DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 84599--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: August 7, 2025, 8:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do you have a document titled Notice of Enforcement?
If so, then please post it up and please confirm that the name
and address on the NoE is yours and correct and current?
So the car is apparently up for auction on ebay. Have you
checked? Please post up a link to the ebay listing.
What's the make and model of the car and the VRM?
The warrant is said to be dated 10th Jan 2025.
I suggest that you phone the TEC helpdesk and check the address
the address on the warrant and whether or not the warrant has
been re-sealed (re-issued) against your current address and
when?
Traffic Enforcement Centre 0300 123 1059
Opening Times
Telephone Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm
#Post#: 84604--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: freedom07
Date: August 7, 2025, 8:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: abc link ---
>
> The core legal position is that enforcement power under a
warrant of control ceases to have effect once the debt is paid
in full. The authority to take control of goods, including the
power to remove or sell them, derives exclusively from Schedule
12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Paragraph
6 of that Schedule provides that the enforcement power is
exercisable only while the sum outstanding remains unpaid. Upon
full payment, the warrant is spent, and any further enforcement
activity is without lawful authority and amounts to trespass and
conversion.
>
> You state that the penalty charge was paid in full in February
2025 and that Newlyn issued a receipt confirming a nil balance.
That receipt is not merely evidence of the transaction but a
material representation by the enforcement company that the debt
was satisfied. Once that occurred, all statutory powers of
entry, seizure, and sale were extinguished. It follows that the
seizure of your vehicle in August was unlawful unless Newlyn can
establish either that the February payment was not actually
received or that it was properly reversed before enforcement
recommenced. You are entitled to put them to strict proof.
>
> The next step, therefore, is to prove the flow of funds and
the discharge of the debt. You must collate and preserve the
following evidence: (a) the February 2025 receipt from Newlyn
showing a zero balance; (b) any online payment confirmation or
email receipt issued at the time of payment; (c) your bank or
card statement showing the exact date, amount, and recipient of
the funds; and (d) any correspondence with Newlyn confirming
that enforcement was closed or dormant thereafter. This evidence
will be crucial both to secure the immediate return of your
vehicle and to support any subsequent claim for damages or
restitution.
>
> As regards the bailiff’s suggestion that the payment was
'cancelled', that assertion is legally and procedurally fraught.
If a card payment was reversed or dishonoured, Newlyn was under
a duty to notify you and allow you an opportunity to regularise
the position before recommencing enforcement. The sudden removal
of your vehicle without prior notice or an updated compliance
letter breaches Regulation 7 of the Taking Control of Goods
Regulations 2013, which requires at least seven clear days'
notice unless the court directs otherwise. Moreover, the failure
to notify you of the vehicle’s location violates the statutory
obligation under paragraph 61(4) of Schedule 12 to keep
controlled goods safe and make them accessible to the debtor.
>
> In these circumstances, enforcement beyond February 2025
appears to have occurred without jurisdiction. Your vehicle has
been taken when the underlying warrant no longer authorised such
action, and the agents have refused to disclose the vehicle's
location or basis for their conduct. This conduct is not only
procedurally deficient but substantively unlawful.
>
> To protect your position, you have several options. First, if
auction is imminent, you should prepare and file an urgent
application to the County Court for an interim injunction to
restrain sale. The grounds are that the enforcement action is
ultra vires, the debt was discharged, and the risk of
irreparable loss (through sale of your vehicle) outweighs any
inconvenience to the Defendant. A supporting witness statement
should exhibit the February receipt and all payment
confirmations.
>
> Second, you should write to Newlyn and the instructing
authority (usually the local council) placing them on notice of
a claim for unlawful interference with goods and conversion. The
council must be reminded that it remains liable for the acts of
its enforcement agents pursuant to Southwark LBC v Woelke [2013]
EWHC 3492 (QB). Demand immediate disclosure of the payment and
enforcement history under the Data Protection Act 2018,
including all logs showing how and when the February payment was
allegedly cancelled.
>
> In Southwark LBC v Woelke [2013] EWHC 3492 (QB), the High
Court confirmed that a local authority is vicariously liable for
the unlawful acts of enforcement agents it instructs. This
directly advances your position by allowing you to pursue the
council, not just Newlyn, for the wrongful seizure of your
vehicle. Where enforcement has continued after payment of the
debt and the authority to act under the warrant has expired, any
further action by the bailiffs is ultra vires. If Newlyn acted
without lawful justification in removing and threatening to sell
your car, the council, as the instructing creditor, is equally
liable in tort for conversion, trespass to goods, and breach of
statutory duty under Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and
Enforcement Act 2007. This principle ensures that you are not
left at the mercy of evasive enforcement agents and can hold the
council accountable for securing redress, damages, and return of
your vehicle.
>
> Third, while it is open to you to pay the amount demanded
under protest (mitigation on further damages) to recover your
vehicle, that payment must be explicitly made without prejudice
and accompanied by written notice reserving all rights to bring
proceedings for restitution and damages. If you choose this
course, the principle in Burton v Ministry of Justice [2024]
EWCA Civ 681 supports a subsequent claim that fees or actions
taken without lawful authority may be set aside and repaid.
>
> In Burton v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWCA Civ 681, the Court
of Appeal held that enforcement agents who act outside the scope
of their statutory powers, such as pursuing fees not lawfully
due or enforcing against exempt goods, commit actionable wrongs.
This authority supports your position that once the debt was
paid in full and the warrant thereby exhausted, Newlyn no longer
had any legal power to seize your vehicle. Any fees demanded or
actions taken thereafter fall outside the statutory enforcement
scheme and are therefore unlawful. The case affirms your right
to seek recovery of improperly charged fees, damages for
wrongful interference with goods, and restitution where payment
was made under protest to avoid further loss. It confirms that
statutory limits on enforcement activity are strictly construed
and that agents who exceed them may be held liable.
>
> Lastly, you may consider, if the original PCN was already the
subject of enforcement and is now being enforced a second time,
whether to file an out-of-time witness statement with the
Traffic Enforcement Centre under CPR 75.7(3), asserting that the
enforcement is improperly duplicative or abusive. However, that
mechanism is more appropriate where the underlying PCN was not
known to you; in your case, the issue is the unlawful
continuation of enforcement after payment.
>
> The legal foundation of your position is therefore as follows:
enforcement authority ended when payment was accepted in
February 2025. Any subsequent action taken by Newlyn is without
jurisdiction and unlawful. You should act immediately to stop
the auction, compel return of the vehicle, and preserve all
rights to compensation.
>
> You have a strong argument in estoppel by representation.
Newlyn confirmed the debt was paid in full and issued a zero
balance receipt. You reasonably relied on that, took no further
steps, and have now suffered loss. It would be inequitable for
them to contradict that position. Estoppel therefore prevents
them from reasserting liability or enforcing further fees based
on the same debt.
>
--- End Quote ---
hi i emailed you
#Post#: 84629--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: Bailiff Advice
Date: August 7, 2025, 11:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: freedom07 link ---
>
> [quote author=abc link=topic=7538.msg84346#msg84346
date=1754463930]
> You have every reason to challenge what has occurred,
especially given that you paid the debt in full in February and
were later told it was reversed without your knowledge. Even if
enforcement were lawfully resumed, which remains highly
questionable, there are strict procedures that must be followed,
including giving you clear notice and not imposing additional
fees unless properly justified under the regulations.
>
> Storage fees, for example, cannot simply be added without
proof. Under the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations
2014, enforcement agents may only charge fees that are either
fixed or reflect actual costs incurred. If storage is claimed,
they must be able to show that they paid for it and that the
amount is reasonable. This is not a discretionary fee and cannot
be inflated or imposed without proper documentation.
>
> As your next step, you may wish to file an urgent application
to the County Court to stop the auction and seek the return of
your vehicle. You can explain that the debt was previously paid,
no valid notice was given, and the fees now demanded are not
supported by law. If you are considering paying the fee under
protest to recover your car, make sure you clearly record that
the payment is made under objection so that you can later pursue
a refund through the appropriate legal process.
>
> If you are also submitting PE2 and PE3 forms to challenge the
original PCN, and they are accepted, then yes, if the court
cancels the enforcement order, you may be eligible for a refund
of enforcement fees already paid. Just be aware that the outcome
depends on the tribunal accepting your reasons for filing late.
>
> Stay calm, keep copies of all evidence, and ensure everything
you submit to the court or to the Traffic Enforcement Centre is
clear, complete, and supported by documentation. If you need
help preparing your court application or understanding the legal
position in more detail, seek individual advice as soon as
possible. Time is now very short before the auction date.
>
--- End Quote ---
I really appreciate everyone's help on this and will keep
everyone informed of what happens in the coming weeks
have a couple of questions
1. how do I file an urgent application to the county court to
stop the auction, I live in Barnet London and how long do they
take to act?
2. IO was considering just paying the fee for now and contesting
it with the pe2/3 and then contesting it with the council if
successful with the pe2/3
you reassured me by saying that everything I paid will be
refunded if I'm successful in both.
I just have a question
when I pay/ pick up the vehicle, I was told online that I will
have to admit liability and waive my right to contest later, and
if I don't then they wont give my vehicle back, so what do I do
in that situation?
[/quote]
An application to court will be very costly and frankly, should
be unnecessary as this situation regarding the removal of your
car should be simple to resolve without involving the court. If
you have not given the enforcement company the opportunity to
resolve this matter, then you could find yourself having a
significant costs order imposed against you by the court.
You have confirmed today that you made the initial payment to
the enforcement company and that for reasons that cannot be
explained; your payment was returned to you. Therefore, the
position is clear in that no payment has been received for this
Penalty Charge Notice.
My personal advice would be to make payment to Newlyn of the
amount requested and then, once you have possession of your
vehicle, you can then look at making a Formal Complaint. This
option would at least mean that you get your vehicle back as
soon as tomorrow.
Taking Court Proceedings will NOT mean that your car is returned
to you. It would merely stop the sale and a date will then be
set to hear the case....that could be weeks if not more.
#Post#: 84630--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: August 7, 2025, 11:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
+1. Practical, as opposed to theoretical, advice with financial
indications.
OP, IMO there is no quick fix which you can implement soon
enough or without risk. Pay what's demanded and argue the toss
later once the immediate pressure of losing your car has gone
and you can engage with the council effectively.
#Post#: 84655--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: freedom07
Date: August 7, 2025, 1:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Enceladus link ---
>
> Do you have a document titled Notice of Enforcement?
> If so, then please post it up and please confirm that the name
and address on the NoE is yours and correct and current?
>
> So the car is apparently up for auction on ebay. Have you
checked? Please post up a link to the ebay listing.
>
> What's the make and model of the car and the VRM?
>
> The warrant is said to be dated 10th Jan 2025.
> I suggest that you phone the TEC helpdesk and check the
address the address on the warrant and whether or not the
warrant has been re-sealed (re-issued) against your current
address and when?
>
> Traffic Enforcement Centre 0300 123 1059
> Opening Times
> Telephone Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm
>
--- End Quote ---
no, after i had paid in feburary, the only time i was contacted
by letter or email by newlyn was AFTER they had taken my vehicle
#Post#: 84657--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: Bailiff Advice
Date: August 7, 2025, 1:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: freedom07 link ---
>
>
> No, after I had paid in February, the only time I was
contacted by letter or email by Newlyn was AFTER they had taken
my vehicle
>
--- End Quote ---
When making payment in February, had you made payment because
after returning home, you noticed correspondence from the
enforcement company? Had a visit been made by the bailiff.
If you are now considering filing an Out of Time application, is
there a reason why you had not submitted the application in
January/February when you first became aware of the PCN?
#Post#: 84678--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: freedom07
Date: August 7, 2025, 5:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Bailiff Advice link ---
>
> [quote author=freedom07 link=topic=7538.msg84655#msg84655
date=1754591657]
>
> No, after I had paid in February, the only time I was
contacted by letter or email by Newlyn was AFTER they had taken
my vehicle
>
--- End Quote ---
When making payment in February, had you made payment because
after returning home, you noticed correspondence from the
enforcement company? Had a visit been made by the bailiff.
If you are now considering filing an Out of Time application, is
there a reason why you had not submitted the application in
January/February when you first became aware of the PCN?
[/quote]
i didnt realise out of time application was an option.
in febuary i was notified that my car had been clamped by text
message
#Post#: 84685--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: 404BrainNotFound
Date: August 8, 2025, 12:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is to bring you up to date. The matter is now in hand. I am
grateful to those who assisted Freedom by requesting the PCN
number, vehicle registration, and supporting documents so the
original contravention could be accessed via Barnet's website
and the images shared here. That said, Freedom's case is not a
motoring issue in the usual sense.
The core issue is that Freedom paid the traffic contravention
debt in full and can clearly evidence the flow of funds, thereby
bringing the enforcement power to an end under paragraph 6(3) of
Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
Despite this, the enforcement company, acting unilaterally,
chose to refund the payment and then sought to treat that refund
as reviving the enforcement power. That position is legally
untenable, as no statutory provision permits enforcement to
recommence simply because an enforcement agent, for reasons of
its own, has elected to return funds after lawful payment has
been made.
Freedom was therefore left with two lawful options. The first
was to submit forms PE2 and PE3, which would activate paragraph
8.1 of Practice Direction 75 and thereby suspend enforcement,
allowing time to apply for interim injunctive relief to restrain
the auction and recover the vehicle, with a further hearing to
be listed for costs and damages.
The second option was to pay the amount again, expressly without
prejudice, in order to recover the vehicle, while preserving the
right to bring a claim against Barnet for unlawful interference
with goods and for any damage or loss arising from the
enforcement. That claim would rely on paragraphs 35 and 66 of
Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007,
together with section 3 of the Torts (Interference with Goods)
Act 1977. That course has now been adopted.
Barnet will be invited to settle Freedom's claim, or otherwise
resolve it judicially if not agreed.
#Post#: 84690--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: August 8, 2025, 3:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So the matter has been brought under control.
Perhaps now - assuming the OP still wants informed input- we can
see documents and have the chance to see whether the OfR option
applies or whether extra-road traffic contravention procedures
would have to be engaged.
As we don't even know the contravention - 'last year I drove
into a street that needed a permit and got a fine' - doesn't
really clarify matters, we don't know the applicable
legislation. OP, this is vitally important because whether you
even have the option to file an OOT depends upon the
contravention.
TEC are not empowered to deal with matters which fall outside
the grounds specified under whichever legislation applies.
OP, what was the original contravention?
#Post#: 84693--------------------------------------------------
Re: Baliff (newlyn) took my car months after i already paid the
debt, please help
DIR By: Bailiff Advice
Date: August 8, 2025, 4:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So the 'new' poster with the username of ABC, has opened a new
account calling himself '404 No Brain'
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page