Notice period needed before WOC can be allocated

Quash the Conviction. Revoke the Fees. Claim Damages for Improper Enforcement Action
Post Reply
mhakcm
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 Jul 2017 19:59

#1 Notice period needed before WOC can be allocated

Post by mhakcm » 14 Jul 2017 00:58

Enforcement Agent is an acquaintance, and he came to tell me at my workplace that unfortunately, he will have to come tomorrow to collect the money or clamp the car for a parking ticket (that I had not paid to the local authority) which dates back nine months. He was merely coming after receiving his notice of tomorrow's list of debts that he is collecting and saw my name on it, so he contacted his firm and asked it be allocated to him.

Today at midnight will end the 7th day since the notice of enforcement was apparently sent to me sent. However, I got a text message at 7 pm at the time he was with me about his visit saying that "Enforcement Agent called - case allocated - WOC sent".

That is obviously a lie as he was simply coming to see me without any paperwork (but with his PDA) to forewarn me and so as not to embarrass me at work the next day. No enforcement agent has called at my house address. My understanding is he should call tomorrow for the first time (i.e. after at least the 7th day has passed and not before) as before which the WOC can't be issued.

My question is (1) am I correct that if before he comes tomorrow, I pay the £195 on the enforcement notice then I won't need to pay the extra £300 or so extra that would be due when the Writ of Control is actually issued. (2) They making a notification by text before the 7th day has expired with false info i.e. "Enforcement Agent called - case allocated - WOC sent" is illegal. (3) Who should I complain to about the company?

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13241
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#2 Re: Notice period needed before WOC can be allocated

Post by Schedule 12 » 14 Jul 2017 16:46

mhakcm wrote:
14 Jul 2017 00:58
Enforcement Agent is an acquaintance,
He won't be local. Bailiff companies never send them to work in their own 'manor'.


and he came to tell me at my workplace that unfortunately, he will have to come tomorrow to collect the money or clamp the car for a parking ticket (that I had not paid to the local authority) which dates back nine months. He was merely coming after receiving his notice of tomorrow's list of debts that he is collecting and saw my name on it, so he contacted his firm and asked it be allocated to him.
If he is a true acquaintance, then he would not press for clamping and full fees. He would hand it back to the company as a conflict of interest and just give you a tip-off.


Today at midnight will end the 7th day since the notice of enforcement was apparently sent to me sent. However, I got a text message at 7 pm at the time he was with me about his visit saying that "Enforcement Agent called - case allocated - WOC sent".

That is obviously a lie as he was simply coming to see me without any paperwork (but with his PDA) to forewarn me and so as not to embarrass me at work the next day.


The bailiff cannot call at work.

If the debt is in your name, the law says the bailiff may take control of goods where you live, trade or situated on a highway.

Clamping your car on your place of employment will result in failed enforcement.


No enforcement agent has called at my house address. My understanding is he should call tomorrow for the first time (i.e. after at least the 7th day has passed and not before) as before which the WOC can't be issued.

My question is (1) am I correct that if before he comes tomorrow, I pay the £195 on the enforcement notice
The debt enforceable is the warrant sum and the £75 compliance stage fee. If only the debt alone is paid - this is called the "amount outstanding" then the £75 is still owed but there is no enforcement power. There is no enforcement power for the £235 enforcement stage fee after the amount outstanding is paid.

This is why bailiffs don't sue debtors for their fees.




then I won't need to pay the extra £300 or so extra that would be due when the Writ of Control is actually issued.
It is a warrant of control. Not a writ of control.


(2) They making a notification by text before the 7th day has expired with false info i.e. "Enforcement Agent called - case allocated - WOC sent" is illegal.

The word 'illegal' is too strong a word. It's noncompliant with regulations 6,7 and 8 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013. Enforcement will fail is an enforcement step is taken and a complaint notice has not been given.

(3) Who should I complain to about the company?
Nobody. It's a waste of time complaining.

If you have a grievance, then you bring legal proceedings and ask the court to order the bailiff company to put things right.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

mhakcm
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 Jul 2017 19:59

#3 Re: Notice period needed before WOC can be allocated

Post by mhakcm » 19 Jul 2017 16:40

Thank you for your response, you know your stuff. Let me clarify the points on which you might have misunderstood what I was conveying. I kept it brief previously as I did not want to go into unnecessary detail, but as you have raised points concerning matters I summarised I will give you now the full background.

No enforcement agent has called at the registered office address, as far as I am aware. This Enforcement Agent merely got the case he says due to him having ANPR and it picked my vehicle. The Enforcement Agent and I are acquainted only because he lives in the flat opposite the shop I work in; I have known him for many years. The vehicle is on the public highway when I am at work, and so he could clamp it or tow it which is what he threatened.

Last Thursday 13th got a text message at 7 pm when the agent was with me which read "Enforcement Agent called - case allocated - WOC sent", (they had my number due to a previous similar occurrence long ago). My understanding is he cannot call for the first time until the 7th day has passed, after the issuing of the notice that I have not responded and they will come and take goods away which he tell me was on the 6th. This means the 7 days finish on midnight of last Thursday, which may be perhaps why he did not ask for the money when he came in to see me initially. He said that has nothing to do with it, and I was only sent that message by Newlyn HQ by mistake as it was intended for him (which I doubt). I also now know that the warrant of control (WOC) was sent to him at 10.30 p.m. on Thursday, as he told me the next day, last Friday, when he called.

However, since the meeting at the shop last Thursday forewarning me (that he would come the following day), I paid £235 (should have only paid £188 on the enforcement notice dated 18th June - but got the figures mixed up). He came the following day Friday 7th to the shop saying that I still owe £188 (the difference). I told him I disagree, and as my payment on the Enforcement Notice was paid before his official visit (the day after forewarning me) he cannot expect to get the remainder he claims now with the official Warrant of Control. His answer was that the remainder is still due and if he has to clamp the vehicle or have it towed it would increase it by another £110 plus. I said that I think he is wrong so he allowed me to speak to his boss who basically said that I was wrong. We compromised in that he has given me a few days in which to seek advice, but he maintains the money is due to him.

He quoted some case in which a person had paid directly to the council the £75 parking fee and claimed he did not have to pay the extra charges to the Bailiff even though the payment to the council was only after receiving notice that Bailiffs were coming, (whether it was after the WOC or not I do not know), so he was claiming that I have no case (as the court ordered the person to pay the full amount and paying directly to council did not relieve him of the rest) but you will see my case is slightly different.

One other point which I should perhaps clarify in addition to the above is that the vehicle is registered in name of a limited company that has a registered office address of where I am living but is not owned by me (sister's house) which he would not get anything from, as it is domestic premises, with nothing belonging to the company. Apart from the car if it was parked there, however, I saw another response from you to someone else say the clamping can only be done on premises belonging to the owner. Does that apply to it being towed away? The address where he visited me is a business that does not belong to me (I just work there) and in any case is a different compa

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13241
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#4 Re: Notice period needed before WOC can be allocated

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Jul 2017 18:58

mhakcm wrote:
19 Jul 2017 16:40
Thank you for your response, you know your stuff. Let me clarify the points on which you might have misunderstood what I was conveying. I kept it brief previously as I did not want to go into unnecessary detail, but as you have raised points concerning matters I summarised I will give you now the full background.

No enforcement agent has called at the registered office address, as far as I am aware. This Enforcement Agent merely got the case he says due to him having ANPR and it picked my vehicle.
This happens in the enforcement of unpaid parking tickets. Newlyn is very big on this. Its not legal because it involves ANPR. here is more: http://www.dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk/Ba ... R-vans.htm



The Enforcement Agent and I are acquainted only because he lives in the flat opposite the shop I work in; I have known him for many years. The vehicle is on the public highway when I am at work, and so he could clamp it or tow it which is what he threatened.

The schedule 12 enforcement procedure doesn't work like that.

Last Thursday 13th got a text message at 7 pm when the agent was with me which read "Enforcement Agent called - case allocated - WOC sent",
Upload a copy of the text message and report it online. The sender will have their services suspended. http://www.dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk/Ba ... xtSMS.html

(they had my number due to a previous similar occurrence long ago).
If you are sure about that, then you can issue the bailiff company a section 10 notice but only then the enforcement power has ended. The company has no reason to retain your data.


My understanding is he cannot call for the first time until the 7th day has passed,
He cannot take control of goods until the statutory period has lapsed.



after the issuing of the notice that I have not responded and they will come and take goods away which he tell me was on the 6th. This means the 7 days finish on midnight of last Thursday,

Check the arithmetic on the number of days. Here is how: http://www.dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk/ba ... osoon.html


which may be perhaps why he did not ask for the money when he came in to see me initially. He said that has nothing to do with it, and I was only sent that message by Newlyn HQ by mistake as it was intended for him (which I doubt). I also now know that the warrant of control (WOC) was sent to him at 10.30 p.m. on Thursday, as he told me the next day, last Friday, when he called.

However, since the meeting at the shop last Thursday forewarning me (that he would come the following day), I paid £235 (should have only paid £188 on the enforcement notice dated 18th June - but got the figures mixed up). He came the following day Friday 7th to the shop saying that I still owe £188 (the difference). I told him I disagree, and as my payment on the Enforcement Notice was paid before his official visit (the day after forewarning me) he cannot expect to get the remainder he claims now with the official Warrant of Control. His answer was that the remainder is still due and if he has to clamp the vehicle or have it towed it would increase it by another £110 plus. I said that I think he is wrong so he allowed me to speak to his boss
Never speak to the bailiff company.

The bailiff is personally liable. The company director is only liable when an action is brought under Paragraph 66 of Schedule 12. There is no corporate liability for the bailiff company because the law says (a)the person on whom the enforcement power is conferred and that person is the director of the enforcement company before conferring it to an enforcement agent.

Company employees aren't liable for anything unless a criminal offence is committed under section 993 of the Companies Act 2006.



who basically said that I was wrong. We compromised in that he has given me a few days in which to seek advice, but he maintains the money is due to him.

He quoted some case in which a person had paid directly to the council the £75 parking fee and claimed he did not have to pay the extra charges to the Bailiff even though the payment to the council was only after receiving notice that Bailiffs were coming, (whether it was after the WOC or not I do not know), so he was claiming that I have no case (as the court ordered the person to pay the full amount and paying directly to council did not relieve him of the rest) but you will see my case is slightly different.

One other point which I should perhaps clarify in addition to the above is that the vehicle is registered in name of a limited company
If its OWNED by the company, then it can only be taken into control to pay a debt owed by that company.

Otherwise, a company director can interplead the car at court. Just have someone added as a director and they can make the interpleader claim.


that has a registered office address of where I am living but is not owned by me (sister's house) which he would not get anything from, as it is domestic premises, with nothing belonging to the company. Apart from the car if it was parked there, however, I saw another response from you to someone else say the clamping can only be done on premises belonging to the owner. Does that apply to it being towed away?
Yes.

Towing away is one of the four methods which a bailiff can take control of goods. None of them can be carried out on land that is not the debtor's residence, a highway or where he trades.



The address where he visited me is a business that does not belong to me (I just work there) and in any case is a different company
A place of employment is not a place a debtor trades or carries on a business.

One bailiff company has already tried that and ended up shelling out. A contract of employment and a copy of regulation 14(6) of the TCGR's 2013 put that to bed.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Post Reply