Beware ! Traffic Police and civil parking matters

[Rovinghawk]

Snowboy said:

I think everyone knows the law change.
If they don't they can Google it.

I don't know it & can't find it- could you show me, please?

Snowboy said:

I like to think that if an innocent new owner explained the situation and asked for police assistance then the balif could be persuaded to not take the car even though they legally could.

I like to think that when I get home, Catherine Zeta Jones will be waiting for me in a vat of warm custard. however, I realise how unlikely this is to be the case.

[Snowboy]

10 Pence Short said:

Snowboy said:

I think everyone knows the law change.
If they don't they can Google it.

I don't. I would like you to put up the link, please.

No.
There's a link back in the thread somewhere.

I'm finding it quite sad that the current method of discussion is for posters to just pick apart other people's comments without actually posting any interesting comments of their own.

If you disagree post a rebuttal, post a different opinion.
Post something that's worth reading.

[Red 4]

Snowboy said:

No.
There's a link back in the thread somewhere.

I'm finding it quite sad that the current method of discussion is for posters to just pick apart other people's comments without actually posting any interesting comments of their own.

If you disagree post a rebuttal, post a different opinion.
Post something that's worth reading.

There's no point "arguing" with someone who has their own "interpretation" of law.

Many of your comments are inaccurate/ false/ misleading or plain daft.

Opinions are one thing but when you state something as fact or law that isn't - it just gets silly.

[FiF]

10 Pence Short said:

Snowboy said:

I think everyone knows the law change.
If they don't they can Google it.

I don't. I would like you to put up the link, please.

Thank you 10PS.

Seconded. Provide the link and an explanation please.

[Snowboy]

Red 4 said:

There's no point "arguing" with someone who has their own "interpretation" of law.

Many of your comments are inaccurate/ false/ misleading or plain daft.

Opinions are one thing but when you state something as fact or law that isn't - it just gets silly.

I very rarely say something is fact or law.
I say it's opinion or thoughts.
I also often say I'm happy to change my opinions if someone can post a compelling argument or link some proof.

But people often crop that bit of the post in their eagerness to win on the internet.

[anonymous-user]

Snowboy said:

FiF said:

Snowboy said:

I would hope that if you were the new owner and it wasn't you that had the ticket/debt then the balif wouldn't take the car.
In fact, in such a situation it might be handy to have a cop nearby to help out.

Even if the dvla havent been updated a couple of calls to insurance companies should sort things out.

From here

bailiffadviceonline said:

Given that the bailiff is seeking to locate the vehicle and not the debtor it is very common indeed for a bailiff to seize a vehicle that belongs to a new owner. This is very common with PCN’s issued by any of the 33 London boroughs as residents appear to change their cars on a more frequent basis than anywhere else in the UK. We receive enquiries about this every day. Very often the new owner is forced to pay sums of up to £1,000 to the bailiff for the release of their own car!!

??

This came up earlier in the thread.
It is quite common for gangs and families to use shared cars.
These cars are frequently 'sold' to other members to keep the balifs from claiming them or to prevent speeding/parking tickets finding the real driver.
It also let's them much about with insurance too.
It's an old trick.

The law change means that these cars can be seized.

I think it's very unlikely a genuine new owner who's bought a car in good faith would fall foul of this when stopped at one of these checkpoints with a cop nearby.

I can imagine this is mostly a problem with cars taken from houses of new owners by the deeper end of the balif profession.

Edited by Snowboy on Tuesday 15th April 10:47

So, FiF has given a sourced statement saying seizures from new owners are "very common indeed", then you quote that post and say it's "very unlikely" (DISCLAIMER: in your opinion) a new owner would lose a car bought in good faith.

You'd argue black was white, and night was day. Who are you really, Comical Ali?

Why people bother still trying to reason/get through/communicate with you is beyond me.

[10 Pence Short]

Snowboy said:

I very rarely say something is fact or law.
I say it's opinion or thoughts.
I also often say I'm happy to change my opinions if someone can post a compelling argument or link some proof.

But people often crop that bit of the post in their eagerness to win on the internet.

You said;

Snowboy said:

I think everyone knows the law change

Two of us said we didn't and asked you which law you're talking about.

All you have to do is tell us which law you know has changed.

[smegmore]

Snowboy said:

I very rarely say something is fact or law.
I say it's opinion or thoughts.
I also often say I'm happy to change my opinions if someone can post a compelling argument or link some proof.

But people often crop that bit of the post in their eagerness to win on the internet.

This thread just keeps on giving...

[Snowboy]

OpulentBob said:

So, FiF has given a sourced statement saying seizures from new owners are "very common indeed", then you quote that post and say it's "very unlikely" (DISCLAIMER: in your opinion) a new owner would lose a car bought in good faith.

You'd argue black was white, and night was day. Who are you really, Comical Ali?

Why people bother still trying to reason/get through/communicate with you is beyond me.

Did you read my post?
Did you read the link?
Because I read the link.

I was highlighting the difference between a balif doing a seizure of a parked car vs a traffic stop with a cop nearby.

Because the link spoke mostly about problems with the seizure of parked cars. The police stops section had other concerns.

[FiF]

Third time of asking. Are you going to provide a link to answer the question. Then provide an explanation to answer the question that has been asked.

That link covers many situations including roadside anpr stops with the Met.

If you can't then just say so and we'll move on.

[jshell]

You guys don't learn. It's like mud wrestling a pig. And futile. Give it up, he'll just keep going on winding you up.

[Snowboy]

Fif.
I've said I'm not providing another link to stuff that's been discussed several times on this thread.

But, if someone reads the most recent link that someone posted then the changes are explained very clearly. It's a good link.
It clearly explain a the problems with the current balif and debt collection laws.

It concentrates more on the system, and on balifs using anpr and taking parked cars which is a shocking situation. I can't imagine anyone would agree that it's a good process.

But, that's different to the original question about police assisting in stopping cars to allow chats with balifs.
And if we were to consider the two options, I'd rather be stopped by a cop and be able to discuss the situation than just have my car taken when I was inside a shop.

If there's a third option involving a rewrite of the law book I'd probably go for that instead.

[anonymous-user]

Snowboy said:

the original question about police assisting in stopping cars to allow chats with balifs.

I can't decide whether this quaint idea of yours - that a bailiff is interested in a chat - is endearing or naive.

A bailiff wants only one of two things: your money or your property. A chat is of as much interest to him as an offer to make him a paper hat.

[Snowboy]

Let me try and put it another way, in a question back to you lot.

If the police stopped helping balifs, do you think it would make things better for people like the OP?

Bearing in mind balifs still have anpr, they can repossessed parked cars, they could set up a checkpoint with a small fleet of motorbikes to follow you to your destination and collect the car there.
The first you'd know about it was when you came back to find the car gone.

[10 Pence Short]

Snowboy said:

Let me try and put it another way, in a question back to you lot.

If the police stopped helping balifs, do you think it would make things better for people like the OP?

Bearing in mind balifs still have anpr, they can repossessed parked cars, they could set up a checkpoint with a small fleet of motorbikes to follow you to your distination and collect the car there.

Please provide the fking link you talked about.

[FiF]

He won't because he can't. Good job I am not a moderator because at this point he would be history.

[Snowboy]

10 Pence Short said:

Please provide the fking link you talked about.

I didn't talk about a link. I mentioned a law change.
A change that has been discussed several times in this thread.
You have asked for a link, I have declined to find one for you.
However, if you follow the link to the balifs site above it explains the law changes quite clearly and the impact of them.

Now that's settled, do you think you might answer my question and perhaps try and get this thread back on topic?

[10 Pence Short]

I'm out. Thanks for the fish, etc.

[Rovinghawk]

Snowboy said:

Fif.
But, that's different to the original question about police assisting in stopping cars to allow chats with balifs.
And if we were to consider the two options, I'd rather be stopped by a cop and be able to discuss the situation than just have my car taken when I was inside a shop.

If there's a third option involving a rewrite of the law book I'd probably go for that instead.

These 'chats'- how often do you think bailiffs say "I believe you totally & see your POV - I'm no longer interested in taking anything, have a nice day"?

[Rovinghawk]

Snowboy said:

Let me try and put it another way, in a question back to you lot.

If the police stopped helping balifs, do you think it would make things better for people like the OP?

Bearing in mind balifs still have anpr, they can repossessed parked cars, they could set up a checkpoint with a small fleet of motorbikes to follow you to your destination and collect the car there.
The first you'd know about it was when you came back to find the car gone.

It removes any question of police corruption.

That strikes me as a positive move.