PCN Debt and the EA. *success*

[Peterbard]

Thanks for that i will have a look later.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

It's ok CD I was expecting this anyways, GTSTL is an EA and would know from my wording what I have said is correct, I have no reason to lie because if other debtors follow this and are able to see what I said is true then that will suffice,

 

 

I did not want to put up any documents, firstly it would identify the town and the PC its a short thought to the EA company. After all it is possible to create a look-a-like redacted document is it not? That would be too much effort on my part just to post information on a forum, I see no point whatsoever.

 

 

This town also operates a different parking structure and they informed me that a disabled user can park in all zones except an X zone all day including 'residents only bays' providing that the badge and time clock are displayed correctly, then no PCN will be issued. Suffice to say when I passed on this information to the driver they have had no more PCN's because of overstaying the permitted 3 hours on lines and all day in certain car parks for free....

 

 

I can of course redact the payment plan document but until I get the original from the office I will refrain from posting the email version up. Then and only then if the debtor agrees...

 

 

I just wish that some would be happy but alas this is not to be, but given the information is now posted it will be up to each reader to draw their own conclusions from it! Good or bad....

 

So you are unwilling to provide any documents that actually show the reasoning on headed paper that show this fine was "written off"?

Ok. Fair enough.

Another pointless thread offering no advice apart from "sit in the dark, hide your car, dont answer the door and hopefully it will go away".

 

Its not that I don't believe you, as the EA bit is plausible, as in, fees will be written off after 12 months.

 

But....the council just writing a ticket off!?! No, that I find interesting and id like to see proof that it happened and WHY it happened.

 

I am betting that there are mitigating circumstances that are involved here.

 

Also, as you are holding personal data about this third party, I assume you comply fully with the DPA and this is why you choose not to release copies, redacted or otherwise?

[Bailiff Advice]

Sorry I have not been back as had an awful episode and not back in good form.

 

Early '15 the debtor was parking with a blue badge incorrectly and got some PCN's

 

Mid June '15 one had gone to the TEC but was appealed they won that one with help from the CAB I think. One was missed and enforcement commenced. We are now at 15/07/2015...

 

The others were paid and cleared and dealt with. Somehow a new batch of PCN's were issued and the debtor didn't appeal. By now we are in March '16. I was asked for help.

 

Now the one that got away, this went to the EA and they attended and did the usual thing and called added fees but got nowhere for payment.

 

As we all know a PNC debt is valid a year only. This expired on the 16/07/2016. I called the PC and asked for the debt to be written off as uncollectable due to the payment plan already in force,

 

Since I am still very groggy from my bad fit I hope I have covered the points I missed in my original post for this I am sorry, I think this was the build up to the fit when I started to post originally.

 

Firstly, I am sorry to hear that you have been unwell, you should ensure that take plenty of rest (very difficult I know in this weather).

 

I hadn't realised that the debtor was a Blue Badge holder. If she or he had a Motability vehicle, this would have restricted bailiff enforcement considerably. Hopefully she will manage to adhere to the payment plan.

[stu007]

Also just to Clarify the Motability Vehicle and PCN.

 

See this Motability link: http://www.motability.co.uk/contact-and-support/faqs/do-i-need-to-pay-parking-tickets-or-traffic-offences-fines

[Coughdrop]

 

Also, as you are holding personal data about this third party, I assume you comply fully with the DPA and this is why you choose not to release copies, redacted or otherwise?

 

I'm reasonably sure MM will be doing things by the book, as that seems to be how he operates. However, I share your concern about posters holding personal data and complying fully with the DPA.

 

If anyone here is concerned about what they can and cannot do, the ICO website is superb, and I have always found them extremely helpful when chatting to them over the phone.

 

I know this is a slight diversion from the main topic, but as you mentioned it, it is worth reiterating for other members.

 

MM

You are far more important than this thread, so do what you need to look after yourself before feeling the slightest bit obliged to answer anything on here. Your health comes first, and I have little doubt we'd all say that.

[Andyorch]

I also had started a topic re the CPR rules and a PCN this thread was moved and I have been unable to locate it. I have added the letter that was dated the 15/05/2016 and asked for advice but the thread disappeared so here as more history and a fully redacted PDF... This was the final contact letter from the EA in regards to this PCN.

 

 

The rest is listed above...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?467307-NEW-CPR-changes-applicable-6th-April-2016

 

Thread recovered.

 

Andy

[mikeymack2002]

Sorry for the long reply its worth the read!

 

 

So you are unwilling to provide any documents that actually show the reasoning on headed paper that show this fine was "written off"?

Ok. Fair enough.

 

 

Also, as you are holding personal data about this third party, I assume you comply fully with the DPA and this is why you choose not to release copies, redacted or otherwise?

 

 

Since the information required is on the memory stick the debtor has then until I see them next I cannot access this information. Since I have 3rd party I will ask the PC if the will email me a copy of the letter directly, I cannot see an issue with that.

 

 

Grumpy suffice to say when the information is given to me and I can redact I will post it up, whether or not the PC state why I cannot say ATM.

 

 

Andy. Although this PCN has been cleared by a strange course of events it is actually ended. Even when I get the redacted info up I will of course expect to be told its a fake. Either way I am on a hiding to nothing here. Thx for recovering the thread, but the CPR issue is confusing me still! Why is this?

 

 

 

 

Off/ON topic as it has been posted please allow in this instance:

 

 

CD/BA thanks for your concerns this time of year is awful for me and I am taking some serious precautions. Also of concern is my ability to live alone, so I am looking at sheltered accommodation now with assistance from my LA/ALMO.

 

 

Other answers:

 

 

1. Yes the car is a Motability car and as a customer I am aware of the T&C's of the agreement:

 

 

2. The debtor is a future family member (maybe)

 

 

3. Since the debtor is (2) I can do much more than normal (very acceptable for ICO and DPA) already checked.

 

 

4. Grumpy not unwilling but my hands are tied until post arrives plus making sure I can post with permission.

 

 

5. Using the guidance is always a great tool I have used this extensively on this case.

 

 

6. The payment plan is succeeding is because they pay me each week I pay the PC. This way the remaining debt WILL be paid... No further enforcement will happen provided the plan stays on course and it will, the cost would be too much to bear, X6 PCN's to pay, times those fees it's a nightmare debt.

 

 

7. I came in to this very late in the day but used the knowledge gained here and elsewhere to assist and resolve.

 

 

8. Debtor does bury their head until its almost too late to help, trust me this madness has ended!

 

 

9. Most of you know I have a serious problem with my health, part of my recovery is to get the brain working again, this is why I am TRUSTED to do what I do and have done and excellent job thus far. Almost A 1,00 positive reputation markers...

 

 

10. Once I move to more secure accommodation and with my new support my postings will slowly drop as I will now need to make time for me. A number of years here on CAG have been great. I now need to make time for me and my recovery for some time to come...

 

 

11. Totally off topic this part but this is me being honest as I always am when posting on CAG: This issue that caused me to be as I am has returned, and it is serious so I will need not put me 1st and CAG has to come second for a while whilst I recover again. I hope you all understand this?

 

 

12. The biggest battle I am in so far is my water rates issue because the BBC has now picked this up and investigating, because I posted information here...

 

 

 

 

Finally lying on a public forum gains me nothing and I have nothing to gain and I would undoubtedly lose any and all respect that I have gained over the years would it not, I would also lose the respect of the one person I love dearly that is well you know whom that is!!!

 

 

PS A lie will always be a lie, my pride in myself far out weighs any lie to post a lie I cannot and will not do this CD picked up on this thx for that CD...

 

 

PPS Admin are aware of the thread and responses from the BBC why because I broke the story right here on CAG my greatest achievement to date!

 

 

Thank yo for reading

 

 

MM

[daverules]

Coughdrop....can you please keep this thread on topic !!!

 

Sorry BA but CD's post was no more off topic than the following

 

"I have worked extensively with " the poorest in the community", and I can assure you the genuine poor do not drive tax and insure vehicles."

 

It works both ways.

 

Regards to all

[mikeymack2002]

Andyorch your reply post #31 the thread I was looking for is here >> http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?464602-Final-chance-letter-from-Bailiff-co.-acting-as-on-a-PCN

 

 

Sorry I missed this more times than I can remember sorry for that... Further reading in the link above...

[mikeymack2002]

The link in post #34 this thread, dx100uk asked to see the letterhead this is now visible see attachment. This was at post #36 of the link.. Pers have been removed: But header fully readable now:

Doc1a.pdf

[Peterbard]

Sorry BA but CD's post was no more off topic than the following

 

"I have worked extensively with " the poorest in the community", and I can assure you the genuine poor do not drive tax and insure vehicles."

 

It works both ways.

 

Regards to all

 

Given the amount of time posters are spending on here disusing ther personal issue i thought i would be allowed one small paragraph which was in answer to another off topic post in any case.

 

The certification issue is one i tried to raise earlier but was sidetracked by CD thinking i was yet again refering to his" highly successful" debt charity, i wasn't and oddly enough never have, perhaps he should start a thread.

 

Now we see that there are other issues which may concern the authorities in regard to regulation.

[mikeymack2002]

OK further update. Just spoken to the PC and they will send a copy of the letter confirming the PCN has been cancelled and written off.

 

I am allowed to react and post. This will be up later in the day. I am away fromy keyboard for several hours. Sorry for the wait...

 

MM

[Bailiff Advice]

The letter that you have exhibited in post number 35 is very interesting as it confirms what I have been saying for a very long time.

 

The advice that is commonly given to individuals by some posters (not me I hasten to add), is to 'sit it out' and wait for approx 3-4 months for the debt to be returned to the local authority. I have indicated recently that enforcement companies are retaining accounts for much longer period (up to 6 months or more). In the Rossendale's case that you have assisted with, it would appear that they have retained the warrant for well over 10 months.

 

In future, if any posters are minded to advise debtors to 'sit it out', they should refrain from advising that a warrant will be returned to the council /creditor after three months as this is not the case.

[Bailiff Advice]

OK further update. Just spoken to the PC and they will send a copy of the letter confirming the PCN has been cancelled and written off.

 

I am allowed to react and post. This will be up later in the day. I am away fromy keyboard for several hours. Sorry for the wait...

 

MM

 

I am not sure what you mean by PC but will wait to see the exhibit.

 

Where the problem lay yesterday, was that you had indicated that it was the enforcement company that had written off their fees and that they had also written off the local authorities debt as well. Quite rightly, I questioned the legality of an enforcement agency being able to write off a debt that is not theirs.

 

It would also seem that the reason why Rossendale's have 'written off' (so to speak) their fees of £310, is because the warrant that was issued on 15th July 2015, has now expired.

 

Nonetheless, I agree with your comment yesterday that this thread is an important one. It has highlighted to debtors and posters that enforcement companies are retaining accounts for almost the entire 12 month period of the warrant.

[Peterbard]

Yes this was my, and I believe grumpy point also.

 

I also wondered who PC is.

[Coughdrop]

The letter that you have exhibited in post number 35 is very interesting as it confirms what I have been saying for a very long time.

 

The advice that is commonly given to individuals by some posters (not me I hasten to add), is to 'sit it out' and wait for approx 3-4 months for the debt to be returned to the local authority. I have indicated recently that enforcement companies are retaining accounts for much longer period (up to 6 months or more). In the Rossendale's case that you have assisted with, it would appear that they have retained the warrant for well over 10 months.

 

In future, if any posters are minded to advise debtors to 'sit it out', they should refrain from advising that a warrant will be returned to the council /creditor after three months as this is not the case.

 

As someone who does this, though only for CT debts as you are aware, I don't put a time frame on it, nor does it matter too much. As long as the debtor is putting as much money as possible to one side to make a payment once it has been returned, then in a way, the longer the better. They won't keep it for more than 12 months as the warrant will die, by which time the debtor will hopefully be in a position to make a decent payment towards the principal sum owed.

 

Incidentally, have you come across many, or even any cases, where the warrant has been kept for 10 months for Council Tax?

[Leakie]

Hi CD

 

I have a LO out with Newlyns this I think is from August last year,

 

I did ask the council to bring it back after I set up a payment plan for another LO

but in reply it was ignored.

But saying that I have only had 1 visit at 5 am with a letter posted,

and a few threats from Newlyn since.

[Peterbard]

It doesn't really matter how long the EA keeps the warrant, the point i no one is going to tell the debtor anyway.

So I expect the advice would be to ring the bailiff every 5 minutes for the next 12 months.

 

Even then the liability order can be re issued and another warrant produced, the LO can do this seamlessly as said before.

[Bailiff Advice]

Hi CD

 

I have a LO out with Newlyns this I think is from August last year,

 

I did ask the council to bring it back after I set up a payment plan for another LO but in reply it was ignored.

 

But saying that I have only had 1 visit at 5 am with a letter posted, and a few threats from Newlyn since.

 

Leakie,

 

You need to start a NEW THREAD regarding your above query with Newlyn's.

[Coughdrop]

Hi CD

 

I have a LO out with Newlyns this I think is from August last year,

 

I did ask the council to bring it back after I set up a payment plan for another LO

but in reply it was ignored.

But saying that I have only had 1 visit at 5 am with a letter posted,

and a few threats from Newlyn since.

 

5am is, as you know, outside legal times for a visit. Is this CT?

 

If so, what is your intent with this, to wait for it to be returned and ensure no goods are taken under control, or are you wanting to get a repayment arrangement with the EA? Given your lack of response to Newlyns I'm assuming the former, but it's better to check.

 

As DB stated, it may be best to start a new thread for this if it is going to be an involved post. If mentioned only in passing, then obviously there's no need.

[mikeymack2002]

Ok I am home.. PC = Parking Company (PC) here is the redacted letter sent via email: Only personal information removed everything else is in place.

This is a redacted version of the letter sent to the debtor which was received by them today.pdf

[Peterbard]

Hi CD

 

I have a LO out with Newlyns this I think is from August last year,

 

I did ask the council to bring it back after I set up a payment plan for another LO

but in reply it was ignored.

But saying that I have only had 1 visit at 5 am with a letter posted,

and a few threats from Newlyn since.

 

If this is council tax I would be inclined to give the authority a ring, you may find it has already been returned.

I know that there is a temptation to let sleeping dogs lie, but sometimes they can wake up and bite you in the bum.

[mikeymack2002]

I believe that this debt has actually been unique in these circumstances why?

 

 

 

 

1. Speaking to the OC or the entity that owns the debt (sorry for the word entity I cannot think of another other than OC)

 

 

2. Trying to deal with the EA with a vulnerable debt is/was very hard at times. (EA wanted nothing less than full payment) disclosure was produced and verified but still only full payment requests made!

 

 

3. The hard part of 'sitting it out' this was possible due to refusing our offers and vulnerability issues? Not sure on this 100% the debtor is anyways!

3a. Trying hard to get accepted as vulnerable was nigh on impossible (OC) accepted but EA didn't )) Ultimately there were 6 different visits made)))

 

 

4. Getting this debt returned. this is always an option, but as discussed it could go straight back out to a new Enforcement Company new fees added.

4a. Keeping a very close eye on the time frame is extremely important (saves money and a new EA getting involved). Regular contact is very important.

 

 

5. Getting arrangement plans in place was easy for other PCN's, BUT: gaining the trust of the 'creditor' took some doing.

5a But by doing this and keeping to the plan is vitally important. I had more help from talking to the OC than the EA in this case.

 

 

6. Keeping everything up to date with written confirmation at EVERY stage and recording calls.

6a A failure to do these basic tasks can cause some serious complications when trying to get the debt paid!

[Bailiff Advice]

MM,

 

Is this thread of yours from the parking section anything to do with the case being discussed on here?

 

If so, was her Out of Time witness statement accepted or rejected?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?461471-Need-advice-for-a-pcn-that-is-out-for-enforcement

[mikeymack2002]

Having just remote accessed the memory stick the PCN in this case is the same one....

 

 

The OOT was rejected hence the continued visits for payment. I was not aware of the refusal from the TEC