Appeal traffic debt enforcement and stop unlawful bailiff action

Appealing Traffic Debts After Bailiff Enforcement

When a bailiff attempts to enforce a penalty arising from a traffic contravention, the debtor retains a statutory entitlement to seek suspension of enforcement by submitting a witness statement or statutory declaration. This safeguard, set out in Paragraph 8.1 of Practice Direction 75, applies to Penalty Charge Notices issued by local authorities, Transport for London, Dart Charge, and Highways England. Upon filing, enforcement action is paused, enabling the debtor to examine the validity of the enforcement and, where necessary, seek judicial intervention to challenge procedural or legal defects.

Requesting Return of Clamped or Removed Vehicle

Where a vehicle has already been clamped or removed, it is imperative that the debtor promptly requests its return in writing. This obligation arises not only as a matter of prudent conduct but also to mitigate any potential loss for which the creditor may be held liable if the appeal is successful. A failure to request the return of the vehicle may be treated as a failure to mitigate loss, which may limit the debtor’s right to recover full compensation for deprivation of use and associated damages. A written request evidences responsible conduct and strengthens the claim for reimbursement and damages arising from unlawful enforcement.

Obtaining the PCN Number and Filing the Correct Forms

A Penalty Charge Notice number is essential for identifying the originating authority, completing the required appeal forms, and verifying whether the Warrant of Control is valid. This reference can usually be obtained by providing the vehicle registration number to the issuing authority. The appropriate forms are TE9 and TE7 for parking and Dart Charge matters, or PE3 and PE2 for moving traffic contraventions such as bus lane or yellow box junction breacches. Bailiff companies are under a statutory duty to provide the PCN number upon request. If the bailiff substitutes the PCN number with an internal reference, this may indicate a deliberate attempt to obscure the issuing authority and frustrate your right of appeal. This conduct may amount to a breach of Regulation 8 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 and Paragraph 26(1)(b) of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, which require the bailiff to show evidence of authority when requested.

Challenging a Warrant Issued to the Wrong Address

Where enforcement is attempted under a warrant that does not correspond to the debtor’s current address, the warrant is "defective". Civil Procedure Rule 75.7(7) provides that a fresh warrant must be obtained if the debtor has changed address. Enforcement under a warrant issued to an old address is invalid and may be challenged under CPR 84.13 or section 4 of the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977. In appropriate cases, the court may order the return of the vehicle and award damages for wrongful interference. The court may also award the debtor compensation for loss of use, inconvenience, and legal costs, regardless of whether the witness statement is ultimately accepted, provided the warrant is shown to be defective.

Preserving Evidence and Notifying the Creditor

Before commencing proceedings, the debtor should serve notice on the bailiff company and the instructing creditor setting out the grounds on which the warrant is believed to be invalid and requesting the return of the vehicle or suspension of enforcement pending court review. This preserves procedural fairness and provides the enforcement party with an opportunity to correct their error without further litigation. The debtor should retain clear supporting evidence, including photographs showing where the vehicle was clamped or removed, proof of address, and copies of all correspondence. Where relevant, evidence of the warrant’s defect should be presented to the court.

Beware of Paid Intermediaries and Motoring Forums

Particular care should be taken to avoid unregulated third-party intermediaries offering paid assistance via motoring forums. One individual frequently charge substantial fees to produce generic appeal forms which are routinely identified and rejected by the Traffic Enforcement Centre. This not only wastes time and money but may jeopardise an otherwise valid appeal. Fixers typically approach group members privately, often off-site, to encourage them to post public endorsements within the forum to manufacture a perception of credibility. Individuals promoting the fixer operate under pseudonyms such as H C Andersen, Incandescent, Enceladus, and Stamfordman. It remains unclear whether these individuals are aware that the fixer in question has convictions for vehicle-related fraud.

Recommended Legal Steps

The correct course is always to gather the PCN number, request a copy of the warrant, verify the enforcement address, and file the correct appeal forms. Where enforcement has occurred outside the scope of the statutory scheme, remedies including injunctive relief, damages, and recovery of legal costs are available. I am able to provide legal advice on your available options and draft the appropriate forms, notices, and applications to advance your claim effectively.