Court Fines: Warrant of Control does NOT cease when sum adjudged is paid to the court !!

[Peterbard]

You would think that after three years of absolutely no evidence to prove their theories and countless incidents proving the contrary being shown. Even the staunchest FMOTL crackpot would admit their may be room for a rethink. Not a bit of it .

[Bailiff Advice]

 

What did come across (and I find the same with queries that I receive on a daily basis) is that 'complaints' tend to stem from the individual believing inaccurate information that they have read on the internet.

 

How true my above comment is !!

 

Yet again, there is an internet report today of a debtor believing the inaccurate information that paying the amount of a court fine only to the court (minus bailiff fees) would lead to the warrant ceasing.

 

As is always the case, the court forwarded the payment to the enforcement company so that they can deduct their Compliance fee (of £75) and apportion the balance on a 'pro rata' basis in line with legislation.

 

Yesterday, a bailiff attended the debtors property yesterday to collect the remainder of the debt (£310). The debtor argued that the internet advice was correct (which it was not). Police were called. The debtor refused to pay and accordingly, his vehicle was removed and taken to the bailiff companies pound.

 

He is now also liable for the removal fees and his own costs in collecting his vehicle.

[Peterbard]

It does make you wonder if this is the advice of a misguided "individual", or if it is the front end of a business, designed to extract payments from the hapless debtor.

[Bailiff Advice]

How true my above comment is !!

 

Yet again, there is an internet report today of a debtor believing the inaccurate information that paying the amount of a court fine only to the court (minus bailiff fees) would lead to the warrant ceasing.

 

Yesterday, a bailiff attended the debtors property yesterday to collect the remainder of the debt (£310). The debtor argued that the internet advice was correct (which it was not). Police were called. The debtor refused to pay and accordingly, his vehicle was removed and taken to the bailiff companies pound.

 

He is now also liable for the removal fees and his own costs in collecting his vehicle.

 

UPDATE:

 

It simply beggars belief how 'gullible' some debtors can be....and more importantly, the way in which they open themselves up into embarking on unnecessary....and more importantly, utterly hopeless and expensive litigation.

 

This individual made the mistake of believing that paying the court direct (minus bailiff fees) would mean that the warrant ceased. He would have received the standard letter from the court advising him that his payment had been sent to Marston Group and that this payment had not cleared his account..

 

Following the removal of his car, he approached the person whose advice he had followed (to pay the court direct) and he was advised to do the following:

 

When he collects his car.....pay by credit card. Wait until he gets home, call his card provider...and apply for a 'chargeback'.

 

Refuse to sign any documentation or receipt provided by the vehicle pound.

 

Take at least 40 pictures inside the pound using his mobile phone. Photograph the car for any marks or scuffs and complete a form provided to him whilst at the pound, and send it straight over to the enforcement company and the court.

 

 

What happened when he went to the vehicle pound?

 

The debtor advised that he had to pay by cash.

 

He advised that he signed one document but refused to sign the other.

 

He advised that staff at the vehicle pound refused to allow him to take pictures inside the pound.

 

He was able to take a few pictures of his vehicle. There were some scuff marks. He sent details to the enforcement company using the template provided to him.

 

 

Was the advice given to him correct?

 

In a nutshell, the advice was utterly hopeless.

 

All bailiff companies use secure vehicle pounds. The security at these pounds can resemble Fort Knox. Staff are frequently subject to high levels of abuse and it is apparently very common for vehicle owners to attend the pound unannounced with a view to 'recovering' their vehicle (without paying). Vehicle pounds will not allow pictures to be taken of their pound.

 

All vehicle pounds refuse point blank to accept payment by credit card and before collecting a vehicle, the vehicle owner will have been informed by the relevant bailiff company that payment must be made by CASH. In that way, before turning up at the pound, the vehicle owner can go to a cash machine and withdraw money from either his debit or credit card.

 

Taking pictures of the vehicle

after

it has been released is of little value. The only time that pictures will be of use, is in cases where pictures had been taken at the time of the removal. Having

'before'

and

'after'

pictures will assist with any future claim for damage.

[Peterbard]

Oh my god, and is this "advice" still being given ?

[Bailiff Advice]

Oh my god, and is this "advice" still being given ?

 

Yes it is....and equally as important...is not being corrected.