Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

If it is shown the EAs were acting in contravention of the conditions attached to a warrant, they and the local authority are stuffed. Their actions will be unlawful from the outset. Apart from any arguments they might try and put up, my gut-instinct is that we may yet see history repeat itself and a civil enforcement company be forced to recover a vehicle they have unlawfully seized, as happened to Jacobs when they unlawfully seized someone's VW Microbus for someone else's debt.

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Sweenyblue - please don't get your hopes up about compensation. Whatever peoples' feelings, I'll believe any redress when I see it.

Let me clarify, Wombats. The seizure was almost certainly unlawful and the civil enforcement company involved will, in all probability, be forced into a situation where they stand to get thrashed in the legal sense. The most likely outcome, as far as I can see, is that they are forced to recover the vehicle and to forgo their fees. It would be perverse to allow the civil enforcement company to charge or retain fees when those fees arise from unlawful actions. The cost of recovering the OP's Hackney Carriage taxi is unlikely to be low and having to compensate any mug who now has possession of the taxi is not going to be cheap either. The civil enforcement company has fecked-up spectacularly along with the Metropolitan Police. This is not going to do the Met's already-tarnished reputation any favours.

[ploddertom]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Can they charge enforcement fees if they get no response whey they visit.
By the way they did not visit on a couple of the days mention.


List of fees.
council debt. £127
first enforcement letter £11.20. 30/04/2014
enforcement fee 1. £145.00. 16/05/2013
visit 1. 39.00 16/05/2013
visit 2. £63.00 23/05/2013
visit 3. £67.00 03/06/2013
vat. £65.04
total £517.24

council debt. £202
first letter £11.20 12/12/2013
enforcement fee. £145.00 10/01/2013
visit 1 fee. £57.00 10/01/2014
visit 2 £68.00 20/012014
visit 3 £72.00 05/02/2014
vat. £70.64
total. £625.84

council debt £202.00
levy fee £59.70. 04/03/2014
enforcement fee 1. £111.80 04/03/2014
enforcement fee 3. £111.80 04/03/2014
storage fees. £566.61
vat. £169.98
total £1221.89

vehicle seized 04/04/2014

The fees I have highlighted in red were incurred post-6 April 214 and are, therefore, subject to the new regulations.

I suspect the first date is a typo given the others are all 2013, if they were post 6 April then that would meant the car was seized before the fees were charged.

[Sweeneyblue]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

First letter date should read 30/04/2013
sorry about that
are they allowed to charge an enforcement fee (£145)
if they did not make contact until taking car in March 2014

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

First letter date should read 30/04/2013
sorry about that
are they allowed to charge an enforcement fee (£145)
if they did not make contact until taking car in March 2014

If the seizure was carried out unlawfully, whether they are allowed to charge fees becomes academic.

[Sweeneyblue]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Standard Operating Procedures is to support the following MPS and
Traffic OCU objectives:


Make neighbourhoods safer through partnership working to reduce crime.


Disrupt criminal networks by denying criminals the use of the road.


These operating procedures are intended to provide clarity for both MPS
staff and partners regarding police powers in relation to civil debt
recovery, county court and magistrates court warrants.


There are benefits to the MPS and our communities by working in
partnership with external agencies. They provide additional enforcement
and intelligence gathering opportunities by proactively targeting a wide
range of criminal activity. Increased visible policing activity also
deters offenders making our communities safer and increasing public
confidence.


These procedures will allow a smooth partnership working between MPS
Traffic OCU and Civilian Enforcement Officers / Bailiff companies involved
in Traffic ANPR operations, whilst protecting the reputation of the MPS
and reduce the risk of civil litigation.


Protocols / Operating Procedures


For clarity these operating procedures have been divided into 2 parts and
appendices for reference purposes.


Part 1 deals with pre-event protocols / Service Level Agreement


Part 2 deals with operational deployment protocols


Appendix A provides guidance on MPS Policy and instructions


Appendix B summarises relevant legislation


PART 1


Pre-event protocols


1.1. MPS ANPR Operations are an intelligence-led tactical option
intended to target criminals who are using the roads network; Police
matters will take primacy over civil matters.


1.2. The MPS will work with Civilian Enforcement Officers as a
tactical option in circumstances when the nature of the ANPR deployment,
its risk assessment and community impact assessment make it safe and
appropriate to do so.


1.3. For every MPS Traffic OCU ANPR Unit / Borough / Civilian
Enforcement Officer partnership operation the following protocols must be
adhered to prior to the commencement of the operation:


1.3.1. The CEO Supervisor will contact ANPR Team / Borough
Sergeant providing them with sufficient time to plan an operation and
secure sufficient resources.


1.3.2. Any partnership operation will be at the discretion of the
ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant with consideration to corporate tasking
commitments, which will take priority.


1.3.3. The ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant in charge of the
operation will ensure that a risk assessment is conducted before
commencement of the operation this will include reference to the
attendance of CEOs as the MPS may have a duty of care for non-police
personnel engaged on an MPS operation.


1.3.4. The ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant will have discretion
regarding the attendance of CEOs at a MPS ANPR operation with
consideration to both corporate pre-planned and dynamic risk assessments,
which may include but not limited to:


· The venue of the stop site e.g. sufficient in size to accommodate
both police and partner agencies.
· Sufficient resources to provide duty of care for partner agencies
involved in policing operations.
· Intelligence and nature of the operation; e.g. Pre-planned
anti-gun crime operations may not be suitable for deployment of non-police
agencies.


1.3.5. Prior to any operation, it will be the responsibility for
the CEO Supervisor to confirm the accuracy of their information. They must
be in a position to show that a warrant is valid and that all reasonable
steps have been taken to trace the person named on the warrant have been
taken prior to engaging in an ANPR Operation. This will include:


· At least 2 visits to the last known address of the person named
on the warrant and enquiries have been unable to locate the person or
identify another address, or 1 visit where it is recorded that the person
has moved from the address and no forwarding address has been provided.
· At least one letter sent by recorded delivery or other registered
post at the last known address which has not been responded to.
· A recent check (within the preceding 3 weeks) with DVLA to
confirm the registered keeper of the vehicle. If the person named on the
warrant is no longer the registered keeper then that vehicle must be
removed from the database unless it can be demonstrated that the vehicle
is being falsely registered or still used by the person named on the
warrant and it is likely that they will be traced through the registration
number being held on the database.
· A recent check with the Motor Insurers Bureau, which shows that
the person named on the warrant is still insured to drive the vehicle –
this will provide reasonable grounds to suspect that the vehicle continues
to be used by the person named on the warrant.
· The agency will inform DVLA through their own protocols if they
suspect a person is committing an offence in relation to S.18 or Ss.20 to
24 of the Road Vehicles (Registration & Licensing) Regulation 2002 –
failing to correctly register the vehicle. This intelligence will be
passed to police through the normal procedures for inclusion on the wider
MPS Intelligence and ANPR Databases.
· All vehicles on the database must relate to a person named on a
warrant that is currently valid and not previously been executed.
· There must not be in existence any recorded dispute between the
enforcement agency and the subject of the warrant.


1.3.6. All CEO’s must satisfy themselves and be in a position to
satisfy the MPS that the data / information / intelligence that they hold
is up to date and accurate. In addition they must be in a position to
verify that it complies with relevant legislation e.g. Data Protection Act
1984, Human Rights Act 1998, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
etc.


1.3.7. The CEO Supervisor will provide the relevant MPS ANPR Team
Sergeant with a database of vehicle registration numbers relating to
outstanding warrants issued under S.125 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980
only providing that the wording of the warrant does not prevent a
constable executing it.


· This will be in a format for uploading onto MPS ANPR Database to
be used only for the duration of the operation.
· MPS ANPR Van / Database operator will upload this information
onto the local van at the commencement of the operation and will remove
this data at the end of the operation.
· Only warrants that have been issued under S125 of the Magistrates
Court Act 1980 will be uploaded onto the MPS database as these are the
only warrants that both CEOs and police have a power to execute, therefore
giving police officers a lawful power to stop a vehicle to execute these
warrants.


1.3.8. A CEO supervisor will be in attendance at all ANPR
operations. They will be responsible for ensuring that that CEOs are fully
briefed in relation to this policy and the relevant legal powers afforded
to police and CEOs.


1.3.9. The CEO Supervisor will maintain a duty of care for their
staff and will be responsible for conducting a risk assessment for their
staff in relation to each operation. A copy of this risk assessment will
be provided to the ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant.


1.3.10. As part of the planning for the operation, the CEO
supervisor will liaise with the ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant prior to the
operation to agree the positioning of CEO vehicles at stop sites. The
presence of any non-MPS vehicles at a stop site will be at the discretion
of the ANPR Team Sergeant.


1.3.11. The number of CEOs at a stop site will be at the discretion
of the ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant with consideration to the number of
police resources required to police the operation effectively and maintain
duty of care for non-police personnel. As a guide this would be 1 CEO
Supervisor and 2 CEO’s plus an ANPR / Database operator. Any more would be
likely to divert police resources from their primary function in dealing
with criminal offences. However, the ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant has full
discretion to allow more if resources and size of the stop zone allow.
This must be agreed prior to the operation.


1.3.12. Only one Civilian Enforcement Agency / Bailiff company will
be present at any operation. This will avoid conflict of interests at the
scene and ensure effective management of the stop site.


1.3.13. ANPR Operations may be at the request of other (B)OCU’s who
may have existing relationships with Civilian Enforcement Agencies whom
they wish to include in the operation. The ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant
receiving the request will ensure that the (B)OCU officer planning the
operation and the CEO supervisor are aware and agree to these operating
procedures prior to the commencement of any operation.


1.3.14. Verbal and written briefings before the stop site opens
should make clear to all Police Officers, Police Staff and CEOs present
that they will be required to operate within the parameters set out above.



1.3.15. Community Impact Assessments will be completed by the BOCU
where the operation is to take place, if deemed necessary by the BOCU SMT.


PART 2


Operational Protocols


2.1 MPS ANPR Operations are an intelligence led tactical option
intended to target criminals who use the road network; as such Police
matters will take primacy over civil matters.


2.2 To protect the reputation and minimise risk to the MPS and in
line with legal advice and corporate instructions, police officers will
only stop vehicles where there is a power to do so.


2.3 Police officers must ensure that they are acting impartially
and not be seen to be acting as civil debt recovery agents. The appendices
are intended to provide guidance for officers regarding powers in relation
to county court and magistrates court distress warrants.


2.4 For every MPS Traffic OCU ANPR Unit / Borough / Civilian
Enforcement Officer partnership operation the following Operational
Deployment Protocols must be adhered to throughout the duration of the
operation:


2.4.1. Police Officers Role in civil enforcement matters will be
restricted to the following:


· Remain impartial.
· Prevent Breach of the Peace.
· Deal with any Criminal Offences.
· Officers must ensure that any actions that they take are both
legal and appropriate.


2.4.2. The operational risk assessment and management of Traffic
OCU ANPR stop sites will be the responsibility of the ANPR Team Sergeant.
This includes but not limited to the volume of vehicles stopped at any one
time, the deployment of resources, discretion to stop or not stop any
vehicle.


2.4.3. The ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant has the discretion to
suspend or end an operation e.g. when there are insufficient police
resources to continue due to arrests.


2.4.4. Civilian Enforcement Officers will:


· Be smartly dressed.
· Wear a high visibility jacket that complies with European Health
& Safety Legislation.
· The jacket must clearly identify them as Civilian Enforcement
Officers to avoid any confusion with police officers in the eyes of the
general public or the media.
· CEOs will carry photographic identification, which will be
visible throughout the operation.


2.4.5. The ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant will have discretion to ask
any external agency to leave the site for any reason at any time if it is
felt that their presence is hindering the effectiveness of the policing
operation e.g. too many officers involved in civil disputes preventing
their dealing with ANPR hits for criminal offences.


2.4.6. MPS ANPR Operations are police led operations and as such
only MPS ANPR technology will be used to identify vehicles that are to be
stopped by police.


2.4.7. MPS officers retain the operational discretion not to stop a
particular vehicle for any reason and also to stop a vehicle not
identified by means of ANPR where there are other grounds for exercising
their power.


2.4.8. The ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant will have discretion to
allow Civilian Enforcement Officer vehicles or equipment to be used to
identify vehicles that are of interest to them. ANPR equipment must meet
the national standards for ANPR equipment and data must be handled in full
compliance with relevant legislation.


2.4.9. The CEO supervisor will have responsibility to ensure that
their actions are legal and proportionate.


2.4.10. Only MPS police officers in full uniform will stop
vehicles. The MPS officer will decide whether or not to stop a vehicle,
taking account of all the circumstances, including space at the stop site,
safety of personnel and any effect on the efficiency of the operation.


2.4.11. MPS police officers may stop a vehicle at the request of
the CEO supervisor if the following circumstances apply:


· When reasonable suspicion of criminal offending is pointed out to
an officer.
· For the purpose of executing a warrant providing that constable
with a power to arrest or to detain or enter and search the vehicle in
question, (but not purely for the purpose of executing a warrant directing
enforcement by civilian enforcement officers only) In respect of powers of
CEO and Police this would normally only be warrants issued under S.125 of
the Magistrates Courts Act 1980.
· The CEO supervisor provides reasonable suspicion that an offence
under S 18 or S.20 to S.24 of the Road Vehicles (Registration & Licensing)
Regulations 2002 (vehicle is not correctly registered). However see
section 1.3.5 above.


2.4.12. External agencies, including CEOs will NOT stop vehicles or
indicate in any way to a motorist that they wish him / her to stop that
vehicle. There is no power to do so and any attempt to exercise a power
would be unlawful and may be place other staff in danger.


2.4.13. Once a vehicle is stopped, MPS officers will speak with all
occupants, explaining the reasons why the vehicle has been stopped.
Officers will deal with relevant offences / matters as appropriate. Agency
staff should not be present during this conversation.


2.4.14. To ensure MPS impartiality throughout the operation CEOs
will not approach any vehicle or occupants whilst police are dealing and
will remain in their vehicle until called upon by police officers.


2.4.15. If a vehicle or occupants are also of interest to the CEO
the following protocols will be followed to ensure impartiality and
protect the reputation of the MPS:


· The CEO supervisor present at the site will contact the ANPR Team
/ Borough Sergeant and inform him / her that the vehicle is also of
interest to the agency.
· The ANPR Team / Borough Sergeant will inform the officer(s)
dealing with the vehicle.
· When the officers have concluded their dealings with the vehicle
they may invite the CEOs to speak with the occupants.
· The officer dealing with the vehicle will:


o Explain clearly to the occupants that police enquiries are
complete.
o Explain clearly to the occupants the role of the CEO who would
like to speak to them.
o Explain clearly to the occupants that if necessary, officers may
use power of arrest for 'breach of the peace' and detain those who are
obstructing the bailiff. However, officers are advised to avoid using this
power by making it plain what the position is, and what will happen if the
bailiff is resisted.
o Explain clearly that police involvement, unless other criminal
offences come to light will be to prevent a breach of the peace.
o Police will withdraw unless required to deal with a Breach of the
Peace or other criminal offences that come to light.


2.4.16. Any actions taken by CEO will only be after police
enquiries are complete. A CEO will not seize or immobilise a vehicle until
police have completed their enquiries and only if it is established that
the vehicle is owned or controlled by the person named on the warrant.


2.4.17. The CEO supervisor at the scene will accept responsibility
for providing for the welfare of any person affected by their execution of
a warrant whether or not they are present at the scene e.g. other
occupants of a vehicle seized in lieu of payment, vulnerable persons such
as children awaiting collection from school etc. MPS staff should only be
expected to provide this support in exceptional circumstances.


2.4.18. If a vehicle has activated a hit on MPS ANPR camera for no
other reasons other than a S.125 Magistrates Court Act warrant which was
loaded from the enforcement agency database onto the local van solely for
the purpose of that operation, then, subject to any other police matters
that require action, the ANPR officers may choose to allow the enforcement
agency to execute that warrant in order to free police resources for other
matters.
· The ANPR Van operator or stopping officers will inform the ANPR
Team / Borough Sergeant that the matter is a S.125 warrant.
· The ANPR / Borough Sergeant will inform the CEO supervisor
allowing them to approach the vehicle and take ownership of the
investigation / execution of the warrant.


2.4.19. CEOs will have responsibility for managing their own data
information systems and must ensure that it is up to date and accurate.


2.4.20. It will be the responsibility of the CEO at the scene to
verify the identification of any individual or information provided to
them in line with their internal policies and with due regard to relevant
legislation e.g. Data Protection Act 1984, Computer Misuse Act 1990,
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 etc.


2.4.21. All Police officers and staff must ensure the security of
MPS intelligence and information in accordance with MPS policies and
relevant legislation e.g. Data Protection Act 1984, Computer Misuse Act
1990, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 etc.


2.4.22. Police officers have no powers to share information from
the Police National Computer with CEO’s and indeed doing so may be
committing an offence contrary to the Data Protection Act 1998. Civil
Enforcement Agencies have appropriate data sharing provisions with DVLA
and through Her Majesties Court Service.


2.4.23. Police will only detain a person if there is a power to do
so. There is no power for police to detain a person on behalf of a CEO.


2.4.24. Police will only pursue a person or vehicle if there is a
power to do so. There is no power for police to pursue a person or vehicle
only by virtue of them declining to speak to the CEO.


2.4.25. Inappropriate behaviour by CEOs will be reported to the
CO15 ANPR Unit Manager who will inform the relevant agency management. The
MPS reserves the right to withdraw this SOP at any time.


Responsibilities


These standard operating procedures are owned by Superintendent
(Operations) CO15 Traffic OCU


These operating procedures are subject to annual review by Traffic OCU
ANPR Manager / Policy Inspector.


The relevant Traffic ANPR Team Sergeant will ensure that Borough leads and
CEO Supervisors are aware and agree to comply with these protocols prior
to the commencement of any partnership operation.


Appendices


Appendix A


MPS Policy / Instructions


MPS Policy regarding ANPR operations can be found at Police Notice
04/2005. Although there have been recent changes to the corporate tasking
process, these instructions generally remain valid.


http://intranet.aware.mps/DPA/notices/no...


There is currently no MPS Policy / Standard Operating Procedures
specifically in relation to partnership working with Civilian Enforcement
Officers / Bailiffs. However the following advice was posted on the
corporate news site 18th September 2006:


Police action when called to an incident to a bailiff executing a warrant:


· Officers should check the bailiff has valid identification and a
valid warrant to enforce.
· Officers' role is then to prevent a breach of the peace. Officers
have a legal obligation to ensure that the bailiff is not hindered in any
way. It must be remembered that a court has issued a warrant for property
to be seized.
· If necessary, officers may use power of arrest for 'breach of the
peace' and detain those who are obstructing the bailiff. However, officers
are advised to avoid using this power by making it plain what the position
is, and what will happen if the bailiff is resisted. Officers are aware
that they may be liable to the creditor or court for unreasonably
preventing a bailiff from enforcing a warrant, especially if officers'
actions result in the bailiff losing the opportunity to seize the
property.
· Officers should not prevent the bailiff from enforcing the
warrant just because someone is upset by their activity.
· Officers should neither assist the bailiff nor the debtor and, as
with any other civil dispute, remain impartial throughout.
· If the other party approaches officers with any complaints
regarding the bailiff then officer should direct them to the County Court.
· If an agent or bailiff is acting in a wholly unlawful manner
(e.g. assault / criminal damage) then officers must act to prevent them
committing any offences and deal with any offences that they have
committed.


The full article can be found at this link :

http://intranet.aware.mps/Corporate/corp...


Appendix B


Relevant Legislation & Police Powers


The following pieces of legislation appear most relevant in relation to
police and civilian enforcement officers powers in relation to warrants
and are provided as a guidance:


Section 125 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980


This provides for the issue and execution of warrants and provides
constables with a power to execute warrants acting within their own police
area. It also provides powers under Section 125A(1) for Civilian
Enforcement Officers.


The warrants referred to will generally be Non-Payment of Fines warrants
issued by magistrate’s courts.


By virtue of S.125D(1) and S.125D(2) there is no longer a requirement to
be in possession of the warrant. However by virtue of S.125D(4) the
warrant must be produced on demand of the person arrested or as soon as
practicable


This section therefore provides police officers with a power to execute
these warrants but would not necessarily allow for the person to be
detained by police in order that CEOs execute the warrant.


Section 85 County Courts Act 1984


This relates to the execution of judgements or orders for payment of
money.


It has been often quoted that police officers have a duty to assist
officers of the court executing these warrants by virtue of Section 85(4),
which states “It shall be the duty of every constable within his
jurisdiction to assist in the execution of every such warrant”


However this section has been restricted by virtue of Statutory Instrument
1993/2073 - The Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts Order 1993 (article 6)


This section does not afford police officers with a power to execute the
warrant and there is no power for police officers to detain a person in
order for CEOs to execute the warrant. Police officers powers in relation
to these warrants would be limited to the common law power to prevent a
breach of the peace.


Section 10 of the Criminal Law Act 1977


This creates the offence of obstructing enforcement officers or court
officers in the execution of process for possession against unauthorised
occupiers.


This section has again been quoted as providing a power of arrest for
anyone obstructing a bailiff. However it must be noted that the wording of
the section is specific and applies to recovery of premises and is not
applicable to enforcement of warrants under the Magistrates or County
Courts Acts above.


Common Law


Police officers hold a Common Law duty to prevent a breach of the peace.
'A breach of the peace is committed whenever harm is done, or is likely to
be done to a person, or, in his presence to his property, or, whenever a
person is in fear of being harmed through an assault, affray, riot or
other disturbance'.


There is a power of arrest at Common Law:


(a) Where a breach of the peace is committed by the person arrested
in the presence of the person making the arrest; OR


(b) Where the person making the arrest reasonably believes that
such a breach will be committed in the immediate future by the person whom
he has arrested, although no breach has occurred at that stage; OR


(c) Where a breach of the peace has been committed by the person
arrested and the person making the arrest reasonably believes that a
renewal of it is threatened.


To justify an arrest using (b) or (c) above the threat of a breach of the
peace or renewal must be both REAL and IMMINENT.


S.18 & S.20 to 24 of Road Vehicles (Registration & Licensing) Regulation
2002


These regulations refer to driver obligations to inform DVLA of changes to
registered keeper. Police officers have a power to deal with the offence
of failing to notify change of keeper details as they identify them e.g.
at a roadside check and would have a power to stop a vehicle that they
reasonably believe is not correctly registered.

[Sweeneyblue]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

The police have no power to detain a vehicle

2.4.23. Police will only detain a person if there is a power to do
so. There is no power for police to detain a person on behalf of a CEO.




2.4.24. Police will only pursue a person or vehicle if there is a
power to do so. There is no power for police to pursue a person or vehicle
only by virtue of them declining to speak to the CEO.

[bluebottle]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Looks like the Met and Newlyns are IDS.

[Wombats]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

I tried going to the two links to read the full article, but neither works unfortunately for me. Do you have a link to your source for this? :beagle:

[Sweeneyblue]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Freedom of information request

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...utgoing-314750

[Sweeneyblue]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

This is a brilliant resource check it out

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

I tried going to the two links to read the full article, but neither works unfortunately for me. Do you have a link to your source for this? :beagle:

They don't work for me either, they appear to be links to an intranet, which you can only access when you are within the organisation's network, as opposed to a public website. :nerd: :confused2:

[Sweeneyblue]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

You might have to Just register @whatdotheyknow.com
first but great site on previous information requests

[Wombats]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

Freedom of information request

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...utgoing-314750

Indeed a brilliant resource for lots of stuff. I assume you've read the very relevant post about this subject OTR. It is a must read.

[Sweeneyblue]

Re: Stop by police during routine check baliff took my pco reg.taxi

OTR no what was it?
send it to me please ty