The forms that you would need (either forms TE7 and TE9) or forms PE2 & PE3, depend entirely on the actual contravention itself. If the offence was for a 'moving traffic' offence, (ie: an offence that would have been detected by CCTV camera), then; with a couple of exceptions, the forms would be PE2 and PE3. If however, the offence had been for parking, then forms TE7 and TE9 would be required. PS: The 'exceptions' for moving traffic offences would be for Merseyflow and Dart Charge penalties. In both cases, forms TE7 and TE9 would be required.

Would you mind letting us know when this particular incident happened. You mention that you have written 3 letters of complaint and that the enforcement company have IGNORED them. Can you provide more details on this. For example, did you receive responses to each letter?

Whilst you are right UB that an enforcement agent can gain 'peaceful entry' into a property, this is not exactly what is expected during the COVID 19 pandemic. Since, March (when we had the 1st 'lockdown') this is the first case that I have come across where a bailiff has entered a property. This is very odd indeed and appears not to be in line with the recent Guidance for enforcement agents during COVID 19. If it is the case that complaints to the enforcement company have been rejected, then the enforcement company should have given the OP the option of EITHER asking that the complaint be considered by Marston's Independent Advisory Group OR CIVEA.

Given the popularity of this forum, for anyone else reading this post could you please note that Out of Time Witness Statement forms (TE7 and TE9) do NOT require a signature to be witnessed. On the other hand, if an Out of Time Statutory Declaration is required (Forms PE2 and PE3), the forms require that a signature be witnessed (by a solicitor).

For the sake of clarity, the most common debts that CDER enforce relate to parking and road traffic contraventions; most commonly, for Dart Charge and Transport for London (amongst many others). Would this give you a clue as to what debt is being enforced? PS: CDER used to be called JBW Group. The word CDER is pronounced as: Sea....Der

Is there a reason why you believe that the debt relates to a Student Finance loan? Have you received previous communication about this debt from a debt collection company? For the sake of clarity, the most common debts that CDER enforce relate to parking and road traffic contraventions; most commonly, for Dart Charge and Transport for London (amongst many others).

For the 'in time' Stat Dec's ( the 2 Ealing and 1 Camden tickets) you merely need to ensure that you tick box number 1 (I did not receive the Penalty Charge Notice) and in the 'reason' box state: 'I would like to request that the debt registration be cancelled and a new Penalty Charge Notice issued as I was unable to pay the charge at the earlier discounted rate as I only became aware of this moving traffic offence a few days ago when I was able to collect items of post from a previous address'. Also, don't make the same mistake that almost all motorists make when submitting these applications in that in the Applicant box ,(top right hand corner), they provide their name. This is wrong. In this box, you must provide the name of the issuing authority (in this case; either Camden or Ealing Council. For the 'Out of Time' application, it would be perfectly OK to state that it was only after receiving correspondence from a bailiff at your current address regarding this particular penalty that you decided to visit your previous property to ascertain whether there was any items of post. It would be wise to also mention that the property had been a house share with 7 other people. Out of Time applications have NOTHING whatsoever to do with the address on your driving licence. With all moving traffic and other contraventions, it is the information on the V5C (Log Book) that is relevant. Therefore, you must state that you have updated your V5C to your current address. There is no requirement to state WHEN you did this. Kepp it simple. Finally, you will NOT be prosecuted for failing to update either your V5C or Driving licence any sooner. What is important is that you have now updated them.

Can I just correct you here DX. If a motorist is submitting an 'In Time' Statutory Declaration' (in other words, the Stat Dec is submitted to TEC within 21 days of the Order for Recovery being issued, then he will only need to provide a brief outline such as: 'I would like to request that the debt registration be cancelled and a new Penalty Charge Notice issued as I was unable to pay the charge at the earlier discounted rate as I only became aware of this moving traffic offence a few days ago when I was able to collect items of post from a previous address'. His Statutory Declaration will AUTOMATICALLY be accepted and a new Penalty Charge Notice issued allowing him to pay at the earlier discounted rate. If however, the motorist is unable to submit a Statutory Declaration within 21 days of the Order for Recovery being issued, (usually because he only became aware of the Penalty after being contacted by a bailiff,) then he will still be able to submit a Statutory Declaration. The difference between submitting the Stat Dec 'In Time' (i.e: within 21days of the OfR being issued) and 'Out of Time' (after the 21 days has expired) is that in ADDITION to submitting a Statutory Declaration, he will also have to submit a second formal document to 'seek permission' to allow him to submit his Statutory Declaration LATE (in other words 'Out of Time'). Also, and this is very important, his application will not automatically be accepted. Instead, the Traffic Enforcement Centre contact the local authority to ask them whether or not they will allow the motorist to In doing so, he will be required to also complete form PE2 (entitled: Application to file a Statutory Declaration 'Out of Time'. Crucially, on this form the motorist is required to provide HIS REASONS for filing his Statutory Declaration LATE (in other words, outside of the legally required 21 days from receipt of the Order for Recovery. And this is where there is always a problem. Motorists fail to understand this point. It is ALWAYS the case that when completing form PE2 that the motorist provide the REASON why he could not file his Statutory Declaration within the legal timeframe. Such as, that he has only just become aware of the penalty because all prior correspondence had been sent to his previous address etc, etc.

Can I just be clear here... The Barnet contravention dated 22nd Oct 2019 requires both the PE2 and PE3 but the other 3 PCN's only require the PE3. In other words, you only have to submit ONE Out of Time Statutory Declaration and for the other three contravention, they only require a Statutory Declaration. If I am correct, the good news is that for the 3 contraventions where you are still within time to submit Statutory Declarations, these will AUTOMATICALLY be accepted and new Penalty Charge Notices will be issued by Camden and Ealing Councils allowing you to either pay the charge at the earlier rate or alternatively; to make representation (assuming that you have grounds etc). When you moved, did you update your driving licence? Have you now updated your V5C (Log Book) and if so, when?

Excellent outcome.

I cannot tell you how many enquiries, identical to yours we have dealt with on this forum. Once again, if payment is made after a warrant is issued and passed to bailiffs, then any payment made to the court of just the fine amount (minus bailiff fees) is simply forwarded by the court to the relevant enforcement company. And here is the most important piece of information to remember: Lets say for example that the bailiff requested a sum of £425 and that this was broken down as to £350 for the fine and £75 for the Compliance Fee. The debtor then makes payment TO THE COURT of just the sum of £350 (fine amount). Here is what happens next: As a warrant has already been issued and passed to bailiffs, the court will send the £350 to the enforcement company. Legislation provides that from any payment made (irrespective of whether that payment was made direct to the creditor/court or enforcement company) that the £75 Compliance fee is first deducted. Therefore the payment made of £350 has been allocated as to £75 towards the Compliance fee and the balance (in this case of £275) allocated towards the fine. The compliance fee of £75 has been paid in full and the balance remaining against the fine has now been reduced to £75. Unless payment of this £75 is made, the bailiff is entitled to make a visit and at that stage, an enforcement fee of £235 becomes due and payable. To avoid this scenario happening, don't pay a creditor (or court) direct once the debt is with bailiffs. If you are in arrears with paying a court fine, then what happens is that HM Courts will send you what is called a Further Steps Notice. You have just 10 working days to clear the arrears otherwise, a warrant would be issued. The court are not under any obligation to send more than one Further Steps Notice during the lifetime of the fine. In other words, if you had previously been late in making payments and had received a Further Steps Notice, the court are not required to send another one to you if you again default in payment. If it is the case that you had not received a FTS, then you need to make enquiries with the Magistrate's Court.

Can you provide some background information please. When was the ticket issued? Did you receive the initial parking ticket on your car? Did you appeal online to the council? Did you receive confirmation of safe receipt? When roughly was this? Did you receive any further notices regarding the penalty (such as: a Charge Certificate and an Order for Recovery? Did you receive any previous correspondence from Bristow & Sutor?

I have to be really honest here and say that your posts are most confusing. When you initially started this thread in November 2019 you had been complaining at the charging of a fee of £235. Ten months later (on 2nd September) you state that a FRESH visit had been made that morning and that a clamp had been applied to the vehicle and that you had to pay the amount outstanding to get the clamp removed. Even though a clamp had been applied you state this: BUT NO EVIDENCE OF THAT VISIT'. As I have said, I am really confused.

You may have missed the OP's post (number 19) on 2nd September where he stated that a bailiff had visited that day, clamped his car and he had to pay the full amount in order to have the immobilisation device removed. Therefore, there is no need at all to involve the council.

Most importantly, when showing evidence that she is not the debtor, your daughter should NOT allow the enforcement agent into her property. She should speak to the agent outside.

If your father had not received any previous notices, it would usually be the case that this would be because all prior correspondence had been sent to a previous address and the enforcement company has now been made aware of a change of address. Could this possibly be the case?

Since 2014, legislation provides for enforcement agents being able to make a personal visits on both Sundays and Bank holidays. An enforcement fee of £235 is the correct charge. If the bailiff returns a 2nd time, he cannot make another charge. The fee of £235 can only be charged once.

Although not relevant in this particular case, we need to note that as a result of COVID, bailiff enforcement was ceased by the government under secondary legislation in April. Enforcement will be able to resume from 24th August.

It would be a good idea to suggest to your ex partner that he carry out a credit search against himself in order to establish whether there are any further judgments recorded. You also need to get assurance from him that he is dealing with the one CCJ that he is aware of.

I think that you will find that opening post addresses to somebody else, is an offence.

Thank you for your earlier responses to my questions. I have further queries on the N244 applications, but in the meantime, can you elaborate further on the actual seizure of the car. You mention that you had a call from the person who purchased your car asking whether you can 'sell the car keys'' and that the 'boot was empty' and that construction tools and personal belongings appeared to be missing. I am assuming that the car was seized BEFORE you filed Out of Time witness statements (and N244 Applications). Is this the case? Clearly, at some stage you SOLD the vehicle. I am confused at this because the title of this thread is : Bailiffs sold MY car while N244 processed by TEC. When the car removed to the pound was it still owned by you? If so, when was this? When did you sell the car? How much was the sale price? Did you advise DVLA of the sale? When was the car sold by the bailiff company? Do you have any idea how much it was sold for?

Progress at last !! Please keep us all posted. A good weekend to you and hubby......

I am very confused by some of what you have said above but hopefully things will become clearer if you could answer the following: You mention that penalties had been issued by Transport for London. How many penalties were issued? How many Out of Time Statutory Declarations did you submit? I am assuming that they were all initially rejected? Did you submit all of the N244 Applications at the same time? Was each N244 Application sent to the Traffic Enforcement Centre individually (in other words, if they were sent by email, was EACH application sent individually)? If so, did you receive an automated email from the Traffic Enforcement Centre for each application? Did you have to pay a fee to file the N244's or were you exempt from paying? How much did you pay? Did you request that the N244 Applications were to be decided with or without a personal hearing?

Yes, I would copy BMI's solicitors into the email.

In that case, you may wish to revise my suggested email to say something like this: Dear Sirs. Reference number: xxxx Creditor: xxxx I am writing with regards to the above account. As you will be aware from previous emails over the past 2 weeks, I am unable to make payment of this debt at this present time. Neither my husband or I are currently working and we are relying entirely on Universal Credit. Faced with the difficulty is making payment, I have applied to the County Court by way of an N245 Application to vary the judgement so that it can be repaid by way of affordable monthly payments. With delays to the Court system, my application is waiting to be processed. I am anxious to get a payment arrangement in place as soon as possible and would be grateful if you could advise the creditor that I am willing to make an arrangement with your company to pay £100 immediately followed by monthly payments of £30. We would be looking to increase the monthly payments to £100 per month as soon as my husband is back working. Could you also please confirm safe receipt of this correspondence. Kind regards Mr Joe Blogs. PS: In the email subject box, I would suggest that you put the words: URGENT...PAYMENT PROPOSAL....Reference number: xxxxx