Form 55 - Notice of Seizure

[BailiffIsKnocking]

Hi, I need some help. I had one of these left by Peter Nonle Watt.

 

I had a CCJ in April for some outstanding rent on a business unit. I had no notification that bailiffs may be attending.

 

They want £3000 which I don't have.

 

What can I do about this??

[renegadeimp]

I think he;s a HCEO. I'll flag your thread for admin notice and to get it moved to the right forum.

[ims21]

Thread moved to Bailiff forum

[ploddertom]

Hi, I need some help. I had one of these left by Peter Nonle Watt.

 

I had a CCJ in April for some outstanding rent on a business unit. I had no notification that bailiffs may be attending.

 

They want £3000 which I don't have.

 

What can I do about this??

 

Is it possible you can start from the beginning so we can see what we are dealing with?

[BailiffIsKnocking]

Is it possible you can start from the beginning so we can see what we are dealing with?

 

Ok, I had a business unit three years ago which I vacated.

 

The landlord wanted to charge me money that I didn't agree with.

 

Up to this point I've been ignoring the request for payment.

 

He applied to the court for a CCJ which was granted in April. I'm only aware of this after checking my credit file.

 

I did have the blue Northampton forms, but chose to ignore those as well. (Stupidly)

 

I have had no correspondence from anybody, including the court. Today high court bailiffs turn up while we were out and levied on items outside the house.

 

I don't know what to do. Should I have had paperwork to say the court decided in the creditors favour?

[ploddertom]

As you ignored the original paperwork from the Court your Creditor will have been awarded Judgment but you should have been informed of this by the Court. As for it now having been transferred for enforcement then unfortunately there is no requirement for anyone to inform you and the first you will know is when someone calls - which is what has happened.

 

In what capacity did you trade - sole trader, partnership, Ltd Co etc? Is the Writ in this name? You say they have levied on goods outside - can you list them exactly as described on the Notice of Seizure?

[tomtubby]

You also state that the High Court Enforcement Officer "levied upon goods outside". Can you be a bit more specific...such as; did they levy upon a car, lorry, caravan etc. If so...do these items belong to you....are they on finance etc.

[BailiffIsKnocking]

You also state that the High Court Enforcement Officer "levied upon goods outside". Can you be a bit more specific...such as; did they levy upon a car, lorry, caravan etc. If so...do these items belong to you....are they on finance etc.

 

I traded as sole trader.

 

They levied on two unroadworthy cars (restoration projects) in my drive, along with a trailer, set if alloy wheels and garden patio furniture. All of which I own. Along with "all other goods required to satisfy writ"

It also seems that I'm missing a page, as there are some numbered points, but these only start at point 5.

I just want to get this resolved. I don't know how/who to make an offer of payment by instalments

[wonkeydonkey]

You need to apply for a stay of execution to the writ N244 and also make a realistic offer by way of an N245

 

With both of these if you are on any benefits you need to check if you qualify for fee remission(see form ex160)

 

Take a look at the aforementioned forms and if you struggle to complete or understand them, then come back here and help will be at hand.

 

Applying for the stay has to be your priority and if your local County Court is classed as a district registry then you can file your application there in person and explain it is urgent, if not then you will need to send to the High Court as given on the writ.

 

The N245 is pretty straight forward and you will need to complete an income and expenditure sheet to show your offer is the maximum amount affordable to you. When doing this always remember you are allowed to have a 'life' so only ever offer what you can comfortably afford and will be able to sustain payment to.

Edited June 26, 2013 by wonkeydonkey

[wonkeydonkey]

Following the above and if successful all enforcement is halted and unless you fail at a future date to make a payment on time the matter is under your control.

 

I would suggest you write to the HCEO company concerned and advise them of your set aside application but remember until such time as the stay is rubber stamped they are entitled to continue with enforcement, if they return while everything is being processed then it will be frowned on by the courts if they fail to take everything into consideration.

 

It will also pay you to rquest a full breakdown of the fees applied to the writ (in writing) and then post them up here so we can see if they are'questionable' as if often the case.

[HCEOs]

It also seems that I'm missing a page, as there are some numbered points, but these only start at point 5.

 

Usually it is page one of a three part form 55 (2 x NoS and the WPA) that has the amount owed which includes points 1 to 4. As you know the amount owed I would presume you have points 1 to 4 also.

[BailiffIsKnocking]

Thanks for your help

 

Breakdown of the Total Levy

 

Judgement Debt - £1853.95

Judgement Costs - £0

Execution Costs - £60

Interest 8% to 1/5/13 - £27.23 @ £0.41 per day from 1/5/13

Sheriff's Fees - £822.76

VAT - £164.55

TOTAL - £2928.49

 

Sheriff's Fees seem pretty damn high to me!

[tomtubby]

Sorry to any High Court Enforcement Officer who may be reading this reply but I personally consider that "Sheriff fees" of £822 on a debt os £1853 is steep.

[jaffro]

Sorry to any High Court Enforcement Officer who may be reading this reply but I personally consider that "Sheriff fees" of £822 on a debt os £1853 is steep.

 

i totally agree with you... WD will vouch that we had similar amounts to a similar debt.........not right at all they make things ten times worse in my eyes as people who cant afford the debt certainly cant afford the debt with there "steep" fees added.......... and i for 1 would not say sorry if my comment is read by any but i think they are the lowest of the low

 

and in fact after checking they added £1300 for a debt of just £695.....making it £2100 pound near enough ....rant over

[brassnecked]

Distress as a remedy is problematic, as if the debtor cannot afford to repay the original debt, there is no chance they can afford it after the fees have doubled or tripled it.

[ploddertom]

I'm still to be convinced that HCEO's are any more different than any other type of Bailiff particularly with regard to the fees they charge.

[jaffro]

I'm still to be convinced that HCEO's are any more different than any other type of Bailiff particularly with regard to the fees they charge.

 

 

i agree PT they like to think they are different because they have "special" powers so they say ...the words "high court" give them super powers so they think...but when it comes down to it they are not much different and they charge ridiculous amounts of money that most dont have.

[tomtubby]

What worries me about HCEO's is the frequent way in which an officer attending the premises of a debtor levies upon 5 or 6 random cars and, when questioned try to rely upon the old "chestnut" of Observer v Gordon which was even dismissed by the Ombudsman in the case of council tax. In so many cases that I have seen the officers knows perfectly well that the vehicles in question are nothing to do with the debtor and to my mind "levies" in any event so as to ensure that he can charge such high fees.

 

The case of Observer v Gordon has long since been overtaken by the appeal case of DSI Foods where the owner of a High Court company ( Shergroup Ltd) attempted to claim protection from the court for a significant PERSONAL claim when her officers went to the WRONG address. Despite being shown evidence that the goods in the premises were nothing to do with the debtor, the officers "seized goods" and in doing so.....barged their way into a "secure area" of the premises and contaminated a a significant amount of food ( the company have contracts with various airlines to provide in flight meals for passengers). The officers only left after the company's accountant was forced to pay the debt from his personal credit card.

 

The Judge made it clear that the officers must NOT assume that all goods on the premises belong to company "A" and instead, they MUST ensure that they read any documents shown to them and take into consideration what is being told to them VERBALLY by the owner of the goods.

 

The owner of Shergroup LOST the case.