bailiffs took my car

give_them_FA · 3 June 2012 at 12:29PM

It's an aside to the query, but insurance is the one essential for a car and should all be fixed up BEFORE you drive it.....

taffy056 · 3 June 2012 at 12:30PM

Tilt wrote: »

Well if you were driving it without insurance, you were liable to get it seized anyway. If the old bill had of clocked you by ANPR, that's exactly what would of happend.

I see this differently... karma.

You are making an assumption here, you don't know if this person was driving the car without insurance, he could have a full comp insurance on another car and drive it third party as its insured by the seller still, or it could have been parked on the seller's driveway waiting for it to be collected.

How else would they have known to tow the car from the person buying it, I presume they have different addresses.

peter_the_piper · 3 June 2012 at 12:32PM

It does not say the car was on the road, let alone being driven, even if it was its of no concern to the bailiffs. Had it been the DVLA/police then it would be important but as it is (assuming not a fiddle to avoid bailiffs) they have no right to ask for insurance. It should be returned to the same place it was taken from and in the same condition it was in before they took it.

Tilt · 3 June 2012 at 12:36PM

Well perhaps the OP can expand on the insurance issue then.

Tilt · 3 June 2012 at 12:37PM

taffy056 wrote: »

You are making an assumption here, you don't know if this person was driving the car without insurance, he could have a full comp insurance on another car and drive it third party as its insured by the seller still, or it could have been parked on the seller's driveway waiting for it to be collected.

How else would they have known to tow the car from the person buying it, I presume they have different addresses.

In know the word 'IF' is a small word, but it was in there non the less.

give_them_FA · 3 June 2012 at 1:01PM

I do think the insurance issue is irrelevant. The OP could not drive it as an extension of his own comprehensive cover if it was his, you can only drive a car not belonging to you. Yes indeed, that is assuming it was on the road at all.

If the car had not been levied on by the bailiffs then there was nothing to stop the owner disposing of it to prevent that happening.

The OP can always take them to court on an interpleader to return his property.

vax2002 · 3 June 2012 at 1:09PM

You need to serve a NOTICE OF WARNING upon the Bailiffs, a solicitor will be able to draft the letter for £30 ish, it will warn the bailiffs and place them on notice that they have seized goods they have no lawful right to hold and lay out very clearly a list of expenses occurred daily by them doing so, this can be a hire car, taxis, bus fares, the depreciation of the vehicle and a flagrancy charge for ignoring the notice.
Once served the Bailiffs will become liable for any costs lost through their actions and the OP is entitled to be placed in a position that does not leave them any worse than before.
If they refuse to return the vehicle by the same way they took it, then then charges continue, its their money.
Contact a local solicitor.
But first makes sure the vc5 is dotted and crossed and the dates pre-date the seizure.

Tilt · 3 June 2012 at 1:16PM

I'll stick to my opinions in post 11. IF the OP was driving the car without the appropriate minimum insurance cover, then as far as i'm concerned, the bailiffs have prevented further offences being committed and the possibility of some poor sod being involved in an accident with the OP.

So sorry, but I do think the insurance is relevant.

HOWEVER if the OP had magically managed to transport the car away from the seller and keeping it off road for those 2 days while getting the insurance sorted, then as the OP has apparently already provided sufficient proof, he/she should notify the bailiffs that they have wrongly levied on the car where the warrant has no connection with him/her and as such requires them to release it otherwise it will be considered to be stolen and reported accordingly. Perhaps the bailiffs may require to check that the car is adequately insured before releasing it.

give_them_FA · 3 June 2012 at 1:28PM

Tilt, in no way am I condoning driving without insurance. But as regards the subject of this thread it is a side issue and there is no evidence the OP did anything wrong on that score.

Indeed, I take Taffy's point that the car probably remained on the original owner's premises, otherwise how would the bailiffs have located it?

peter_the_piper · 3 June 2012 at 2:01PM

Tilt wrote: »

I'll stick to my opinions in post 11. IF the OP was driving the car without the appropriate minimum insurance cover, then as far as i'm concerned, the bailiffs have prevented further offences being committed and the possibility of some poor sod being involved in an accident with the OP.

So sorry, but I do think the insurance is relevant.

HOWEVER if the OP had magically managed to transport the car away from the seller and keeping it off road for those 2 days while getting the insurance sorted, then as the OP has apparently already provided sufficient proof, he/she should notify the bailiffs that they have wrongly levied on the car where the warrant has no connection with him/her and as such requires them to release it otherwise it will be considered to be stolen and reported accordingly. Perhaps the bailiffs may require to check that the car is adequately insured before releasing it.

Why? Its not for them to decide.

bailiffs took my car

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free