Ross and Roberts PCN

[wahoo_thomas]

Hi all,

A friend of mines elderly father(75) had the misfortune of a Bailiff from Ross and Roberts appearing at his doorstep for an unpaid parking fine.As the old fella had no idea he let the nice gentleman in to have a chat.My friend was called by his father when the Bailiff refused to leave without him paying £231.70 odd or his goods would be removed.

Upon hearing this I got a call and we both set off to his fathers to remove said bailiff .When we arrived the Bailiff had already called the local police saying he believed there would be a breach of the peace.When the 6 police officers turned up just prior to our arrival they seemed to be best pals with the guy.

They basically said he is right everyone is wrong etc,the Bailiff could not produce the court order he was supposedly acting upon ,once this was pointed out to the local plod they ignored it and again said we are here purely to prevent a breach of the peace etc.

Long story cut short the old fella was getting pretty stressed at this point and said he would pay .Then the bailiff adds yet another £140.00 on as "waiting fees" .My main question is what would be the legitimate fees that he could charge .I have tried to work it out but when the original amount of £120.00 was passed to him from the court I get no where near £371.70 .Any help with the fees would be greatly appreciated and any further advise on this .

thankyou in advance

[bizzybob]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

You can challenge the "waiting fee" It may be worth complaining to the council who are 100% liable for there actions of Ross 'n Robbers, address to CEO and elected leader, copy to MP and other Beagles will no doubt be along soon What council is this, as they may outsource to Capita for back office services, and guess what Capita own Ross 'n Robbers

[wahoo_thomas]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

Hi it is yet again Arun Council ,I have had a few run ins with them but this time for a 75 year old man recovering from cancer to have to go through that for a PCN is terrible

[bluebottle]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

A number of things -

1. The Waiting Fees are not provided for under the relevant legislation and are, therefore, illegal;
2. An elderly person recovering from cancer is vulnerable under MoJ National Standards for Enforcement Agents. This should have been referred back to the local authority involved;
2. Report the six plods to the Professional Standards Department at the Force HQ of your local police force. They have potentially committed breaches of Police Conduct Regulations and could face disciplinary action over the action they took and failed to take.

[bizzybob]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

OP can now go and kick the council and thug bailiff, with Formal Complaints, and copy to MP about them ignoring obvious vulnerability, whilst also reporting plod. Is it worth informing the new Commissioner for that area?

[bluebottle]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

OP can now go and kick the council and thug bailiff, with Formal Complaints, and copy to MP about them ignoring obvious vulnerability, whilst also reporting plod. Is it worth informing the new Commissioner for that area?

Depends on what the PCC's political persausion is, bb. Some are better than others.

[ploddertom]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

What were the causes of the original PCN? Did he know about it?

[wahoo_thomas]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

Hi all and thanks for your speedy replies,

The original PCN was his sons fault as he was using his dads car to get him to and from hospital for his treatment,he did receive a letter but in fairness did the emu thing ,understandable really,so for my first course of action what is the best way forward,as I understand there has been illegal charges and the bailiff did act illegally with the help of the nod nod plods ,

1 Send a letter asking Rob and Co for full breakdown of fees
2 Complain yet again to Arun council
3 Complain against the 6 nod nods involved.(May need a bit of help on this one as not sure what channel to go down).

Could some one point me in the right direction for a letter for the 3 above actions ,also is there a way i can get power to deal with this as the old fella is stressed enough without having to deal with letters etc as well.I have spoke to him and he is happy for this to be corrected but is also feeling a bit vulnerable about the whole thing.
Thanks again

Jim

[ploddertom]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

My thoughts on this are & I'm not putting words into anyones mouth if you see what I mean.

He was confused because of his treatment and medication and thought he had paid it. He could try and claim the vulnerability angle for which he would have to provide proof - maybe a letter from his GP saying he has been having ongoing cancer treatments with a list of his meds perhaps. If you work on this angle and the proof is provided he should also involve his local Councillor(s) to fight his corner.

[bluebottle]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

Being a retired policeman, I can help you with Item 3. In the first instance, you need to write to the Professional Standards Department of the police force involved at their Force HQ, cc ing the letter to the Chief Constable and the local Police & Crime Commissioner. You may also wish to consider sending a copy to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), informing them that you have referred this to the Professional Standards Department of the police force involved. However, please be aware that the police force may refer the matter to the IPCC voluntarily or they may be obliged to refer the matter to IPCC.

In your letter, head it "Formal Complaint". The first paragraph should read -

"I am writing to you to lodge a formal complaint against six of your force's officers, namely -

[Rank, Number and Surname of Officers Involved]

who attended an incident at [Father's Address] on [Day and Date] at [Time].

The rest of the letter should read -

"The circumstances are -"

After that, describe, in detail, the series of events, in chronological order, numbering each paragraph. Make sure you include a contact telephone number.

I would recommend you ring the police force involved on 101, give details of the incident and request the Incident Log Number and the Rank, Number and Surnames of the officers who attended the incident.

Hope this helps.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

Upon hearing this I got a call and we both set off to his fathers to remove said bailiff .When we arrived the Bailiff had already called the local police saying he believed there would be a breach of the peace.When the 6 police officers turned up just prior to our arrival they seemed to be best pals with the guy.

The bailiff may be a former policeman, or may belong to the same Masonic Lodge as those plods.

[bluebottle]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

The bailiff may be a former policeman, or may belong to the same Masonic Lodge as those plods.

Which, in itself, raises questions as to the conduct of the individual officers who attended. At the very least the plods actions may well amount to Neglect of Duty in failing to remove the bailiff and allowing him to add the illegal fees.

[Fair-Parking]

Re: Ross and Roberts PCN

Classic maladministration.

First I can guarantee that no warrant of execution was ever prepared in this case. 100% - hence the faliure of the bailiff to have a 'court order' with him. No warrant - no enforcement - that is the law.

Secondly the police should never have been there - this is a civil matter. Do they not know the meaning of 'decriminalised'? Section 6 of the Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts Order 1993 actively prevents police attendance in CIVIL parking enforcement.

'Breach of the Peace' is becoming a catch all excuse for in sending police officers who have no legal authority to attend. A 75 year old sitting in his own house minding his own business could never construed as a 'breach of the peace'. The only breach of the peace here is a bailiff refusing to leave a house he had no right to be in. Police guidance requires that bailiffs who have no right of continued occupation should be escorted from the premises

Bailiff fees are subject to the Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts (Certificated Bailiffs) Order 1993. There is no provision in this statute for waiting fees. The fees that are outlined in the statute are of course subject to rthe existence and production of a genuine warrant.

Back to square one