Disputing ticket is mine.

[Sleepyhead]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

I would check with the Council to see if a decision has been made. If perchance it has gone against you I would ask who dealt with it as I believe some Councils let the bailiffs deal with them - and we all know what happens then.

The refusal letter states .

A court officer (bailiff.?)
Sitting at Northampton county court (Does this mean the hearing was at county court or worded as though the court officer was in charge of the proceedings.?
Under refusal of rule 23.8this means that in court officers opinion he does not think it is worth going befor a court and has decided to refuse it him self)

[Sleepyhead]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

Will post updates so enyone finds themselves in similar position.

Advice i recieved from decent guy in peppoo.

Please correct me if I have got any of the below wrong!

If you are not resident at the old address then the bailiff's warrant is just a piece of paper. He cannot enforce at that address and your ex should not pay anything or let him into the house. She simply has to state that you do not live there any more. She is not obliged to even tell him where you do live. If the bailiff appears then demand a copy of his warrant (which he won't have) and call the police.

To enforce against you the Council will have to apply to the TEC to have the address changed on the warrant. In theory the TEC should reject that application as you had moved before the Notice to Owner was served.

Hmmm! It is not the case that the ticket is not yours. It is yours, however you had a statutory defence, "that the vehicle had been permitted to remain at rest in the place in question by a person who was in control of the vehicle without the consent of the owner". Presumably neither you nor the hire company gave permission. Otherwise you were obeying the instructions of a Police Constable.

You made some sort of informal representations against the original PCN, hopefully along the lines above. At that point the PCN should have been cancelled.
You then moved.
Either no response was sent by the Council or the response was sent to your old address. The response must have been rejection. We don't know why.
The Council then issued an NTO and sent it to the hire company.
The hire company then responded with their statutory defence. "We are a hire firm and the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from the firm under a hiring agreement; and the person hiring it had signed a statement acknowledging liability in respect of any penalty charge involving the vehicle during the period of the hire agreement."
The Council would have had re-issued the Notice to Owner to you. This would have gone to your previous address however after you had moved out. The resulting chain of events mean that you have been deprived of your opportunity to appeal your case to the Adjudicator.

The rejecting of the Out of Time (TE7) by the TEC is not unexpected. Routine even. It depends what exactly you put on the TE7 OOT application?

So you now need to submit an N244 application. Request a personal hearing. This will get the matter before a judge in your local county court. You are requesting the court to review the TEC decision to refuse your Out of Time (TE7) application. Stick to the truth of what has happened. Specifically that you did not receive any Notice to Owner as you had already moved when it was issued. I don't see why you can't say such as it is true.

It costs £80 for a personal hearing. So also ask for you fee to be refunded both on the N244 application and at the hearing. Mostly the fee is refunded however it is not guaranteed.
If you are on a low income you can seek fee remission by completing form EX160. Submitting the N244 will stop further bailiff action.

Eventually the TE9 will be accepted, the warrant revoked etc. If the Council wish to pursue the matter they will have to issue a new NTO to you at your current address. And you have a statutory defence.

I also suggest that you Google and make contact with bailiffadviceonline and seek also advice there. They are expert at complex bailiff situations. They are highly recommended on this forum and others. BAO chaarge a small fee or a premium rate number. PePiPoo does not get any money from it.

This post has been edited by Enceladus: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 - 04:26

[bluebottle]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

I would check with the Council to see if a decision has been made. If perchance it has gone against you I would ask who dealt with it as I believe some Councils let the bailiffs deal with them - and we all know what happens then.

Yes, certain London Boroughs were found to be letting JBW handle appeals and one, I believe, was found to be letting JBW issue warrants. Both totally unlawful, if not, illegal.

[bizzybob]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

Yes, certain London Boroughs were found to be letting JBW handle appeals and one, I believe, was found to be letting JBW issue warrants. Both totally unlawful, if not, illegal.

JBW warrants probably have ink all over them from their use of a John Bull Printing Outfit, as they haven't got around to knocking them up in MS Word yet. Either way bailiffs should not handle appeals nor issue warrants.

[bluebottle]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

JBW warrants probably have ink all over them from their use of a John Bull Printing Outfit, as they haven't got around to knocking them up in MS Word yet. Either way bailiffs should not handle appeals nor issue warrants.

In the case of the warrant, the endorsements on the warrant showed it had been handed to the bailiff before the court had authorised the warrant to be issued. Now you know why the "B" in JBW stands for "brainless" or "brain-dead". I'll leave it to your imagination to work out what the "W" stands for. Clue: It sounds like "anchors".

[bizzybob]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

In the case of the warrant, the endorsements on the warrant showed it had been handed to the bailiff before the court had authorised the warrant to be issued. Now you know why the "B" in JBW stands for "brainless" or "brain-dead". I'll leave it to your imagination to work out what the "W" stands for. Clue: It sounds like "anchors".

So it is there plain for all to see, JBW are not only potentially forgers of warrants, but several of them may be onanists too? Definitely not fit and proper persons to enforce debt for public authorities

[labman]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

I'm glad Pepipoo came up trumps for you, especially as I recommended it. The advice you have received seems absolutely spot on to me.

You have the N244 http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...1-Useful-Links Link 4 to set aside the judgment. You also have the N245 http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...1-Useful-Links Link 6 which will stop a County Court Bailiff.

[Sleepyhead]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

All done,just sent my forms off.
Remember you need to make 3 lots of copies.
One for the courts.
One to be served on TEC.
And copy for yourself.

Will keep you informed of progress.:beagle:

[bluebottle]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

There also needs to be a formal investigation into JBW's relationships with local authorities and what those local authorities are allowing them to do. Where it is found they are being allowed to handle appeals and issue warrants, restorative justice might be an option. Having their ANPR vans and tow trucks seized and sold might make them focus and realise that what goes around comes around.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

I'm glad Pepipoo came up trumps for you, especially as I recommended it. The advice you have received seems absolutely spot on to me.

You have the N244 http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...1-Useful-Links Link 4 to set aside the judgment. You also have the N245 http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...1-Useful-Links Link 6 which will stop a County Court Bailiff.

And all without having to prove one is a Free Moron On The Land.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

There also needs to be a formal investigation into JBW's relationships with local authorities and what those local authorities are allowing them to do. Where it is found they are being allowed to handle appeals and issue warrants, restorative justice might be an option. Having their ANPR vans and tow trucks seized and sold might make them focus and realise that what goes around comes around.

No - getting the Army to drive a tank over their ANPR vans would be better.

[bluebottle]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

No - getting the Army to drive a tank over their ANPR vans would be better.

Why didn't I think of that? Lol!

[bizzybob]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

No - getting the Army to drive a tank over their ANPR vans would be better.

A missile from a RPG would be good also

[labman]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

There also needs to be a formal investigation into JBW's relationships with local authorities and what those local authorities are allowing them to do. Where it is found they are being allowed to handle appeals and issue warrants, restorative justice might be an option. Having their ANPR vans and tow trucks seized and sold might make them focus and realise that what goes around comes around.

Wouldn't that be good! lol Sadly it will never happen. The tank could possibly be arranged?

[Mentally incapacitated]

Re: Disputing ticket is mine.

Being mentally unwell and taking into consideration the circumstances I would have thought you could have the bailiffs put on a leash as a "Vulnerable Person". I may be wrong but I think Every local council has a department responsible for the "protection of vulnerable people". Sounds far fetched I know but If you get in touch with your local council and ask to be out through to whomever is responsible for "protection of vulnerable people". Also since this was issued through the county court can't the OP just apply to the court to have the warrant set aside. Might need a letter from your doctor? I AM QUITE OFTEN WRONG.

M I