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

[righty]

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

Manchester police were at the same scam stopping motorists under false pretences as their ANPR was also identifying unpaid parking fines etc. The inspector responsible claimed it was being done because "many who don't pay their fines are often involved in crime" Of course this didn't explain why one young lady motorist was detained until the debt collector arrived on the scene who then forced her to go to the nearest cash machine with the threat that the cops wouldn't let her go until he got paid.

I understand the matter is ongoing and it should be noted that the council in question knew nothing of this & indeed warned the debt collectors (Rossendales) about their breaching the of DPA

AND I agree complain to the Police followed by everyone else including the media

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

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

The involvement of the Police in helping bailiffs in collecting unpaid parking fines on the strength of a warrant of execution is, in the least debatable.

For the bailiff to have seized your private hire vehicle, which is licensed I presume, is illegal.

Also illegal the fact that the car (exempt or not totally immaterial) has been seized without you receiving in writing the reason why, and the amount that you owe, plus any other fees and or costs.

The whole incident is an absolute disgrace!

[righty]

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

There wasn't a warrant just a notice of an outstanding debt on the debt collectors data base which the police themselves had downloaded to their data base and ANPR system

[bizzybob]

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

There wasn't a warrant just a notice of an outstanding debt on the debt collectors data base which the police themselves had downloaded to their data base and ANPR system

Then the MET need reporting to the ICO, for breaches of data protection, the debt is Civil so the police have no right to act as debt collectors the whole stop is unlawful ab-initio. They will squirm and spout the same crap GMP did about "fines" crime and evaders, but none of it will overide the wrongfulness of these operations.

But then the MET is riddled with Common Purpose useful idiots brainwashed into leading beyond authority, aka break the law if required to achieve the goal, make it up as you go along, and then obfuscate and obstruct if found out, and the end justifies the means :

[bluebottle]

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

Manchester police were at the same scam stopping motorists under false pretences as their ANPR was also identifying unpaid parking fines etc. The inspector responsible claimed it was being done because "many who don't pay their fines are often involved in crime" Of course this didn't explain why one young lady motorist was detained until the debt collector arrived on the scene who then forced her to go to the nearest cash machine with the threat that the cops wouldn't let her go until he got paid.

I understand the matter is ongoing and it should be noted that the council in question knew nothing of this & indeed warned the debt collectors (Rossendales) about their breaching the of DPA

AND I agree complain to the Police followed by everyone else including the media

Then, potentially, the lady motorist was unlawfully detained. The case has the potential to bite Greater Manchester Police hard on the backside. They believe it is perfectly acceptable to allow private security to behave like thugs and do nothing about it when people complain.

[Fair-Parking]

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

A number of points have been raised since I last posted, first let me deal with Manchester. I am not aware that there have been any recent incidents though I would be interested to learn more. However the case described has a remarkable similarity to one in 2008, the only diference being that it was Marstons who was involved.

I complained to Manchester City Council and parking manager Graham Marsh did undertake an investigation, the upshot of which is that he agreed that there had been breaches of data protection ie the passing on of private data to the police for non criminal purposes and instructed Marstons to cease such operations within 24 hours. That was in July 2008.

Whilst Marstons did stop, it didn't prevent the same deceitful company from carrying on in London as if nothing had happened or that the data protection laws which applied in Manchester could be ignored in London. Consequently Marstons carried on.

I brought this to the attention of HHJ Cryan who in cross examining the Marstons bailiff on 17 June 2011 stated
'I am given to understand by some of the information before the court that this is a practice which used to go on in Manchester, but the police in Manchester since, I think, 2008, I was told - it may not be right, I do not know – have ceased operations of this nature with civil bailiffs. Do you know about that?'

Bailiff - 'No, your Honour'.

With regard to other points. My understanding is that a police officer can stop any motorist for a variety of reasons, however the officer cannot detain a motorist unless he has reason to suspect that a) he has committed a crime b) he is on his way to commit a crime. Thus the thrust of Judge Cryan's questions about retaining the motorist for bailiff purposes were quite specific and - far over the head to the two dimensional bailiff sitting before him - quite mocking. Detaining a motorist for introduction to a civil baliff is illegal. HH knew that - the bailiff hadn't a clue. Not even when he left the witness box.

I should also make it quite plain that there is no information on police computers in such operations - all the information comes from the bailiff ANPR van parking up the road and is passed on to the police who then stop the motorist based on this major contravention of the Data Protection Act 1998 - as per Manchester in July 2008.

In short neither Newlyn, Marstons or JBW think that the DPA applies to them but worse - the penny still hasn't dropped with the Met either despite the passage of six years.

What on earth is going through the minds of the senior officers sitting in splendid isolation on floor 12?

[bluebottle]

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

Good to see you on LB again, F-P.

It might be prudent to remind civil enforcement companies, local authorities and police forces that the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has the power to impose a Civil Monetary Penalty (CMP) of up to £500,000 for breaches of the Data Protection Act 1998.

As to what is going through the minds of senior officers on Floor 12 at New Scotland Yard, even though I am ex-Met and NSY was on my beat, few if any Met officers have been able to work out what goes through the minds of senior officers, apart from "When can I draw my pension?"

[bizzybob]

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

A number of points have been raised since I last posted, first let me deal with Manchester. I am not aware that there have been any recent incidents though I would be interested to learn more. However the case described has a remarkable similarity to one in 2008, the only diference being that it was Marstons who was involved.

I complained to Manchester City Council and parking manager Graham Marsh did undertake an investigation, the upshot of which is that he agreed that there had been breaches of data protection ie the passing on of private data to the police for non criminal purposes and instructed Marstons to cease such operations within 24 hours. That was in July 2008.

Whilst Marstons did stop, it didn't prevent the same deceitful company from carrying on in London as if nothing had happened or that the data protection laws which applied in Manchester could be ignored in London. Consequently Marstons carried on.

I brought this to the attention of HHJ Cryan who in cross examining the Marstons bailiff on 17 June 2011 stated
'I am given to understand by some of the information before the court that this is a practice which used to go on in Manchester, but the police in Manchester since, I think, 2008, I was told - it may not be right, I do not know – have ceased operations of this nature with civil bailiffs. Do you know about that?'

Bailiff - 'No, your Honour'.

With regard to other points. My understanding is that a police officer can stop any motorist for a variety of reasons, however the officer cannot detain a motorist unless he has reason to suspect that a) he has committed a crime b) he is on his way to commit a crime. Thus the thrust of Judge Cryan's questions about retaining the motorist for bailiff purposes were quite specific and - far over the head to the two dimensional bailiff sitting before him - quite mocking. Detaining a motorist for introduction to a civil baliff is illegal. HH knew that - the bailiff hadn't a clue. Not even when he left the witness box.

I should also make it quite plain that there is no information on police computers in such operations - all the information comes from the bailiff ANPR van parking up the road and is passed on to the police who then stop the motorist based on this major contravention of the Data Protection Act 1998 - as per Manchester in July 2008.

In short neither Newlyn, Marstons or JBW think that the DPA applies to them but worse - the penny still hasn't dropped with the Met either despite the passage of six years.

Q: What on earth is going through the minds of the senior officers sitting in splendid isolation on floor 12? A: Where can we extend our grasp and maybe get a few quid as kickback from bailiffs; and Lead Beyond Authority like good Common Purpose useful idiots?

IFYPFY

Seriously FP there is something seriously amiss with these scams, and no one in the corridors of power seems to give a flying fsck

[Sweeneyblue]

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

Te7-9 are in pe2-3 are also in and accepted
will keep you updated.

[geoffrey]

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

No wonder there are so many murderers, rapists, child abusers, violent attackers, etc around if the police are entangled with this kind of thing. Baliffs, like wheel clampers have too much power in the UK. They should never be allowed to act without a court order.

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

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

No wonder there are so many murderers, rapists, child abusers, violent attackers, etc around if the police are entangled with this kind of thing. Baliffs, like wheel clampers have too much power in the UK. They should never be allowed to act without a court order.

They do act with a Court Order, except that some overstep the mark, and not by a couple of inches, but by a couple of miles!

[bizzybob]

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

No wonder there are so many murderers, rapists, child abusers, violent attackers, etc around if the police are entangled with this kind of thing. Baliffs, like wheel clampers have too much power in the UK. They should never be allowed to act without a court order.

They have very little power actually above and beyond any granted in the court order, and zilch for council tax as it ia a Liabilkity Order not an actual warrant as such, and depend on persuading gullible debtors and clueless police that they have the powers of Judge Dredd.

[wales01man]

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

The power they do have over most people is Fear because whatever powers they have they ignore and threaten people with all sorts of things Prison etc that they cannot do but as most are ignorant of the powers bailiffs have they get worried hence the posts we often see on here .

[bizzybob]

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

The power they do have over most people is Fear because whatever powers they have they ignore and threaten people with all sorts of things Prison etc that they cannot do but as most are ignorant of the powers bailiffs have they get worried hence the posts we often see on here .

Exactly Wales, the most formidable thing in any armoury is to instill fear into the target, with letters containing loads of ifs buts and maybes with no definites is one, a great example of this is the bailiffs standard letters, along with DCA and TVL correspondence. Nowhere does it say on them that you don't have to have any dealings with them.

[wales01man]

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

Some of us regulars on here who have dealt with Bailiffs know what they cannot do and will not be intimidated if more were to tell the bailiff where to go and seek advice after first contact they would soon be running the school bully gets away with it because no one fights back we all need to fight back .