.
I suspect that they have sent a previous NoE to the previous address.
Don't waste your time arguing the toss with B&S. Their legal guy (Mr Angry) does not possess the ability to understand legislation. I've recently had dealings with him that confirmed this to me.
Write to Gloucester CC straight away. Head your letter "Formal Complaint Stage 1"
Remind the council that they are responsible for their agents, INCLUDING THEIR FEES.
B&S have added an enforcement fee to your account. They may well have visited a previous address but this does not in itself mean that the enforcement fee can be added. Unlike council correspondence (that may be sent to your last known address) a bailiff cannot visit you UNTIL a NoE has been sent to your usual address.
Gloucester CC will revert back to Mr Angry who will no doubt come out with some skewed interpretation of legislation akin to that, that a 10 year old would come out with. If GCC remove the fee, all well and good. If they refuse to do so, ask whether there is a stage 2 to their complaints procedure or whether you are now free to escalate the matter to the ombudsman.
Yes, file the OOT by all means but also complain as I've suggested. If your OOT fails, you still need to ensure that the £235 enforcement fee is removed.
John The Baptist wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018 22:35
Don't waste your time arguing the toss with B&S. Their legal guy (Mr Angry) does not possess the ability to understand legislation. I've recently had dealings with him that confirmed this to me.
He does understand legislation but gives his own interpretation of it to suit his agenda.
Another bailiff company Newlyn Plc has a legal guy we call Mr. HirePurchase - because he thinks Paragraph 10 of Schedule 12 means bailiffs can take cars still on HP.
John The Baptist wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018 22:35
Don't waste your time arguing the toss with B&S. Their legal guy (Mr Angry) does not possess the ability to understand legislation. I've recently had dealings with him that confirmed this to me.
He does understand legislation but gives his own interpretation of it to suit his agenda.
Another bailiff company Newlyn Plc has a legal guy we call Mr. HirePurchase - because he thinks Paragraph 10 of Schedule 12 means bailiffs can take cars still on HP.
He does not understand legislation. If he did, he would give an interpretation that would actually be convincing, not a ridiculous, childish interpretation that would be laughed at by any adult.
The HP bloke does know what he is talking about and does give valid interpretations.
