Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

It would need to be high tensile boiler plate or inscribed on a stone tablet as carried by Moses. as da babylon may try to melt it

Knowing the Met they'd probably borrow a breaking hammer from somewhere.

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Knowing the Met they'd probably borrow a breaking hammer from somewhere.

I am sure they have a confiscated (not) tool of the trade somewhere in their evidence store

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Reply from southwark council and recieved almost identical(without prejudice)from newlyns



Newlyn's records confirm that three bailiff visits had been conducted to your premises prior to the vehicle seizure. A message had also been left on the 8 January 2014 during a telephone call with Mrs Sweeney. This indicates Newlyn have given you ample opportunity to settle this matter at an earlier juncture.

If Newlyn do not hold written permission from you to discuss the issue with your wife they have just shot themselves in both feet, as the above statement implies that they discussed the issue at hand with your wife which is a gross breach of the DPA.

A fine of up to £500,000.00 awaits!

[bizzybob]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Sadly Sir Vere they may well try to or manage to wriggle off the hook by claiming Bailiff thought Op was debtor and acted in good faith as he wanted his fees, or some such nonsense

Referral to ICO is definitely a to do.

[Milo]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

I have read this thread with a great deal of interest. "Behind the scenes" there is a huge amount of work being done about these "Bailiff and Police Roadside Operations" by both DCLG, DVLA and now...the ICO.

I was present in a meeting last October where all bailiff companies were represented and a question was asked for a 'show of hands' from any enforcement company who have undertaken one of the 'operations'. The meeting room went silent and only ONE hand was raised. This was from a representative from Marston Group who confirmed that such operations ONLY ever take place regarding 'persistant evaders' (there is specific legislation for this). All other companies denied that these operations take place. And yet......these are past becoming an almost daily feature.

With regard to the involvement of the police.....again, behind the scenes there are some pretty serious developments ( in particular as to how these operations are funded and more importantly....how the police are paid!!!!!

The response that you have received is very interesting and thank you for posting it. I am surprised to hear that Newlyn are relying upon Toseland.

I will stick my neck out by saying that as far as I am concerned your vehicle should be 'exempt' and this is made clear by the fact that the PCO licence is against the VEHICLE and is not against the individual. I have correspondence to this effect from the PCO. I will try to find it later today.

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

I have read this thread with a great deal of interest. "Behind the scenes" there is a huge amount of work being done about these "Bailiff and Police Roadside Operations" by both DCLG, DVLA and now...the ICO.

I was present in a meeting last October where all bailiff companies were represented and a question was asked for a 'show of hands' from any enforcement company who have undertaken one of the 'operations'. The meeting room went silent and only ONE hand was raised. This was from a representative from Marston Group who confirmed that such operations ONLY ever take place regarding 'persistant evaders' (there is specific legislation for this). All other companies denied that these operations take place. And yet......these are past becoming an almost daily feature.

With regard to the involvement of the police.....again, behind the scenes there are some pretty serious developments ( in particular as to how these operations are funded and more importantly....how the police are paid!!!!!

The response that you have received is very interesting and thank you for posting it. I am surprised to hear that Newlyn are relying upon Toseland.

I will stick my neck out by saying that as far as I am concerned your vehicle should be 'exempt' and this is made clear by the fact that the PCO licence is against the VEHICLE and is not against the individual. I have correspondence to this effect from the PCO. I will try to find it later today.

Within the London area, Hackney Carriage taxis and their drivers are licensed by the Public Carriage Office (PCO) and Private Hire taxis and their drivers are licensed by the London Boroughs. Outside of London, local authorities license both Hackney Carriage and Private Hire taxis and their drivers. The licensing of a vehicle is completely separate from the licensing of a driver. In theory and in practice, a driver, as long as they are correctly licensed, can drive any number of vehicles, provided the vehicles are correctly licensed and plated.

Putting London Borough of Southwark and Newlyns to strict proof is, I suspect, going to cause them some problems as the burden of proof as to what they claiming and that their actions were lawful, in the circumstances, falls on them. As for any data protection issues, the OP would be wise to speak to the ICO about this and London Borough of Southwark, the Metropolitan Police and Newlyns need to take such matters very seriously as the ICO has the power to impose a fine of up to £500,000 on transgressors and is not afraid to do so. The largest fine handed out by the ICO to date is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, £480,000 which was imposed on a local authority. It is my understanding the data protection breach was serious, which is reflected by the fine imposed.

[bizzybob]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Surely a vehicle registered as a taxi with the PCO is NOT a private car in the legal sense, it is a taxi so therefore should be automatically exempt from seizure as tool of trade. Are Screwlyn and The council cacking it and trying to face it off and bluff their way out and let screwlyn sell the taxi.

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

A Hackney Carriage in London will be one of a number of vehicles built or modified by manufacturers approved by the Public Carriage Office. Also, a Hackney Carriage has to be fitted with an illuminated sign that can be extinguished once a passenger boards the vehicle and a meter, which is sealed by the PCO.

I have to agree with Milo that any taxi, whether it be Hackney Carriage or Private Hire, is exempt from seizure as it is a vehicle for use in connection with a person's employment, vocation or business and warrants, unless specifically stating that such a vehicle may be seized, will clearly state that no vehicle used by a debtor in connection with a debtor's employment, vocation or business may be taken.

I am wondering whether it would be worth the OP in this case seeking an ex parte injunction against the local authority concerned, applying on an N16A, which would stop any attempted sale of the taxi dead in its tracks.

The N16A also has provision on it if there are or are likely to be issues under the Human Rights Act. If the OP owns the taxi as a self-employed person, it could be argued that the taxi is his personal possession and given the nature and use of the vehicle, plus the fact a PCN is a civil debt, not a criminal fine or statutory tax, Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Possessions) applies, which would need to be included in any pleadings and skeleton arguments. It would need a judge to rule on any human rights issues relating to the matter. If the taxi is leased or on contract hire, then it belongs to a third party and the leasing or contract hire company will need to submit a third party claim.

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Hi private hire no I did not

If at the time of being stopped for the "routine check" the car was displaying the PRIVATE HIRE plate it should have never being seized.

However, it's gone, you should send to Newlyn and the Borough Council copies of the paperwork that singles your car out as a private hire vehicle, such as the inspection report form the Council Officer that vetted your car as fit for purpose.

[Milo]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

A word of caution about a taxi being 'exempt'.

A few years ago I was assisting a gentleman who has his 'black cab' seized by one of these bailiff and police roadside operations in the West End of London. Firstly the seizure took place at 11pm which is outside of the required time for a bailiff to visit.

His complaint was awful as the police ORDERED all 4 passengers out of the car (the passengers were all being taken at Gatwick Airprort which would have earned the driver a good fare). He was asked to pay approx £900 which he could not do and the car was taken. He managed to pick the vehicle up the following day by which time a further £400 had been added to the bill. Being a 'black cab driver' he used the services of a solicitor provided by his union. He LOST the case.

In court it was established that whilst he OWNED the vehicle outright......he only used it himself during the hours of 7pm and 6am (evening and night time) and that during the day his BROTHER has the use of the cab. The judge ruled that although it would normally be exempt he could not claim exemption given that the vehicle was not for his PERSONAL use in the course of his business.

An unusual case but similar to Toseland.

I notice that a short version of 'Toseland' is posted above.I will have a look at the whole document later today. The case originated from Shergroup.

[ncf355]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Good grief, surely that was worth an appeal?

[ploddertom]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

The Toseland case is always used as the de facto standard for vehicles. However it has been defeated now on several occasions so imagine it can no longer be relied on.

[ploddertom]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

What I should have added at the end of the previous post is that one of the people to ask about Toseland is pepsie/wonkeydonkey who overturned Toseland in a case involving Sherforce a couple of years or so ago. This was where SF had seized & removed a vehicle which had to be subsequently returned. Not sure if she still has all the paperwork for it as it may have been retained by the people she was helping.

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

If at the time of being stopped for the "routine check" the car was displaying the PRIVATE HIRE plate it should have never being seized.

However, it's gone, you should send to Newlyn and the Borough Council copies of the paperwork that singles your car out as a private hire vehicle, such as the inspection report form the Council Officer that vetted your car as fit for purpose.

The vehicle is a Hackney Carriage, Sir Vere. It is a case of who actually owns the vehicle - the OP, a taxi company, a leasing company or a contract hire company. If the vehicle is subject to a finance contract with the manufacturer, which is not unusual where special-purpose vehicles are concerned, the status of the OP within the contract will need to be established. It may transpire to be a case of "Act in haste, repent at leisure" on the part of Newlyns.

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

The Toseland case is always used as the de facto standard for vehicles. However it has been defeated now on several occasions so imagine it can no longer be relied on.

And I bet Newlyns hope the OP and other people don't know that. Having read about the behaviour of Newlyns and their senior management, especially one of their directors being branded a liar by a judge, serious questions need to be asked of the BIS and MoJ as to why no action has been taken to bring about the compulsory dissolution of Newlyn PLC.