PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Problems with JBW and Barking and Dagenham council please help!
hazedunks
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 07:51
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 3 Feb 2011
Member No.: 43,965



I had my car clamped today which is on PCP finance by JBW baliffs with regard to a ticket received in January 2019. The only problem is I appealed the original ticket which was for a bus lane contravention and I did not hear anything back from the council. I also emailed the council despite not hearing back from them and did not recieve any response.

I assumed the matter was closed until today. When JBW clamped my car they informed me that barking and dagenham had been sending all correspondence regarding my ticket to number 63 whereas I live at 69 hence none of the original correspondence had been received by myself. I had to pay the £513 to release the clamp as I needed the car for work I was just wondering if i can claim the money back as the scenario was not my fault.

Ive also checked the baliff licence for the individual on the MOJ website and it appears they are not employed by JBW but by brighton court if this makes any difference to anything?
Thanks for any help.

This post has been edited by hazedunks: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 07:52
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 07:51
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 14:52
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (hazedunks @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 14:01) *
Hey stamford man the address on the v5c is where the original pcn was sent where my tenant currently resides and forwards mail to me and that is the address the finance company also have.



Regardless of whether you or the finance company is the registered keeper (and you don't seem to know - the finance company is the owner though) you should change the address of either the V5C if you do have it or tell the finance company you live somewhere else. While you are entitled to have your post sent to a rented out house it's silly to rely on a tenant to relay important documents and in your current case certainly did not help.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 15:49
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



...it's silly to rely on a tenant to relay important documents and in your current case certainly did not help.

In general, yes. But it has no bearing on the current case because the owner says they notified the council to use an alternative address - as they were permitted to do - and the authority were obliged to comply.

But they did not.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 16:06
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 16:49) *
...it's silly to rely on a tenant to relay important documents and in your current case certainly did not help.

In general, yes. But it has no bearing on the current case


Yes HCA. I'm only trying to tidy up a loose end for the OP. Housekeeping is part of the service here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hazedunks
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 16:49
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 3 Feb 2011
Member No.: 43,965



Hey guys whilst going through my original convo with the tenant via whatsapp i managed to find a copy of the original pcn they forward to me the contravention is being in a bus lane. So just to clarify what is the first thing to do:

1) Out of time contravention?

2) Or out of time contravention and statutory declaration

Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hazedunks
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 17:05
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 3 Feb 2011
Member No.: 43,965



Also I definitely made initial representations and stated my new correspondence address as I took a screenshot of when i submitted the online web based form the form was submitted on the 10th of Feburary 2019 and I was even given an online reference code.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 17:32
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,265
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (hazedunks @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 18:05) *
Also I definitely made initial representations and stated my new correspondence address as I took a screenshot of when i submitted the online web based form

A screenshot of when?
or
a screenshot that shows you advised them of your correct address?


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 17:43
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,265
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 11:37) *
through an out of time process that must be done properly.

Which means you first need to understand what you are doing -
QUOTE (hazedunks @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 17:49) *
1) Out of time contravention?

2) Or out of time contravention and statutory declaration

Which involves getting the terminology right.
This is nothing to do with the contravention.

And there is no rush.

Start by downloading forms PE2, PE3 and try to understand them.
Ask any questions you need to.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...ion-out-of-time

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...y-charge-notice

This post has been edited by Neil B: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 17:47


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 18:08
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



OP, just download the forms and print off - you need to get the statutory declaration witnessed by a court officer at your local county court.

Pl post a draft of your narrative here first.

As per Neil B, this has nothing to do with the contravention, it is purely procedural.

I gave you the main points to be included in an earlier post:

You live at address B having moved from address A;
When you moved you put in place mail redirection arrangements;
At the time the PCN was issued, DVLA still had address A as the registered keeper address and therefore you received a PCN addressed to address A;
You submitted representations in time and as required and notified the authority of address B as the address for service for all future correspondence;
Despite this, the authority ignored your instructions and continued to use address A, however, because the mail redirection had lapsed none of their correspondence and notices was served at address B;
You were therefore unable to submit a statutory declaration in time because you did not receive the Order for Recovery;
The lateness of your Out-of-time application is a consequence of you only becoming aware of the penalty being registered as a debt when the enforcement agents enforced a warrant at address B by clamping your car (for information it must surely follow that the warrant was issued against address A, not address B).

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 18:32
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 19:08) *
Despite this, the authority ignored your instructions and continued to use address A, however, because the mail redirection had lapsed none of their correspondence and notices was served at address B


No - once again this is wrong. Council just got address B wrong. 63 instead of 69. This is why Neil has been asking for proof that the number 69 was specified.

Also, address A is also the OP's property so it would have OK had they used it.





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 19:18
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,265
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 19:32) *
This is why Neil has been asking for proof that the number 69 was specified.

Well I'm not disagreeing with HCA that proof isn't essential but as it now seems Haze might have
some then yes, let's make use of it.
To my mind it gives a much better chance of fending off any possible objection from B&D.

Additionally, proof of actual current address, is a standard attachment.
And, as I've asked, what did 63 do with the notices? If returned, that might be thrown in too.

A bit pedantic maybe but neither was it 'representations'. Rather, an informal 'challenge'.
Still counts for our purposes but we might then make it clearer what first notice went astray - the EN.

Most of all, Haze should note there is absolutely NO RUSH and affords us the opportunity to optimise
this OOT application.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 20:17
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



No - once again this is wrong. Council just got address B wrong. 63 instead of 69.


The council continued to use the DVLA address contrary to the owner's instructions. C**-up or conspiracy doesn't really affect matters, they did not address the notices and correspondence as required, and this is all the OP needs to claim.

If the authority have reps which do not include such an instruction, then on production as part of the authority's objection TEC would probably refuse permission to submit a SD.

But they would be required to provide evidence if they have this and the OP should make it clear in their submission that such evidence exists.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 20:34
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 20:37
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,265
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 21:17) *
No - once again this is wrong. Council just got address B wrong. 63 instead of 69.


The council continued to use the DVLA address contrary to the owner's instructions.

No, they didn't. That's what Stamf is saying.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hazedunks
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 20:56
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 3 Feb 2011
Member No.: 43,965



I will have to find out what 63 has done as I knocked on their door twice to no response. Ive downloaded both forms and will post a rough draft here before submitting. Thanks guys.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 21:47
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



I got the original pcn and i appealed it all further correspondence was sent to the wrong address by the council.

[i]On the online portal i put my address as 69 my telephone number and my email.


The baliffs clamped my car outsidemy house at 69 *** they said they sent a NTO on the 9th of August but it was sent to 63** they further confirmed all correspondence had been sent to 63***
[/i]


So what have I missed??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Thu, 22 Aug 2019 - 03:36
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,265
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 22:47) *
So what have I missed??

Seriously? Do we have to, again? Do we want to?

Something I posted last month in another case -
QUOTE (Neil B @ Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 22:26) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 22:15) *
Why is this point not being addressed by the OP?

Because he had already, entirely independently, realised the mistake you are making.

I'm sorry I can't put that more politely.

Again I'm sorry I can't find words to put that more politely but I think the same applies in this case:

Since you ask -
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 21:17) *
The council continued to use the DVLA address

No they didn't: Clear as day.
and -

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 19:08) *
however, because the mail redirection had lapsed

Redirection has nothing to do with it.


And, as an aside -- I wouldn't but you've chosen to quote it - and also for the benefit of 'Haze' --
QUOTE (hazedunks @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 11:28) *
they said they sent a NTO on the 9th of August but it was sent to 63**

was the bailiffs saying.
And I said,
QUOTE (Neil B @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 18:43) *
getting the terminology right.

Meaning, no; the bailiff was talking about an NoE; Notice of Enforcement, served on 63, to justify their
attendance at 69. A mandatory notice to be served by bailiffs prior to visiting.
The relevant notices are those earlier issued by the council.

-----
I sincerely hope 'Haze' is not now confused further.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bailiff Advice
post Thu, 22 Aug 2019 - 08:06
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 4 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,440



QUOTE (hazedunks @ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 - 18:05) *
Also I definitely made initial representations and stated my new correspondence address as I took a screenshot of when i submitted the online web based form the form was submitted on the 10th of Feburary 2019 and I was even given an online reference code.


Good morning Hazedunks,

I thought that this enquiry was familiar. You and I spoke at length on Monday (19th August). As I explained, we only have the bailiffs word for it that correspondence has been sent to number 63 instead of the correct house number of 69 but nonetheless, what he said cannot be ignored. It is important to stress though that the INITIAL correspondence from the council had been sent to your previous address.

When making your online representation, you stated to B & D that you had moved address. You provided the address. It is possible that you made an error when typing the house number and it is equally possible that the council made a mistake. Either way, if we are to believe what the bailiff had told you, a mistake was made. I explained to you that the only route to enable you to get a refund, is to submit an Out of Time Statutory Declaration (forms PE2 and PE3). If accepted, a refund must be given. The Local Government Ombudsman has made 3 separate decisions on this subject.

If accepted, the council should either 'rewind' the penalty back to the 'appeal' stage or issue a new penalty allowing you to once again make representation.

PS: I did offer to assist you with drafting of the forms.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Thu, 22 Aug 2019 - 08:13
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Thank you.

I would add again that the burden to rebut the assertion that the documents were not addressed as required lies with the authority because they, unlike the OP who never received them, are the only ones who have these records!

It is simple for them to disprove with the evidence at their disposal, but only of course if that evidence does disprove. Hence why I strongly believe that any OOT must stress to the court that the authority hold all the evidence, whether in their favour or not, and the need for the authority to produce this evidence as part of any objection.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 - 08:58
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Thu, 22 Aug 2019 - 17:20
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



As I posted earlier, it matters not a jot whether the authority are using the DVLA address or, as seems to be held, simply having regard to the OP's instructions but getting them wrong: this point is not at issue.

They failed to issue notices to the address as instructed by the OP.

The OP's OOT is not required to establish the basis for their error, simply to point it out to the court.

And we seem agreed that the authority could not rebut the assertion that the notices were wrongly addressed ( NB. if some weird hybrid address then no mail redirection could anticipate such incompetence), so they should not object to an OOT. But who am I to place limits upon their stupidity? The OOT should spell out the issue so an to ensure that there would be no basis for them to feign misunderstanding the point at issue.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 - 17:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hazedunks
post Fri, 13 Sep 2019 - 17:21
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 3 Feb 2011
Member No.: 43,965



Hey guys great news my out of time declaration has been accepted. I was just wondering what is the next step? I received a letter from the council a new pcn will be issued but I already paid £513 to the baliffs initially as they had clamped my car. So can the council not take the money from there and refund me the rest.

Thanks for all your help guys.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hazedunks
post Sun, 15 Sep 2019 - 16:17
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 3 Feb 2011
Member No.: 43,965



Bump
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 19:08
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here