When a bailiff attempts to take control of a vehicle that does not belong to the debtor named on the Warrant of Control, they may erroneously claim that the court has issued a warrant specifically against the vehicle involved in the traffic contravention.

The bailiff has made a misrepresentation of the law to achieve a benefit for himself or another and commits an offence under section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.

The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) issues a Warrant of Control against a 'respondent'—the person or company listed as the registered keeper on the date of the alleged offence—not against a particular vehicle.

Under Civil Procedure Rule 83.15, a bailiff must separately apply for and obtain a Warrant of Delivery to remove a specified vehicle legally. Therefore, if a bailiff implies they have such a warrant, you should demand to see it.

A Warrant of Control, issued under Civil Procedure Rule 75.7 by the Traffic Enforcement Centre, does not specify which of the debtor’s goods the bailiff may take.

Importantly, the vehicle in question may not even belong to the debtor, especially if it is leased, on hire purchase, or the respondent named on the Warrant of Control has sold the vehicle to a new owner.

Warrants empower bailiffs to take control of goods that belong to the respondent (the debtor), not necessarily the vehicle involved in the traffic contravention.

If a bailiff has wrongfully taken your vehicle for someone else's debt, you may file a Third Party Claim to Controlled Goods or, if you lease or hire the vehicle, apply for an injunction to have the bailiff deliver your vehicle back to you.