Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

CSA arrears, Marstons. Advice kindly requested


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4592 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I've a right old situation here. I have CSA arrears of c.£6,000, a Liability Order has been granted and I've got Marstons on my back. I had no notification that the bailiff would visit, but he did 2 weeks ago. I didn't let him in. He put a note through the door demanding full payment and that he would return in 5 days to remove my posessions. They haven't visited again since then, but I received a letter through the post today from them stating that they have authority from the court to remove my goods unless I pay in full - last chance, but no time limit.

 

The arrears is partly based on interim assessments and my ex (who won't let me see my daughter) has been recently busted for benefit fraud. She thought I shopped her, but I didn't even know about it. The fact she thinks I told the authorities is why she won't let me see my daughter. Following this accusation I notified CSA by email and they wrote to me saying it makes no difference and they are taking me to court. Which they did, and were granted the LO. I didn't attend, I have been so depressed about all this and I guess that is my only excuse as to why I didn't. Shortly after I received the LO through the post I emailed the CSA again requesting a copy of my file - this was ignored and then the bailiffs instructed.

 

My question is, if I persistently refuse the bailiffs entry into my house, will it return to the CSA and then to the court? If so, will I then have an opportunity to make a repayment offer to the court to pay the debt in affordable instalments? I understand Marstons won't look at affordable instalments? (I am just about to send my income and exp. details to the CSA - should I send to the bailiffs as well?). Or, will it just continue with the bailiffs and will they be able to force entry (or can they only force if they have walking posession)?

 

I emailed this to Marstons earlier today:

 

"I received your letter today offering me a final chance to pay the debt in full and I am contacting you to advise that a.) I cannot afford to pay the debt in full and if the full amount is demanded persistently then the situation will obviously worsen. B.) I requested a copy of my file from Plymouth CSA and they ignored it. Apparently it is my right to request this. C.) I informed them that my ex fraudulently claimed money from the government (I am expected to foot the bill when I’m not even allowed to see my daughter), noted but dismissed. D.) the amount is partly based on interim assessments which is unfair. E.) Yes I know, I had the chance to contest. But due to the depression the CSA caused to me and my family, I regrettably didn’t. F.) I own a guitar and a laptop (but the laptop is used for my business anyway). G.) I put it to you that I will make you an instalment arrangement offer. Please can you let me know if you will be prepared to consider this and in the meantime I will work out what I can afford. It is the only way I see the debt being paid."

 

 

My heads all over the place! Not sure what I'm asking or what to do, but any help and advice would be much appreciated.

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bailiffs cannot break into your home as a csa liability order is not a criminal offence. The bailiff should visit within the first 7 days of the LO being made and then once more within the following 14 days. The LO should be returned to the court after 13 weeks if the bailiff has been unable to secure payment or levy on your home.

 

I would also suggest you subject access request the CSA to ensure the amount is correct, there is no charge for this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi gonabreaksoon

 

maggie is right what she says about a liabilty order not being a criminal offence,and that the order will be returned to the court if they are unable to gain entry in to your home or secure payment

i would also request all your details under the data protection act as i did and had all my case files sent to me and found errors in thier assesment which i was able to use against them in court and the judge found in my favour,however each case is different,but i woud make payments to the csa on what you can afford to pay maybe £10 a week to show willing your not refusing to pay, but cant pay what they want you to pay,the csa usualy want arrears clearing with in 2 years,so your looking to be paying at least £60 a week to clear them off,if they send the case back to the courts and you pay nothing it shows your unwillingness to pay,but paying what you can afford will help you,the bailiff cant break in to your house or use locksmiths to gain entry,remeber to keep your doors and windows secured,if they come back,are you on benefits of any kind?what are your circumstanses,if any thing has changed did you inform the csa of any changes to update your files?as they wont change the original assesment if you dont inform them of any thing that has changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi

Many thanks for your comments and invaluable advice and apologies for the delay in my reply (no broadband for a while! :eek:)

 

I had another visit from Marstons yesterday which works out to be 13 weeks and 5 days after the LO was issued. I was in, but hid in the kitchen! My mother in law who was here answered the door. The bailiff asked for me and my mother in law said I wasn't here, to which he then said he had a warrant to enter the property and told her exactly what it was all about. He then went to take details of my cars on the drive (both on HP not loans and are for my business - (I was making better money last year than now, customers have folded/stopped paying etc due to economic downturn!)).

While he was doing this, my mother in law locked the door. His attitude changed and told her she made a big mistake doing that. He asked where my wife works, her number etc but info not given. He put a final warning before removal notice and a notice of ditress through the door and went on his way. The notice of distress listed my two cars as the inventory and in the walking possession agreement section where I am supposed to sign it, he entered "NOT PRESENT". Also, hand written on the final warning doc was "Re your email - Points A to F are of no relevance to bailiff action, please phone to pay or removal action is next." Removal obviously being the cars - both used for business, one frequently, the other occasionally. Also, Points A -G are detailed in my first post in this thread, he missed out G, so is he implying that they will negotiate instalments?

I am going to email and post scans of the HP agreements for the cars today. Can they take them?

 

Can he enforce anything since it's after 13 weeks? Should it now be back with the court?

 

Any help would be much appreciated.

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to say..

 

Could the warrant he's talking about be a Warrant of Execution? What exactly is that? I know it applies to arrears up to £5000 and my arrears are £5600. What warrant could it be?

 

Also, on the final warning before removal document he put through the door it states in print:

"If you fail to make immediate payment we may re-attend your premises with a locksmith, remove goods in your absence (as instructed by the CSA and in accordance with the law) and sell these goods at public auction"

 

Surely this is scare tactics and lies?? Besides nothing inside the house is listed on the walking possession

Link to post
Share on other sites

send copy's of H P agreements and ask for them to remove the levy and all associated charges

 

cant get a locksmith to help enter your home as there has been no entry before (no levy on property in your home)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi hallowitch, that's what I thought re no levy on property in my home, but wasn't sure. Thanks for clearing that up! Also, do you know if the bailiffs are still able to pursue this even though the 13 weeks are up?

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't know about the 13 wks but will have a goggle to see what i can find if i find any thing i will post it up

 

i would almost certainly do as suggested a get a subject access request sent of

my daughter has had dealings with the Bolton C S A and in the end we had to go to our M.P i also bought a true call to record her conversations with them our m p told us that Bolton were the worst and they cant cope perhaps going to see your MP could help you

 

one the other side of the fence my son deals with falkirk who are not much better

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right I'm not really sure why it's not coming up properly, maybe it would be better for you to google it yourself - Bailiff Advice Online - you'll find all the relevant information there.

Edited by maggie1968
Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be advisable to pay what you can afford direct to the csa,its better to pay some thing rather than nothing,it shows your not refusing to pay. marstons may send your case file back to the csa, then the csa could take you back to court.if this happnes you can show the court that you have at least made an effort to pay,as it can lead to you being sent to prison,for non payment,(as a last resort) and you will still have the amount to pay when you came out,going to prison doesnt wipe off your arrears.youll have to still pay them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

The court is only involved with signing a liability order. The CSA does not return unpaid accounts to court. The court receives a presenting officer and a magistrate signs a dozen or-so liability orders in one sitting under Regs 33/34 of CS Act 1991 without cosidering a defence. The CSA only use other means of enforcement if warrant addressed to the bailiff doesn't yield fuition. They are (in this order), 1. Charging order against your property, 2. Committal to prison.

 

If you have a committal hearing then the CSA must prove culpable neglect. If you cannot pay then you will not be committed to prison. That is the official advice given to magistrates by the MoJ when presiding a CSA/Council tax committal proceeding. If the CSA run iout of enforcement options then the arrears will churn their system ad-infinitum or when a change in the debtors circumstances is picked up.

 

I think you need to speak to an expert in CSA. Contact Durham Legal Services or NACSA.

Edited by Happy Contrails
too much info
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Happy Contrails, I subscribed with NACSA and am in the process of getting all the info I need before phoning them. Thanks also nightsurf, I have been paying what I can when I can (as little as it is!) - so hopefully that scrubs culpable neglect.

I haven't had any response from Marstons since I emailed and posted copies of the HP agreements asking them to remove levy. My concern now is that, even though they would be acting illegally, will they just come and take the cars anyway and worry about the legalities later. That would screw me up completely as I use at least one of them regularly everyday for my business, plus all the tools in them etc. Would I be wise to not assume that they won't take them just because they're not supposed to?

Link to post
Share on other sites

From experience when I helped a friend deal with this, if you ignor the bailiffs they will eventually hand it back to the CSA and you can then come to an arrangement.

 

My advice... Dont give the bailiffs a penny and wait for it to be handed back... Call the CSA each week untill they stop saying its in the hands of the bailiffs then you can start talking to them.

 

The 2 years to repay is only a guideline, its not the law.

 

And if you can make small payments then keep doing so direct to the CSA. This way they cannot say you have refused.

 

Eventually they will have to listen, even if it does take a while....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

askmk is correct in the bailiff will have to return the debt back to the CSA eventually. Remember Child Support law does not provide for bailiffs to charge you his fees for collecting unpaid maintenance, its taken out of the money collected before paid to the CSA then the other parent. The law doesnt obligate you to trade with a bailiff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Im sorry but if this guy is proven to be the childs father and has accumilated arrears what will the childs mum tell them sorry you wnt eat this week as "dad" is hiding behind his mum in law in the kitchen and wnt pay any arrears and therefore you wont eat this month MAN UP!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this disgusting Im a single mum with nowt but hassle from CSA to collect payments and back dated payments unable to collect as computer glitches. Im struggling so if some so called "dads" are infact proven "Biological fathers" why are they hiding behind Mother in laws in their kitchens from their responsiblity "proven biological children" WHY ARE GROWN MEN HIDING?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have resurrected an threat that finished over a year ago.

 

We dont know the whole picture but I am a landlord of a large portfolio of rental properties and I used to get the CSA on my back asking for 'proof' of housing costs for my tenants who have a debt with the CSA.

 

On one occasion the CSA accused my tenant of making his own tenancy agreeement "on a home computer" which effectively accused me for falsifying my own tenants housing costs and they still dissallowed my tenant to retain his own income to pay his rent (or 'housing costs - as its called by the CSA) yet, he was able to sign on the dole and my rent was paid direct to me by the taxpayer with the CSA getting nothing in child maintenance. This is down to CSA stupidity and greed, plus it was the CSA itself that made a false represnetation as to my tenants personal circumstances by saying my tenancy agreement is fake and thus, insinuating I am a landlord out to cheat the taxpayer.

 

Grown men are not hiding, they have their lives screwed by mums to choose to use ther CSA to impose what is otherwise an absent fatherhood tax. Its a levy on a working parents income which bears no relation to the actual needs of a child. This is why UK Child maintenance was downgraded by the EU to spousal alimimony. Im sorry if this is probably not what you wanted to hear, you need to remember many working parents dont have choice when they are excluded from their children by their mother as in the case of several of my tenants.

 

Only last year I lost a tenant after CSA bailiffs hounded him out of his property, they even threatened to cionfiscate my furniture for his debt (it was a furnished property) and he has since emigrated to Cyprus. He now pays child maintenance to according to what the UK awards benefit claimants - £60 a week. The Cypriot court (via REMO) when making the award to the UK mum said (about UK benefits for supporting a child on the state) "Its good enough for the goose then its good enough for the gander". Consequently, he is also now excluded from the British tax system, which is a sad loss to the British economy, we need working parents, not having the CSA forcing them away to more hospitable shores.

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ang, pointless!!! for a start this is an old old thread and this is a bailiff forum to help people with their bailiff matters regardless whether they owe and to who, for what ever.

If you have a beef about absent fathers not paying for their children, then may I suggest you find a forum for just that subject.

Just to add my twopence on the subject whilst I am here. I can see it from both sides, I never had a penny from my childrens father and he ended up opting out by going abroad under a false name, I worked my butt off to provide for them. The only one who lost out was him. By the way I was awarded, wait for it... 1p a year, and he couldnt even pay me that. Old system, nothing has changed though apart from the fact that CSA do not take into consideration that they are often at fault and mothers do tend to lie ....A LOT !!!! My daughter has been fighting the CSA for 2 years and has never seen a penny from her daughters father, on the other hand her boyfriend pays way over the top for his child support and lives on the breadline literally scraping pennies together to feed himself after he has paid out his bills. whats fair about that, he his ex has refused him any access after she ran off with another man and dissapeared, not allowing him to see the child, he wasnt good enough to see his own child but his money is good enough to pay for her.

There is NO JUSTICE IN THIS SYSTEM AND CHANGES ARE NEEDED!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

£330 to live on? you would probably get more than that on the social.

 

I have a tenant who was working when he started renting one of my properties and his employer checks showed an income of £39,000 as a mechanic.

 

On came divorce, on came the CSA and on came the court orders and he ended up losing nearly all his income. He signed on, his rent is now paid to me by the social, he gets jobseekers and all his council tax is paid. Thats an equivalent net income of around £20,000 a year, which is over £10,000 more than what he would take home if he continued working.

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

The website is very funny. Ive never had a CSA liability but I'll pass on your website to any tenant whom I am approahced by the CSA requesting verification of their tenancy agreement.

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...