Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

[KDK]

Good morning all.


I'm hoping some of the experts present are able to offer their opinion on an incident I am currently dealing with and I hope this is the correct place to ask.


Just over a week ago I awoke to find that my car had been clamped by a bailiff under instruction of my local council authority. My car was parked in a private car park which is attached to my property (a flat) The car park is for the sole use of the property's residents. The car park contains individually numbered parking bays. The lease for my flat includes sole use of one specifically marked out parking bay within this private car park. The parking bay numbers do not match the flat numbers for security reasons.


So, for arguments sake, I live in flat number 1 and I own parking bay number 5.


There was a sticker attached to the windscreen of my car stating my car 'had been clamped...and was in the custody of the law'. I rang the bailiff on the contact number given and it turns out that an order was made to seize goods from flat number 5 and the bailiff wrongly assumed that parking bay number 5 belonged to the person they were after and so they clamped my car. The bailiff begun laughing which made me angry and in turn he refused to return to release my car on the grounds that there may be a breach of the peace (he never told me this at the time). Several calls to their office and the police later, as well as being asked to produce a council tax bill or lease to prove my identity, he eventually returned and released my vehicle.


I have complained to both the council and the bailiff company and have received an identically worded response separately from them both.


In their response they claim it was reasonable to assume that parking bay number 5 belonged to flat number 5 so, in turn, it was reasonable to assume that the car parked in parking bay 5 belonged to the person they were trying to recover the debt from. They state that they had no legal requirement to check the registration details or ownership of my vehicle before they clamped it as it was reasonable to assume it was owned by the owner of flat 5. They have admitted they were wrong in their assumptions and that they had no order to seize any goods from me.


I have requested that they compensate me for the half day salary I lost while dealing with the matter (I was leaving for work when I found the clamp and begun dealing with it) and also pay damages to reflect the emotional distress caused to me and the damage to my reputation in my local community they have caused.


Their response has been to offer without prejudice a 'gesture of good will' of £100. £100 doesn't cover a half day salary of mine nor address the other damages I feel are reasonably requested. At this point I'm unsure if the offer is £100 or £100 from each party as they both sent identically worded responses.


I don't feel they are right in saying it's reasonable to assume that parking bay numbers match flat numbers by default. Also, I feel that even if the parking bay numbers did match the flat numbers it isn't reasonable to assume that any vehicle left in that parking bay would automatically belong to the owner of the flat (it could have been a friend or family members car, somebody who parked in the bay by mistake, etc, etc).


While no material damage or injury was caused by this incident I actually feel it is a very serious matter when a private company or govt authority enter private land without permission especially when they follow this up by seizing goods which they had no right to do - so I would like to defend myself against this in the strongest terms possible. As a reminder, the individual parking bay (the land it occupies) is clearly marked out in my lease and deeds as belonging to the leaseholder for their sole use. It's private land within private land almost.


If you've read this far, thank you, I would like to hear your opinions on this matter, specifically if you think the council or bailiff may have acted illegally / unlawfully at any time. I would also be interested in hearing your opinions on their gesture of good will.


I understand that any opinion given is just that and will have no bearing on this matter.


Thanks in advance.

[wales01man]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

Someone will come along with some advice,all have to offer is to suggest you contact your councillor and council CEO and escalate this complaint,behaviour and attitudes like this are totally unacceptable from council employees paid from your taxes

[KDK]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

I agree and that's exactly what I've done. Their response is pretty much as I've put in the original post which I think is not acceptable either.

[charitynjw]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

Can you prove, with documented evidence, your estimated monetary loss?

[KDK]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

Yes, I have made up the lost hours at work by working beyond my contractual hours which my company would attest to in writing.

[charitynjw]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

Good morning all.


I'm hoping some of the experts present are able to offer their opinion on an incident I am currently dealing with and I hope this is the correct place to ask.


Just over a week ago I awoke to find that my car had been clamped by a bailiff under instruction of my local council authority. My car was parked in a private car park which is attached to my property (a flat) The car park is for the sole use of the property's residents. The car park contains individually numbered parking bays. The lease for my flat includes sole use of one specifically marked out parking bay within this private car park. The parking bay numbers do not match the flat numbers for security reasons.


So, for arguments sake, I live in flat number 1 and I own parking bay number 5.


There was a sticker attached to the windscreen of my car stating my car 'had been clamped...and was in the custody of the law'. I rang the bailiff on the contact number given and it turns out that an order was made to seize goods from flat number 5 and the bailiff wrongly assumed that parking bay number 5 belonged to the person they were after and so they clamped my car. The bailiff begun laughing which made me angry and in turn he refused to return to release my car on the grounds that there may be a breach of the peace (he never told me this at the time). Several calls to their office and the police later, as well as being asked to produce a council tax bill or lease to prove my identity, he eventually returned and released my vehicle. Numpties!


I have complained to both the council and the bailiff company and have received an identically worded response separately from them both.


In their response they claim it was reasonable to assume that parking bay number 5 belonged to flat number 5 so, in turn, it was reasonable to assume that the car parked in parking bay 5 belonged to the person they were trying to recover the debt from. They state that they had no legal requirement to check the registration details or ownership of my vehicle before they clamped it as it was reasonable to assume it was owned by the owner of flat 5. They have admitted they were wrong in their assumptions and that they had no order to seize any goods from me. I disagree - at best they were negligent, possibly even reckless.


I have requested that they compensate me for the half day salary I lost while dealing with the matter (I was leaving for work when I found the clamp and begun dealing with it) and also pay damages to reflect the emotional distress caused to me and the damage to my reputation in my local community they have caused.


Their response has been to offer without prejudice a 'gesture of good will' of £100. £100 doesn't cover a half day salary of mine nor address the other damages I feel are reasonably requested. At this point I'm unsure if the offer is £100 or £100 from each party as they both sent identically worded responses.


I don't feel they are right in saying it's reasonable to assume that parking bay numbers match flat numbers by default. Also, I feel that even if the parking bay numbers did match the flat numbers it isn't reasonable to assume that any vehicle left in that parking bay would automatically belong to the owner of the flat (it could have been a friend or family members car, somebody who parked in the bay by mistake, etc, etc).


While no material damage or injury was caused by this incident I actually feel it is a very serious matter when a private company or govt authority enter private land without permission especially when they follow this up by seizing goods which they had no right to do - so I would like to defend myself against this in the strongest terms possible. As a reminder, the individual parking bay (the land it occupies) is clearly marked out in my lease and deeds as belonging to the leaseholder for their sole use. It's private land within private land almost.


If you've read this far, thank you, I would like to hear your opinions on this matter, specifically if you think the council or bailiff may have acted illegally / unlawfully at any time. I would also be interested in hearing your opinions on their gesture of good will.


I understand that any opinion given is just that and will have no bearing on this matter.


Thanks in advance.

If it were me, I would escalate this - a 'letter before action' to the Local Authority CEO - "if not resolved within xx days, I will submit my complaint to the LGO/take County Court action" (your choice, although courts do prefer you to exhaust any mediation options available)
If using Royal Mail, don't forget to obtain proof of postage, & keep a copy.

[KDK]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

Thanks for the reply. I have submitted my complaint in writing and their response was the above - that it was a mistake made on reasonable assumptions and an offer of £100 compensation. In my mind the compensation doesn't match up to what they have done but I'm sure others / a court may well see that differently.

Does my original complaint, which was escalated to the council CEO, count as the 'letter before action'?

[charitynjw]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

It would depend on the precise content of the letter.

For avoidance of doubt, it is better to use a header 'letter before action', or to stipulate so within the letter content.

Also to state exactly how much you would expect in compensation - be proactive!

http://www.lgo.org.uk/making-a-complaint/

[ostell]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

And the council department AND the bailiff company could be one and the same with outsourcing. Escalate to the CEO of the council and your local councillor.

Edit: In fact reading the letter from the council it would appear that it IS the same people: "We are not legally obliged to conduct any checks with the DVLA prior to seizing a vehicle but nevertheless would do so if it were possible to obtain a response within a reasonable period."

[KDK]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

Thanks for the link!

This matter has been escalated to the CEO and their response is what I've summarised in my original post.

This is the full response I have received from the council, minus any identifying features, which is titled "Stage 1 complaint":


Re: Stage 1 complaint

In the first place may I take this opportunity to convey my apologies for any distress this incident may have caused.

<Bailiff Name> have been working with <MY> Borough Council for over ten years and this is the first instance of this nature.

We were enforcing a Liability Order under the Council Tax, Administration and Enforcement Regulations (As Amended) which relates to <MY> Council. I am unable to disclose the full details of this order as we are required to adhere to the Data Protection Act.

As this liability order does not relate to you, we are unable to provide you with a copy, but <MY> Council are able to confirm that such an order exists.

The bailiff was acting in the belief that the numbered parking bays relate to the flats of the same number (as is usually the case). I am sure you will appreciate this is not an unreasonable assumption to be made, and in the absence of any signage stating to the contrary in almost all circumstances would be accurate.

Having viewed the street layout I can appreciate why the bailiff came to his conclusion. The properties are low rise and do lend themselves to the assumption that spaces are allocated per property.

A certificated bailiff is authorised to seize goods belonging to a debtor anywhere in England and Wales and requires no permission to enter onto private land in order to do so, providing that entry is peaceful. He may also seize goods which he has reasonable grounds to believe belong to the debtor. The bailiff feels that he did have reasonable grounds to believe that the vehicle belonged to the debtor because in the vast majority of cases (although clearly not this one) parking bays do correspond to the flat of the same number.

A certificated bailiff has never been required to hold an SIA licence. Such licences were introduced to regulate the activities of private wheel-clampers. A bailiff is executing a court order by seizing goods and the application of a wheel clamp is purely incidental to this.

Certificated bailiffs are required to produce their certificate on demand but there is no requirement to wear or display any form of identification.

We are not legally obliged to conduct any checks with the DVLA prior to seizing a vehicle but nevertheless would do so if it were possible to obtain a response within a reasonable period. Unfortunately our access to DVLA information in respect of Council Tax is limited to submitting written requests via the postal system and it can take many weeks for a response to be received.

In respect of your call to the office I am advised that at the time of your call you refused to identify yourself. While I appreciate you’re feeling that as an innocent party you should not have to provide ID, had you, it would have helped clarify your position. As it was, call centre staff (and the bailiff) were left aware of your complaint but still uncertain that you may have been connected to the debtor. In respect of your request to speak to a manager. I have spoken to the team, they confirmed you were passed to the supervisor (the most senior manager on the section at that time) and this supervisor confirmed she dealt with your query and there was no further request for escalation to a director or partner.

I can fully understand your annoyance at finding you car clamped. However, the bailiff states that when you phoned him he was left feeling a breach of the peace may ensue upon his return. Accordingly he phoned the Police and they advised him not to return until they had spoken to you. This did delay the release of your vehicle. When they phoned the bailiff back they said that they had spoken to you and advised you to remain in your flat whilst the bailiff removed the clamp. When he received this information the bailiff returned immediately and removed the clamp which I believe was at approximately 9.20 a.m. The bailiff confirms he did not laugh during the course of his conversation with you.

Council Tax collection within the Borough during these economic times is difficult and the bailiff does make a best judgement call in respect of his actions. This was an unfortunate incidence for which I apologise.

While I am content that we have acted in good faith in this matter I do appreciate that you have been inconvenienced and therefore, without prejudice and as a sign of good faith, I would like to offer you £100 in compensation. I would appreciate if you could confirm acceptance of this gesture.

Finally, it is not the intention of this office to cause upset, and in this matter you have my personal regrets that you were.

[bizzybob]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

Send a further Formal Complaint marked as Stage 2 to the CEO of the council, the elected leader, your local member and copy it to your MP and the bailiff company, indicate you have suffered a "provable" financial loss due to their agents the bailiff for whom they are 100% liable jointly and severally, said loss exceeds the paltry £100 "goodwill gesture" offered after your initial complaint. inform them that the next step will be a letter before action detailing the particulars of loss inviting them to settle prior to small claims court action against themselves and their appointed bailiff company as joint defendants, along with eventual escalation to the LGO, as bailiffs should check vehicle details before clamping or taking away. What muppet bailiffs are these please?

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

You have the following causes of action against the local authority and bailiff company, which I would not mind betting are sending both letters -

1. Unlawful Interference with Property; Attaching the wheelclamp to the car
2. Unlawful Detention of Goods; Clamping the car without lawful authority
3. Failing to Exercise Reasonable Care; Assumption of ownership without conducting adequate and proper checks.
4. Failing to Conduct Adequate and Proper Enquiries to Establish the Ownership of the Vehicle; See 3 above, but is additional and separate cause of action
5. Trespass Against Property. See 2 above, but is additional and separate cause of action

Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. I'm afraid assuming the car belonged to Flat 5 is not enough to get them off the hook. They have to show they have taken adequate and proper steps/enquiries to ascertain the vehicle belonged to the resident of Flat 5. You are entitled to be fully compensated for the financial loss you have suffered as a result of the bailiff's malfeasance and incompetence (Incompetence is not a defence either.)

I have also noted they have admitted that they had no lawful authority to seize/clamp you car. They have stuffed themselves by admitting this as they have admitted to acting ultra vires (outside the law). Under these circumstances and in view of their admission, a goodwill or ex gratia payment is not inappropriate, in these circumstances. My gut-feeling is that a judge would wipe the floor with them, if this went into court.

[KDK]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

Thanks for the reply. Your response makes perfect sense to me and reflects how I feel but I have been unsure how much of what they have done is unlawful / criminal / illegal / civil offence, whether there's any distinction between those and if that would alter how I should proceed.

Would I be write in stating any of the above in a response to their response? I'm guessing I need to find out what stage 2 of this complaints procedure is and how I move into it?

[bizzybob]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

write a letter marked Formal complaint Stage 2, put in the muppetry and criminality indicated by bluebottle in it, remind them of their absolute liability for the bailiffs, you are dissatisfied with their dismissive attitude, and the fact they have admitted they are ultra vires, leaves you no alternative but to initiate action for consequential loss according to your schedule of loss, if they do not pay the enclosed bill, copy it to all the bigwigs mentioned and the bailiff company. BB is correct that a judge would give them more than a slight tolchock, in fact a visit from Mr Deltoid to squeeze the cash from their droog bailiffs yarbles would be a distinct possibility, if they didn't pay up.

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff clamped wrong vehicle on my private land

I feel you would do best to ask a solicitor to deal with this for you. Local authorities take things a lot more seriously when they get a solicitor's letter land on them out of the blue. Like I said above, I would not be surprised if the bailiff company sent both letters, as you have stated that they are identical, save for the letterheadings. Which bailiff company is involved, please?

Do you lease your flat from the local authority involved? If so, they have committed a breach of the lease by trespassing on the land, through an agent, the brainless bailiff.

For this reason and other reasons, you would be wise to consult a solicitor and let them deal with this.