Hello, I need your help. Would you please give me some advice regarding to following issue?

UPDATE: Feel free to read long version in comments below, but it's a lot of text.
There is short summary:
Two parking contraventions happened 31/10/2017 (issued 03/11/2017) and 15/12/2017 (issued 19/12/2017).
I moved the house 21/10/2017 without knowing that contraventions happened and forgot to update V5. But updated my driving licence (issued 4/11/2017).
I made the car SORN 03/03/2018 so V5 has never been updated to my new address. It means that the car is SORN and still registered on my old address.
I received two Notices of Enforcement to my new address 10/9/2018, both issued on 7/9/2018. It's £346 total. Deadline to pay is 20/9/2018, visit of enforcement agent if not paid.

I am currently trying to figure out how to formulate OOT (Out of Time declaration) without lying and without having OOT rejected by TEC.
One member of the forum suggests that even if I would updated V5, DVLA would not have my new address in the system yet, so there is a chance to have OOT for the first PCN accepted.
I do not know what to do with second PCN because TEC is likely to figure out that I have not updated my V5.


Today I have received two suspicious letters and I was not happy after opening them. Both letters are Notice of Enforcement letters (see links below). I went through couple of threads on the forum regarding to Notice of Enforcement, however I was not able get some good advice out of them as my case is slightly different.

Would you please advice me how to react and possibly lessen induced charges?

There is link to Notice 1 and Notice 2.

I thought they have send me same notice twice, but no, they differ. Both Notices are stating that I owe money to Kirklees Council, both were issued 7th September 2018 and both letterheads are "marston" branded. Both Notices are stating:
"A warrant has been issued by Northampton County Court
Penalty Charge
Market Street (Huddersfield)
DATE
NUMBER PLATE"

The only difference between notices is "DATE", one Penalty Charge has got date 31/10/2017 and the other 15/12/2017. Total amount to pay is 2x£173 = £346.

Council confirmed that both notices happened because of using buslane, it's contravection code 34J. On both ocasions the car is clearly in wrong lane and the place is well marked, so there is no chance of challenging this.

I have moved the house before first contravention happened - 21/10/2017, but was checking the post regularly next couple of months. Big mistake is that I forgot to update address on V5 and made the vehicle SORN 3/3/2018 without updating the address. I have not received/I am not aware of any letter prior these two letters and I have not had attached PCN to the vehicle windscreen, so do not have any additional info yet.

I have clearly made a mistake not informing DVLA about address change, however I was checking post on my old address regularly and have not noticed any letters.

I would like to consult my further steps with you before causing more damage by injudicious actions. Easy way is obviously to pay £346, however I want to be sure that I am not missing any cheaper way out of this trouble.

My next actions going to be:
1) Contact enforcement agent - Marston Group. I am quite sure about this step. I would like to get more details out of them - especially when and where all the missed letter were sent, type of contravention and possible PCN number so I will be able to get more details (photos, exact time, etc.) from Kirklees Council
2) Contact Kirklees Council for details
3) Figure out on what grounds I can defend myself and do appropriate actions. I have very little knowledge about dealing with authorities, so I am likely to rely on your advice and other threads on the forum. I reckon there is no benefit to hiring a solicitor as money spend on that are likely to be higher than to pay the charges.

I have got time till 20/09/2018 to do something.

Do you think there is a chance to leverage the fact that I have not received any letters prior to NoE and revert this case to beginning so I will have to pay for just two PCN's? I would like to know your opinion and possible ways (if any) to mitigate the cost.

Please help.

This post has been edited by Jkman: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 - 09:51

Update: I am slowly digesting this and this website. I reckon it's useful info for others, hence posting it here.

Given your enquiry, you need to be submitting two separate Out of Time witness statements (or statutory declarations). An explanation of the procedure is outlined here:

http://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/index-pag...tness-statement


In relation to the links that you have provided, the same individual owns another website called the Bailiff Help Forum. Sadly, the owner (posting as Schedule 12) knows very little indeed about the procedure for Out of time witness statements. This is evidenced by his advice to the following posters over the past 24 hours.


In the following thread, the motorist has received a Charge Certificate and is being told to submit an Out of Time witness statement !! His application will not be able to be precessed as the debt is only at Charge Certificate stage and has not yet even been registered at the Traffic Enforcement Centre.

https://www.bailiffhelpforum.co.uk/viewtopi...?f=5&t=5228

In this particular thread the OP is stating that they had received notification from a bailiff company. The name and address is correct but the vehicle registration is wrong. The OP had not received any previous notices. You will note that 'Schedule 12' is advising the following:




The advice is WRONG. TEC will not process any form UNLESS one of the boxes in ticked. In this particular case, the motorist should be ticking box number 1 (that they had not received any previous notices). They should then explain further about the vehicle. In any event, an OOT should not be submitted until the OP had discovered the reason WHY the wrong vehicle is recorded and WHY they had not received previous notices.

PS: You will also notice that the Bailiff Help Forum has recently changed it's name. It is now passing itself off as my my website......Bailiff Advice Online. Trading Standards are aware. Also, the owner now lives in the Philippines.

This post has been edited by Bailiff Advice: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 14:35

Thank you very much for useful info.

I realised that "Field Reference or account number" on NoE is actually PCN number so I was able to retrieve contravection details from council online, including images. It's very clear that both contravection happened.

Vehicle Registration Number NUMBERPLATE
Penalty Charge Notice KM*********
Contravention Date 31/10/2017
Contravention Time 13:05
Issue Date 03/11/2017
Make BMW
Colour Grey
Was seen in Market Street (Huddersfield)
Contravention 34J - Being in a Bus Lane

Also I rung Marstons and asked what's going on and told them to put it on hold, which was refused. They told me that I can not defend myself and any other action from my side will induce another fees. They were quite pushy so I was offered to pay over the phone about five times and payment plan was offered as well. I politely told them that I will take my time as visit from enforcement agent is going to happen after 23:59 20/09/2018. I am not surprised at all. After all they are just debt collectors.

I have followed this link. Here I learned that forms I should be using are PE2 and PE3 as the offence is "moving trafic" type. There is a nice summary of all things. Interesting thing I have learned is that you can submit Out of Time declaration even after you paid to the bailif and they are required to refund you if it is accepted. It also mentions that you can send "out of time" challenge and Appeal against a penalty charge notice by email to TEC.

Previously listed links are to bailiffadviceonline.co.uk, it's quite helpful, but let's see what govermental websites provide. There is a nice starting point. Info gained from it:

1) I missed 21 day window to challenge court order => I need to "fix" that - can be done by "out of time" challenge - info here. They will take couple of weeks to make decision, but good news that bailiff actions will be put on hold.

2) If "out of time" challenge will be accepted, they will reconsider my apeal

3) If my apeal is successfull I am going to receive new PCN and can start to deal with that - I will plead guilty as I can not see any viable defence.

4) There is forms required to chalenge and guide how to fill it - it's quite useful - good bit is that it confirms that you can use email. It also says that I need to fill "out of time application" if 36 days has passed since registration with TEC (I thought it is 21 days - I am missing something. Probably 21 days is for challenging PCN or court order, but 36 days is since registration with TEC"

5) I noticed that others are sending PE2 and PE3 together, so will do as well.

6) Filling out the forms is straighforward apart from "giving reasons" which has to be done very correctly otherwise applications will be rejected. There, there is a template,

I found out that majority of "out of time" declarations written by general public is rejected. I came to conclusion that I am not able to write correct declaration on my own. Is there any "winning" template? Apparently I do not have to mention that I forgot to update V5 so maybe just plain statement:

I have never received PCN. It might happen because I have moved from OLD_ADDRESS to ADDRESS on DATE, see my tenancy agreenment attached.

I bet this will be rejected, have you got any tips on that?

Please be aware that one of the links that you have provided is a site that has deliberately been set up to mislead the public that believing that it is a government backed website. A public information site has been set up to warn the public.

http://www.nationalbailiffadvicewebsiteisacon.com

Sheila
http://www.baiiffadviceonline.co.uk

This post has been edited by Bailiff Advice: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 20:49

The key thing to be aware of is that Out-of-Time submissions as you propose to submit can be opposed by the enforcement authority, and invariably are. TEC then refuse the OOT. At this point, the facility for a review by a County Court judge then becomes available, but costs money, - £100 for papers-only review of the TEC decision, and £255 for an interview with the judge "in chambers". Neither sum is reimbursable, and there is no guarantee of success. As you failed to update your V5 or put in place mail redirection the case may go against you.

If you do decide to go down the OOT route, rather than pay the bailiffs, then get assistance with the submission. We see lots of cases on here where people have not updated their V5, it is the commonest reason for them having bailiffs at their door. The problem is we don't get much feedback on the success or failure of OOTs based on house moves without updating the V5. Those that succeed are generally those where the PCN or NtO was sent whilst a V5 was in course of updating.

Thank you for the advice. I guess it won't be hard for enforcement authority to figure out that I forgot to update V5 as I am using different address than on V5 and I am using this reasoning on OOT declaration anyway, so they will oppose OOT and TEC will reject it.

I guess £100 papers-only review of the TEC decision won't do the trick so would have to go £255 "in chambers" route. I will still have to pay 2x£60 for bus lane tickets if being successful. So total cost will be at least £375 without my time spent.

It looks like that I will be better off to pay £346 to bailiff agency.

The deadline is 23:59 20/9/2018 so I will leave it until then. Please let me know if you have got any ideas what to do better.

Heck, I will still try to file up OOT, just to be sure I exhausted all meaningful options.



So there is a question - How should I word OOT to not being opposed by enforcement authority if I forgot to update address on V5 without lying? I moved the house 21/10/2017. Contraventions happened 31/10/2017 and 15/12/2017. I made the car SORN 03/03/2018.

This post has been edited by Jkman: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 10:53

An awful lot of words in this thread.

So, basic facts -

When did you actually move and when did you eventually update the V5 ?

Hello, yeah, sorry for beefy comments. I updated my initial question with brief summary.

I moved the house 21/10/2017. Contraventions happened 31/10/2017 and 15/12/2017. I made the car SORN 03/03/2018 so V5 has never been updated to my new address.

This post has been edited by Jkman: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 11:11

So for the first one it's highly unlikely you would have received any notices, even if promptly
updating V5 as DVLA would still have been processing.

For the second, in a review of an OOT decision, at least one Judge has ruled that up to 3 months is an understandable
delay in updating.

With DVLA having an up to 6 weeks turnaround time you could argue that even if you had delayed just one month
(while dealing with the numerous tasks necessary after moving) you still probably wouldn't have received the notices.

--
You need to post drafts here before filing.

Ah, OK... thank you!



Where can I find official outcome of that judgement so I can reference it in my OOT? Is Courts and Tribunal Juridicary the right place?

This post has been edited by Jkman: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 11:36

I found this probably dubious website which to my understanding says - you can pay the fine direct to the council and it will cancel fees introduced by enforcement agent(bailiff). I went through Schedule 12 of Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and all paragraph referenced by that website are in place.

It would save me bailiff fees of £150 and leave me to pay £196 direct to the council.

All is based on Paragraph 6(3) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007:
Paragraph 6 (3): The property in all goods ceases to be bound when any of these happens—
(a)the amount outstanding is paid, out of the proceeds of sale or otherwise;

The website says:


Do you think it's good idea to do so?

Where does para 6 say the part in red above?

The 'amount outstanding' at the moment is £173 per PCN.

imho.

Sheila
http://www.baiiffadviceonline.co.uk


This post has been edited by Bailiff Advice: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 20:50

The information is highly misleading, it is inaccurate and it will FAIL. I have written endless threads on various forums regarding the legal position of 'paying the court or council direct' after receiving notification from a bailiff company.

When the government introduce legislation, they will produce something called an 'Explanatory Memorandum'. This is usually a short document which explains the purpose of the legislation. Bailiff fees are set under the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014. The Explanatory Memorandum supporting the fee regs states the following under section 8.3:



As outlined above, one of the reasons for the compliance fee (of £75) being deducted first, was to curb aggressive bailiff behaviour.

Last year, the government undertook a 'review' of the bailiff regulations in order to find out whether the regulations were working and whether there was a need to make any changes etc. A copy of the governments response to the review was released a few months ago and most importantly, the government highlighted one problem area under Section 4.7.3 the following. You will note that the government lay the blame for this problem on 'online sources' (i.e.; forums and websites):



This post has been edited by Bailiff Advice: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 17:39

This is the alarming part. The website owner (Jason Bennison) knows perfectly well that his advice is WRONG and he knows perfectly well that his 'theory' was tested in court and his client (Mr Bola) not only lost his court case, but worse still, he was ordered to pay significant costs to the enforcement company (Newlyn Plc) and local authority (Harrow Council).

The legal case (Bola v Harrow Council & Newlyn plc) is significantly important and is outlined in detail by me in the following thread:

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.u...000-cost-order.

I should also mention that during the hearing, the Judge asked Mr Bola to read out to the court the relevant part from the Notice of Enforcement where it refers to methods of how to pay. The NoE stated that payment could be made:

By online payment to the enforcement company.
By telephoning the enforcement company
By BACS transfer into the enforcement companies bank account

The Judge stated that nowhere on the statutory Notice of Enforcement did it provide that payment should be made direct to the creditor. Crucially, District Judge Carr in his summing up said this:made this comment:



Lastly, in September last year, the High Court of Justice found significant failures by Jason Bennison (Dealing with Bailiffs, Bailiff Help Forum) in litigation that HE issued against a company. He lost that case and has been ordered to pay significant costs to the tune of £26,000. Details of the case are recorded on this website:

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum...-the-High-Court

Sheila
http://www.baiiffadviceonline.co.uk

This post has been edited by Bailiff Advice: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 23:35

Many thanks to Neil B and Bailiff Advice for detailed advice. It's quite scary that someone can read misleading informations I have found, act according to them and get to even deeper trouble.

I think my little adventure is slowly coming to bitter ending.

I will try to submit PE2&3 forms to TEC, I might be very lucky to not have OOT rejected, one never knows. I am definitely not going to apply for "in chamber" hearing regarding to the OOT. Cost of the hearing and original fine is higher than amount listed on Notices of Enforcement I received.


Comment from Neil B suggest I should highlight that in my OOT declaration. I have not managed to find the decision about 3 month understandable delay.

I have got couple of questions prior filling the OOT declaration:
1) Do you think it is worth to try to find reference to the 3 month tolarative judgement and put reference to the OOT declaration?
2) Can I make the textfield for reasons on the OOT bigger so my reasons will fit in? Can it cause rejection because PE2 form formatting was altered?
3) Shall I mention that I have been checking the post reguraly and it can be whitnessed by the landlord? Also I have collected and paid another PCN sent to that address for bus lane contravection issued on 13/1/2018.
4) Is it good to mention that the property from which I moved out is shared property?
5) Is it worth to mention that moving out of the that property was done under high stress caused by new tenants? Landlord knows about it, so can be whitnessed as well.
6) High stress situation can be further supported by the fact that neglience of new tenants caused broken leg of my cat - main reason for moving out? I was sorting cat out at the time. Have insurance claim, vet reports, etc.. Is it worth to mention it?
7) Is is worth to emphasize good will of the clerk who will read the OOT, say "please", refer to common sense? (I know it sounds funny, I could have avoid this situation with little bit more of common sense,
but nevermind.)
8) What you would write down?

As posted, you need to make 2 separate OOT submissions. And they don’t have to be submitted at the same time.

How do you approach this? Telling half-truths or not.

The facts are that you neither updated your V5C nor it would appear(I cannot see where you say you did, so I assume you didn’t) did you make any arrangements for your mail to be forwarded. Consequently you did not receive the notices.

The probability is that, as regards PCN 1, even if you had DVLA would still not have amended their records by the time the authority submitted their request.

The authority addressed all notices as required as far as we’re aware.

So your argument for the first is that the authority requested and were given your keeper details some time between the contravention and PCN issue dates (31 Oct. and 3 Nov. 2017 respectively). You had moved on 21 October (see enclosed evidence in the form of ******) and clearly DVLA still had your previous address on their records.

That’s as far as I go with only telling a partial story because DVLA had no record to update.

As regards the second PCN, my concern is that if TEC put 2 and 2 together they’ll realise you made no attempt to update your record.

And please stop referring to ‘appeal’ in the context of TEC, and for info the enforcement agents are not ‘debt collectors’, they’re enforcing a warrant issued by the court to recover money owed by you and due to the authority. They have the full force of the law on their side, providing they follow procedure. (from what I understand agents’ main failings are ‘miscalculating’ their fees and trying to enforce warrants against wrong addresses).

Firstly, it is the case that around 65% of Out of Time witness statements (or late appeals) are rejected and I have highlighted the reason why this is so on the following page from my website. However, my own personal experience, is that very few applications that I assist with are rejected. I always ask anyone that I have assisted to keep me updated and the accepted figures reported back last week were 67 acceptances and 2 rejection. The week before, I had 58 acceptances and only one rejection reported to me.

http://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/index-pag...tness-statement

The local authorities who are excellent at using their discretion wisely when considering these applications continues to be Highways England (Dart Charges) and Transport for London.

Unlike individual motorists who have never before come across these applications, I have been providing assistance to motorists for 12 years. The reason for the high success rate is that I NEVER use a standard template as each case is individual.....and most importantly, I ask lots of questions. For example:

You moved at around the same time as the contraventions, but you say that you continued checking the post regularly over the next couple of months. Are you certain that the vehicle had been registered to that particular address?

Did you update your driving licence when you moved?

Have you now returned the V5C to DVLA?

BA might have it ?

BUT


No; I wasn't suggesting it as a precedent or to be mentioned. It's just an indicator that Judges understand
the realities and constraints of modern life.

Since you never updated it's less relevant,