PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Wrong house number, right street - Bailiffs, URGENT
Jae24
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 11:28
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 16 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,472



Hi,
My father in law has had bailiffs at his door for a pcn for stopping his back wheels in a box junction in camden,

He did not receive the original PCN or any correspondence until the bailiffs knocked at the door, he dispute this and was show a warrant with the wrong house number, the bailiff was insistent that it was what was taken from V5C.

However, my father in laws car is on Motability and he has never seen the V5C, the only information he has is his general correspondence from motability, all of which is correctly addressed.

He is a very honest man and had he received the ticket he would have made payment in the first instance, however he is now being harrassed for over £500 by Marston bailiffs who are uninterested in anything other than getting into his house.

Can someone please advise the best course of action here please, he has already written to Marston, explaining but was sent a reply the next day, which did not acknowledge anything he had told them but just demanded payment and threatened forced access with a locksmith.

Thanks in advance
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 11:28
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 11:53
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,263
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Ok, so seems fairly obvious there has been a mistake by either Motability or Camden when transposing
the address, when transferring liability.

It will help if you can find out which but not essential and time is short.

Download forms PE2, PE3 and the Guidance.

DO NOT attempt to complete these without our help. They must be correctly focused
and formatted.
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/t...nt-centre-forms

Interesting the bailiff is trying to enforce at wrong address. That's naughty and we can
look into that.

I'll post more when you respond.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 12:12
Post #3


Member


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



They cannot force access with a locksmith, most they can do is enter through an open door or window.
Keep that letter, may be useful for a complaint but this is not the time.

There is enough here to make me think you should be able to reset this to PCN stage, can't guarantee but there is a system.

Basic is that the house number is wrong.
Motability car so original PCN would have gone to them and they would have nominated FIL giving his details.
Check with Motability ASAP what address they hold for FIL ??
Today if possible plus check paperwork you have that shows address of record.
An error, either at Motability or at Council led to the required notices being sent to an incorrect address.
This is not FIL's error but simply an unfortunate breakdown within the system and one which procedures are in place to correct.
Don't suppose Marston left you with a copy of the warrant ??
No matter if not TEC has that information.

From that you can download forms from Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) who deal with this.
We will link you to correct forms.
One is a Statutory Declaration. Tick the box saying no Notice to Owner...PCN received. Sign it, witnessed at local court, make sure details such as address, name and PCN number are right...ready for sending.
Second is an Out of Time request. This is a request for the court (TEC) to accept the SD even though it is out of time.
It must give reasons for the delay, it must not include anything not relevant to that.
Again we can help you draft something.
Council can object but if we word it right, they may not or indeed TEC may accept even if council object.
We can but try.


Once you send the forms to TEC, they act quite fast, same day if the forms are early enough, next day certainly.
That will put bailiffs back on leash and everything on hold while TEC make a decision.
Unless you know a commissioner of oaths that is open later today or tomorrow, local court on Monday will be best bet for the witness signature.


I'll go and find some forms for you now.....edit, Neil has pointed you to them.

This post has been edited by DancingDad: Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 12:13
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 13:11
Post #4


Member


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



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 12:12) *
They cannot force access with a locksmith, most they can do is enter through an open door or window.

They can't enter through an open window any more, law was changed a couple of years back.


--------------------
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
hcandersen
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 13:30
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,049
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Can we pl forget about locksmiths, forced entry etc.

@DD, Check with Motability ASAP what address they hold for FIL ??

Second action point:
Check with Motability ASAP what address they hold for FIL ??

You get my drift.

Third action point:
Email council, copy to bailiffs, include copy of council tax and, presuming he's registered to vote, make reference to the electoral roll, and say that you have received a visit from bailiffs brandishing a warrant for ***** address (council have a copy) whereas as can be seen he lives at ******.

He understand this relates to a penalty charge notice in respect of *******(VRM) which is a vehicle registered to Motobility. He is the permitted user.

Forget SDs, CDs, DVDs..how can you submit a late OOT when you were NOT served with any formal notices in the first place? The ingenuity of the bailiffs is not relevant: wrong address(if substantive) on warrant means strictly speaking there's no action to take with TEC, this should be directed at Motobility, the council and the bailiffs.

It would be premature to submit anything to anyone until he's cleared his lines with Motobility.

This is not our normal fare - where an owner denies receiving docs correctly addressed- in this case we're told it is objectively the case that the warrant has the wrong address.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 13:41
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,263
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 13:30) *
Third action point:
Email council, copy to bailiffs, include copy of council tax and, presuming he's registered to vote, make reference to the electoral roll, and say that you have received a visit from bailiffs brandishing a warrant for ***** address (council have a copy) whereas as can be seen he lives at ******.

He understand this relates to a penalty charge notice in respect of *******(VRM) which is a vehicle registered to Motobility. He is the permitted user.

Forget SDs, CDs, DVDs..how can you submit a late OOT when you were NOT served with any formal notices in the first place? The ingenuity of the bailiffs is not relevant: wrong address(if substantive) on warrant means strictly speaking there's no action to take with TEC, this should be directed at Motobility, the council and the bailiffs.

It would be premature to submit anything to anyone until he's cleared his lines with Motobility.

This is not our normal fare - where an owner denies receiving docs correctly addressed- in this case we're told it is objectively the case that the warrant has the wrong address.

Disagree.
He may well approach the Council in the way you suggest and I have no problem with that.

But an OOT application remains essential as a first action, to secure OP to a point of safety by getting
enforcement suspended.

The, last seen, erroneous address on the warrant can be changed in circa 24 hours.
There is no time to be reliant solely on a Coun il response.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jae24
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 13:42
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 16 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,472



Have made contact with Motability, they confirmed correct correspondence address for general mailings, but advised to call on monday as they have a team who deal with PCNs etc, who are able to access the communications with regards to the PCN, to figure out where the error was made.

Very interested with regards to the legality of enforcing a warrant at an address other than that shown in the warrant.

Am at work until tomorrow night, but will get FIL to fill out the forms, as per any guidance that can be given, on monday.

Thanks

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 13:49
Post #8


Member


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



I can see where you are coming from HCA but disagree.

Wrong house number means that the bailiffs cannot enforce at a different address but does not mean it cannot be changed, the warrant re issued.
And no guarantee that council or bailiffs will reset to where they ought to be.

If the warrant is correct in all other aspects one has to assume that a PCN has been served as well as all the remaining statutory notices.
Not correctly served but certainly sent.
This has to be addressed, dare I say must be addressed with TEC.
Trying to sort it via council, bailiffs and or motability is going out of process.

Check information, especially what address Motability has on record but IMO do not stray from process, we have seen the results of that and they are not pretty.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:10
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,049
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



They cannot change the address on a warrant to one where notices were not sent in the first instance!.!(or maybe they were and only the address on the warrant is wrong....see below, there are so many unknowns the head spins)

I stick with my original post.

Docs have been misaddressed. How?

The answer starts with Motobility.

1. Motobility gave authority address held on their system but this was incorrect.
2.As above, and address was correct.
3.Motobility gave authority an address not held on their system

Until the OP knows, I don't see how any argument could be put together. They must nail down where the mistake arose before firing off an OOT.

But they MUST get back to the council. The council can stop action quicker than TEC and all this dancing around without getting back to the council worries me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jae24
post Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:22
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 16 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,472



Have located FILs motability hire agreement which has the correct address, and insurance docs, which are also correctly addressed, so not sure where the error has occurred.

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:10) *
maybe they were and only the address on the warrant is wrong....see below, there are so many unknowns the head spins


The first he was aware of the PCN was a bailiff from Marston at the door asking for payment last week, reluctantly showed a warrant when my FIL threatened to call police, which was addressed to #15 and my FIL lives at #16, i assume they saw the car on driveway, they eventually left but said would be back, so he wrote to Marston and explained nothing received at all, they wrote back and demanded payment again.. FIL called the bailiff on number provided, who was uninterested in any facts just said make payment or will be back soon with locksmith. My FIL remembers the incident in which the PCN would have occurred, having visited a friends grandchild at Great Ormand Street, as this would have been the only time he has visited London in the car, but doesn't recall stopping in a box junction, so assumes would only have been his back wheels.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:33
Post #11


Member


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



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:10) *
They cannot change the address on a warrant to one where notices were not sent in the first instance!.!…………..
Happens all the time, we see many cases of wrong address from DVLA records being wrong and where it is obvious that Notices would not have got to intended recipient.


The council can stop action quicker than TEC and all this dancing around without getting back to the council worries me.



I don't disagree with contacting council.
But when was the last time you saw a council, any council, pulling back bailiffs and resetting to earlier notices without being told to by TEC ???
Mind you, if they did we could then claim the new NTO was out of time rolleyes.gif

There is a process.
Yes Op should and is checking with Motability to see if the error came from them, ATM it does not seem to have done.
OP's recorded address is correct with Motability.
They have checked that.
That is the sum total of their responsibility in this.
Anything else is an admin error, whether at council or motability, dunno, don't care.
They can check what address is held for the warrant with TEC on Monday.

This is a OoT that should provide all the necessary elements.
Obviously needs tuning to suit what OP finds out tomorrow.

IE
I could not action this earlier as I had no knowledge of any PCN nor had received any of the required Notices.
The first I knew of this was when a bailiff appeared with a warrant made out to the wrong address.....details needed.
This is a Motobility vehicle, registered with DVLA to Motability.
Motability have my correct address on record.....proof required, copy of recent letter or email from Motability re this.
Motability have confirmed that they sent the right address or wrong address..whatever comes from the PCN people there on Monday.
How or why the enforcement authority used the wrong house number I can/cannot say but they did.
This is not my fault in anyway, it is simply a case where notices were sent to the wrong address.
Given this there can be no expectation that I could have actioned them sooner.
Please allow my OOT, the authority may assert that they sent notices to the address they were given.
I cannot dispute that but once again state that this is not and cannot be something that I can be held responsible for.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:46
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,049
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



been the only time he has visited London in the car, but doesn't recall stopping in a box junction, so assumes would only have been his back wheels.

Let's not even go there. This is procedural.

And with respect, put the question to Motobility.

As regards an OOT submission:

On **** an enforcement agent acting on behalf of ****** (council) with a warrant addressed to ***** called at my property whose address is ******. The warrant relates to an unpaid penalty charge.
Putting to one side for the moment the agent's actions in trying to serve a warrant at an address other than that specified in the warrant, I had received none of the statutory notices associated with this penalty charge.

The owner and registered keeper of my vehicle is Motobility who CONFIRM that they received a *** from the council on *** and made representations transferring liability to me, receiving confirmation by letter dated ***that these had been accepted The address supplied to the council was ***** - see enclosed letter/email from Motobility dated *****. As can be seen, this address is *********

The council are aware of their use of an incorrect address *******(see my email dated *****)

So as regards Motobility:
Date of PCN; dates of reps and Notice of Acceptance from council; address supplied to the council...; and get confirmation from them in writing/email.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:58
Post #13


Member


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



@HCA
Don't disagree with any of that smile.gif
I prefer the more narrative over legalistic but that is opinion.
Fully agree council can be and should be informed of the wrong address issue, I would suggest once clearer information has been obtained from TEC and Motability and worded to persuade them not to contest the OOT or at least think twice on it.

Obviously the more info the better but OP must IMO stay with process, ie OOT.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 12:19
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,263
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



A bit surprised at HCA on this one. Unlike him to advocate stepping off process.
But it seems nearer a consensus now.

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:10) *
all this dancing around without getting back to the council worries me.

Neither I nor Dad were against contacting the Council.

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 09:10) *
They cannot change the address on a warrant to one where notices were not sent in the first instance!

We seem to see that happen regularly and I find nothing in CPR that supports your view.

--
I'm with Dad, as in my first response, that where the error occurred would be useful but not essential.

We'll see what Motability and the Council have to say tomorrow but I'm glad we've got
some drafts ready to adjust and fire off.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 12:49
Post #15


Member


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



QUOTE (Neil B @ Sun, 17 Feb 2019 - 12:19) *
...….I'm with Dad, as in my first response, that where the error occurred would be useful but not essential.
……….


My only fear on that was if the error was self inflicted.
As per not updating DVLA but in this case not updating or correcting Motability.
But seems to have been checked and can be evidenced with Motability agreement papers.
To me it then comes down to someone c0cked up but it wasn't me so I cannot be punished for it.
Said nicely of course.

I would love to get something in that puts the council totally in the wrong but that will depend on what OP finds tomorrow from further discussions with Motability.
If they can confirm they sent the right address, we have that in writing and we put it in the OOT then council would have to be really obtuse to object and TEC to accept the objection.
As we all know, wording is everything with an OOT and even then needs the gods to smile.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:06
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,049
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



HCA's not so much stepping off process as getting the essential information from a third party in order to submit a compelling OOT and priming the council. biggrin.gif

The OP must have Motobility's input - not guesswork from their contract.

The council should be told that their agent has c****d-up (by purporting to serve a warrant at an incorrect address) - how else are they to know? This has nothing directly to do with an OOT, it's a logical parallel strand of action AND gives them a heads up for when an OOT arrives on their desk. Not without a context or out of the blue - therefore getting the knee-jerk response- but with a context.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:55
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jae24
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:27
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 16 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,472



Motability have confirmed correct address on their files, no reason for error as far as they're concerned. They are unwilling to write a letter of support, but have said that the hire agreement, is proof in itself that they hold correct records, FIL pressed them as to where the error came about and says they were somewhat evasive, and only alluded to a "typo somewhere down the line".

FIL prefers the idea of writing to Camden first, in the hope they can put a hold on any action, any help with wording to them, would be greatly appreciated. He plans to attach his hire agreement and some sort of utility bill showing correct address
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:34
Post #18


Member


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



QUOTE (Jae24 @ Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:27) *
Motability have confirmed correct address on their files, no reason for error as far as they're concerned. They are unwilling to write a letter of support, but have said that the hire agreement, is proof in itself that they hold correct records, FIL pressed them as to where the error came about and says they were somewhat evasive, and only alluded to a "typo somewhere down the line".

FIL prefers the idea of writing to Camden first, in the hope they can put a hold on any action, any help with wording to them, would be greatly appreciated. He plans to attach his hire agreement and some sort of utility bill showing correct address


Write to the council in parallel yes but do not write to them and expect any action...except perhaps bailiffs turning up with the warrant made out to the correct address.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 11:28
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,263
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Does your FiL realise the urgency of the situation?

He must get this application filed withe Court. Mystery solved or not.

What is to stop him phoning Camden and asking the simple question, 'what address
were they given by Motability?'

I understand many people think they can resolve things by writing to Councils.
1/. It's unlikely
2/. He doesn't have time.



Bottom line.
Bailiff could appear at any minute with a correct warrant.
It could be next week before Camden even read a 'letter'.

This post has been edited by Neil B: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 11:29


--------------------
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 Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 17:26
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,263
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Jae24 @ Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:27) *
FIL prefers the idea of writing to Camden first, in the hope they can put a hold on any action,

Ok, let's call a spade a spade; this is stupid.

Filing the OOT application puts a hold on enforcement, within 24 hours or less, far quicker
than FiL's plan
(even in the unlikely event it worked)
AND -
releasing him from the anxiety of imminent threat.

TEC will send a copy of his application to Camden, effectively conveying the same info he proposes to
send in a 'letter'
, outside process. They'll do so in the same timescale as his proposed letter but TEC
correspondence is likely to get read first.

In a cage, FiL proposes to stick his head in the Tiger's mouth: I suggest he step out of the cage.

This post has been edited by Neil B: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 17:27


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 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 - 08:34
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