Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
I've been reading your forum for some time now but only just joined so I'm very new to this and apologise in advance if I do anything wrong!
I would very much appreciate anyones help and/or advice.
My husband and I were taken to court over our daughter's non-attendance of school (please don't judge us as we also have 2 sons and no problems there)!
We disagreed with this decision in the first place as we had done everything we could with very little support from the school and Education Welfare. Therefore, we decided to plead Not Guilty against the advice of the Court Clerk.
My husband represented us in court as we were not elligible for Legal Aid.
The Magistrates found us Guilty but with an Absolute Discharge.
EWO had put forward their costs of £478.85 for both parents which the Magistrates slashed to £200.00 for both. This was on 31st July 2007. My husband stood infront of the Magistrates and told them that he wouldn't pay it as he felt we hadn't done anything wrong and we had not had the help and support we had asked for. The Magistrates agreed but the way the law is worded, they had to find us Guilty!
Anyhow, the next thing we heard was by way of two letters from Drakes bailiffs. One addressed to my husband for a 'fine' of £100.00 plus bailiff fees of £50.00 for a 'non-standard motoring offence' and the other addressed to me (although they put 'Diane' instead of 'Diana')! These were dated 26th October 2007. My husband phoned Drakes and told them their paperwork was incorrect and also their charges for a letter were extortionate.
We heard no more until there was a knock on the door on 21st May 2008. There stood an enormous gentleman from Marstons Group (it was only at this time we found out that Drakes had become Marstons). He was about 6' 4" and wore the customary 'bailiff' uniform of Dr Martin boots and black leather box jacket! He had with him 'warrants of Distress' for 'non-standard motoring offence' for my husband and once again 'Diane'. We informed him that we did not have any outstanding 'fines' for any motoring offences and that he needs to check with his office and the court for the correct paperwork. As he started to tap in numbers on his mobile, my husband said that we were going to close the door while he did that and we would also make a call to the court. At this point, the bailiff put his foot in the door and said 'I can't allow you to do that, I'm afraid' and he pushed open the door with some force which knocked my husband back against the wall. My husband then pushed the man out of the door at which point the bailiff pretty much just picked him up and threw him to the ground. I remember him being pretty intimidating before all this as I had already said to him 'just because you're a big bloke don't think you can intimidate us, we know our rights'. I then called '999' and the police eventually came but, as usual, they were on the bailiffs side as no-one seems to know the law regarding bailiffs (or is is that they are, in fact, above the law!). They eventually all left around 2pm, however, before leaving, the bailiff very kindly posted two 'Removal Notices' through our letterbox. One addressed to my husband with the time at 13.00 and the other addressed to 'Diane' timed at 16.04! As I said, they all left around 2pm which, correct me if I'm wrong, is 14.00!
Anyhow, after much complaining to the courts and police and pretty much banging our heads against a brick wall, we had yet another visit from another bailiff of Marstons on 27th May 2008 (sorry, forgot to say, in the meantime we had been up to the court to pay £50 off each of the 'costs' leaving £50 each to pay). This one had a copy of my husbands 'Warrant of Distress' with the 'motoring' crossed out in black biro and the words 'attendance at school' handwritten above it! He wouldn't actually let us see it or give us a copy but I was filming it and managed to get a good close up of the paperwork (the bailiff was told we were recording the whole thing). He didn't have my warrant with him (how convenient as it was probably addressed to 'Diane' with the same crossing out and such!). Again, we explained the situation and told him that he also had the wrong paperwork and the behaviour of his colleague was unacceptable etc etc. He then called the police as he was adamant that he wasn't leaving without the money. After about two hours of conversation outside between my husband, the bailiff and the PO, the bailiff decided that he was going to call a clamping company to come and clamp our car which the PO agreed to. We were in a no win situation and ended up having to pay two lots of £283.25 bringing the original £200.00 costs up to £666.50! The pleasure of paying an extra £466.50 for having all the wrong paperwork (which we didn't even get to see), having to put up with all the abuse and to then rub salt in the wounds, the receipt he wrote out to me was in the name of 'Diane'!
I'm sorry it's so long but I needed to give you as many details as possible.
We are not going to let them get away with it but we don't know what is the best way forward now. Any help would be very much appreciated.
I must also add that my husband had been in constant contact with the courts warrants manager who said that the court had sent the paperwork to the bailiffs correctly and the mistakes were the bailiffs but the bailiffs told my husband that the courts were lying to him!! What should we do next? Please help!
There are various people that deal with complaints such as this at HMCS. If you let me know the area of the country then I can provide you with further details. Please only provide this by private message.
The bailiff MUST let you know where you can inspect the original warrant. You MUST write for a copy. You are entitled to see these. The slight name difference will not be sufficient to have this invalid.
The Warrant is important as the bailiff has just 180 days in which to enforce it. You must ask for copies.
Finally,in order to clamp the car the bailiff must have been provided with a Clamping Order. Again, you need to request details.
This is yet another example of police not knowing what the rules are. At the very least, the police should have asked to see copies of the distress Warrants.
HunnyB, I presume that for whatever reason you were unable to comply with the school attendance order Education Act 1996 (c. 56)
As a Level 3 fine has been imposed by the magistrate`s court, Marston`s do have additional entry rights, although their conduct in executing this warrant is shockingly poor.
We were never given a school attendance order we merely had countless meetings in school where the EWO's would ask my daughter if any decisions they made were okay with her!
Also, the Magistrates actually said that after listening to our argument, they were not imposing a fine on us at all and our guilty sentence was with an absolute discharge but we were ordered to pay £200 costs to the Education Welfare. Not sure if fines and costs come under the same category.
At the moment I can`t find absolute reference in the education act that allows enforcement of a unpaid costs order, the act allows a cost order to be applied, but there appears to be no provision as to enforcement. As it appears not to be a magistrate imposed fine, Marston could only use peaceful entry methods. This being the case, you could unless someone shows otherwise intiate a Part 4 complaint (if the bailiff was certificated) and/or a private law action for assault.
Tomtubby, you able to shed any more light on this?
This is the problem we appear to be having as no-one seems to know for sure whether a fine and a cost are treated the same. I've spent days searching the internet, the police don't know and the court seems to tell us one thing and tell the bailiffs another.
Also, what do you think to the wrong wording on the copy of the bailiffs warrant? We felt we were within our rights to close the door on the first bailiff while he checked the information.
I`ve not had time to fully read the act yet, normally "costs orders" are treated as a civil debt, and as such the creditor can use standard enforcement routes.
Sorry, I`ve just re-read one of your earlier posts as to whom the order is to be paid.
You`ve been ordered to pay the local education authority their costs and as such the debt is enforceable by peaceful entry only.(It`s a civil debt as against a criminal debt, although non payment is technically contempt)
Have you had any other post from the court or the LEA regarding non-payment?
It`s certainly not unreasonable to ask the bailiff to wait whilst you verified the "distress warrant" given it`s vagueness concerning the debt.
It sounds like a Part 4 complaint is pending given the bailiffs conduct and "forced entry", hopefully TomTubby can give you further info as to the complaint
Thanks for that Sweep1. It is a very grey area and even the officials don't know the ins and outs.
No we didn't have any contact from anyone until the first bailiffs letter came from Drakes, as they were then, which was October, then this visit from the marstons bailiff.
I would certainly be interested in knowing whether or not this warrant is within date and whether there was a clamping order.
I always recommended that the bailiff company should have the opportunity to respond fully BEFORE going the Form 4 route but the problem with enforcement of Magistrate Court Fines is that the MOJ have agreed that Drakes, Philips and Swift can use UNCERTIFICATED bailiffs for the initial 6 month period. Any complaints made about this fall on deaf ears. It is for this very reason that you will not be able to make a formal complaint UNLESSS he is certificated.
Just in case, could you send me by private message only the name of the bailiff and I search for you.
Marstons Group/Drakes
. One addressed to my husband for a 'fine' of £100.00 plus bailiff fees of £50.00 for a 'non-standard motoring offence' and the other addressed to me (although they put 'Diane' instead of 'Diana')! These were dated 26th October 2007. My husband phoned Drakes and told them their paperwork was incorrect and also their charges for a letter were extortionate.
Reply With Quote
