A ROAD fines expert has identified a loophole which may save hundreds of people being hounded by Mersey Gateway bailiffs.

Dr Adam Snow, a senior law lecturer at Liverpool John Moores University, believes he has spotted a mistake in the recovery notices issued to drivers who fail to pay fines for non-toll payment.

Recovery notices, known as TE3 forms,  warn people their possessions may be seized if they do not pay outstanding penalty charges notices (PCNs) they owe.

They are issued by toll enforcement company Merseyflow around 56 days after the initial PCN is sent and lead to bailiff enforcement action if ignored or forgotten about.

People have seen unpaid £2 tolls spiral into hundreds of pounds worth of debt through this charging system, which has been criticised for impacting low income families and people with mental health issues.

But Dr Snow has revealed how drivers worried about the threat of bailiffs may legally contest their TE3s after spotting what he thinks is an error – known in legal terms as a "procedural impropriety" – in the charging order.

Under Road User Charging Scheme Regulations set out by the Government, only the charging authority – in this case Halton Borough Council – are entitled to issue orders for recovery of unpaid penalties.

But as the photo below suggests, some TE3s have been issued with Mersey Gateway Crossing as the applicant – something which Dr Snow says "doesn't exist" as a body that can enforce such charges.

He explained: "These cases involve people who have not paid their Penalty Charge Notice and so someone – "Mersey Gateway Crossing" –  on the TE3’s I have seen, has applied for an order for recovery.

"Firstly the "charging authority" – an important phrase -  must issue a Charge Certificate under Regulation 17

"Now the TE3 forms I’ve seen don’t include the charging authority as the applicant, they include Mersey Gateway Bridge as the applicant.

Basically this means the authority must be “Halton Borough Council” not "Mersey Gateway Crossing".

"So long and short of it is that Halton have gone wrong again potentially here by not following correct procedure."

The Traffic Penalty Tribunal, where appeals against Mersey Gateway fines are made, have also confirmed they are aware of this mistake.

A spokesperson said: "I can confirm it has come to the attention of the Traffic Penalty Tribunal that the Orders for Recovery issued by the Traffic Enforcement Centre in relation to the Mersey Gateway Road User Charging Scheme state that 'Mersey Gateway Crossing' is the 'applicant'.

"Because in law the applicant should be Halton Borough Council, the Chief Adjudicator has raised the issue through the appropriate channels and awaits a response."

It is unclear what this could mean for the thousands of people who have been visited by bailiffs, many of whom have forked out huge sums to get rid of them.

Dr Snow said those with threat of bailiffs looming may have legal grounds to contest this – but it would require someone brave enough to take the matter on.

He said: "The aggrieved applicant would need to fill in a N244 form for a stay of proceedings, not any TE forms.

"What the effect of that stay would be is unknown at the minute. I think it would require someone brave enough to take the matter on.

"My preliminary view would be that at the very least Halton Council should not be allowed to enforce the current TE3's,  and any fees already accumulated by enforcement agents (bailiffs) should either be borne by Halton or not recoverable.

"Basically any debt owed is owed to Halton not Mersey Gateway Crossing and it is confusing (to say the least) for recipients of TE3 forms to be told that they owe money to an organisation they won’t recognise or potentially understand."

Dr Snow suggested  that people who go down this route may still be liable to pay their original Penalty Charge Notice fees, but could be successful in wavering the additional bailiff fees.

He continued: "PCNs issued for non-payment of crossing state "Halton Borough Council "We" serve this penalty charge notice on you …"

"Anyone receiving a TE3 notice following non-payment may legitimately be confused as to why some organisation called "Merseyflow" or "Mersey Gateway Crossing" are now saying they owe them £70 + bailiff fees, and indeed given some of the claimed tactics of the enforcement agents (bailiffs) may think the form is actually a scam.

"This reinforces my belief that at the very least the fees charged above those requested in the TE3 form should be waived or borne by Halton BC."

Halton Council have been contacted for comment over Dr Snow's findings.

It is the latest blunder to be exposed by resentful toll payers following a number of high profile cases regarding the legal enforceability of the tolls.

Last year, the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT) ruled five drivers were not liable to pay the £2 charge because Halton Borough Council had not specified the exact price of the toll in  Mersey Gateway Road User Charging Scheme Order 2017, and only said a range of what the price should be.

The landmark ruling was followed by a case earlier this year which saw a  genius driver expose  a catalogue of errors in the wording of two PCNs he received for failing to pay the £2 crossing charge on June 15, 2018.

Incredibly, one of those errors was use of the word "toll" in the PCN – when the legal term is actually road user charge. The ruling meant the driver did not have to pay the toll or the PCNs that came with it.

On both occasions, the local authority have insited it is “business as usual” on the Mersey Gateway – warning drivers must pay their toll if they want to avoid being charged with fines.