Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on V5

[Magdalena]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

Dear Bluebottle; thank you for sharing your knowledge. Please note that the warrant is from Northampton county court.
Not sure if can take any more of your time..
Thank you

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

Dear Bluebottle; thank you for sharing your knowledge. Please note that the warrant is from Northampton county court.
Not sure if can take any more of your time..
Thank you

The "warrant" is from the Traffic Enforcement Centre which is a star chamber - not a lawful court - and has no judges. In fact, the staff admit this freely. The "warrant" only allows the bailiff to take goods belonging to the debtor named on the warrant, not those belonging to a third party. If the bailiff does not comply with what is on a "warrant", they are acting unlawfully and/or illegally, depending on just how stupid they have been.

[Magdalena]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

How can I seek an injunction as the company director. Any knowledge about the procedure?

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

You could, but I would suggest that engaging a solicitor on a "one-off" basis to deal with this may prove to be the most practical course of action. A local authority takes a communication from a legal professional seriously. The last time a civil enforcement company did something like this, a third-party vehicle that had been unlawfully/wrongfully seized was returned within 24 hours of the legal professional contacting the local authority concerned.

[Magdalena]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

Thank you Bluebottle, I will be in touch tomorrow, trying to get solicitor on board. Thank you all for your time.

[enquirer]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

A thought occurs - when the new law comes into effect in April (allowing seizure of third party goods by bailiffs), what will happen in a case like this? I cannot see large companies taking this lying down.

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

A thought occurs - when the new law comes into effect in April (allowing seizure of third party goods by bailiffs), what will happen in a case like this? I cannot see large companies taking this lying down.

Although there are provisions to accommodate instances where disingenuous, or dishonest, or dim-witted bailiffs seize third-party goods, i.e. the interpleader provision, as far as I can see, the new regulations do not confer any power or right to seize third-party goods, only those of the debtor named on a warrant. I can certainly see third parties exercising their right to use as much reasonable force as is necessary to protect their possessions and, quite possibly, the rogue elements within the civil enforcement industry lying to police they are being obstructed from carrying out their lawful duty. Well, the law is very clear; if a bailiff is stupid enough to try and take something belonging to someone other than a debtor named on a warrant without lawful authority, they should not be surprised if they get a slap or a bloody good hiding.

[bizzybob]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

Although there are provisions to accommodate instances where disingenuous, or dishonest, or dim-witted bailiffs seize third-party goods, i.e. the interpleader provision, as far as I can see, the new regulations do not confer any power or right to seize third-party goods, only those of the debtor named on a warrant. I can certainly see third parties exercising their right to use as much reasonable force as is necessary to protect their possessions and, quite possibly, the rogue elements within the civil enforcement industry lying to police they are being obstructed from carrying out their lawful duty. Well, the law is very clear; if a bailiff is stupid enough to try and take something belonging to someone other than a debtor named on a warrant without lawful authority, they should not be surprised if they get a slap or a bloody good hiding.

Unfortunately that inspector the OP encountered seems to be sort that would be doing anilingus on the bailiff and likely arrest the third party for a public order offence, or assaulting the bailiff. The problem with the interpleader is that if the bailiff still insists and tells plod that the third party must go to interpleader, the evidence provided is insufficient, some coppers who have not been trained will allow the bailiff to remove the vehicle, possibly at one of the joint MET/JBW ANPR unlawful jollies

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

The joint ops between the Met and JBW and Newlyns are illegal. If challenged under the Human Rights Act 1998, the Met, the local authorities involved and both JBW and Newlyns would be stuffed. And that is before any criminal aspects are taken into consideration.

Also, it appears the IPCC have changed their game where investigating complaints against police forces is concerned. Greater Manchester Police is currently under investigation for corruption and I know of at least one other police force under investigation by the IPCC.

[enquirer]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

Although there are provisions to accommodate instances where disingenuous, or dishonest, or dim-witted bailiffs seize third-party goods, i.e. the interpleader provision ...

This is what I'm wondering - bailiffs starting to seize company cars ('it was parked on his drive'), vehicles on HP, hire cars and vans, etcetera. Large companies have deep pockets and are likely to reach for their lawyers.

[bizzybob]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

This is what I'm wondering - bailiffs starting to seize company cars ('it was parked on his drive'), vehicles on HP, hire cars and vans, etcetera. Large companies have deep pockets and are likely to reach for their lawyers.

This is why the interpleaders could eventually backfire on MOJ, unfortunately a great many innocents with shallow pockets could well lose their cars as they cannot afford to pay all the bailiff fees court fee and cars value into court to contest the seizure as the bailiff won't take the receipt or bank statement and insurance certificate as proof as DVLA have not processed the change of ownership as yet, so they force an interpleader.

As to Magdelena, if Screwlyn are silly enough to remove the vehicles it will bite them severely on the bum.

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

This is what I'm wondering - bailiffs starting to seize company cars ('it was parked on his drive'), vehicles on HP, hire cars and vans, etcetera. Large companies have deep pockets and are likely to reach for their lawyers.

It sounds to me that the civil enforcement industry is "testing the water" so to speak to see if they can get away with what you have highlighted. My instincts tell me the practice is going to backfire on them and their creditor clients big-time. It only needs someone to take a case to the courts under the Human Rights Act pro bono, in particular, Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Possessions), and being secondary legislation the courts could deal a fatal blow to the interpleader provision by striking it down.

The other thing I can see happening is that police officers will, finally, wake up to the fact that certificated bailiffs are not what they think they are, but are dangerous individuals who will think nothing of using a police officer as an unwitting accessory to a criminal act and not give a damn if the police officer cops the flak (No pun intended.) when the aggrieved third party lodges a formal complaint, sues the police force or secures judgement against the police force under the HRA. As Bizzybob has intimated on previous occasions, the HRA penetrates where other legislation does not and far more deeply than other legislation does.

[Magdalena]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

Good Morning Everyone,

I think Newlyn Plc just shot themselves in the foot.

We just got a letter from stating that fee's raised to £922.84 and they will be selling vehicle in 7 days. The funny part is that they claiming they will be selling Audi vehicle not BMW which they have in their possesion

I have no idea how you can misplace vehicles or don't know what's in your yard?

Also they sent a letter for us to sign authorising them to sell vahicle and deduct all their fees from the sale.

Any creative ideas what can be done with this case unfolding?

[bizzybob]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

"Also they sent a letter for us to sign authorising them to sell vahicle and deduct all their fees from the sale."

Do Not sign anything from Screwlyn, they have no authority or right to sell third party property, that would be theft.

[Milo]

Re: Bailiff from Newlyn took the car which belongs to the company because my name on

I am so sorry but I have just spent over 15 minutes trying to read this tread but it is difficult as we seem to be talking a lot about the new Interpleader applications which are not in place for 2 weeks !!!

To try to keep things simple could you answer the following questions:

It seems to me that you have a PCN and your car was seized in relation to the debt but your argument (which is a valid one) is that the vehicle should be 'exempt' as it is subject to finance. Am I correct?

Did you receive a Notice to Owner, Charge Certificate or Order for Recovery?

Did you appeal the PCN?

You say that you have now filed an OTT in order to stop the sale. With respect, an OTT is not for that purpose it is to rectify a mistake that may have been made earlier in the process. Such as, that you had not received a Notice to Owner or that you had appealed the PCN to the LA within the time scale allowed and had not received a response. What was the basis of your OTT?

Have you received confirmation from TEC of safe receipt?

Once an OTT is filed all enforcement of the warrant must CEASE until the matter has been resolved. Accordingly, Newlyn cannot sell your vehicle.

Last point. It is a misconception that vehicle subject to finance cannot be seized and sold. The crux of the matter concerned the EQUITY in the vehicle. For instance, if a vehicle is on a 4 year finance deal and you have already been paying for 3 years then in theory, the vehicle may indeed be sold (with permission of the finance company). However, in this respect the enforcement company would have to ensure that the sale proceeds would cover the balance to the finance company and the debt to the local authority and their fees.