Tweet
Re: Parking Fine and Equita Bailiff Fees
Thank you for your quick response Bluebottle, I will indeed start this in a new post. Janner, not heard that one in a while :-) my sister lives in Plymouth see, I'm from London and was visiting her when this 'alleged' contravention took place. I hear ya, they are a bunch of lying, cheating b stardos. I guessed that I was being seriously overcharged but it certainly helps to have that same confirmation from yourself. I thought though, please correct me if I'm wrong but under the legislation, although I had a hand delivered letter and so obviously attended, he did not come at that time to levy or remove goods (so I believe) so would that £ 28.00 charge apply?? Also, if the other bailiff had returned my calls and told me the truth of the debt then this actual visit would not have taken place anyway. I mean it's so underhand. I appreciate your comments. Also, I just want to run this by you and get your thoughts, I mean yes, I think I have enough angle to sort out my own affairs but I am a bit of a people's champion and would like to take this further. I already intend to send a recorded letter of complaint to Bob Coomber (interim CEO at PCC) about this overcharging, also a letter to the Civil Enforcement Association and to Northampton trading standards and to the OFT. If necessary, I will also be sending a letter to the local government ombudsman. Here's the thing though, as we can all clearly see this is a criminal act of fraud and I am intending to have somebody's neck for this, I am intending to record the conversation between myself and the bailiff, without his knowledge (naturally, otherwise he is likely to manipulate the situation) now, whilst it is legal to do that, it is of course unlawful to share that data under privacy laws. From my research as well, it would not be permissible in court, with one exception. Like when reporters intercept sensitive data, they are allowed to use/expose the information if it is in the public interest. I of course strongly believe that it is in the public interest. What do you think and indeed if anybody else has any opinion on this, I would be pleased to hear it. Thanks again bluebottle, really appreciate it. On your advice, I will start a new post now. Ed.
Thank you for your quick response Bluebottle, I will indeed start this in a new post. Janner, not heard that one in a while :-) my sister lives in Plymouth see, I'm from London and was visiting her when this 'alleged' contravention took place. I hear ya, they are a bunch of lying, cheating b stardos. I guessed that I was being seriously overcharged but it certainly helps to have that same confirmation from yourself. I thought though, please correct me if I'm wrong but under the legislation, although I had a hand delivered letter and so obviously attended, he did not come at that time to levy or remove goods (so I believe) so would that £ 28.00 charge apply?? Also, if the other bailiff had returned my calls and told me the truth of the debt then this actual visit would not have taken place anyway. I mean it's so underhand. I appreciate your comments. Also, I just want to run this by you and get your thoughts, I mean yes, I think I have enough angle to sort out my own affairs but I am a bit of a people's champion and would like to take this further. I already intend to send a recorded letter of complaint to Bob Coomber (interim CEO at PCC) about this overcharging, also a letter to the Civil Enforcement Association and to Northampton trading standards and to the OFT. If necessary, I will also be sending a letter to the local government ombudsman. Here's the thing though, as we can all clearly see this is a criminal act of fraud and I am intending to have somebody's neck for this, I am intending to record the conversation between myself and the bailiff, without his knowledge (naturally, otherwise he is likely to manipulate the situation) now, whilst it is legal to do that, it is of course unlawful to share that data under privacy laws. From my research as well, it would not be permissible in court, with one exception. Like when reporters intercept sensitive data, they are allowed to use/expose the information if it is in the public interest. I of course strongly believe that it is in the public interest. What do you think and indeed if anybody else has any opinion on this, I would be pleased to hear it. Thanks again bluebottle, really appreciate it. On your advice, I will start a new post now. Ed.
Comment