I think there is a bug with the forum software because I am showing an admin control panel and my name is a different colour. I have not asked for a promotion on this forum.

I emailed Marstons. I thought they should be aware of an impending claiming against the SoS for Justice. Heads usually roll when it receives a DRP.

The C&C Bill as I understand it is to introduce the Bailiffs and Enforcements Council as an approved regulator. For bailifs to be regulated, it needs a statutory regulator - whose function will: -licence bailiffs -approve the businesses and organisations that employ them -accredit the professional bodies that represent them -set standards of conduct -monitor performance -investigate complaints -punish failure to comply with regulations and order redress where appropriate But government will never do it because its the government stands to be the biggest loser being the largest benefecial user of bailiffs. Its widely accepted that bailiffs are having to collect as much money from debtors that do pay, to offset losses from debtors that dont pay which is why we have this mess we see today. A statutory regulator? Stand on me, it will never happen.

1. Yes 2. No other action needed. but make three copies of your completed form 244, one for the court, one for the bailiff company and one is your file copy. 3. No N245 needed.

James, if this is not High Court, change your Part 3 to this and file it at the court making the judgment as PT says. The Defendant applies for: a) the judgment to be set aside b) costs because:- The Defendant has moved and the judgment was made in his absence and without his knowledge

I stand corrected. James you need to complete a form N244 and enter the above in Part 3 of the form.

An application for set aside is made on a form N245. You can download it from the court service website. On the form, in part 3 of you application, enter something like this ... The Defendant applies: a) for the writ of fieri facias to be set aside b) to set aside the original judgment made in the county court c) costs because:- The Defendant has moved and the judgment was made in his absence and without his knowledge

You have been given two options, apply for set aside, or a variation. which of these would like to do?

I am sorry but I am afraid that advice is not right either. The bailiff can add fees provided he has lawfully executed distrain over the defaulters goods, the law in this case is Part 52.8 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2011. However these costs are deducted from the proceeds of sale and the balance paid to the defaulter.

Back on topic. alanpower, if this fine is genuine, then the test of the fact you are only liable for the fine amount can be executed in the following manner and saving you £300 in the process. Identify and locate the sentencing court. Go in person and pay the fine at court – and get a RECEIPT. There is an ATM-like machine in the court lobby to pay fines. It will NEVER ask you to pay the bailiffs £300 fees because the court service knows you do not have to pay them. Court ushers are on hand to advise you how to use it and when you are done the Distress Warrant is expunged.

Marston can ask the defaulter to pay it, but nothing in the contract says the defaulter has to pay it nor the bailiff company enforce payment. If the defaulter does not want to pat £300 of hard cash, he does not have to.

Good advice but the Department has updated them with the January 2012 edition. http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/bailiffs-enforcement-officers/national-standards-enforcement-agents.pdf

I am sorry but that advice is not right. The court does not set any fees for enforcement of court fines. The figures you have quoted are contained in a document called the Enforcement Services Contract which sets the terms of operation between the HM Court Service and the four companies contracted for the enforement of unpaid court fines.

I am sorry but that advice is not right. The court does not set any fees for enforcement of court fines. The figures you have quoted are contained in a document called the Enforcement Services Contract which sets the terms of operation between the HM Court Service and the four companies contracted for the enforement of unpaid court fines.

You will need to recover the fees from the bailiff company but they will not refund you. Their standard letter says "warrants cannot be un-executed..." so I am afraid you will need to file a form N1 to reclaim your money. The Marston will send the long threatening letter (goes onto two pages) with legal nonsense, and if you ignore that and wait for the hearing date to approach, they eventually refund your money and say its a "mistake". Regards the PCN, the council is contractually liable by for the bailiff company so they should be named as the first defendant and the bailiff company as the second defendant. For the HMCTS fine, this is a government unit and cannot be sued, you need to name the first defendant as "the secretary of State for Justice" at their Petty France address, and they will issue directions to the court for their current service address, and the bailiff company as the 2nd defendant. Marston use a PO Box address, but the court can look up the registered destination address which is Marston Group, 37 Sun Street, Waltham Abbey EN9 1EL and this should be your service and correspondence address.

I'll make this a separate post for clarity between the PCN and HMCTS matters. Section 38 of Schedule 5 of the Courts Act 2003 says the court must send a 'Further Steps Notice' to your current address before sending a bailiff, and Rule 52.2 of the Criminal Procedures Rules 2011 says the court must not excersise enforcment unless a notice has been sent to the defendant. It is common for bailiff companies to try and trace missing defaulters using credit reference agencies and proceed with enforcsment at your new address without complying with the statutory notice requirements. You need to telephone the sentencing court and say you want to make a "statutory declaration" and they will give you the address for service. I can knock up a stat dec for you but you will need to take it to court to have it sworn in. This will not overturn the fine but it will get you the bailiffs fees back.

You need to contact the TEC with your PCN number on 01604 619450 and make what is called an "out of time statutory declaration" (called a 'stat dec') they will send you the forms TE7 and TE9 to complete and return. In other words, lodge an appeal with the court on the grounds you have recenly moved. You need to find out whether the PCN has other grounds for appeal. Post back here and many here can help you fill them in.

If this is a criminal fine then a vehicle clamping can only be done if the bailiff has obtained a clamping order from the magistrates court under section 38 of Schedule 5 of the Courts Act 2003. If no order has been made then you were perfectly entitled to remove the clamp with bolt cutters and there would be no liability on your part under the Criminal Damage Act 1970. Your post later says this is a parking penalty, but enforcement rules are completely different. The bailiff would need to have made a valid levy over the vehicle before using a wheel clamp and without any levy you can remove the wheel clamp and its yours to keep unless the bailiff can prove ownership by producing a sales receipt. Again there is no Criminal Damage liability and you can even sue for the cost of removing and disposal of the wheel clamp. The bailiff has damaged your car and you need to make a separate claim from the bailiff company for the repairs. For this, you need to maintain a separate correspondence file between you and the bailiff company. You need two estimates and get the car repaired and ask the company to pay your bill plus the costs of obtaining the estimates. If the bailiff company does not pay you the repairs then waste little time in making a claim on a Form N1. This is a claim in the county court, very easy to do. You have moved address recently, and this means you can have the case rolled back to pre-enforcment stage regardless this is a magistrates couret fine or a local council parking ticket. Your first task is identify the source and type of debt. You can do this by telephoning a local magistrates court and make enquiries on whether you had any unpaid fines. Your local council can tell you about any unpaid parking offences. You can also make enquiries with the DVLA. You can ask the bailiff company of this information but I have feeling they will get funny and go on about £10 SAR fees and making you jump the hoops etc. This policy is designed to wear you down and hope you don’t discover you have been overcharged and start a claim in the small claims court. An easy way to get information is Form N1 everything you paid them plus the damages for your car, and the defendant bailiff company will complete the defendants response pack giving the nature of the debt and you can apply for a refund of everything else. Once the creditor is identified, add them as the 2nd defendant and ask the court to decide who pays your costs and disbursements. Remember to ask for interest, its a sizeable 8% a year. Once you have identified the origin and type of debt, post back here and we can give you the appropriate guidance on how to move forward and recover your money. The bad news is this wont be settled this side of Christmas.

Davis v Listle started out as a trafic offence (lorry obstructing an entrance) but the relevence is the judge held that although the officers entering the premises were not trespassers, they became trespassers they were told to leave and thus, were not acting in the execution of duty.

commercial business, yes and be insured to protect person commercially advised . government unit, no, and many advisers do not,they work under the supervision of qualified persons.

In a commercial capacity I would say yes.

I am going to put this thread down to human nature. If someone holds a book close to their chest as if to hide the contents, its human instinct to try and discover what is inside the book. We learned tomtubby is a person secretive with his (her?) sources of information, uncommon in legal circles. Repeated phrases about this anonymous commercial business plc. got my attention because I have never known any such business remotely fitting that description. It could be a volunteering group or an activist lobbying parliament. Curiousity deepened because further enquiries all reached the same result. An address in somerset, a name nobody has heard of, different to the one publicised in forum circles and the assumed name is not held by any authority and no qualifications easily identifiable. I can only put this down to experience that somebody went to extreme lenghts to hide their identity, only discovered by a casual request for the source of information in a forum post.

I assume we will not be seeing the source of the information. I dont see what the problem is, or why all the AE's (the sames ones over again) need to create a smoke screen by questioning me over my original request to see the source and how you came to determine the plaintiffs first name is Michael. why?

The liability for costs of returning goods to the debtor only lies with the debor if the levy is valid and the debt has been satisfied. If there is a mistake on the part of the enforcment company then liability resides with the at-fault company. There is case law but it escapes me but the OP can make the claim as litigant in person and the judge will search for the case.

That figures, so why are you so protective over your source?