Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
  • 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
      • 161 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

Phillips Bailiffs and overpayment of housing benefit


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4536 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

A number of years ago i was overpaid housing benefit. I didn't pay this back and the council sought county court judgement against me (£900 approx). They then pursued this through an attachment of earnings (which was consolidated as I had others also), I was paying this back at a rate set by the judge until February this year when I lost my job. The judge asked me to supply details of my income and expenditure and basically "suspended" the AOE.

 

I received a letter from Phillips a couple of weeks ago informing me that they were seeking to clear the debt. I put this to one side and forgot all about it. Another letter has dropped through my door today basically saying that as I have ignored them they are looking at taking the debt back in full within 7 days or if not they will be sending bailiffs to me.

 

What can I do? I presumed that the judge's word would have been final. If a judge rules I cannot afford to pay it then surely that should be good enough???? Confused!! Advice needed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi welcome to cag:

 

Do you know exactly how much of the debt remains owed to the Council in relation to the actual ccj?

What is the wording of the DJ order, it may be he has stayed the AOE not merely suspended it.

 

 

Send Phillips and the Council a copy of the DJ order suspending AOE. and if applicable draw their attention to the following:

 

The national standards of Enforcement agents 2002

NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR ENFORCEMENT AGENTS MAY 2002

 

Those who might be potentially vulnerable include:

  • the elderly;
  • people with a disability;
  • the seriously ill;
  • the recently bereaved;
  • single parent families;
  • pregnant women;
  • unemployed people; and,
  • those who have obvious difficulty in understanding, speaking or reading English

WD

Link to post
Share on other sites

It didn't say suspended you're right - I can't think off the top of my head what it said but it said "it's been xxxxx with liberty to restore". Don't you just love it when your mind goes blank lol!

 

I can't remember how much the original debt was but it was around that so not sure they've added charges.

 

My confusion is that the council opted for a CCJ and then an AOE and now cos the judge has said we cannot afford to pay they've gone to bailiffs.

 

If they turn up won't be gettin in but would still like to know if they're allowed to do it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless they have returned to Court to resore the order they cannot pass it to bailiffs .....if you have not received notice to a hearing to that end then I suggest you use the CCJ reference number and contact the Court to see if the Council have actually followed procedure.

 

WD

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the letter:-

 

PRE-ENFORCEMENT NOTICE

 

You have failed to make suitable repayment arrangements concerning overpayment of housing benefits to yourself which remains outstanding. Therefore you have left us no option but to carry out full recovery procedures in which you may incur additional charges of no less than £45.

 

Our recovery agents have now been granted approval to attend your premises without any further warning to commence recovery procedures.

 

You must make the IMMEDIATE FULL PAYMENT of all of the outstanding amounts (as shown above) to prevent this action commencing.

 

YOU HAVE 7 DAYS FROM THE DATE STATED IN THIS NOTICE TO PAY ALL OUTSTANDING AMOUNTS IN FULL.

 

I haven't received any further notification from the court and at a rough guess the CCJ was granted around 3/4 years ago. The overpayment was from me not declaring maternity allowance as a change in circumstances and was interviewed under caution at 36 weeks pregnant in Dec 2005.

 

So do you think that they are simply working in a debt collector capacity in this instance as opposed to bailiffs? I am confused as my partner has had dealings with Phillips for a court fine as bailiffs and they were horrendous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right......I have emailed them explaining my situation and asking them to clarify in what capacity they are collecting this debt; whether they are acting as bailiffs or debt collection agents as if they are collecting as bailiffs I haven't received notification from the court.

 

Not sure if that was the right thing to do but at least they can't say i'm ignoring them lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the CAG library is a letter for Doorstep Collectors, send them that. No matter what happens they cannot attend as Bailiffs. As a guide to what happens read through this:

1 - you owe someone some cash and either refuse or cannot afford to pay

2 - creditor takes you to Court and wins

3 - Judge orders you pay even at a low rate or in your case via AoE

4 - for whatever reason payment by you fails

5 - Creditor can either pass remaining to Debt Collector or go back to Court for further enforcement

6 - one way of enforcement is to ask for Warrant of Execution - cost £100 added to Debt

7 - if WoE is granted this is for the County Court Bailiffto attend and he writes first anyway

8 - a private Bailiff such as Phillips cannot collect on civil debts

So I bet the headed paper from Phillips says Bailiffs and Debt Collectors and they will be very economical with the actual powers they do have.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have emailed back and confirmed that they are acting as debt collectors. They have asked me to submit an offer of payment and they will go to WMDC for their "approval".

 

Cheers guys for your help - much appreciated! Very, very sneaky oh Phillips using their bailiff guise though me thinks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have emailed back and confirmed that they are acting as debt collectors. They have asked me to submit an offer of payment and they will go to WMDC for their "approval".

 

Cheers guys for your help - much appreciated! Very, very sneaky oh Phillips using their bailiff guise though me thinks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Order you have is the current offering then you should remind the Council of this by sending them a copy. If they want to take it any further then they need to go back to Court for another Hearing but if your circumstances are still the same then they are just wasting taxpayers money.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...