Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 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.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4269 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

If the bailiff had levied your mother's car, apart from the levy being invalid (making the levy fee and attendance fee void), the bailiff has charged these fees on the same visit.

 

Even if it was detailed in the council's Service Level Agreement (which it wouldn't), a bailiff wishing to "Levy and Remove" on the same visit and incur those fees, would need to arrive with sufficient transport - vans etc, to remove the goods it anticipated distraining upon.

 

In your case the bailiff levied on a vehicle, he would need to prove that he had arrived in transport sufficiently capable of safely removing the vehicle. A point worth remembering for anyone else incurring both these fees in respect of the same attendance.

 

This is not only relevant for levy and attending to remove fees charges made on the same visit, it also applies to attending to remove in general. If they haven't arrived in suitable transportation and incurred that cost themselves, they will be attempting to defraud you by imposing it, and actually defrauding you if they are paid it.

 

hi i have has a similar problem where bailifs were coming round to collect council tax. i have been paying 40 pond a month since september last year but then the council sent me bil for this years bill and i couldnt afford both so i spoke to the bailif and asked if i could pay a lesser aomunt

 

he told me to write to the office with a statement of earnings which i did the wrote back and said i had to arrange with the bailiff so i paid 20 pound and they then wrote to me saying the bailiffe was coming to remove goods

 

i phoned te bailife back and he told me to write back to tnem and explain agan and offer them what i could pay, they then wrote back saying this was not acceptable and full payment was due in 7 days.

 

i phoned the office several times i was old nothing could be done but keep paying what i could afford so i kept paying 40 pound for 2 month but i kept geting letters sayin after repated requests i had done nothing to clear this debt fone this no immediatly i foned them on the 6/6/12 and asked when th bailif was coming and she told thatno bailif had been asigned yet and to just keep paying my monthly payments.

 

i told her i would pay on the 15/6/12 as thats when my payment was due. on the 9/6/12 i got a letter from equita for 24hr notice to remove my goods payment full in 7 days. on the same day a bailif posted a letter through my door saying and delivered payment full in 24hrs and they may come back at anytime and charge my inexcess of 200 pound.

 

i phoned this bailiif which was a different one to the one i spoke to before and he was told me he was coming on friiday and my bill had gone up by 206 pound. because he came with a van to remove my godds. i had to get my dad to pay this for me i asked him if he could just accept the 458 pound as that was all i had and he said that he would come bak the week after and charge me another 200 pound so i payed it all but i dont think i should have paid that much fees and i dont no what to do

Edited by citizenB
spacing for easier reading
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

hi i have has a similar problem where bailifs were coming round to collect council tax. i have been paying 40 pond a month since september last year but then the council sent me bil for this years bill and i couldnt afford both so i spoke to the bailif and asked if i could pay a lesser aomunt he told me to write to the office with a statement of earnings which i did the wrote back and said i had to arrange with the bailiff so i paid 20 pound and they then wrote to me saying the bailiffe was coming to remove goods i phoned te bailife back and he told me to write back to tnem and explain agan and offer them what i could pay, they then wrote back saying this was not acceptable and full payment was due in 7 days. i phoned the office several times i was old nothing could be done but keep paying what i could afford so i kept paying 40 pound for 2 month but i kept geting letters sayin after repated requests i had done nothing to clear this debt fone this no immediatly i foned them on the 6/6/12 and asked when th bailif was coming and she told thatno bailif had been asigned yet and to just keep paying my monthly payments. i told her i would pay on the 15/6/12 as thats when my payment was due. on the 9/6/12 i got a letter from equita for 24hr notice to remove my goods payment full in 7 days. on the same day a bailif posted a letter through my door saying and delivered payment full in 24hrs and they may come back at anytime and charge my inexcess of 200 pound. i phoned this bailiif which was a different one to the one i spoke to before and he was told me he was coming on friiday and my bill had gone up by 206 pound. because he came with a van to remove my godds. i had to get my dad to pay this for me i asked him if he could just accept the 458 pound as that was all i had and he said that he would come bak the week after and charge me another 200 pound so i payed it all but i dont think i should have paid that much fees and i dont no what to do

 

HI Diane welcome to CAG could you please use this link to start a new thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=168

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi can anybody help me please. i had balifss thratening to take my goods away, i have now paid them in full but they have charged me a lot of money for fees that i dont think are right. is there anyway i can claim these fees back from equita i would be very greatfull for any advice thankyou

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok thankyou. i think i may have already started one sorry. i have never been on any of these sites bfore it is a bit confusing any way i was reading someones post about equita and it was very simalar to mine. equitta have charged me a lot of fees but i have never actual been visited by them i have had contact with them by phone and by letters. i have had a hand delivered letter which has actualy cost me 209 pound. i got a breakdown of there fees but i dont understand them. i was charged for a first visit and a levy fee and an enforcement fee could this be right as i have never even seen the bailiff only spoke to him on the phone

Link to post
Share on other sites

list the fees you have been charged as in

 

Date 1st visit fee £xxxx

Date 2nd visit fee£xxxx

Date levy fee£xxxxx

Date walking possession fee £xxx

Date enforcement fee £xxxx

 

and any other fee you have been charged

 

in the meantime send an e-mail asking them what goods they levied

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they may well have overcharged you. if they only visited once, and didn't levy anything then first visit fee £24.50 is all they get. ass to the "Enforcement Fee" no such animal in the regulations,

 

You need to ask the council

How many Liability Orders they hold for you

When were they obtained

Which tax years they are for

when were they sent to bailiffs for enforcement

Are any still outstanding

 

Then write to the bailiffs using this template:

"From:

My Name

My Address

To:

Acme Bailiff Co

Bailiff House

Ref: Account No: 123456

Dear Sir

With reference to the above account, Can you please provide me with a Breakdownlink3.gif of the charges.

This includes:

a - the time & date of any Bailiff action that incurred a Fee.

b - the reason for the fee.

c - the name(s) of the Bailiff(s) that attended on each occasion a Fee was charged.

d - the name(s) of the Court(s) the Bailiff(s) was/were certificatedlink3.gif at.

e - the date of the Certification.

 

This is not a Subject access requestlink3.gif under the Data Protection Act S7 1998 so does not incur a fee of £10. You are obliged to provide this information.

I require this information within 14 days.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

Ripped off customer"

 

 

Once you have the info post back so Caggers can unpick the fees and see what is legal, and which is dodgy.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi thankyou for taking ythe time to reply. i received a breakdown of fees but it doesnt have any dates they consist of

debt £680.42

statutory visit fees £42.50

levy fees £39.00

enforcement fee £167.00

card charges£3.50

girobook charge £5.82

total £942.04

paid £942.04

outstanding balance £00.00

 

debt £166.67

statutory visit fee £42.50

levy fee £28.00

enforcement fee £160.00

card charge £1.00

total £398.17

paid £398.17

outstanding balance £00.00

 

 

althoug i have never seen the bailiff i have spoke to him on the phone when i trid to pay him i thought i owed £453. but was told they had put £206. on because they had a warrent and i aked if i could pay the £453. and sort out the balance of the fees late as i didnt think this was right he told me i could but he would come back next week and charge me another £206. all i have had is a hand delivered letter saying i nhad 24 hours to pay or i would incur charges of £200 and a leter came from equita on the same day saying notice for removal of goods and i have 48 hours to pay the full amont

Link to post
Share on other sites

What goods did the bailiff levy, and did he leave you a list? We need this to further unpick the fees, but likely there is room to challenge some of them, Specifically "card charges£3.50

girobook charge £5.82" Where in the Regulations does it permit a charge for a payment book? Nowhere i would opine. the "enforcement fee" masy also be dodgy, if their levy is dodgy, or there isn't one an Attending to Remove fee cannot be applied, and there is no provision to allow a fee called an Enforcement fee, in the regulations.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi thankyou for taking ythe time to reply. i received a breakdown of fees but it doesnt have any dates they consist of

debt £680.42

statutory visit fees £42.50

levy fees £39.00

enforcement fee £167.00 *

card charges£3.50

girobook charge £5.82

total £942.04

paid £942.04

outstanding balance £00.00

 

debt £166.67

statutory visit fee £42.50

levy fee £28.00

enforcement fee £160.00 *

card charge £1.00

total £398.17

paid £398.17

outstanding balance £00.00

 

 

althoug i have never seen the bailiff i have spoke to him on the phone when i trid to pay him i thought i owed £453. but was told they had put £206. on because they had a warrent and i aked if i could pay the £453. and sort out the balance of the fees late as i didnt think this was right he told me i could but he would come back next week and charge me another £206. all i have had is a hand delivered letter saying i nhad 24 hours to pay or i would incur charges of £200 and a leter came from equita on the same day saying notice for removal of goods and i have 48 hours to pay the full amont

 

 

Something odd here (nothing unusual).

 

The enforcement fees (presumably attendances with transport), are different i.e. £167 in the first instance and £160 in the second. Is this a typo?

 

 

.....i phoned this bailiif which was a different one to the one i spoke to before and he was told me he was coming on friiday and my bill had gone up by 206 pound. because he came with a van to remove my godds. i had to get my dad to pay this for me i asked him if he could just accept the 458 pound as that was all i had and he said that he would come bak the week after and charge me another 200 pound so i payed it all...

 

 

£206 equates to the £167 attendance fee and £39 levy fee and although you don't have dates, it sounds as though from your description that these were both charged on the same day.

 

For all bailiff action which incurred fees it's important that they supply dates. As brassnecked has mentioned, do you know what goods were levied?

 

They should have handed you or left at your property a Notice of seizure of goods and Inventory.

 

It is also important to know what vehicle the bailiff arrived in on his levy/van attendance as it would need to have the capacity to transport the levied goods. If for example he had levied a car he would have had to arrive in a tow-truck.

 

I'd be interested to know what the £200 would be for that the bailiff threatened to charge if he had to return. Perhaps actually removing goods rather than attending with a view to remove...

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

i have asked for dates and times of visits. as i said though i have never had anything levied as i have never actualy had any visits apart from the hand delivered letter. but i phoned the bailif after receiving the letter and he said he came to remove goods but he has never been in the house and that was the first time he hsa been. he said if iwas in he would of took my goods then but as far as i know he didnt even knock but just posted the letter as i was actualy in all day. at first i thought the letter came through the post as i got one the same day from equita that said 24 removal notice which was dated the 6th june but i received on the 9th june and the hand delivered baliff removal payment due in full in 24hrs came the same day. also i phoned the office to ask when the bailif was coming on the 6th and was told no bailif had been asigned yet.so from the 6th to the 9th of june i was charged another 206 pound.

Link to post
Share on other sites

when i phoned equitas office on the 6th/june i was told that no bailiff was asigned yet and to keep paying what i could they must have issued this letter later on it actualy says that despite repeated requests i have failed to clear the outstanding balance and there bailif has been unable to contact me so they are sending removal contracters in the next 24 hrs and that an additional charges in excess of £200 will be added to my debt. how can this be if no bailiff was assigned to me yet. this is the letter that came on the same day that the bailiff posted his letter through the door.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without wanting to sound too optimistic at this stage, it does seem as though they've handed it to you on a plate.

 

If like you say they haven't levied on any of your goods, both the "levy" and the "attendance with a vehicle to remove" fees, will have been obtained fraudulently. See this post ¡¡HERE!!, particularly the LGO Report.

 

Just so you don't have any surprises, I will make a prediction that the bailiff might say they had levied goods (probably a vehicle). However, if they say this you can counter their claim by stating you never received the Notice of Seizure of Goods and Inventory. They are required to leave this when levying goods.

 

SI 1992/613 Regulation 45(5), says so:

 

(5) The person levying distress on behalf of an authority shall carry with him the written authorisation of the authority, which he shall show to the debtor if so requested; and he shall hand to the debtor or leave at the premises where the distress is levied a copy of this regulation and Schedule 5 and a memorandum setting out the appropriate amount, and shall hand to the debtor a copy of any close or walking possession agreement entered into.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not be overly concerned about what they are trying to do. In my view they couldn't win an Ar*e kicking contest. The fact they have failed to give you the dates in your breakdown request suggests they are trying to con you. You should not phone them unless you can record the call. You are definitely doing the right thing by denying them entry to your home and they cannot charge you for sending letters via Royal Mail.

 

As they appear to be obstructive I would put the ball back in the Council's court and demand they fulfil the rest of the request for the dates as the Bailiffs are refusing to do so - remember the Council are 100% responsible for the actions of their Bailiff whether they like it or not. If you are met with a stonewall at the Council ask the person whether they are an employee of the Council or Capita, if the latter request to be put through to someone higher - Head of Revenues possibly. Do not be fobbed off by them.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i received a letter from equita with another breakdown of fees but this time there is only one list of fees and its different from the other one it says

liability order date 31/05/2011

period up to 31/03/2012

my addres

debt £680.42

statutory visit fees £42.50

visit/levy fee £46.00

atendance fee £160.00

paypoint fees £3.80

card fee £3.50

giro book/admin fee £5.82

total £942.04

balance nil

 

 

then they go on about how they noticed the dates werent logged but tthe dates were

22/08/2011, 30/082011, 19/09/2011/, 14/11/2011, 27/04/2012/ , and 09/06/2012 gives me the names of three bailiffs and where they were certified

 

these dates are wrong as the bailiff never came but i may have got a hand delivered letter around august 2011, i had written to equita with a statement of my earnings but i was refused the offer to pay £40 pmth

as they wanted £109 pmth, i phone there office and was told to pay what i could. i was and thats when the first bailiff eas going to come round i phoned the bailiff and he told me i had a week to get the money or he was coming round. he wouldnt accept a propasal to pay monthly payments at first unless i made a payment of £356. and then i could pay £40pmth. i was paying this but then i was getting letters that they was going to call again so again i phoned there office and it was down to the bailiff not putting anything on record but that got sorted out and i have been paying it everymonth and he never came to visit me. i have paid every month till march i missed a payment then i got a letter saying that someone would call and the name of the 2cnd bailiff, so i phoned the bailiff and he advises me to write to head office which i did i explained to them that i was struggling and asked if i could reduce my payments and i made a apyment of £20, they wrote back and said that it was in the hands of the bailif and to speak to him. i phoned him and he didnt seem to know anything about it and told me to write back to them which i did he never came to visit me. i kept paying the £40 but equita wrote back and refused the offer and said tge full balance is now due i rang them and was told there was nothing i could do but keep making regular payments which i did. but i got another letter saying a baliff would be in the area next week which is why i rang on the 6/06/ to find out when they was goona call thats when the lady told me no one had been asigned yet. then the 3rd bailiff has been on the 9/06 and charged me£ 206 extra for putting a letter through my door so i then phoned him and tried to see if he could do anything to help me,he said he would ring the office and ring me back but he never did, so the next day i borowed the money and had to pay £656.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like they're being deliberately obstructive by providing the information one bit at a time and in this cryptic form. Perhaps next time they'll send you just a hint as to what goods they supposedly levied.

 

You need complete lists relating to both liability orders, itemising all charges / dates and items they claimed to have levied.

 

Would you get more sense from the council?

Link to post
Share on other sites

should i write back to them but i dont really know what to say or even ask for. or as you say the council but i dont know where to go from here. i seem to have paid a lot of money for so long to still owe so much at the end of it now i am in debt as i took a loan to pay the first payment of £356. and then another loan for £656 and i have been paying evry month since august last year. oh i dont know all this does my head in how the more you try to pay your debt the more they add on. i wish now that i hadnt payed anythhing as i dont have anything of value that they could of took anyway. but thankyou for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

list the fees you have been charged as in

 

Date 1st visit fee £xxxx

Date 2nd visit fee£xxxx

Date levy fee£xxxxx

Date walking possession fee £xxx

Date enforcement fee £xxxx

 

and any other fee you have been charged

 

in the meantime send an e-mail asking them what goods they levied

 

 

You need the information in the above form for both accounts.

 

Which council are you dealing with? It might be possible to get hold of its bailiff contract with Equita to use against them.

 

Here's Equitas Code of Practice for your interest.

 

See how many times the bailiffs have breached their own conditions.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

well its been a week now since i asked equita again to resend me the information i wanted such as the precise dates of visits and dates the fees were charged and i asked them for a list of goods that were supposedly levied but i havent heard from them yet

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they need a reminder

 

You might have this already, but in case you haven't their email address is:

 

[email protected]

 

for Revenues and Benefits

 

EDIT:

 

Sorry! I see you're dealing with Equita...still, maybe you should involve the council as well.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

hi i got a letter back from equita today with the dates and levys it kind of goes like this

both liability orders were dated the31/05/2011

both levy and attendance charged incured on 09/06/12

the levy was made on 09/06/12 the levy was made on blue volkswaggon passet payment was made following visit 13/06/2012

liability order 2

levy and attendance charge was incured on 27/09/11

folowwing payment being made the case has now been archived and so cant retreive specifics asa to what goods were identified but details would of been left with me

statutory visits of 42.50 were added on both cases in line with visits that took place on the 22/08/11 and 30/08/11

 

firstly no such details were ever left as i have only ever spoke to them on the phone and secondly i dont have a blue vw passat. but i have a blue vw polo so they have levied the wrong car and i didnt even know they had levied a car. can you help me as i dont know where to go from here. thanks for all the help you haven given me so far

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your most recent post suggests there are 3 liability orders.

 

a) One L/O – levied in 2012

 

b) Two L/O's – levied in 2011

Because of this:

 

"
statutory visits of 42.50 were added on both cases in line with visits that took place on the 22/08/11 and 30/08/11
"

 

Ignore above.

 

Just back tracked through thread and should think the gap between levies will be down to broken or revised agreement.

 

However, it seems mutiple visits fees have been charged in respect of the same visit. There is something ruling against doing this in an LGO report somewhere.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...