Out of time statutory declaration rejected, Out of time statutory declaration rejected Options

[danielz000]

Hi all,

A few weeks ago, a friend I live with had a knock on the door from some bailiffs who had put a control order on his car. We asked why this was and the bailiff said it was for a parking ticket for Newham. This was the first either of us had heard about it.

After a few phone calls we discovered this was actually for a bus lane offence. We eventually managed to get a few details on the offence and have no objections as to whether it occurred. My friend was driving in the bus lane.

He was advised by CAB to file a PE2 and PE3 form to stop the bailiffs continuing enforcement. We completed these forms stating that the first we knew about the PCN was the bailiff knocking on the door. We had not received any PCNs, any NIPs, Charge Certificates or Notice of Enforcements from the bailiffs.

Newham rejected the out of time request (stating it was unlikely that none of the letters were received and so he must have just ignored them) and the TEC/Court then refused the application. The letter the court sent gave no explanation as to why it was refused but the letter explains that a N244 form can be completed but this costs £100 or £255 if a hearing is wanted.

So I have a few questions (i appreciate they may not all be appropriate for this forum but any input is appreciated):

1) How would you guys/girls deal with this (currently the bailiffs want about £500)

2) Are the N244 fees refundable if a judge finds in your favor? If not, could the costs be recovered in a small claims court?

3) Why would the out of time declaration be rejected? Isn't this exactly what the form is there for?

4) Is it normal for the TEC to reject these out of time requests? Is a judge likely to see things differently?

Should we continue to argue this case, the only evidence we have of a lack of delivery is as follows:

A) I recently had a similar situation with Havering where a number of letters were never delivered (I blamed Havering for this, but in hindsight the issue was probably with royal mail). I have copies of my correspondence with Havering to this affect.

B) We started dealing with the situation as soon as we became aware of it, unlike Newham's suggestions in the rejection

C) After this happened we reported the missing letters to Royal Mail and have a reference number for this (they're clearly going to do nothing about it though)

D) My friend thinks that a debit card also went missing in the past and had to be reordered (we're gonna check this with his bank).

Any way guys, if any one has any suggestions I'd really appreciate the input, even if it's just to point us in a general direction... Obviously, there's not really any documents or photos for us to upload as we never received any.

Thanks in advance,

Daniel





Hi guys, just looking responses to other similar threads... I'll get the PE2, PE3, response from Newham and the TEC refusal uploaded ASAP.

[Advertisement]

[danielz000]

Hi guys,

Here's the letter I'm thinking to attach to the N244 form, if anyone has any feedback or advice it would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Daniel

Dear Sir/Madam,

N244 form for PCN PN1234567

I am writing in regards to the attached N244 form. I am completing this form and requesting that a judge review my “Application to file a Statutory Declaration Out of Time” after receiving a letter from Newham contesting the application (12th June 2019) and subsequently a letter from HMCTS refusing the application (20th June 2019).

In regards to the PE2 form (Application to file a Statutory Declaration Out of Time), on 22nd May 2019, having just received a completely unexpected visit from a bailiff, I hastily and without seeking suitable advice completed the PE2 form to the best of my ability. This form provided a small box for me to provide “my reasons for filing the Statutory Declaration out of time”. The form did not ask for any evidence and so, regretfully, I did what it asked and simply stated my reason which was that having received no letters from the council or the bailiffs I was completely unaware of the PCN until the bailiff knocked on my door. With hindsight I now believe I should have taken the time to gather evidence and make a better case for my PE2 to be accepted. I now intend to present this case to you.

Since the visit from the bailiff I have spoken to Newham Council a number of times, although they have been of little help, they did provide me with copies of documents and the details of the PCN in question. I would firstly like to state that I have no objections to their PCN, my car was driven down a bus only route in error, my objections are against the way the PCN has progressed to a £513 debt without my knowledge.

Unfortunately, as Newham decided to send these letters by first class post, it is extremely difficult for me to give a definitive explanation as to why or how the letters failed to be delivered but given the fact they have the correct address details for me, it is my opinion that the most likely explanation for the missing letters is that they are being discarded or stolen in transit. Although this may sound unlikely I do have some evidence to suggest this could be the case.

Since the bailiff visited, it has occurred to me that a number of other letters addressed to myself and a friend I live with have gone missing. Unfortunately the majority of our bills and correspondence are done online and few letters are posted to us anymore but I have managed to confirm the following:

On two occasions I had to re-order bank cards that were meant to have been delivered to me. I spoke to my bank on 26th June 2019 and they have confirmed the dates as follows:

Card ordered - Card re-orderd
21st May 2018 - 1st June 2018
20th November 2018 - 22nd December 2018

Although the bank is unwilling to provide this information in writing, I can provide an audio recording of the confirmation is required.

The friend that I live with had a similar issue in regards to a PCN issued by Havering Council. At the time he assumed that Havering were at fault for failing to send letters to him and argued this to the independent adjudicator. The correspondence he had with London Tribunals (the adjudicator) and Havering Council are recorded and documented. I have attached one of these letters (attachment 1) and highlighted on it the multiple accounts of missing letters.

Additionally, after becoming aware of the missing letters I called Royal Mail and logged a complaint with them whilst asking for any information possible regarding the letters. I was given a reference number (1-4976887749) and told the issue would be passed to the local depot but that they would be unable to help me any further as the letters were not sent via tracked or signed for delivery. Royal Mail also confirmed that it would impossible for Newham to provide proof of postage if they used first class postage and more importantly, that there is no guarantee that a letter is delivered or returned to sender when using first class postage.

In Newham’s response (attachment 2) to the PE2 and PE3 (Statutory Declaration) form I submitted, they offer no proof of postage but go on to state that “unless the notices are returned to us by Royal Mail we would assume that the notices were received”. This, in essence, means that despite Royal Mail confirming there are no guarantees of a first class letter being delivered or returned to the original sender, Newham expect an assumption they make to be valued and trusted more than a signed legal document stating, as a fact, that the letters were never received.

Newham then go on to say “we must therefore assume they were received but not acted upon”. This makes absolutely no sense for two reasons:

The first reason is that as soon as I became aware of the situation I started to act upon it and have not stopped doing so since. These actions include multiple calls to Royal Mail, Newham Council, the Traffic Enforcement Centre, the Citizens Advice Bureau and the bailiffs. They also include completing the PE2 and PE3 forms which needed to be countersigned in the local county court and now this letter and the N244 form. All of these actions began from the date that the bailiff first visited me and I became aware of the situation. There was nothing before that.

The second reason is that given that I have no objection to the original PCN and knowing that the DVLA have my correct address, it makes no sense for me ignore the PCN and watch a debt gradually increase from £65 to £513. It makes even less sense given that I am now in a situation where I have to pay £100 to have my case reviewed when the original fine was only £65.

Given that Newham have provided no proof of postage or delivery, there is no guarantee that Royal Mail will deliver or return a letter, the Statutory Declaration I made and the fact that it makes no logical or financial sense for me to ignore these letters I think it is fair to say that the attempt by Newham to contest my PE2 application should not only be discarded but noted as being completely unreasonable.

I therefore ask that you not only consider my application to file a Statutory Declaration out of time but that you also consider awarding me the cost of this application as not doing so will leave me an additional £100 out of pocket by no fault of my own.

Yours faithfully,

XXXXX XXXXXXX

[Neil B]

Have you downloaded an N244 form yet?

[danielz000]

Have you downloaded an N244 form yet?

Hi Neil,

I had a glance at it today... Need to work out what all the fields are and then if necessary modify what I've written and copy it in to the N244 form as appropriate

Cheers

Dan

[hcandersen]

I still get confused by the OP, who is not the owner, chopping and changing between posting on their own behalf and their friend's.

Anyway, rowing back:
The authority issued notices as required;
The OOT mentioned nothing about a missing mail problem, it just stated that no correspondence was received. (in the absence of any substantive argument to the contrary, TEC take the evidence of posting as proof of service on the balance of probabilities).

IMO, the OP's friend would never succeed with a hearing on the papers only, therefore the options are to pay the penalty or turn up in person and with the force of their credibility hope to carry the day. This should be the financial framework which needs to be addressed now. Repeated iterations of evermore crafted submissions will not address this point.

OP, just for fun put your postcode into this https://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode

I would be interested to know what you find e.g. 20-30 addresses covered by the same postcode and whether your address word for word is one of these etc.

[danielz000]

Thanks for the input hcandersen.

I'm confusing myself posting in first and third person if I'm honest but i think it's better if I write the letter for my friend.

I appreciate a hearing in person might carry more credibility and I'll discuss that with my friend. Obviously the issue is striking a balance between cost and success whilst also taking in to account that the hearing cost is 50% of the current debt and if we won we'd still have to pay the PCN on top... Any one else's thoughts on this would be welcomed. Maybe someone has experience of both methods and can suggest odds of success for both methods...

I have tried to explain why no evidence was given along with the PE2, it was a mixture of haste and a badly worded form. I can also understand your opinion that increasingly crafted letters are unlikely to change an judge's opinion. Unfortunately other than turning up in person that's all I have to work with... That and the fact I'm telling the truth...

I put my post code in to the search box. There's about 35 houses with the same postcode. My house number is 3 digits long, my two neighbours have the most similar numbers with a single digit difference. One of them I don't speak to but I'd say it was unlikely they received our mail as we rarely receive there's.

Cheers

Dan

[hcandersen]

But your address as per the V5C appears in every respect as one of the properties covered by the postcode, yes?

[danielz000]

But your address as per the V5C appears in every respect as one of the properties covered by the postcode, yes?

Yes. Exactly

[stamfordman]

And the docref date on the V5C? In other words the date of last change, as shown in several places e.g sections 9, 10, 11

[danielz000]

And the docref date on the V5C? In other words the date of last change, as shown in several places e.g sections 9, 10, 11

Hi Stamfordman,

Section 5, vehicle acquired on 18/09/2017
Section 9 and 11 doc ref date is 02 10 17
No dates in section 10.

Cheers

Dan