And my concerns were quite justified. I know you are not a solicitor, doesnt take much to work that out. I am confidently told you are infact a woman, using a male name on this forum, and your own name as it was suggested to me, appears nowhere on any official source from the area the informant suggested you are from. Your posts encourage private conversation and you repeatedly say to forum users "I have a commercial business......" You have nothing registered with companies house, nothing with the ICO and the Charity Commission has never heard of you. I have no idea what your agenda actually is. You simply dont exist, at least not under the name you have apparently been telling everyone. This explains why you are unable to quote your source. You could have just given the source. e.,g. withers or tolleys and I would have followed it. Instead, questions and more questions from your AE's, as if something to hide.

HM Court service.

What do you want to achieve and who do you want to direct it to?

because you gave the plaintiffs first name as "Michael" and that is not in the judgment text. 32 posts since I asked you for it.

I bet that is no comfort for the likes of James Goacher who had his Bridlington fish & chip shop ransacked by her firm in a case of mistaken identity, and two years on, she has not even sent a bunch of flowers with a 'sorry' note, let alone repaid him his loss of earnings and replacement fish & chip shop.

I asked for the source. I didnt these alter-egoes to fill the thread with their critique.

Actually you are right, it can be a stat dec, the statute is somewhere in rule 2 of the CPR Interpleader Order.

That made me smile, you sound like an expert!

PT I see you are made an admin. congratulations. can I have a PM facility?

attitude? what is wrong with asking for the source? tomtubby could have posted if he wanted to. Nobody asked you to rebuke my request on his behalf unless..... he did.

Someone hasnt been taking their tablets today.

Ive heard of the name but I am not familar with his work. I made a very simple request but I am perplexed why so much rebuke.

You need to make a formal written request for SF to pay you £XXX by date DDMMYYYY. If no payment received then download a form N1 from the HMCTS website and enter the following in your claim particulars something like this: The Defendant took a motor vehicle [give description and reg] from [where from?] on [when?] but the vehicle is the Claimants's tool of his trade making it exempt goods for the purpose of using it as a lien for a debt, the Defendant released the vehicle on [when?] but failed to pay the Claimant's disbursements resulting from the unlawful deprivation of its use in the course of his business. The Claimant paid the following disbursements: a) rental van, b) taxis c) recovery service to collect vehicle from Defendants choice of address d) etc. e) costs allowed by the court at the prescribed rate. f) statutory interest at 0.00022% daily from the date the money became due to the date payment is made.

Unfortunately not, it ceased functioning after I reported to an admin about somebody's intellectual property being hosted on a CAG server without the authors permission.

Set a date for payment then file small claims track, you get 8% interest on everything and SF can take as long as they like.

Go get your car and send SF your bill.

Thats the one, the latter, but its name escaped me.

15 posts later still no source.

You can make a complaint with a recommendation the attending officers undergo retraining on the CDA 1970 and what conststutes a tort, but the problem is persuading the CPS to take up the case. They have an adversity to prosecuting enforcement officers and that is why you got confusing excuses.

A sworn affidavit does it as per post #35 A letter can be rebuked.

No good for those that dont have PM.

I reckon affidavit first, but if that is ignored then a formal complaint should be started. The V5C does say the RK is not necessarily the owner.

Please post it.

The owner can made a sworn affidavit in support of ownership.

If the car is not yours then you can ignore the levy, the LGO says in a report into complaint no 11 007 684 against Blaby District Council, in paragraph 8 of the introduction said it "considers it reasonable for the BAILIFF to check ownership with the DVLA"