Since he left the clamp unattended and drove off, did he come back for it within the 2 hour period? Since it wasn't on the highway and it was on your own drive you can to a CPR fee recovery and a charge back claim if you managed to get the PCN. You are a victim of drive by clamping.
I advised him he was about to commit an offence, but I didn't realise he had already clamped my vehicle which I use for business. Then he never returned to remove the clamp at all. He returned once and stopped a little further down the road before shortly afterwards driving off again. Even though he had the opportunity to return and remove the camp, he also did not return after 2 hours to recover the vehicle. It was an unlawful clamping and once notified it was used for business he had a duty to remove the clamp. He didn't even bother to ask for the insurance certificate because he probably was on an ego trip! He also did not have his SIA license on display that authorises him to lawfully clamp vehicles so he breached the licensing conditions of the Private Security Industry Act 2001 section 9 subsections (1) (c) failure to display while operating overtly. Subsection (4) describes enforcement of failing to abide by legislation regarding the non display of license. There is much more to this matter still to come, and also Citizens advice are putting in a complaint for the poor lack of service on the telephone from a group conference call initiated between myself, a Citizens Advice representative and Marston's themself. Any developments in this matter will be collated for a future video update, but only when they come to light. [UPDATE edit added] Complaints are now in motion directly with Marston Recovery and Chesterfield Borough Council.
@@davecarter2508 I used that universal key when I forgot to tax. Came off quick with little disc wear. I taxed straight away at the post office And asked if I could pay the back tax. Post office said no, not without the reminder you can just tax from today. I did that & nobody ever wrote to me or came back ever again On the matter. My neighbour said a car lifting truck drove past week later and paused at my house. maybe they can only lift cars that have clamps on but mine didn’t have a clamp on. Nobody return for the clamp so it’s now recycled into something nicer no doubt by my local council tip. 😀👍🚙
i had one on my drive, i offered to pay him £1 a week, he said thats not acceptable, i said ok give me a letter saying you have refused payment, he just drove off
16:25 So he dials 999 because he was gently pushed. No way could that be seen as appropriate use of police time and resources. He is abusing his job and role to get preferential treatment from the police. And trespass is a civil matter. And even all the auditor trolls say that you can use reasonable force to remove a trespasser.
And escalating the report by not stating the severity of the pushes means the police will assume that extreme violence has been used. Why else someone call the police. Shameful actions by James Pike.
I worked for a large company dealing with so called warrants and you would make an initial call to house and part of the process you had to list colour of front door type of house etc and leave a notice you would call back in 14 days. I found that's agents not bailiffs were sat at home filling the forms in to claim £30 visit fee, and they did the same again for a second visit. When l raised my concerns l no longer received any more work from them. By the way we were all self employed.
Westminster Council tried same with me. The Marston bailiff took £423 off my mother to pay fine i wasn't at property. Unfortunately the parking fine was issued illegally and was paid back within 3 days. The parking attendant who issued ticket had taken a picture of a payment sign not related to parking space I was in. All proved yet Westminster and marstons still pursued matter. Country is corrupt.
Keeps saying it's a fine. A fine is from a court of law. From a council or any other like NCP it is a penalty and you receive an invoice for said penalty
No name of a magistrate/judge on a "warrant" means it has no power. How does anyone know if marston parasites have a template online they can use whenever they want? No accountablility, no authority. And as he has stated the claim is in dispute, no collections agency can get involved. The council have even broken the law by not allowing a fair hearing Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 10 "Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him."
@@mijimonmaster It’s not a criminal case. It’s a civil matter and the law is different for that. Charges can be imposed and if you want to dispute them, it’s YOU that has to go to court to prove you don’t owe it. Try contacting a solicitor to check the legality, not Google or RUclips!
@@stetomlinson3146 You rights still count, no matter what man made rule is in effect. They have violated said rights by there not being a fair hearing. Or do you agree with them being able to say whatever they want behind closed doors and you have to agree to it?
@@mijimonmaster No of course not. But as it stands, civil law is different to criminal law. In this case the burden of proof is on them. if you want to object, YOU have to take them to court. (Which by the way the video poster could do.) In a criminal case the state takes YOU to court and THEY have to prove their case, because the burden of proof is on you. It would not be in the interests of us for it to be the same, because then, for example, trespass becomes a legal case.
4:50 So he says once a case has been settled then anything else is between you and the council. We'll that's the issue, the case hasn't been settled. That the council have jumped the gun and got Marston involved means Marston are on the clock too. They need to have done their own due diligence with the council to ensure that the case is completed. To not do so means they are jointly liable with the council.
10:12 UK Law requires services to remain accessible, and by the agent not reading out the text and explaining it to you, does that not somehow breach accessibility rights?
When they come back for the clamp give them an invoice. The invoice will be for the number of days you have provided them safe storage for their clamp, which they abandoned on your property.
Surly the Council should have taken this matter to a County Court before asking a phoney” Court” based ( Northampton), to try to fake some Warrant to attempt to disable a Car. I hope he charged the Council for causing him problems and if these goons ask for their Clamp back, you should charge them storage fees of at least £10 per day ; then it is their choice if they want to pay. I know someone who cut off the clamp and claimed it was a mystery who did it. He then said that the Recovery ( Bailiffs) will have to pay a fee to get it back as he was charging storage !
£400 for a £25 ticket ? how do these people sleep at night ? there's just one man but he is so big i cant handle him, can you send some girls please ? if police stopped supporting these crooks maybe they would stop
This just shows that the only thing the council was interested in is ripping you off in 2 way. No change at the machine and refusing to repay the overpayment and then passing it in to debt collectors and ignoring letters. If the don’t take you to an actual court where you have the right to put your argument across then that alone is a a denial of justice. Typical of councils though thinking they and only they have a that right to deny people access to courts to defend themselves. They do it over council tax too, so it’s not unusual for councils to ride roughshod over justice.
A cordless angle grinder comes in handy I've found on your driveway. Marstons is not a court but a bulk buy fines company. No legal rights at all. Great video 👍
I saw a job advert yesterday, online. It was for the position of enforcement agent working for Marston's. £90,000 PA but commission only. That is a royal piss take.
i once got a clamp in a private car park, i explaind to the filth that the vehicle was damaged due to the clamp being put on.... he turned to me, winked & said" i didnt see him put it on though did i ". i came to understand his response & i havent paid my council tax or any parking ticket since, thank you
this was a lovely way to start my day, its nice the see a viceo of things going the right way for us the people for once, a good warming feeling. Thanks
Should have got the angle grinder out to remove that tool, then...cut the clamp off. The wheel change...inspired by Laurel and Hardy I take it. You dealt with it very well. Well done, I'm inspired by you and I hope others don't fall into the trap of believing these parasites.
I grew up on Laurel and Hardy, they inspired me, I even remember Hectors House and Mary Mongo & Midge... even the Flower Pot men and the Keystone Cops... I have noticed there are many Keystone Cops around in the UK, but they do say, what comes to America, eventually comes to the UK 😎
Unfortunately, blocking a driveway isn't an offence that would involve police, even with a lowered kerb. Blocking an access road is. The only reasonable offence is a parking offence with Councils mandated to issue fined. Ironically.
The bailiff cannot clamp a car on private land. Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act, 2012, created a new criminal offence to clamp a vehicle without lawful authority on private land. “Clamping of motor vehicles on private land is illegal. ” Bailiffs do not have lawful authority for using a wheel clamp on a debtors vehicle if it is on private land, under regulation 16 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013.
Thank you for pointing this out, and in line with - The Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 section (4) (1) (a) ; items or equipment (for example, tools, books, telephones, computer equipment and vehicles) which are necessary for use personally by the debtor in the debtor’s employment, business, trade, profession, study or education, except that in any case the aggregate value of the items or equipment to which this exemption is applied shall not exceed £1,350 www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/regulation/4/made And in conjunction with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Section (54) (1) www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/regulation/4/madeA person commits an offence who, without lawful authority- (a)immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or (b)moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means, The vehicle was used for work as explained to the bailiff but the bailiff did not comprehend this in his line of work!
Has he got business use on insurance for his car. I bet he has not. Marston have been subject of 100s of complaints and use other companies as third party debt collectors as courts unable to recover monies. Cowboys.
dont these bailiff companies buy debts....try to enforce then when unable to collect apply to gov for re-reimbursement.....the debt is still floating around for another debt collection company to pick up and then add their bit......an on an on it goes like a wheel
What used to happen in such cases was that the clamp was removed. Placed to one side. A storage fee was set up 🙃 And within a few days the fees out-shone their 'claim amount'. So if it ended up in a true court, to get them off your back, you just say "I'll drop my fees if you drop yours!" 😤 That "bailiff" can now be arrested (I think) for not ahowing you his card whilst enforcing a warrent, OR for impersonation of a bailiff. Cheers.
While an alleged debt is in dispute, no legal action can be taken by the claimant. Evidence must be presented to prove that a debt exists between two parties under law. If such evidence cannot be produced then no debt exists and while the clarifiation of such a matter is in process, any attempts to obtain an alleged debt (by, in this case, Marstons) are attempts to extort money by menace. The enforcement officer here also committed assault (not to be confused with "battery").
The court? It is in fact the Bulk Processing Centre, Northampton, not an actual Court but a CAPITA business funded by the Taxpayer. Their paper work invites you to incriminate yourself. My understanding is that it is a well established legal principle that an individual CANNOT be "deprived of the means to earn a living" This means that if you use a car to travel in order to work then it cannot be seized. Additionally having given notice that IMPLIED RIGHTS OF ACCESS HAVE BEEN REMOVED. then is it not your right TO CHARGE ANY PERSON A FEE/ ACCESS CHARGE. The same way as say the NATIONAL TRUST OR ENGLISH HERITAGE DO for the public to enter on their Wealthy clients private property?
You had it right about breach of GDPR as you have not consented to the DVLA sharing your data. That's where it should have ended. DSAR and compensation 5,000 minimum.
The way they get round that is, the DVLA have 2 databases, vehicle database and the driver database, obviously no details can be handed over if they are enquiring about a particular driver or his details, however the DVLA can if paid for, hand over details on the vehicle that a recovery firm are enquiring about and it just so happens that the registered keeper is one of many particulars included in a vehicle enquiry..
As soon as you register anything, you are giving all your rights away, if you register your car and you break any of there traps, you are given up anything you own to them. Even your children. 😮
No , the point of a court is not to issue warrants it’s to judge the fairness of a claim and if someone is claiming against you, you MUST have a right to defend yourself in person.
It’s a civil matter. How do these clowns get away with seizing cars when they/aren’t allowed to seize cars under $1350 lawfully. Yet the pigs sometimes assist in this fraudulent ,yet somehow legalize theft. Everyone needs to stop paying all these fines.
NEVER dispute a PCN/FPN. Always write in and ask for a copy of the contract signed by both parties showing you agreed to the terms & conditions. Offer to pay upon receipt of a copy of the contract. They'll write back with a link to RTA 1988 insisting you pay. Write back explaining you're not disputing RTA 1988 or the PCN/FPN. You simply require a copy of the contract for your records & will pay when you get a copy of the contract.
@@Chris66able I can tell you're speaking from a position of inexperience & obtuseness. Don't let your ignorance get in the way of paying for things you don't legally have to. You are free to get as many PCNs as you like. Please continue to pay them. Just believe you are in a contract & you will be. The rest of us need signed documentation as proof we entered into contract.
@@thefoxhat6163 You are dreaming. FMOTL nonsense.. You agree to the terms and conditions of the contract when you use the facility...I have more experience than you will ever have. You are the type who gives people rubbish advice then disappears when the shit hits the fan.
@@Chris66able Why are you insisting on being an FMotL? What is it that causes you to believe the legislation doesn't apply to you? I lived in Hackney (London) for a few years. Every day I got a parking ticket depsite being a resident. The council wanted to charge me an annual parking fee as a resident. I didn't enter into that contract. The council's private contractor gave me at least 1 parking ticket every day. I still haven't paid any of them & Hackney council isn't taking me to court despite the fact I haven't paid around 900 parking tickets. The reason they aren't chasing me for payment is because they can't produce a legal contract signed by both parties. Driving into a private car park with sign on it is entering into contract. Parking on a double yellow line isn't. You probably believe you can't drive in a bus lane. Here is the actual law Travellers and Rights of Way at Common Law. “Save insofar as they are clearly and unambiguously intended to do so, statutes should not be construed so as to make alterations in the common law.” Leach -v- Rex [1912] AC 305. Wills J. said in regard to public right of passage "The only 'dedication' in the legal sense that we are aware of is that of a public right of passage, of which the legal description is a 'right for all Her Majesty's subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and re-pass without let or hindrance.' ". Ex parte Lewis (1888) 21 Q.B.D. 191. Lord Slynn reiterated Ex parte Lewis (1888) 21 Q.B.D. 191 Wills J said that a public right of passage is a "right for all Her Majesty's subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and re-pass without let or hindrance.". DPP v. Jones and Another [1999]. Lord Evershed M.R. said, at p. 259: "The rights of members of the public to use the highway are, prima facie, rights of passage to and from places which the highway adjoins;”. Randall v. Tarrant [1955] 1 W.L.R. 255. Of course, you being a top legal mind will disagree with anyone who contradicts your erroneous belief. The judges will be wrong. You'll be right.
@@thefoxhat6163 Why can't you read properly ? Please show me where I insist on being an FMotL. It is very clear I sald FMOTL stuff is nonsense. Then get someone to explain contracts to you. BTW Brains the majority of your reply is nonsense which does not apply to you. THe JUDGES are right, its just you don't understand the Law... You're deluded.
Never appeal, any court decision or council ruling. Legally, appeal means to throw yourself on the mercy of the court. Never appeal, refute and dispute their claim against you. They have their case against you, you should formulate your case against them.
A crappy automatically generated document on an iPad from the vehicle blah-de-blah place isn't a warrant issued by a court signed/stamped by a judge And in the UK you do have the right to a fair and reasonable trial by a jury of your peers... Not sure about parking fines, but that definitely isn't fair, or even legal. As for the clamp, jack your car, let the air out the tyre, and wiggle it off.
Warrants aren't signed and stamped by a judge but can by a court official. Black belt barrister has explanations of this. The clamp is fitted on the wheel not the tyre only a key can be used to remove it.
@@laceandwhisky the vehicle blah-de-blah place, is it a court? I don't know to be fair If the tyre was deflated it might be possible to wiggle it off...
I've been doing some checks on Pike. I cannot find him on, the certified bailiff register, he's not on it, or pending. Looks like he was trying to steal your car. Last I heard, that's a criminal offence, is it not?
I believe the whole video including the footage with the supposed bailiff is completely fake/staged. I’d like to hope I’m wrong but several parts of the video seem very off and he’s filmed staged videos in the past. However, I detest bailiffs and disagree with almost all and every new policy/Statute that the government put through. Therefore I do hope the video is genuine as I’ve enjoyed many of his videos before but this one appears a little sketchy to me.
@@technojoe4079 Anything is possible, if it is fake, it's a good one. I must admit, I was a bit sus when the police didn't show up. They love to show us, who the alleged boss is,🤣l
Police assistance If the police assist to force entry they are jointly liable on the claim, or if the police force you to hand over cash or goods then they are guilty of conversion and the chief constable is liable on the claim. “If a police constable aids a bailiff to gain forceful entry by using a police power of entry, then nothing that follows is valid and the police force is jointly liable for damages with the authority the bailiff is working under” - the precedent set by the case of Skidmore v Booth [1834] 6 C&P 777. The constable is personally liable for damages in a civil claim following Lister and Others v Hesley Hall Limited [2001] UKHL 22 and may also be subject to a disciplinary action”.
I had a similar clamp attached to my car which was parked legally on the highway I just pulled it off with a crowbar and threw it away as there was no notice attached to my vehicle nor any identity of ownership on the clamp Whoever clamps your vehicle cannot be just a bailiff they also need a license to clamp vehicles which they must show you when challenged These little clamps used by bailiffs to detain your vehicle until the tow truck arrives are not usually lawful Only the large heavy clamps covering the whole wheel as used by DVLA are enforceable on the public highway not private property
Tip for anyone who has a clamp like that one use a plastic nozzle from a sealant tube it opens them with no damage I did this and when the bailiff came back he said where's his clamp I said it had run away PLASTIC NOZZLE
His vehicle will not not be insured for business just social domestic and pleasure, report him to the insurance database giving registration number and his name and times and details and the fact he claimed to be engaged in business activity and not social or domestic or pleasure.
Sorry for my lack of knowledge how this clamp works but it looks like you can just jack the car up and put the spare on? Edit: 5 minutes later spoke too soon.🤦♂️
The Difference in the tone of the voice from the call handlers is disgusting, when the bailiff rings 999 it's all nicey nicey ok love, but when you phone as a member of the public it's combative straight away.... It's like they have been trained to take the baillifs word all the time, the second person you spoke to seemed ok but that show's that they have no consistency.
Why would you not be asked to go to court if they go to court to get you a fine. Surely whenever someone takes you to court you have a right to defend yourself in person ??
@stewartarnold6034 Not nonsence their plastic warrant shit doesn't have a court reference number on it just a PCN number .And its not recorded with the MOJ
You should have called the police, he was parked across your dropped kerb which is instant vehicle removal by the council. Also ask the police to confirm that vehicle is insured for bsiness purposes
Is it not an offence in the highway code that blocking a driveway that has white lines marking the entrance results in an automatic £120 fine on the CONcil employee/PARASITE. THIRD PARTY INTERLOPER.,?
The bailiffs have committed illegally as criminal offences under the Bribery Act 2010, Forgery Act 1981, Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, Fraud Act 2006 and Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
was the so called warrant signed for in wet ink by a judge? if it was on his ipad his certificate needs the wet ink sign and the court stamp. kings bench 2022 case number KB2022004907 ruled un-signed warrants are illegal/un-lawful.
Removal of the implied right of access When you know a bailiff is coming, you can issue formal notice to the collection company of the removal of their implied right of access to your property. If he enters the property after that and refuses to leave when told to do so then the following applies. “A person having been told to leave is now under a duty to withdraw from the property with all due reasonable speed and failure to do so he is not thereafter acting in the execution of his duty and becomes a trespasser with any subsequent levy made being invalid and attracts a liability under a claim for damages, Morris v Beardmore [1980] 71 Cr App 256.” A bailiff rendered a trespasser is liable for penalties in tort and the entry may be in breach of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998;
I did expect them, but in my case, wanted to record how they do business... I soon found out that the camera recording found out exactly what kind of people these bailiffs act like. If they act like this knowing they are being recorded, what do they act like with vulnerable people with no camera recording!
@@BANAMAN Best thing to do is file a complaint with a judge in the court that issued their certificate, claiming the bailiff is in gross neglect for being unfamiliar with the laws regarding trespass.
@@metatroy1 I spoke to County Court Business Centre directly, the only thing they wanted to say was contact the council directly. I firmly believe that the bulk clearing centre is issuing alleged warrants without full disclosure from their warrant applicants. Somebody has either mislead the court, or the court have acted in cahoots with Marston Recover, Chesterfield Borough Council or both!
If you need your vehicle for work, the bailiff is not allowed to take it. Same applies to any tools or other equipment needed for you to conduct your business and earn your living.
Since he left the clamp unattended and drove off, did he come back for it within the 2 hour period? Since it wasn't on the highway and it was on your own drive you can to a CPR fee recovery and a charge back claim if you managed to get the PCN. You are a victim of drive by clamping.
I advised him he was about to commit an offence, but I didn't realise he had already clamped my vehicle which I use for business. Then he never returned to remove the clamp at all. He returned once and stopped a little further down the road before shortly afterwards driving off again. Even though he had the opportunity to return and remove the camp, he also did not return after 2 hours to recover the vehicle.
It was an unlawful clamping and once notified it was used for business he had a duty to remove the clamp. He didn't even bother to ask for the insurance certificate because he probably was on an ego trip! He also did not have his SIA license on display that authorises him to lawfully clamp vehicles so he breached the licensing conditions of the Private Security Industry Act 2001 section 9 subsections (1) (c) failure to display while operating overtly. Subsection (4) describes enforcement of failing to abide by legislation regarding the non display of license.
There is much more to this matter still to come, and also Citizens advice are putting in a complaint for the poor lack of service on the telephone from a group conference call initiated between myself, a Citizens Advice representative and Marston's themself. Any developments in this matter will be collated for a future video update, but only when they come to light.
[UPDATE edit added]
Complaints are now in motion directly with Marston Recovery and Chesterfield Borough Council.
If you had tried to pull off / unscrew the black handle you may well have found the spare key in the void of the handle.
@@markc7440 Or he can use the universal key that Makita make. :-P
@@davecarter2508 I used that universal key when I forgot to tax.
Came off quick with little disc wear.
I taxed straight away at the post office And asked if I could pay the back tax. Post office said no, not without the reminder you can just tax from today.
I did that & nobody ever wrote to me or came back ever again On the matter.
My neighbour said a car lifting truck drove past week later and paused at my house.
maybe they can only lift cars that have clamps on but mine didn’t have a clamp on. Nobody return for the clamp so it’s now recycled into something nicer no doubt by my local council tip. 😀👍🚙
@@davecarter2508 could do, but if a key is there why not take the easy option?
Clamp to be given back on payment of release charge and storage fees
i had one on my drive, i offered to pay him £1 a week, he said thats not acceptable, i said ok give me a letter saying you have refused payment, he just drove off
Good job 👍🏻
16:25 So he dials 999 because he was gently pushed. No way could that be seen as appropriate use of police time and resources. He is abusing his job and role to get preferential treatment from the police. And trespass is a civil matter. And even all the auditor trolls say that you can use reasonable force to remove a trespasser.
And escalating the report by not stating the severity of the pushes means the police will assume that extreme violence has been used. Why else someone call the police. Shameful actions by James Pike.
I worked for a large company dealing with so called warrants and you would make an initial call to house and part of the process you had to list colour of front door type of house etc and leave a notice you would call back in 14 days. I found that's agents not bailiffs were sat at home filling the forms in to claim £30 visit fee, and they did the same again for a second visit. When l raised my concerns l no longer received any more work from them. By the way we were all self employed.
I love how this video ended.
Councils waste so much money and achieve very little for the taxpayers.
I'm pretty sure clamping on private land is not legal anymore
The last 10 mins are like an Earling studio film's, you are a classic.
All over a £25 parking fee…. Society is messed up
Westminster Council tried same with me. The Marston bailiff took £423 off my mother to pay fine i wasn't at property. Unfortunately the parking fine was issued illegally and was paid back within 3 days. The parking attendant who issued ticket had taken a picture of a payment sign not related to parking space I was in. All proved yet Westminster and marstons still pursued matter. Country is corrupt.
Awesome Video and many thanks Banaman. It pays to have a spare wheel in the boot of your cars when the Third party Interlopers are after your money.
No1 will appreciate this video if they skip bits. Absolutely fucking pure class!
It is a road traffic offence that he blocks you in
high quality slapstick very well done
Keeps saying it's a fine. A fine is from a court of law. From a council or any other like NCP it is a penalty and you receive an invoice for said penalty
The police should not be allowed to help the bailiffs. As police are a public servant not a company servant
padlock and chain the tyre and clamp to your gate and write out a penelty notice on it. removal of chain fee £394
Only a judge can give a warrant to go on any land that is private .
No name of a magistrate/judge on a "warrant" means it has no power. How does anyone know if marston parasites have a template online they can use whenever they want? No accountablility, no authority. And as he has stated the claim is in dispute, no collections agency can get involved. The council have even broken the law by not allowing a fair hearing
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 10
"Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him."
Magistrate
@@mijimonmaster It’s not a criminal case. It’s a civil matter and the law is different for that. Charges can be imposed and if you want to dispute them, it’s YOU that has to go to court to prove you don’t owe it. Try contacting a solicitor to check the legality, not Google or RUclips!
@@stetomlinson3146 You rights still count, no matter what man made rule is in effect. They have violated said rights by there not being a fair hearing. Or do you agree with them being able to say whatever they want behind closed doors and you have to agree to it?
@@mijimonmaster No of course not. But as it stands, civil law is different to criminal law. In this case the burden of proof is on them. if you want to object, YOU have to take them to court. (Which by the way the video poster could do.)
In a criminal case the state takes YOU to court and THEY have to prove their case, because the burden of proof is on you.
It would not be in the interests of us for it to be the same, because then, for example, trespass becomes a legal case.
You're no longer innocent until proven guilty in this country you're just guilty until proven guilty.
Along those lines yes it would appear
So true ❤
Brilliant job mate. You stood your ground very well!. Respect from Glasgow
4:50 So he says once a case has been settled then anything else is between you and the council. We'll that's the issue, the case hasn't been settled. That the council have jumped the gun and got Marston involved means Marston are on the clock too. They need to have done their own due diligence with the council to ensure that the case is completed. To not do so means they are jointly liable with the council.
10:12 UK Law requires services to remain accessible, and by the agent not reading out the text and explaining it to you, does that not somehow breach accessibility rights?
If he doesn't want to read it out, they should have a screen reader available.
30:00 That lever bar is longer than the vehicle hahahahaha
Should have used a grinder , the tool not the app
Not the app 😆
When they come back for the clamp give them an invoice. The invoice will be for the number of days you have provided them safe storage for their clamp, which they abandoned on your property.
There are videos on how to remove those clamps.
And now a video how to remove a bailiff 😎
Surly the Council should have taken this matter to a County Court before asking a phoney” Court” based ( Northampton), to try to fake some Warrant to attempt to disable a Car.
I hope he charged the Council for causing him problems and if these goons ask for their Clamp back, you should charge them storage fees of at least £10 per day ; then it is their choice if they want to pay.
I know someone who cut off the clamp and claimed it was a mystery who did it.
He then said that the Recovery ( Bailiffs) will have to pay a fee to get it back as he was charging storage !
Absolutely a legend, well done mate. 👍👍👍
£25 escalates to £394 money grabbing at its finest
Well done Banaman. Your a legend brother
Shame you didn't have a spare clamp . You could've clamped his car for blocking your driveway !
How the FFF does it go from 25 to394 legally, No Fing way
They'll quadruple that when they turn up to collect goods, these parasite are evil bastards
£400 for a £25 ticket ? how do these people sleep at night ?
there's just one man but he is so big i cant handle him, can you send some girls please ? if police stopped supporting these crooks maybe they would stop
coz they have no morals.. plain and simple..
Just Jack car up and put spare on it
So if "someone" off camera cut the clamp off, how do they prove who cut it off?
No need for proof it's not legal and private property and implyed rights removed means that they have to pay if they want it back
@@telme1632Thanks for that, l often wondered though, if ever anyone was clamped and cut it off, they would have to prove who took it off.
@Ade Ferranti with a legal clamp as long as you don't damage it there's nothing they can do also in the UK
@@telme1632 If you cut it off and hide it somewhere, how can anyone prove it was damaged?
No one needed fitting up or illegally arresting so therefore it wasn't a police matter.
No kiddies needed fiddling so they weren't gonna show up
This just shows that the only thing the council was interested in is ripping you off in 2 way. No change at the machine and refusing to repay the overpayment and then passing it in to debt collectors and ignoring letters. If the don’t take you to an actual court where you have the right to put your argument across then that alone is a a denial of justice. Typical of councils though thinking they and only they have a that right to deny people access to courts to defend themselves. They do it over council tax too, so it’s not unusual for councils to ride roughshod over justice.
Mate! That was class! Take no prisoners bro! Lol fantastic!
I listened to your words of advice [edit added] and applied them Jedi Style!
A cordless angle grinder comes in handy I've found on your driveway. Marstons is not a court but a bulk buy fines company. No legal rights at all. Great video 👍
Inspirational :) great job Banaman 😊
I saw a job advert yesterday, online.
It was for the position of enforcement agent working for Marston's. £90,000 PA but commission only. That is a royal piss take.
i once got a clamp in a private car park, i explaind to the filth that the vehicle was damaged due to the clamp being put on.... he turned to me, winked & said" i didnt see him put it on though did i ". i came to understand his response & i havent paid my council tax or any parking ticket since, thank you
"Filth" lmfao
this was a lovely way to start my day, its nice the see a viceo of things going the right way for us the people for once, a good warming feeling. Thanks
Should have got the angle grinder out to remove that tool, then...cut the clamp off. The wheel change...inspired by Laurel and Hardy I take it. You dealt with it very well. Well done, I'm inspired by you and I hope others don't fall into the trap of believing these parasites.
I grew up on Laurel and Hardy, they inspired me, I even remember Hectors House and Mary Mongo & Midge... even the Flower Pot men and the Keystone Cops... I have noticed there are many Keystone Cops around in the UK, but they do say, what comes to America, eventually comes to the UK 😎
Ahh The flower pot men... Surely time for a movie version. As long as they keep Titchmarsh out of it..👍
@@Cybertruck1000 Good old Alan and booby dimmock 😂
That would be criminal damage. You can take it off, but you must not damage it.
@@BANAMAN Yes they were a lovely couple... But I didn't like him.😊
the sparrow are well chirpy, nice one 👍🏻
This sounds very wrong. Fine issued .... no court of appeal ?? Court fine not means tested ??
Didn’t they change the law stating that now they can’t clamp vehicles on private land ???
I thought the Warrant had to be stamped and signed wet by a judge, anyone can print that off.
That’s a myth, unfortunately. It would be good if it were true 🤷♂️
A court official does it all it doesn't have to be a wet signature or a stamp many are just printed off. See black belt barrister he covers warrants
Wheels on pavement, driving offense...
Blocking access to private drive, driving offense...
Unfortunately, blocking a driveway isn't an offence that would involve police, even with a lowered kerb. Blocking an access road is. The only reasonable offence is a parking offence with Councils mandated to issue fined. Ironically.
The bailiff cannot clamp a car on private land.
Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act, 2012, created a new criminal offence to clamp a vehicle without lawful authority on private land. “Clamping of motor vehicles on private land is illegal. ”
Bailiffs do not have lawful authority for using a wheel clamp on a debtors vehicle if it is on private land, under regulation 16 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013.
Thank you for pointing this out, and in line with - The Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 section (4) (1) (a) ; items or equipment (for example, tools, books, telephones, computer equipment and vehicles) which are necessary for use personally by the debtor in the debtor’s employment, business, trade, profession, study or education, except that in any case the aggregate value of the items or equipment to which this exemption is applied shall not exceed £1,350 www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/regulation/4/made
And in conjunction with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Section (54) (1) www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/regulation/4/madeA person commits an offence who, without lawful authority-
(a)immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or
(b)moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means,
The vehicle was used for work as explained to the bailiff but the bailiff did not comprehend this in his line of work!
Has he got business use on insurance for his car. I bet he has not. Marston have been subject of 100s of complaints and use other companies as third party debt collectors as courts unable to recover monies. Cowboys.
The council breeched GDPR Passing your details on.
A hero all of us can be proud of our kids following, stop the steal.
dont these bailiff companies buy debts....try to enforce then when unable to collect apply to gov for re-reimbursement.....the debt is still floating around for another debt collection company to pick up and then add their bit......an on an on it goes like a wheel
What used to happen in such cases was that the clamp was removed.
Placed to one side.
A storage fee was set up 🙃
And within a few days the fees out-shone their 'claim amount'.
So if it ended up in a true court, to get them off your back, you just say "I'll drop my fees if you drop yours!" 😤
That "bailiff" can now be arrested (I think) for not ahowing you his card whilst enforcing a warrent, OR for impersonation of a bailiff.
Cheers.
a court where the supposed perpetrator is not invited/demanded to attend is simply NOT a Court.
While an alleged debt is in dispute, no legal action can be taken by the claimant. Evidence must be presented to prove that a debt exists between two parties under law. If such evidence cannot be produced then no debt exists and while the clarifiation of such a matter is in process, any attempts to obtain an alleged debt (by, in this case, Marstons) are attempts to extort money by menace. The enforcement officer here also committed assault (not to be confused with "battery").
The court? It is in fact the Bulk Processing Centre, Northampton, not an actual Court but a CAPITA business funded by the Taxpayer. Their paper work invites you to incriminate yourself.
My understanding is that it is a well established legal principle that an individual CANNOT be "deprived of the means to earn a living"
This means that if you use a car to travel in order to work then it cannot be seized.
Additionally having given notice that IMPLIED RIGHTS OF ACCESS HAVE BEEN REMOVED. then is it not your right TO CHARGE ANY PERSON A FEE/ ACCESS CHARGE. The same way as say the NATIONAL TRUST OR ENGLISH HERITAGE DO for the public to enter on their Wealthy clients private property?
You had it right about breach of GDPR as you have not consented to the DVLA sharing your data. That's where it should have ended. DSAR and compensation 5,000 minimum.
The way they get round that is, the DVLA have 2 databases, vehicle database and the driver database, obviously no details can be handed over if they are enquiring about a particular driver or his details, however the DVLA can if paid for, hand over details on the vehicle that a recovery firm are enquiring about and it just so happens that the registered keeper is one of many particulars included in a vehicle enquiry..
As soon as you register anything, you are giving all your rights away, if you register your car and you break any of there traps, you are given up anything you own to them. Even your children. 😮
Well done mate, loved this video... ending was hilarious 😅
No , the point of a court is not to issue warrants it’s to judge the fairness of a claim and if someone is claiming against you, you MUST have a right to defend yourself in person.
F****** brilliant video.
It’s a civil matter. How do these clowns get away with seizing cars when they/aren’t allowed to seize cars under $1350 lawfully. Yet the pigs sometimes assist in this fraudulent ,yet somehow legalize theft. Everyone needs to stop paying all these fines.
I think the funniest part of this video was watching the guy trying to work out what to do with his already peeled sticker since he couldn't place it.
The police love to speed to the assistance of a bailiff. Always a good chance of escalating things and make an arrest. 999 Emergency!
NEVER dispute a PCN/FPN. Always write in and ask for a copy of the contract signed by both parties showing you agreed to the terms & conditions. Offer to pay upon receipt of a copy of the contract. They'll write back with a link to RTA 1988 insisting you pay. Write back explaining you're not disputing RTA 1988 or the PCN/FPN. You simply require a copy of the contract for your records & will pay when you get a copy of the contract.
Nonsense.
@@Chris66able I can tell you're speaking from a position of inexperience & obtuseness.
Don't let your ignorance get in the way of paying for things you don't legally have to.
You are free to get as many PCNs as you like. Please continue to pay them. Just believe you are in a contract & you will be. The rest of us need signed documentation as proof we entered into contract.
@@thefoxhat6163 You are dreaming. FMOTL nonsense.. You agree to the terms and conditions of the contract when you use the facility...I have more experience than you will ever have. You are the type who gives people rubbish advice then disappears when the shit hits the fan.
@@Chris66able Why are you insisting on being an FMotL? What is it that causes you to believe the legislation doesn't apply to you?
I lived in Hackney (London) for a few years. Every day I got a parking ticket depsite being a resident. The council wanted to charge me an annual parking fee as a resident. I didn't enter into that contract. The council's private contractor gave me at least 1 parking ticket every day. I still haven't paid any of them & Hackney council isn't taking me to court despite the fact I haven't paid around 900 parking tickets.
The reason they aren't chasing me for payment is because they can't produce a legal contract signed by both parties.
Driving into a private car park with sign on it is entering into contract. Parking on a double yellow line isn't. You probably believe you can't drive in a bus lane.
Here is the actual law
Travellers and Rights of Way at Common Law.
“Save insofar as they are clearly and unambiguously intended to do so, statutes should not be construed so as to make alterations in the common law.” Leach -v- Rex [1912] AC 305.
Wills J. said in regard to public right of passage "The only 'dedication' in the legal sense that we are aware of is that of a public right of passage, of which the legal description is a 'right for all Her Majesty's subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and re-pass without let or hindrance.' ". Ex parte Lewis (1888) 21 Q.B.D. 191.
Lord Slynn reiterated Ex parte Lewis (1888) 21 Q.B.D. 191 Wills J said that a public right of passage is a "right for all Her Majesty's subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and re-pass without let or hindrance.". DPP v. Jones and Another [1999].
Lord Evershed M.R. said, at p. 259: "The rights of members of the public to use the highway are, prima facie, rights of passage to and from places which the highway adjoins;”. Randall v. Tarrant [1955] 1 W.L.R. 255.
Of course, you being a top legal mind will disagree with anyone who contradicts your erroneous belief. The judges will be wrong. You'll be right.
@@thefoxhat6163 Why can't you read properly ?
Please show me where I insist on being an FMotL.
It is very clear I sald FMOTL stuff is nonsense.
Then get someone to explain contracts to you.
BTW Brains the majority of your reply is nonsense which does not apply to you.
THe JUDGES are right, its just you don't understand the Law... You're deluded.
Never appeal, any court decision or council ruling. Legally, appeal means to throw yourself on the mercy of the court. Never appeal, refute and dispute their claim against you. They have their case against you, you should formulate your case against them.
Spot on- you would be contracting with the courts, fuck em. These companies can’t lawfully steal your cars. Vehicles commit offences?. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
How can they take a car, a car is worth more than £394 😮
Absolutely beautiful,.. Knowledge is King.
I love this guy. 😁
A crappy automatically generated document on an iPad from the vehicle blah-de-blah place isn't a warrant issued by a court signed/stamped by a judge
And in the UK you do have the right to a fair and reasonable trial by a jury of your peers... Not sure about parking fines, but that definitely isn't fair, or even legal.
As for the clamp, jack your car, let the air out the tyre, and wiggle it off.
Warrants aren't signed and stamped by a judge but can by a court official. Black belt barrister has explanations of this. The clamp is fitted on the wheel not the tyre only a key can be used to remove it.
@@laceandwhisky the vehicle blah-de-blah place, is it a court? I don't know to be fair
If the tyre was deflated it might be possible to wiggle it off...
I've been doing some checks on Pike. I cannot find him on, the certified bailiff register, he's not on it, or pending. Looks like he was trying to steal your car. Last I heard, that's a criminal offence, is it not?
I believe the whole video including the footage with the supposed bailiff is completely fake/staged. I’d like to hope I’m wrong but several parts of the video seem very off and he’s filmed staged videos in the past.
However, I detest bailiffs and disagree with almost all and every new policy/Statute that the government put through.
Therefore I do hope the video is genuine as I’ve enjoyed many of his videos before but this one appears a little sketchy to me.
@@technojoe4079 Anything is possible, if it is fake, it's a good one. I must admit, I was a bit sus when the police didn't show up. They love to show us, who the alleged boss is,🤣l
Police assistance
If the police assist to force entry they are jointly liable on the claim, or if the police force you to hand over cash or goods then they are guilty of conversion and the chief constable is liable on the claim.
“If a police constable aids a bailiff to gain forceful entry by using a police power of entry, then nothing that follows is valid and the police force is jointly liable for damages with the authority the bailiff is working under” - the precedent set by the case of Skidmore v Booth [1834] 6 C&P 777.
The constable is personally liable for damages in a civil claim following Lister and Others v Hesley Hall Limited [2001] UKHL 22 and may also be subject to a disciplinary action”.
Thanks for pointing this out.
I had a similar clamp attached to my car which was parked legally on the highway I just pulled it off with a crowbar and threw it away as there was no notice attached to my vehicle nor any identity of ownership on the clamp Whoever clamps your vehicle cannot be just a bailiff they also need a license to clamp vehicles which they must show you when challenged These little clamps used by bailiffs to detain your vehicle until the tow truck arrives are not usually lawful Only the large heavy clamps covering the whole wheel as used by DVLA are enforceable on the public highway not private property
Tip for anyone who has a clamp like that one use a plastic nozzle from a sealant tube it opens them with no damage I did this and when the bailiff came back he said where's his clamp I said it had run away PLASTIC NOZZLE
I thought they weren’t allowed to block a driveway anymore?
His vehicle will not not be insured for business just social domestic and pleasure, report him to the insurance database giving registration number and his name and times and details and the fact he claimed to be engaged in business activity and not social or domestic or pleasure.
Sorry for my lack of knowledge how this clamp works but it looks like you can just jack the car up and put the spare on?
Edit: 5 minutes later spoke too soon.🤦♂️
The Difference in the tone of the voice from the call handlers is disgusting, when the bailiff rings 999 it's all nicey nicey ok love, but when you phone as a member of the public it's combative straight away.... It's like they have been trained to take the baillifs word all the time, the second person you spoke to seemed ok but that show's that they have no consistency.
What was the purpose with the police uniform disguise? Didn’t really catch that.
It’s his attempt at being a clever dick, didn’t really work did it ?
Thank you for making my day , the end of your video made me laugh so much I nearly peed myself . TAKE CARE .
Its not a court its a council meeting that always makes you guilty
The wheel change was extremely funny and made me lol. Hope you kept the wheel with the clamp locked up until they paid up. Well done Sir.
Clamp his car for blocking your drive!
I hope you are charging storage fees for the clamp he left on your property.
"What's your name?"..
👉"DON'T TELL HIM PYKE!"
Absolutely amazing
Why would you not be asked to go to court if they go to court to get you a fine. Surely whenever someone takes you to court you have a right to defend yourself in person ??
None of their shit comes from a proper court
@stewartarnold6034 Not nonsence their plastic warrant shit doesn't have a court reference number on it just a PCN number .And its not recorded with the MOJ
Games get played in court. We all need to wake up and share this channel.
The ending needs to be its own video
"HOW TO REMOVE A WHEEL CLAMP"
Love it!
Should have had the belter given a ticket for parking across your driveway. He blocked your driveway, hence he committed an offence
I don't think it's an offence to block a driveway.
@@gwaponobby just did a quick search and it is an offence in the UK.
@@Iwishiwasflying Under what law are you committing an offence?
@@gwaponobby a quick google search will tell you. I've researched it, you do your own
@@Iwishiwasflying Haha you won't say because you're wrong and now you are lying.
It's not a criminal offence, it's a civil matter.
get in the car and lock the doors..
You should have called the police, he was parked across your dropped kerb which is instant vehicle removal by the council. Also ask the police to confirm that vehicle is insured for bsiness purposes
Is it not an offence in the highway code that blocking a driveway that has white lines marking the entrance results in an automatic £120 fine on the CONcil employee/PARASITE. THIRD PARTY INTERLOPER.,?
The bailiffs have committed illegally as criminal offences under the Bribery Act 2010, Forgery Act 1981, Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, Fraud Act 2006 and Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
was the so called warrant signed for in wet ink by a judge? if it was on his ipad his certificate needs the wet ink sign and the court stamp.
kings bench 2022 case number KB2022004907 ruled un-signed warrants are illegal/un-lawful.
How can an inanimate object "be guilty of an offence"?
Removal of the implied right of access
When you know a bailiff is coming, you can issue formal notice to the collection company of the removal of their implied right of access to your property. If he enters the property after that and refuses to leave when told to do so then the following applies.
“A person having been told to leave is now under a duty to withdraw from the property with all due reasonable speed and failure to do so he is not thereafter acting in the execution of his duty and becomes a trespasser with any subsequent levy made being invalid and attracts a liability under a claim for damages, Morris v Beardmore [1980] 71 Cr App 256.”
A bailiff rendered a trespasser is liable for penalties in tort and the entry may be in breach of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998;
I did expect them, but in my case, wanted to record how they do business... I soon found out that the camera recording found out exactly what kind of people these bailiffs act like. If they act like this knowing they are being recorded, what do they act like with vulnerable people with no camera recording!
@@BANAMAN Best thing to do is file a complaint with a judge in the court that issued their certificate, claiming the bailiff is in gross neglect for being unfamiliar with the laws regarding trespass.
@@metatroy1 I spoke to County Court Business Centre directly, the only thing they wanted to say was contact the council directly. I firmly believe that the bulk clearing centre is issuing alleged warrants without full disclosure from their warrant applicants. Somebody has either mislead the court, or the court have acted in cahoots with Marston Recover, Chesterfield Borough Council or both!
Seriously what kind of scumbags want to do this for a job.
A Court Warrant is not a legal reason to phone Emergency Services. The Operator should have informed him and not become part of an illegal procedure.
If you need your vehicle for work, the bailiff is not allowed to take it. Same applies to any tools or other equipment needed for you to conduct your business and earn your living.
Yep. And that's why they gave up.
fake warrants, gdpr breach, tresspass, how many offences has he committed