PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN never received - incomplete address used by TFL
drj
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 21:06
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 14 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,924



Hi All,

I had an unpleasant surprise on Monday when two bailiffs turned up at my door asking for £513 for an unpaid PCN from the 16/10/18. Stopping in a box junction on a red route.
I was completely taken aback as I had received NO correspondence about this prior to the visit (either from TFL or from the bailiffs).
Having never had to deal with anything like this before I paid the bailiffs, but after they left I phoned TFL to find out what was going on. It turns out they had used an incomplete address on all correspondence - they had omitted both my house number and street name, and consequently all mail had been returned to them as undeliverable. I phoned the collection agency, they had used the same address, so I received nothing from them either. Turns out the bailiffs had found my house by walking up my street (they had my name, the town and postcode), finding my car and then asking around who it belonged to!
My V5C has my full and correct address on it, and has done so for many years, There has been no recent address changes (I have been at the same address for over 10 years).
I was advised to complete forms PE2 and PE3, which I have done, and had them signed off at the local county court. I have emailed them to the TEC along with a scan of my V5C.
Just wondering what the next steps are - how do I find the status of my case? Will I get the money back (including bailiff fees)? I'm not contesting the original ticket, but I don't think I should be paying £513 due to the mistake either of the DVLA to provide my full address to TFL, or an error in TFL's systems that caused my address to be cropped so that mail was undeliverable.

All help/advice is greatly appreciated.

Thanks.
drj
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 27)
Advertisement
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 21:06
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
DancingDad
post Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 14:39
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 15:20) *
I still think that when it's all over and done with (I have little doubt Shelia will be able to sort this out), a contempt of court application should be given serious consideration. The administration of justice risks being seriously undermined if council officials submit witness statements with little care of the truth of their contents.



Truth of the contents may well be that DVLA supplied the wrong address.
No that this excuses the SOT or TEC as it is obvious to a blind man in the sea that something went wrong en route with the notices.
But there is a difference between failing to grasp that the error occurred (incompetence) and telling absolute porkies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 14:59
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 15:39) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 15:20) *
I still think that when it's all over and done with (I have little doubt Shelia will be able to sort this out), a contempt of court application should be given serious consideration. The administration of justice risks being seriously undermined if council officials submit witness statements with little care of the truth of their contents.



Truth of the contents may well be that DVLA supplied the wrong address.
No that this excuses the SOT or TEC as it is obvious to a blind man in the sea that something went wrong en route with the notices.
But there is a difference between failing to grasp that the error occurred (incompetence) and telling absolute porkies.

When signing a statement of truth there is a positive duty to ascertain that the information is both truthful and within the direct knowledge of the person making the statement. The VQ7 form from DVLA confirms the correct details were held on record. I would ask DVLA to confirm the address that was returned to the council, if they confirm the correct address was supplied, Susan Watts has a prima facie case to answer because she appears, in the best of circumstances, to have been reckless as to whether the contents of her statement were true.

From previous cases we've seen, the address mangling has something to do with TFL's IT system, rather than anything on the DVLA's end. After all, we've not seen any council, police force or PPC come up with this "company secretary" nonsense.

If in her defence TFL assert that Susan Watts made an honest mistake due to an IT error, that's your smoking gun that will get the OfR cancelled even if the district judge got out of the wrong side of bed.

Personally I would include an application for costs in the N244 form, which I'm happy to help with. If the matter were to go to a hearing, I would also draft an N260 seeking the costs of attendance.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
drj
post Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 16:35
Post #23


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 14 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,924



QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 13:28) *
QUOTE (drj @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 10:51) *
The saga continues.

After having sent my PE2 and PE3, including the copy of the V5C through to the TEC I received a letter from TFL (attached) saying that they were challenging my appeal. I then received a letter on the 10th April (dated 8th April) from the TEC stating that my appeal had been refused.


I am shocked at the contents of the Statement of Truth from Transport for London and in particular; given that the person signing the Statement CONFIRMS that TfL had received RETURNED post on 21st November 2018 !!

I am also lost for words at the ROLE of the TEC 'Court Officer'...…..

This case needs to go back to TfL asap. Please feel free to contact me (details below).

Bailiff Advice Online


Message sent. Thank you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bailiff Advice
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 08:18
Post #24


Member


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



Just a short update on this thread.

Transport for London have agreed to REFUND the OP the sum of £513.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 12:58
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



BTW.

When my sister got a PCN for YBJ from TFL, this was also addressed to "The Company Secretary"
although her name was also included and rest of the address was correct.

So there is evidentially an issue between DVLC & TFL.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 13:10
Post #26


Member


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



We've seen several of these 'companies secretary' errors - must be a problem at TFL's end surely.

Was this case resolved without recourse to N244?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 13:21
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sat, 18 May 2019 - 14:10) *
We've seen several of these 'companies secretary' errors - must be a problem at TFL's end surely.

Was this case resolved without recourse to N244?

+1 ?


--------------------
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 Sat, 18 May 2019 - 14:26
Post #28


Member


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



OP, exactly who returned to notices to the authority, the Royal Mail or someone else?

If, as I suspect, it was the RM then they do not play a game in this respect** and the authority were required to act upon this information. However, there might have been a lag in this process i.e. perhaps held for a few days until returned.

So, I suggest you contact your local delivery office, find out their procedures and then enquire about your specifics.

On *** the authority issued a *** addressed to **** having previously obtained the registered keeper details from DVLA of ***** the registered keeper of ***(the vehicle in question);
On *** this notice was returned to ***, the enforcement authority (authority) by the Royal Mail indicating that ******(reasons for non-delivery);
On *** and *** the authority issued a *** and **** respectively to the same address.
These were returned to the authority on ***** and ****.
On ****, ***** (a duly authorised officer of the authority) in an objection submitted by the authority to TEC in respect of an OOT submission made by the owner made a statement of truth that ****** as a direct consequence of which the OOT was refused.
On *** the owner was visited by enforcement agents acting under instructions from the authority which had obtained a warrant from the court to demand payment of ***.
At this time, **** after the alleged contravention which gave rise to the penalty, the owner had received no communication from the authority.

OP, could you fill in the gaps.

You must complain. It is unlikely that this is a one-off, but more likely to be systemic.

** for aficionados of Miracle on 34th Street, the RM can trace its history to 1516 and when it returns a letter for want of a deliverable address the court attaches considerable weight to this evidence!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 08:23
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