Erm! If you are well educated graduate with 30+ years experience then why do you want to start proceedings with judicial review? You should be starting with lower down the ladder like complaining to JCP first.

No it is not the same. Assignment is giving responsibilty to some one else, and sold means one buyer paid money and a seller sold the goods or anything in return for money changing hands.

The best way to find out if DCA really owns the debt is by asking them to provide the evidence of the ownership of debt, ie the purchase price paid for the debt to original creditor, through a buy and sell contract, until they prove that, they do not actually own the debt, and just acting on the instructions of the original creditor. therefore they do not have the right of enforcement, unless they actually own the debt through purchase, and money actually changing hands. They do not like to divulge this information, as most of them say that they own the debt when they do not, and just tell porkies about debt ownership, I had to extract this information through a court order, that is how much they are protactive about this information.

Dear All, Just to put it on records, I was not wearing a seatbelt, and was driving, until I reached a junction where I spotted a Police officer on motorbike, as I turned the corner I decided to wear the seatbelt, and a few minutes later the police officer caught-up with me, gave me a ticket to pay the £100 penalty. Naturally, as a human nature I did not want to pay the fine, and requested a court hearing, and the courts dismissed the prosecution case, as although I was spotted not wearing a seatbelt, but when the officer actually stopped me I was wearing the seat belt, so no offence was committed. Overzealous, and meaningless prosecution, and waste of tax payers money.

they can either continue with CO or bankruptcy but not both, legally,COURTS DO NOT ALLOW TWO FORMS OF ENFORCEMENT AT THE SAME TIME. So if they opt for bankruptcy then you have a valid defence to set it aside, as the money already been secured through CO. hOPE IT HELPS.

But then if you are going above 70 mph then you are also driving without due care and attention and be served with penalty notice. Why is it that it is OK for someone when they are speeding and putting other people in danger, and being reckless, but a person who is just driving at the max speed allowed, must be dealt with punity. Double standard I think.

If I am driving in the middle lane at say 70 mph, than what right people behind me have legally to go faster, so if I am breaking the highway rule by hogging the lane than anybody who wants to go faster is also breaking the law, which says you are not allowed to go over 70 mph on the motorway.

At least someone knows what I am talking about.

Didn`t go down well, did it? Bitter pill is hard to swallow, I do not want to go on slanging match, I do not ignore or disregards the traffic signs, just at times human beings are in a difficult situations completely out of their control, and authorities want to take advantage of that and want to fine people left, right and centre, instead of using some discretion and accept that some people will make some mistakes. In my case the traffic emerging from the left lane was not allowing the traffic on the main road to cross the yellow box, had waited at least 6 times changing of lights and had not got any opportunities to cross the YBJ, and eventually when I did was only in YBJ for 2 seconds, and only because a van came from the left and blocked my exit route. The ticket itself was issued on technicality, so I am quite entitled to defend my case on the same terms,I agree there are lots of PCN here in different format, but YBJ is written in same legal wordings, no matter which authority is enforcing them, so the main body is same, whichever local authority issued them, and we are talking about YBJ PCN and not others. The enforcement authorities, and machinery that enforces the PCN is corrupt, dishonest, and their only purpose is to trap an innocent motorist, for financial gain. They lie through their teeth, about sending the documents when in fact they do not because they know they are going to be challenged, and if you have bailiffs on your door than you might just pay-up. There is nothing idiotic about it, just being intelligent, and you do not like it because you think you are always right, and nobody is more intelligent than you. Cheerio, will not reply to you again, if you find other people comments, which might be of contrarian nature, offensive.

]it looks like you might be on the payroll of traffic enforcement companies, as you show total distaste of someone correctly proving the [EDIT] who live off the earnings of honest hard working people, who sometimes have to make a decision to choose to pay between paying a fine or feed their children, as all the traffic enforcement industry that has sprung up from local authorities to bailiffs whose only purpose is to fleece the motorists. PCN wording is the same whichever authority issues them, if in doubt please obtain the sample copy and compare.

No I am not Psychic, it is just that I got the PCN for the same offence ie YBJ and contested the PCN all the way to the tribunal and won on those grounds. Nothing psychic about it, just determination to succeed.

just appeal saying the PCN wording is incorrect, case reference number 2100498211, Dabiri-v-TFL Decision date 14th Dec 1010, and PCN is un-enforceable.

I would like to share a rare victory with all of you here, because using the information available here I successfully argued that Yellow Box Junction PCN is unenforceable because it is not written correctly in legal jargon. My appeal was allowed yesterday, and TFL was unable to enforce the YBJ PCN. Hip Hip Hooray.

Dear All, I would like to share an nasty experience I had some time ago with CRA which held incorrect data on me, provided by British gas and Virgin media, about outstanding debt, except that the money was not owed, there was nothing outstanding, checked my credit file and to the horror of all horrors, they had put in a default against me, I owned a business and could not understand why my creditors one by one were withdrawing credit facilities, as a result, so I had to do something fast. So I wrote both to experian, and Equifax who were not playing ball and refused to remove or do anything about the false information, and refer me to the companies involved, who would not even reply to any letters. Than I dropped a bombshell on both CRA, telling them that I am giving them 48 hour notice to remove the offending information, and if they did not than, I shall obtain an injunction through the courts, and compel them to do so, and ofcourse get the court costs refunded, if they did not comply. Hey Presto! Got an immediate reply with removal of the incorrect information, as that is the only language they understand.:lol::lol: