newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

[Johnboy007]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

Schedule 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 defines the mode of trial and maximum penalty for most traffic offences.

s89 offences (speeding) are triable summarily (ie in magistrates court only) and have a maximum fine at level 3 on the standard scale together with points and a discretionary disqualification.

It is a crime.

Whilst I had given up, I do think it is important that information on here is accurate,

I agree it it is a road traffic offence, but you do not get a criminal conviction for it.

[Johnboy007]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

Yes, it is the fact that it is a fine imposed by a criminal court rather than any other sort of debt which affects the enforcement powers.

I believe they still need a signed, court warrant of entry, to be able to force their way in.

[des8]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

Reading your earlier posts can you confirm you are being pressured by Marstons and Newlyns for two different things.

One is the speeding fine. This is Marstons. Bailiffs can force entry into your home to collect fines imposed by a criminal court, but only as a last resort. https://www.gov.uk/your-rights-baili...bailiff-visits

The other you call a "parking fine" and is being chased by Newlyns. Your post does not make clear if the "offence" took place in a private car park or a council run park.
In any event this is a County Court matter and whilst a bailiff has been instructed to enforce payment this does not give him the right to force entry to your property.

This is my understanding of basic position , but there are others on this site who are fully clued up and I defer to their knowledge.

[sarah nicholson]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

Hi there, yes these are separate matters. The parking ticket which I appealed unsuccessfully was pursued bt newlyns (and paid by my brother after being intimidated and threatened a locksmith was ready to attend)this was a disabled bay that looked like it had been made into normal space as the picture had a white thick line painted through middle.

The speeding was withMarstons. But newlyns were also chasing for unpaid council tx. They originally wanted me to pay on the house that was repossessed and I was no longer living in. When I spoke to the council asking how I could be living in 2 places at omce. They eventually agreed that council tax wasn't due but I still had to pay the costs of court and fees from Newlyn which was stiLl several hundreds

[Johnboy007]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

Hi there, yes these are separate matters. The parking ticket which I appealed unsuccessfully was pursued bt newlyns (and paid by my brother after being intimidated and threatened a locksmith was ready to attend)this was a disabled bay that looked like it had been made into normal space as the picture had a white thick line painted through middle.

The speeding was withMarstons. But newlyns were also chasing for unpaid council tx. They originally wanted me to pay on the house that was repossessed and I was no longer living in. When I spoke to the council asking how I could be living in 2 places at omce. They eventually agreed that council tax wasn't due but I still had to pay the costs of court and fees from Newlyn which was stiLl several hundreds

If I am given to understand, How the hell can the council and the Newlyn robbers, expect you to pay for the their mistakes?
If the council tax was not due, then they were wrong to pursue this in the court.
Newlyn were wrong to charge you fees.
I'm sure someone on here will point you in the right direction to claim back the fees.:tinysmile_twink_t2:

[bluebottle]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

Hi there, yes these are separate matters. The parking ticket which I appealed unsuccessfully was pursued bt newlyns (and paid by my brother after being intimidated and threatened a locksmith was ready to attend)this was a disabled bay that looked like it had been made into normal space as the picture had a white thick line painted through middle.

The speeding was withMarstons. But newlyns were also chasing for unpaid council tx. They originally wanted me to pay on the house that was repossessed and I was no longer living in. When I spoke to the council asking how I could be living in 2 places at omce. They eventually agreed that council tax wasn't due but I still had to pay the costs of court and fees from Newlyn which was stiLl several hundreds

And what legal precedent or provision are they relying on to justify this? If the council has admitted you did not owe Council Tax, then they have also admitted they did not have grounds in law for obtaining a Liability Order. Under the circumstances, the council is responsible for paying court costs, not you. I would be inclined to claim the costs back from the council, along with the unlawful bailiff fees they allowed Newlyn to extract from you.

[sarah nicholson]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

I did query this with the council but they said that I was responsible for telling them at the time that I had Eviction Order (or whatever the term) with suchandsuch date to vacate I said that I assumed that as I was dealing with their Housing Dept who had these documents and subsequently registering at a new address with same council and getting CT bills in my name at new address that maybe they were aware.

Incidentally, my surname is very unusual and I am quite certain there are no other people living in my area who share this name. Shouldn't their computer system alert the administrator of duplicate name? Or is this how easy it would be for crooks to make false claims etc!

So to summarize, they made me feel it was my error and they had been good enough to not make me pay for this period but they shouldn't have to pay coats etc either as I should have informed the correct dept

[bluebottle]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

I did query this with the council but they said that I was responsible for telling them at the time that I had Eviction Order (or whatever the term) with suchandsuch date to vacate ... What utter nonsense. Eviction Orders can be revoked or even struck-out. If you applied to the court to revoke or strike-out and were granted a Revocation Order or the Eviction Application was struck-out, the eviction would be stopped dead in its tracks.

I said that I assumed that as I was dealing with their Housing Dept who had these documents and subsequently registering at a new address with same council and getting CT bills in my name at new address that maybe they were aware. That is the view any reasonable person would take.

Incidentally, my surname is very unusual and I am quite certain there are no other people living in my area who share this name. Shouldn't their computer system alert the administrator of duplicate name? Or is this how easy it would be for crooks to make false claims etc! I have an unusual surname, too, and what you say about a computer picking up any false claims is perfectly reasonable.

So to summarize, they made me feel it was my error and they had been good enough to not make me pay for this period but they shouldn't have to pay coats etc either as I should have informed the correct depts. No. They messed up, their error, their responsibility to pay any costs associated with it.

I would put the council to strict proof and force them to prove their arguments. I suspect they would have difficulty doing so.

[stevemLS]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

I agree it it is a road traffic offence, but you do not get a criminal conviction for it.

It is a criminal offence, tried in a criminal court, convicted or not, criminal penalty - I just don't understand how you can think it is not a criminal conviction.

Hey ho

[bluebottle]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

It is a criminal offence, tried in a criminal court, convicted or not, criminal penalty - I just don't understand how you can think it is not a criminal conviction.

Hey ho

I suggest you read the Criminal Law Acts 1967-1977 and succeeding Criminal Justice legislation.

[stevemLS]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

I suggest you read the Criminal Law Acts 1967-1977 and succeeding Criminal Justice legislation.

Nothing in either of those Acts which contradict what I have already said.

Indeed s64 of the 1977 Act defines summary OFFENCE, which is what we are dealing with here.

[bluebottle]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

The attached file lists criminal offences currently recognised as such in the UK. The following link may be of interest to you as this gives the CPS's policy on the prosecution of road traffic offences. http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/r...nces/#P84_4838

[stevemLS]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

I'm getting bored of this now.

CPS policy has no bearing on whether a matter is an offence, minor or otherwise.

That law commission list is not exhaustive. For example, the last labour government created 3,600 new offences. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...ur-918053.html)

I'm not going to bother anymore, I simply can't understand how someone can argue that a criminal conviction of a criminal offence is not a crime.

[bizzybob]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

I'm getting bored of this now.

CPS policy has no bearing on whether a matter is an offence, minor or otherwise.

That law commission list is not exhaustive. For example, the last labour government created 3,600 new offences. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...ur-918053.html)

I'm not going to bother anymore, I simply can't understand how someone can argue that a criminal conviction of a criminal offence is not a crime.

So why the hell don't bailiffs get flaming well convicted when they defraud and harass debtors, and make false representations to police?

Might it be that the police don't want to land them with a conviction that would show on the Enhanced DBS that bailiffs and EAs don't appear to need before they are sent out to collect debt with that shiny certificate, and come into contact with vulnerable groups and people that they shouldn't be within a hundred miles of; neither do police need one but Prison Officers do?

[bluebottle]

Re: newlyns pressurized my brother to pay 350 for disputed parking fine

I'm getting bored of this now.

CPS policy has no bearing on whether a matter is an offence, minor or otherwise.

That law commission list is not exhaustive. For example, the last labour government created 3,600 new offences. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...ur-918053.html)

I'm not going to bother anymore, I simply can't understand how someone can argue that a criminal conviction of a criminal offence is not a crime.

Seeing as I was a serving copper, I should know the difference between a criminal offence and one that is not. Non-crime offences are, basically, those offences which do not carry a custodial sentence.