bailiffs took my car

hallowitch

The OPs relationship to the previous owner makes no difference until there is a levy on the vehicle the previous owner can do what he want with it

However as esmerobbo said if there was a levy on it it wasn't his/hers to sell

Tilt

zarrah wrote: »

Thank you all for your advice i really appreciate it....
the car was outside my friends flat where the seller dropped it off for me as i didnt have insurance to drive the car to my home address, i wasnt driving it. i did call the poilce but they said its a civil matter. after calling the council that [FONT=&quot]issued the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Warrant i found that the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Penalty Charge as been paid but[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT]the bailiffs are saying its still outstanding.

It will depend on when the penalty charge was paid. If it was sometime after the recovery order was made then that will still be out standing. There is a procedure in place where you can make a statutory deceleration to have the recover order suspended/cancelled as I pointed out in my previous post. It is that that the bailiffs are acting upon. The LA who issued the ticket will not now be in a position to stop the bailiffs I don't think. However, I would of thought if you had adequate proof that you acquired the car AFTER the PCN(s) were issued, the bailiffs should turn their attention back to the previous owner/RK.

Having said all the above, can you answer the question in post 27.

Tilt

hallowitch wrote: »

All correspondence regarding this should be sent the council preferably by way of formal complaint to the CEO

This is all wrong i'm afraid. After the council applies for the recovery order, it becomes a matter between the TEC, the bailiffs and the RK of the vehicle at the time.

As I have pointed out more than once on the thread, there is an avenue that the OP can persure but it is via the TEC Northampton Bulk Centre or the bailiffs themselves. They normally clamp a car first before seizing it giving one final opportunity for the RK/owner to pay.

zarrah

vax2002 wrote: »

What is your connection with the "previous owner" ?
Something you are not telling us here, it just does not add up?

I have no connection with the previous owner whatsoever, after i told him what happened he told me to ''f off'' and he will do me for harassment if i call him again:mad:....

Tilt

zarrah wrote: »

I have no connection with the previous owner whatsoever, after i told him what happened he told me to ''f off'' and he will do me for harassment if i call him again:mad:....

In that case then, follow the advice given in the first few posts. Contact the bailiffs and tell them if they don't release your car following you have provided adequate proof that you were not the RK/owner at the time, you reserve the right to hire a car and persue them for the charges. Make sure you provide them with the previous owners address.

give_them_FA

Tilt, sorry but you are completely wrong. Of course the local authority can stop the bailiffs! It is the local authority who instruct them! Although bailiffs are certificated by a Court, the Court does not instruct them.

Ultimately the local authority are responsible for the actions of their agents- the buck stops with them.

If the PCNs were issued to the previous owner then the OP does not need to make any declarations, etc, as they are not anything to do with him.

One understands that the bailiffs will have been given the number of the vehicle that incurred the PCNs; and the check with DVLA will reveal that the previous keeper hasn't changed; but of course it is writ large on the V5 in any case that the keeper is not necessarily the owner.

Whether or not the vehicle is insured is none of the bailiffs' business.

Unless the vehicle was the subject of levy prior to its sale, then they should accept they have no right to distrain on it.

The ones that should be getting it in the neck should be the local authority as soon as ther offices re-open. All this is being done in their name, the bailiffs are merely agents and MUST obey their instructions.

give_them_FA

The actual procedure is that the Council applies to TEC for a liability order for which it pays £5. The TEC then rubber-stamps it if the paperwork is in order and grants the liabilty order TO THE COUNCIL. The Council is then able to instruct bailiifs to enforce the liability order.

Civil courts NEVER instruct bailiffs of their own volition. It is always the creditor party who has to take steps to do this.

hallowitch

Tilt wrote: »

This is all wrong i'm afraid. After the council applies for the recovery order, it becomes a matter between the TEC, the bailiffs and the RK of the vehicle at the time.

As I have pointed out more than once on the thread, there is an avenue that the OP can persure but it is via the TEC Northampton Bulk Centre or the bailiffs themselves. They normally clamp a car first before seizing it giving one final opportunity for the RK/owner to pay.

I can 100% assure you i am not wrong

hallowitch

zarrah I take it you told the council the bailiffs had removed the car
what was there reply to this ?

what council and bailiff firm are you dealing with ? (if you don't want put it on main forum send me a PM or confirm its not Equita or Ross & Roberts)

did you receive any paperwork for the car when they removed it ?

Is there a bailiffs name on it ? did you check to confirm he is certificated ?

whats the approx value of the car ?

give_them_FA

hallowitch wrote: »

I can 100% assure you i am not wrong

Absolutely. Tilt needs to know that no civil court ever takes steps to enforce its own judgments and the TEC is no exception.