Author Topic: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops  (Read 5651 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

EDW2000

  • Guest
Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« on: 07 July, 2014, 10:16:19 PM »
Look at the email of 6 August and  11 Dec.

Can't tell the name of the Bailiffs but Newlyn is mentioned in the email.

 
« Last Edit: 07 July, 2014, 10:18:46 PM by EDW2000 »

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #1 on: 08 July, 2014, 08:01:21 AM »
I know this is largely irrelevant since the Met have now suspended ANPR Operations with Bailiffs, but do we know what this person is offering 15% of?
These operations are usually done on overtime for the Police, so if that 15% would cover that cost, then it seems fair enough that it saves the Taxpayers money.

EDW2000

  • Guest
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #2 on: 08 July, 2014, 11:19:49 AM »
It appears someone is offering money in order for the police to carry out unlawful stops so that bailiffs can collect debts.


Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4364
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #3 on: 08 July, 2014, 11:56:04 AM »
These operations are usually done on overtime for the Police, so if that 15% would cover that cost, then it seems fair enough that it saves the Taxpayers money.

You see it as a way of saving taxpayers money Dick. I see it as an attempt to bribe the police in order to be allowed in on what are extremely lucrative operations for the bailiffs.

Rightly or wrongly (time will tell as to their legality), these operations were running smoothly in Croydon with two bailiff companies regularly being asked to attend with the police. Then a third bailiff company decides they want a piece of the action and a financial inducement (bribe) is offered to the police via the officer leading the operations.

Why would a company do that? It can only be in an attempt to persuade an officer to recommend changes to a system that was working perfectly well.

The Met quite rightly refused the money, but that doesn't detract from the fact that what the bailiffs were offering was a bribe. What really gets my goat is that they have been so open about it, probably because they are arrogant enough to believe that because of a close working relationship with the cops, they have the protection of the law above any other citizen in this country.

Rant over.
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

EDW2000

  • Guest
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #4 on: 08 July, 2014, 12:19:39 PM »
These operations are usually done on overtime for the Police, so if that 15% would cover that cost, then it seems fair enough that it saves the Taxpayers money.

You see it as a way of saving taxpayers money Dick. I see it as an attempt to bribe the police in order to be allowed in on what are extremely lucrative operations for the bailiffs.

Rightly or wrongly (time will tell as to their legality), these operations were running smoothly in Croydon with two bailiff companies regularly being asked to attend with the police. Then a third bailiff company decides they want a piece of the action and a financial inducement (bribe) is offered to the police via the officer leading the operations.

Why would a company do that? It can only be in an attempt to persuade an officer to recommend changes to a system that was working perfectly well.

The Met quite rightly refused the money, but that doesn't detract from the fact that what the bailiffs were offering was a bribe. What really gets my goat is that they have been so open about it, probably because they are arrogant enough to believe that because of a close working relationship with the cops, they have the protection of the law above any other citizen in this country.

Rant over.


Is the right answer!

Read email of 25 March 2014 time 1.53, MPS explains how they will stop a vehicle for a bailiff to "check for driver docs". I am lodging a complaint about this abuse of power.
« Last Edit: 08 July, 2014, 01:40:58 PM by EDW2000 »

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #5 on: 08 July, 2014, 11:17:50 PM »
If Bailiffs wish to help fund an operation (Op. Cubo) that takes 100,000 vehicles that were using our roads illeagally off those roads or were being driven by wanted (some on some very serious charges) criminals and putting them behind bars, then IMHO it is a good use of that money, money which can then be used for other policing purposes. Obviously someone in the Met decided otherwise.

TfL fund the Mets Roads and Transport Policing Command to the tune of millions of £'s - is that a bribe as well?

EDW2000

  • Guest
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #6 on: 09 July, 2014, 11:14:40 AM »
If Bailiffs wish to help fund an operation (Op. Cubo) that takes 100,000 vehicles that were using our roads illeagally off those roads or were being driven by wanted (some on some very serious charges) criminals and putting them behind bars, then IMHO it is a good use of that money, money which can then be used for other policing purposes. Obviously someone in the Met decided otherwise.

TfL fund the Mets Roads and Transport Policing Command to the tune of millions of £'s - is that a bribe as well?


No problem with taking uninsured vehicles off the road, I hope they crush them, my problem is with the police abusing s.163 powers pretending to stop someone for their documents and then thug bailiffs moving in for some easy pickings. Did you watch Parking Mad?

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4364
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #7 on: 09 July, 2014, 12:12:08 PM »
If Bailiffs wish to help fund an operation (Op. Cubo) that takes 100,000 vehicles that were using our roads illeagally off those roads or were being driven by wanted (some on some very serious charges) criminals and putting them behind bars, then IMHO it is a good use of that money, money which can then be used for other policing purposes. Obviously someone in the Met decided otherwise.

TfL fund the Mets Roads and Transport Policing Command to the tune of millions of £'s - is that a bribe as well?

Do you not see the difference between an enforcement authority like TfL (or indeed any council who enforce parking measures), and a limited company Dick?

According to you, provided it saves taxpayer money we should outsource the lucrative parts of the police service to the highest private company bidder. Is that what you are suggesting, because that way lies a very slippery slope?

When it comes to enforcement authorities, there are procedures that should ensure the police's independent role when dealing with parking enforcement. When that independence is potentially compromised, the checks and balances built into the system should trigger a procedure whereby that independence is tested for robustness. That is exactly what has happened in the case of joint police/bailiff operations which, as you know have now been suspended pending an investigation.

There would be no investigation unless there was serious doubt about their lawfulness, and we will have to wait for the outcome.

However, one thing is not in doubt. THAT IS A BRIBE.
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline Mr Mustard

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 40
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #8 on: 09 July, 2014, 02:49:50 PM »
If bailiffs can afford to "donate" 15% of their fees to the police then bailiff fees are 15% too high

EDW2000

  • Guest
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #9 on: 09 July, 2014, 02:56:50 PM »
15% of what is the question?

Is it 15% of the gross or the cost to MPS?

More FOI going in.

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #10 on: 09 July, 2014, 11:24:56 PM »
I am a member of a Police Service, and if there are "lucrative" parts of it, then I don't know what they are - it certainly isn't my little part. Payroll is already outsourced, as are things like cleaning and maintenance of both property and vehicles to the extent that I'm not allowed to change a vehicle indicator bulb - not because of the usual 'elf n safety' but because it would be breach of contract, so the vehicle has to be taken away on a tow truck to have the bulb changed! Maybe someone on here could point me in the direction of the "lucrative" areas, and I'll put in a transfer request?  ;D

As for the idea that TfL is not a Ltd Co....who owns London Underground Ltd?

The only thing I could see being done wrong by the Police on "Parking Mad" was that they should have said something along the lines of 'thank you for your time sir/madam, you may go if you wish, but this gentleman/lady is a bailiff who would like to talk to you'. That's how we did it last time I went on one of those operations, anyway. Obviously, due to the editing on "Parking Mad" we shall never know if this was done or not.

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #11 on: 09 July, 2014, 11:25:34 PM »
15% of what is the question?

Is it 15% of the gross or the cost to MPS?

More FOI going in.

Exactly!

EDW2000

  • Guest
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #12 on: 17 July, 2014, 10:48:30 AM »
http://www.ccrmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11655&Itemid=33


Correspondence on number-plate recognition notices revealed    PDF    Print    E-mail
Wednesday, 16 July 2014

A significant set of correspondence between the Metropolitan Police’s ANPR Operations section and private enforcement companies was revealed last week, after a long-running set of Freedom of Information requests.

As the documents were made public, it became clear that the police have been co-operating over a long period with EAs, enforcing council tax and other debts, by stopping vehicles in roadblocks.

Although the practice has now been suspended (see page 26, CCR-PS, July edition) by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), the correspondence so far released shows that at least one enforcement company, Newlyn, offered to make a 15% “donation” to police,

Another piece of correspondence turns to co-operation between EAs and their ANPR equipped vehicles, with at least one instance where the enforcement company offers it’s service to the police.

In the correspondence, Whyte & Co, make an offer to the police: “Are there any VRMs you would like added to the ANPR systems to assist your staff on the day, if so can you e-mail a list preferably in Excel format to before midday on the 6 Aug (2013) so we can get it loaded to the vans."

Paul Whyte, a partner at Whyte & Co, told CCR-PS: “In respect of the request for VRM's - it is not usual procedure to offer such a facility. In this instance we offered to utilise a valued ANPR facility for police use by way of VRM only (not the police database as reported by some). This offer was made after a conversation whereby a police officer had commented on a number of highly sought after cars for serious crimes and the offer was made in the spirit of partnership but knowing it was very likely to be refused. This is the one and only occasion on which such an offer was made and it was not taken up.”

In an e-mail dated 15 July 2013, a police officer responds to an offer of assistance, so: “OK many thanks for this. The team that is going down to Thornton Heath Ponds really need to be mindful of not interrupting/disturbing the businesses down there. On the last CUBO (operational name for police roadblocks) we had a number of complaints from them and I think this was partly down to the bailiffs taking an unreasonable amount of time dealing with motorists. As discussed I know you are in agreement that they are dealt with efficiently so not as to either clog the site up or make the police officers jobs harder down there.

We contacted Newlyn and Whyte & Co, to ask them for their views.

Paul Whyte added: “Third party agencies including VOSA, immigration and local authorities have been working with the police on such operations for a number of years now.

“They attend upon invitation and are in attendance as guests - it has been mooted such operations are orchestrated by the enforcement agent and clearly this is not the case.

“I am aware of the current suspension pending a review of police operating proceedings and therefore we are unable to comment on police matters.

“I am also aware of the “chatter” currently in progress on some (consumer advice) websites which disappointingly, although not surprisingly, argues an end to such joint operations.

“These operations proceed regardless of our attendance and as such there is no cost to the taxpayer when we do attend. As all vehicles stopped by the police are first subject to their own enquires a number of arrests have been made over the last twelve months in respect of serious offences (drugs/firearms), this before any enquiry can be made in respect of our own enforcement matters.

“There is no doubt that the synergy of these operations, no matter how distasteful to some, produce results that actually bring added value to the taxpayer.

“In the matter of any "donation" I can confirm Whyte & Co have never offered one, nor have we ever been asked to make one, in respect of these operations.”

David Smith of Newlyn, told CCR-PS: “MPS state that operations such as CUBO offer a demonstrable and practical deterrent to non-compliant motorists. These exercises are supported by our clients, the local authority, and indeed we are actively encouraged to participate whenever possible because of the positive results that are achieved both in terms of publicity and the enforcement process.

“These operations, which have been running for several years now, were devised to involve task forces from multiple agencies to combat the illegal activities of some drivers. The basis of our involvement in the operation is to deal with persistent evaders and motorists who fail to pay their outstanding PCN’s.

“To the best of my knowledge we have never collected any council tax arrears on these operations only PCN's. As citied elsewhere in this story these initiatives by the police and government agencies have resulted in arrests for firearm and drug offences as well as identifying drivers with no road fund licence or insurance; including illegally using their cars as unlicensed mini cabs. These roadside exercises provide a benefit to the community as a whole by removing dangerous drivers and their vehicles from the roads. In addition to the above benefits we are able to recover outstanding Penalty Charge Notices that have gone unpaid despite numerous requests prior to the roadside operations.

“These operations are run in addition to the normal duties of the police in a much smaller way similar to crowd control at football matches, sporting events and music concerts, as such they increase the demand on the budgets of local forces. With this in mind Newlyn Plc offered to make a contribution of 15% to the cost of each operation undertaken. The suggestion of a contribution was made with the sole aim of supporting this valuable function as carried out by the police and other government body’s and not as is intimated in the story as a payment of any other kind.

“Newlyn believe that without the support of all of the organisations involved, the running of these campaigns would cease due to lack of funding. Something that the anti-enforcement groups would welcome and which we believe is demonstrated by the “volume” of activity already seen on these types of forums following the release of the information obtained as part of the FOI request.

“Newlyn denies there is any suggestion of wrong doing on its part as the company is not the sole beneficiary of the operation nor does it control the number of cars processed on each exercise, this number varies on each occasion; we are offering a service to our clients. the local authority for which we have been appointed.”



That's right, you made the offer because you knew it would be refused.

EDW2000

  • Guest
Re: Bailiffs offer 15% "Donation" to Met Police for PCN stops
« Reply #13 on: 17 July, 2014, 10:50:49 AM »
I have asked the ICO to review the redactions in the FOI's. Cleary MPS is trying to hide something.