My Parking Fine and Jacobs Bailiff visit please help please

[Jamberson]

First, phone the Council in question, and ask what address they have been writing to. They will have sent out (1) Notice to Owner; (2) Charge Certificate; (3) Order for Recovery.

 

If these were not sent to the address you were living at at the time, then you can contest this through the Statutory Declaration process. If they were all sent to the correct address, then you are unlikely to be able to challenge this - can you find out in the morning, and let us know?

[ploddertom]

I'll make some assumptions based on what you have said so far - no criticism but the questions asked are for specific reasons.

 

If the letter was dated 30 January - last Friday it has no doubt been sent 2nd Class or via a 3rd party mail provider and they should have made allowance for this.

 

If the letter was received today then they must give you 7 clear days notice which starts from tomorrow but cannot include Sundays so according to my calculations the first day they can take Enforcement proceedings is Friday 13 February.

 

Therefore the Notice of Enforcement they have provided is defective and they cannot charge the Compliance Fee of £75.

 

This means they must provide a Compliant Notice as a replacement in order to charge the Fee demanded.

 

I will move your thread to the Bailiff Forum for more help & advice.

[altcr]

Thanks, I have been trying to find template letters in the library but no sucess

[josephbloggs]

Thanks, I have been trying to find template letters in the library but no sucess

 

ploddertom is referring to letters you would have had from jacobs.

 

as for the letters from the council. did you truthfully get them?

if not then do as jamberson says and go about it the stat dec route.

if you did get them, i urge you to contact jacobs and deal with it asap before an enforcement agent calls out and charges you 235 quid

[altcr]

I honestly don't remember getting the letter but couldn't say categorically say definitely no,

 

 

I am on a budget and know they may pressure me into making larger payments than I can afford,

I assume I have no choice but to pay the £75.00 fee?

[Jamberson]

Do what I suggested

- call them and find out where they sent those three notices. They may well have been using an old address,

in which case you have a good case to take forward.

[ploddertom]

The letter you have received from Jacobs is there any way you can scan or photograph it & let me hve a copy. The MOJ are asking for instances of defective notices and yours will be one of them. If you can I will give you one of my email addresses where it can be sent.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

How would it be defective?

Are you talking about days to pay?

 

 

Op has been given seven clear days not including the Sunday in which to make payment.

Or is there something else which makes it defective?

[lookinforinfo]

The 7 clear days are from receipt of the letter not when the letter was dated.

 

 

It was apparently received on the 4th February and the OP has been given until the 7 th February to sort the matter out.

That doesn't equate to 7 clear days notice in my book.

[Coughdrop]

Yes, definitely a defective notice. Please try to find it to send to Ploddertom.

[josephbloggs]

How can everyone jump to this conclusion without even seeing it for themselves

[brassnecked]

If OP can post it up, we can be sure. but if it only gives 3 days then it is defective. It is important to post it up so it can be forwarded to MOJ as another example if it is indeed defective.

 

This is Jacobs we are talking about here, the take third party vehicles, sell them, then have to buy them back specialists.

. No reason not to think they are at it again trying to bend the rules.

[Bailiff Advice]

When the new regulations took effect on 6th April last year all enforcement companies that are members agreed that in order to avoid confusion or complaints about the number of days on the Notice of Enforcement that all companies would give debtors a period of 14 days from the date of the notice to make payments. So far.... most companies seem to be sticking to this period but sadly, it is the case that I have quite a few recent examples where this is being ignored....and in each case, it involves one company only (not Jacobs).

 

The Ministry of Justice have been seeking examples where the period of time given is less than 7 "clear days" and I fully expect this subject to be discussed at next Tuesday's meeting to further review the regulations.

 

Can you please call Jacobs this morning about the letter and ask them about the short number of days provided. Can you post back once you have spoken with them.

[ploddertom]

How would it be defective? Are you talking about days to pay? Op has been given seven clear days not including the Sunday in which to make payment. Or is there something else which makes it defective?

 

Received on 4th, first day is counted as being the following day 5th, 7 days excluding Sundays or Bank Holidays takes us to the 12th, enforcement may proceed from 13th. If Jacobs had followed recomendations from their trade body - CIVEA - then they would have allowed 14 days in the first place which would then have been correct.

 

How can everyone jump to this conclusion without even seeing it for themselves

 

One of the reasons for asking for it. If it is defective then it will be sent to the MOJ, if it isn't then this thread will be updated to reflect that.

[rd83]

Playing devil's advocate...

 

Why is it defective? legislation states that the notice "must be given to the debtor not less than 7 clear days before the enforcement agent takes control of the debtor's goods"? It doesn't say the notice "must not request payment from the debtor until 7 clear days after the debtor received the notice"

 

Why would a defective NOE mean they cannot charge the compliance fee? The Compliance Stage starts at "the receipt by the enforcement agent of instructions", not "the sending of a non-defective NOE"

[josephbloggs]

most enforcement companies also send non prescribed further notice of enforcement letters prior to agents being asked to go out on the cases as well

[ploddertom]

Playing devil's advocate...

 

Why is it defective? legislation states that the notice "must be given to the debtor not less than 7 clear days before the enforcement agent takes control of the debtor's goods"? It doesn't say the notice "must not request payment from the debtor until 7 clear days after the debtor received the notice"

 

Why would a defective NOE mean they cannot charge the compliance fee? The Compliance Stage starts at "the receipt by the enforcement agent of instructions", not "the sending of a non-defective NOE"

 

Post 17

 

They cannot claim a fee if the notice id defective as it does not comply with Legislation. There is however nothing to stop them correcting themselves.

[lookinforinfo]

rd83 the NOE would be defective if it stated that an EA would call within 7 clear days from the date of the letter. However, the alleged debtor has to

receive 7 clear days notice prior to a visit by an EA from receipt of the NOE. If less than 7 clear days notice is left by the time the letter is received

then the EA is not allowed to take control of any goods.

 

As I understand it, even if the EA comes after that stated date, thus giving the debtor the requires notification, nevertheless they cannot take control of goods since at the time of receipt of the NOE it was not compliant with the Regulations.

 

Of course, as Ploddertom has said it is only a temporary setback since the reissue of a compliant NOE puts the enforcement back on track.

[ploddertom]

What I do find strange is that this was rd83's first post although has been a member for sometime but to me it would not make any difference where the EA is from - Jacobs or Bristow & Sutor.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Received on 4th, first day is counted as being the following day 5th, 7 days excluding Sundays or Bank Holidays takes us to the 12th, enforcement may proceed from 13th. If Jacobs had followed recomendations from their trade body - CIVEA - then they would have allowed 14 days in the first place which would then have been correct.

 

Yes, didn't read the dates. Most companies give 14 days as that allows for weekends, bank holidays etc.

 

But to point out to other posters, its of no regard when the op received the notice. It is from the date the notice is sent that the countdown begins.

 

The op should be given 7 clear days not including the day of postage, not including Sundays and not including bank holidays.

 

most enforcement companies also send non prescribed further notice of enforcement letters prior to agents being asked to go out on the cases as well

 

Really? Who does that? I have not heard of that? Certainly not where the ea WANTS to get out and seize goods in order to progress the fee stage!.

[taurusgemini]

Yes, didn't read the dates. Most companies give 14 days as that allows for weekends, bank holidays etc.

 

But to point out to other posters, its of no regard when the op received the notice. It is from the date the notice is sent that the countdown begins.

 

The op should be given 7 clear days not including the day of postage, not including Sundays and not including bank holidays.

 

 

Of course you are assuming that the date the letter is sent is the same as the date on the letter. The reality is a letter dated, say, 1st Feb, sent maybe 4th Feb second class, received maybe 7th Feb. The EA then turns up on the 8th.

 

Don't say that doesn't happen cos we know it does. As has been said, it costs £1.10 to send a letter 'signed-for' - surely the grossly excessive £75 compliance stage fee can accommodate that?

[ploddertom]

Yes, didn't read the dates. Most companies give 14 days as that allows for weekends, bank holidays etc.

 

But to point out to other posters, its of no regard when the op received the notice. It is from the date the notice is sent that the countdown begins.

 

The op should be given 7 clear days not including the day of postage, not including Sundays and not including bank holidays.

 

Sorry but you are looking at this with blinkers on. In this instance they wre only given 7 days from start to finish never mind 7 Clear Days. Just because your good self or your company may comply does not mean to say others do. Classic example at present is Equita who appear to hand deliver their NoE and allow 3days or so for Compliance, but there again as owned by Capita they think they are above & beyond any Legislation & how it applies to them.

 

The following is taken from CIVEA's Code of Conduct & Good Practice Guide'

 

Initial Contact

 

Advance written notice in the form of a Notice of Enforcement must be given to the

debtor at least 7 clear days before a visit. A period of less than 7 days may be permitted

if a court has ordered a shorter period.

 

The CIVEA guidance recommends that good practice would be to allow 14 actual days

notice to ensure that 7 clear days notice is given to allow for postal delays and Sundays

and Public Holidays.

 

All documents, whether posted or hand delivered must be in accordance with the

relevant legislation and should not be ambiguous or misleading.

 

If a Company cannot be bothered to abide by what they have agreed to as a bona fide member then for me the MOJ or whoever should pull the plug on them or at the very least put them to some form of censure until they do learn.

[brassnecked]

Absolutely PT, but if they all did the right thing, and debtors made arrangements at the Compliance Stage, the EA's bottom line would be hit rather badly, they will do anything to make sure they get the £235 Enforcement fee if they can, including fiddking with the clear days.

[ploddertom]

In my mind the general public have been had over on many an occasion by Bailiffs and their Companys', new Legislation was introduced to make a fairer playing field but the Bailiff still wants it all his way or not at all. Government have an awful lot to answer for by not having an Ombudsman or Regulator and trying to make general complaint about failings just takes too long. For Grumpy & rd83's benefit I have in the past provided evidence of defective notices such as this and the message comes back as Thank You & if possible provide any more that fail on a similar basis. I will continue to do so as I am sure if they were not required they would say so.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Sorry, some confusion here. I agree that there are companies put there and that they do send out noe that are non compliant.

 

My original question was just asking if it was JUST the dates that made it non compliant or was there something else.