DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 67562--------------------------------------------------
At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: ChloeApple
Date: April 17, 2025, 11:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello
Hoping you can help me. I'm afraid this has progressed to
bailiff stage although I have only just become aware of it for
the very first time in the past few days.
Situation is that a PCN was issued because I drove my car
(leased by my private company) into a particular road in Camden,
London that I didn't realise was restricted to motor vehicles.
I can see a fair bit of chat about this same road on other
sites. Seems the restrictions were introduced in 2022. Anyhow,
although I didn't see the signs (I was focused on trying to park
around there to take the kids for a walk down to Camden market
on a bank holiday), it seems clear to me that I must have driven
into this zone, which is not for motor vehicles at certain times
of the day. So let's say that my "fault" is not in question
here.
The real issue is that I had the car in question as a company
car lease at the time, so it was actually just leased to my own
service/consultancy company (I am a one-woman band but provide
my services through a company). As a result of this, the PCN was
sent to the registered office for my company, which registered
office is provided by a service provider (one of those addresses
where hundreds if not thousands of companies are registered) and
not an actual physical office (at least, not an office that I
have ever used to run my business out of). Because I had not
paid for mail forwarding, the only mail they were forwarding to
me from that address was "official" post by which they generally
mean Companies House or HMRC. So I wouldn't have ever known
about the PCN or, presumably, the follow-up letters from Camden
Council about it, and subsequently from the debt enforcement
agency to which Camden no doubt passed the matter at some point.
All of that post would have been sent to the registered office
and then shredded by them after 14 days in line with their
policy.
So the first time I actually became aware of the whole issue was
two days ago when the registered office forwarded a "statutory
letter" to me, a copy of which is attached. This is a notice
from Equita stating that they will be attending the premises of
my company to remove goods to cover the balance due of £515.00.
However, as the address given on the notice is the address of
the registered office, I expect that if they try to attend that
office to remove goods, they will be sent packing by whoever
runs that business.
I really don't want to have to pay £515. Had I known about the
PCN at the start, I would have tried to appeal to Camden then if
that failed I would have just paid the £65. My question, in
short, is whether I can just ignore this bailiff's notice
entirely and hope they will give up. When they see that the
registered office is a third party service provider and not
where my company actually resides, will they just give up at
that point? Or will they actually carry on and take my company
to court to recover the £515 plus costs? Do you know what these
debt enforcement agencies would typically do such situations?
Do they just give up or do they keep going to the bitter end?
There is nothing on Companies House which tells them what my
actual home address is, so I don't think they could find my
house without some serious effort and digging on their part.
Alternatively, I could try to contact Camden and tell them what
happened and offer to pay £65 or even £130, but I have a feeling
that isn't going to work here as it has gone too far. Or do you
think that is possible?
I know your guidance says I should post all details of the PCN
except my name and address, however:
- I don't actually have the PCN or any other correspondence
apart from the bailiff's enforcement notice
- I really don't want the bailiffs to identify me on here (of
course I have no idea if they are in the habit of trawling
through this chatroom!).
For that reason, I have attached a copy of the bailiffs notice
with a lot of details redacted. Sorry about that, but I'm
really quite afraid about them catching up with me somehow. I
don't want to terrify my kids with people knocking on the door
looking to take our stuff. I've never been in that position
before and would never have been in that position had it not
been for not wanting to pay £100 per year for mail forwarding.
Just didn't think my little service company would get any mail
apart from HMRC, and it just didn't occur to me to worry about
PCNs which might be issued to my company for my car lease (I
thought those PCNs would go to the lease company first, but
obviously I was wrong about that).
Some of the missing information on the bailiff's notice includes
the date of the original contravention (which was May 2024) and
the charges (which now amount to £515). And the notice is dated
13 April 2025.
Also, I don't have the car any more, as the lease ended about
six months ago. Though that's probably not relevant.
Really, really appreciate your advice here. Tagging @cp8759 as I
am guessing I don't have a lot of time (thank you again).
Kind regards
Chloe
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 67580--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: April 17, 2025, 12:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So why didn't you pay for all mail for you to be forwarded ?
There is a website dealing specifically with bailiff matters, so
it may be worthwhile contacting them : -
www.bailiffadviceonline.co.uk
The only avenue open to you to get the matter reverted to the
PCN stage is to submit an Out-of-Time Statutory Declaration to
the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), that you did not receive
the original PCN, and explain why. As it would be Out-of-Time,
the council can object to it, and if they do, the TEC court
officer will reject your OOT SD. You would then have to request
a review by a county court judge.
Bailiffs are very pro-active, their livelihood depends on this,
so don't assume you can just hide away.
#Post#: 67604--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 17, 2025, 3:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, pl explain.
The car is leased. From whom?
To whom? The company which you own but NOT to you in person?
And the lease company didn't notify the lessee(your company)
that they'd received a PCN. Or perhaps they did but as they're
neither the council, nor Govt. nor HMRC then the accommodation
registered address provider didn't forward?
And the notice is addressed to the company which you own and
also provide services under a director service agreement and not
to you by name?
#Post#: 67925--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 21, 2025, 10:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Would the OP pl deal with the questions so that we're absolutely
clear about details.
#Post#: 68002--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: ChloeApple
Date: April 22, 2025, 4:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello everyone, thank you for your very helpful comments. Just
back after Easter, so apologies for the delay in replying back.
To answer the questions posed, in the order received:
1. I didn't pay for the post forwarding service for ordinary
post because it was about £100, my company doesn't make a lot of
money these days and I was looking to cut costs - also because I
just wasn't expecting to receive any important mail that wasn't
CH or HMRC.
2. The car was leased to my company by the leasing company who
are exclusive leasing agents for the car manufacturer in
question. The lease ended about six months ago. So yes, it was
leased to my company, not to me personally.
3. Not sure if the lease company tried to notify me of the PCN,
but I doubt it because if, as I assume was the case, the car was
registered at the DVLA to my company's registered office
address, Camden (and then Equita) presumably wouldn't have had
access to the lease company's details (or even known of their
existence). Also, the lease company corresponded with me by
email so I expect they would have forwarded the PCN by email had
they received it themselves.
4. Yes the PCN was issued in my company's name, not in my name.
Finally, Pressman, thank you so much for your incredibly helpful
and clear advice. I did have a few questions, if ok:
- You say that I can apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to
reset the process, on the basis that I did not receive the
Notice to Owner or Charge Certificate because they were sent to
my company’s registered office where no mail forwarding
arrangement was in place, and that if this is accepted, it will
revoke the warrant and roll the matter back to the stage where I
can make formal representations to Camden Council. My questions
on this:
- Isn't it possible that the TEC will respond simply to say that
it was my responsibility to ensure that my company had a
suitable arrangement in place for dealing with all mail and on
that basis refuse to reset the process?
- if I file a PE2/PE3, I assume I will have to give an address -
could that address then become known to Equita resulting in
their seeking to take enforcement against my company at that
address? I don't want to give my home address on the PE2/PE3,
and I don't have another obvious address to give them right now
(unless I give the company's registered office address again,
but first pay the £100 for the mail forwarding from that address
- but then I am paying out another £100 for something that I
don't need other than for dealing with this PCN!).
- if TEC do decide to reset the process by revoking the warrant,
you say that Camden may then choose to issue a new PCN to the
same address unless I promptly update the DVLA and Camden with a
suitable service address for my company. But is issuing a new
PCN the only course of action that would be available to Camden
at that point, ie does the revoking of the warrant also somehow
revoke the validity of the original PCN or does the original PCN
still have effect somehow? Just wondering if Camden could
somehow argue the the original PCN is still valid and simply
resubmit the matter to their enforcement process? Though query
why they would do that as it would just seem to lead us back to
the same place whereby Equita would then seek to enforce the
warrant at an address where the company has no presence. Unless
Camden could give the address on the PE2/PE3 (if different to
the company's registered office address) to Equita and instruct
them to try to enforce it there?
Pressman, you also say that if my application to the TEC is
refused, I can apply for a review at your local County Court by
filing a form N244 with a witness statement, although a court
fee applies. To be honest, if my application is refused, at
that point I think I would have to give up the appeal and try to
pay the £515 as I can't afford the time, or really handle the
stress, of taking out a County Court action.
Two last questions (sorry):
- Is the £515 a fair charge for where the matter is at
currently? It seems to have jumped considerably from £165.
- Could the £515 charge go up further from here, if I take no
action and wait it out, hoping that they go away? Obviously I
know it will go up if they look to start court proceedings
against my company, what I mean is could it go up before that,
eg if they send bailiffs to the registered office address and
fail to collect any goods there, could they then charge further
costs for that attempt?
Thanks so much again to all of you for all your help.
Kind regards
Chloe
#Post#: 68016--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 22, 2025, 5:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
To be clear(and subject to the legal form of your company, see
below):
The contravention occurred in May 2024 at which time your
company leased the vehicle from ???, correct?
'the car was registered at the DVLA to my company's registered
office address,'.
No it wasn't. The lease company were the registered keeper and
ALL info pertaining to the lessee had to be provided by the
lease company.
You, as in you personally, have no liability for the debt
although its effects on your company would obviously be felt by
you.
IMO, the nub is whether you want this to remain unresolved
(others may know what effects an unpaid debt by your company
would have on its standing) or for it to be resolved.
IMO, TEC would need proof that your company were not served with
the council's notices and I think you'd struggle. The
authority(we assume) served notices at the address provided by
the lessor who in turn consulted their own records. IMO, it was
your company's duty to ensure that the postal address provided
was adequate to ensure that statutory notices were received. As
it stands, the authority are not at fault, you are. And as they
may object to an OOT submission, you need to bear this in mind.
Your account comes across as being genuine, but in reality you
are naive if you think that such an arrangement(with the
registered address provider) ensures that what you need to see
you do see. A cynic might take the view that it's been arranged
to 'filter out' unwanted mail and then rely upon the 'not
served' argument.
IMO, you need to see the docs which are missing before you
submit anything to TEC to see whether your argument could be
bolstered by process errors on the authority's part. Similarly
with the lease company because at present everything prior to
the Enforcement stage notice is an assumption.
And remember you, as in you personally, cannot do anything
because you are not an interested party to these proceedings.
Your involvement is as an authorised officer of **** company.*
*- what is its legal form please e.g. Ltd, sole trader or what?
#Post#: 68021--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: ChloeApple
Date: April 22, 2025, 5:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi HC Anderson, and thank you (you guys are amazing).
I said: 'the car was registered at the DVLA to my company's
registered office address,'.
You replied: No it wasn't. The lease company were the registered
keeper and ALL info pertaining to the lessee had to be provided
by the lease company.
So that presumably means that the lease company were the ones
who gave Camden and/or Equita my company's address once they
received the PCN? It would have been good if the lease company
had told me that, as I would then have known about the PCN, but
anyhow they didn't for whatever reason.
You say: A cynic might take the view that it's been arranged to
'filter out' unwanted mail and then rely upon the 'not served'
argument.
My reply: Understood, but that is definitely not the case here.
With hindsight, of course it was a mistake not to pay for the
mail forwarding but times have been very hard for my business
with clients not paying up for services contractually rendered
(but that's another matter, not relevant here).
You say: IMO, you need to see the docs which are missing before
you submit anything to TEC to see whether your argument could be
bolstered by process errors on the authority's part. Similarly
with the lease company because at present everything prior to
the Enforcement stage notice is an assumption.
My reply: But will the Council forward a copy of the PCN to me
if I ask for it? If I contact them about it, won't they just
forward my contact details (even if it's just an email address)
to the bailiffs?
Overall, my gut feel is that you are right and TEC are unlikely
to revoke the warrant for my mistake of not being in control of
my company's post. And I also don't really think I will unearth
any mistakes in the Council's original issue of a PCN as I
believe I did go through a street that had restrictions on motor
vehicles using it at certain times of the day, even though it
was not really surprising that I didn't see the signs as I was
really focused on trying to find a parking space at the time.
But I'm sure ignorance of the sign's existence is no defence to
the PCN.
Thanks again.
Chloe
#Post#: 68032--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: April 22, 2025, 6:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> - Is the £515 a fair charge for where the matter is at
currently? It seems to have jumped considerably from £165.
--- End Quote ---
It is a summation of the statutory charges, made up of the Order
for Recovery amount (PCN, plus 50% for Charge Certificate, plus
£10 TEC fee, plus bailiff fees of £75 and £235. So in that sense
it is "fair", in that nobody is diddling you.
#Post#: 68088--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: Neil B
Date: April 22, 2025, 10:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Pressmann link ---
>
> In conclusion, the safest and most cost-effective option is to
file the PE2 and PE3 promptly.
>
--- End Quote ---
But only the drebtor can do so, i.e. your company and signed
appropriately by you as an officer of that company.
#Post#: 68812--------------------------------------------------
Re: At Bailiff Stage - Camden, drove through a restricted street
(prohibition on certain types of vehicles)
DIR By: ChloeApple
Date: April 26, 2025, 10:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi
Thanks again everyone for your help. I have now sent the forms
off. Just took a bit of time as I had to get the two forms
witnessed by a notary before I could send them off.
Also, in case it is helpful for others going through a similar
process, I noticed that there is a guidance note on gov.uk about
how to fill in forms PE2/PE3, here:
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6037706ee90e070558e4299b/pe3-guidance-eng.pdf
You will see that it states that "if the Respondent has been
named as a company/organisation, the person completing the form
on its behalf must ensure they state their own full name, the
company name and their position in the company."
Originally, I filled in the form just with my company's name in
the "Respondent" box, but also giving an explanation in the
"Reasons" box further down about my being the director of the
company. But once I read that guidance above, just to be on the
safe side I amended the "Respondent" box so that it also stated
my name and position with the company.
One other thing: the guidance note states that you can email the
forms to TEC, rather than having to post them to them. That has
saved me a few days and the cost of postage. I got an automated
email back from TEC straight away, which a bit worryingly states
that "If you have submitted an out of time application, please
note that it will take approx. 8 – 10 weeks for a decision to be
made. You will be informed of the outcome in due course."
That's a really long time to have to sit and wait for their
decision. Presumably Equita, the enforcement agents, and Camden
Council won't be aware that I have filed a PE2/PE3, so what if
they continue to chase me and rack up more costs in those 8-10
weeks? Should I email Equita and tell them that I have filed
those forms with TEC, and hope that they will pause any further
action in the meantime? Though I really don't then want to start
getting lots of threatening emails from Equita once they have my
email address.
I'd be really grateful for your thoughts on that.
Kind regards
Chloe
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page