This is helpful Dodgeball. When I posted above, it was solely to clarify to Ploddertom where 'elsewhere' probably was, given the mentions earlier in this thread.

 

When I mentioned it earlier in the thread, I stated very clearly I know little about High Court issues, and stressed it repeatedly. The OP stated they had read the same pdf from The Sheriffs Office - it is dated November 2015, so should really be current, or has it changed in the past 7 or 8 months?)

 

I don't think there is any issue of looking for a loophole, nor am I sure why you think the OP is looking for a loophole. Perhaps I've misunderstood, but anyway, I was just trying to help, and reading something the OP had already read themselves, which should really be current given the date on it, though apparently isn't, in the absence of any other response at the

time.

Hi, yes you're right. I read it on the Sheriff's office website and assumed they had to send another DRO to this address. I'm not looking for a loophole at all, I just wanted to know if I'd get 7 days notice before they showed up here. I can see that I may not get any notice at all now, and have since moved the car.

If you took the time to read properly instead of criticising you would see the OP has been given every encouragement to engage with those who are looking for him He chooses not and that is a decision that has to be respected. As DB & BA have pointed out - on more than 1 occasion i believe - and the NOE was never returned unopened or as a gone away then it will be deemed to have been served correctly. PT took the opportunity to try and put things bluntly and if nobody likes it then tough. This thread has run to 70 posts or so and really it is no point going any further as the OP does not concur with what has been said.

How rude. Yes, PT put things bluntly, and fankly, putting things equally bluntly, made assumptions which are possibly incorrect. If you have problems dealing with that, tough.

Posts on here always run long, and for once I cannot be blamed. The poster is who and what they are. Do we give up on them because of that? You clearly think yes. I'm afraid I think CAG is about continuing to help people, even when it can get frustrating.

Making assumptions is not helpful, and the insinuations were not welcoming. It is pretty much common sense to be honest, but then I'm making assumptions that everyone has common sense, which we know is not the case.

ADDED:

As you can see the OP posted at exactly the same time I made this post, but has confirmed that PT's assumption was wrong.

As for the other comments, sorry if I've offended some of you by asking so many questions, it's just that this matter is important to me and I want to do everything I can to protect myself. There has been conflicting advice even in this thread. For example, I was told that I'm worrying too much about the car being taken, then I now find that they can take the car from here... so I was right to be worried! Good job I didn't just take the first piece of advice and disappear off the forum.

But thanks for the information, I know where I stand a lot better now. Car is moved, they won't get access to the flat, been in contact with the Sheriff's office and they recommended getting the DRO company to call them. Sent them an email this morning asking them to do that, hopefully it'll be ok. All I can do now is wait.

That sounds like a great step forward Starbug. I'd say just keep on at the DRO company, as you need to ensure they make that call. Maybe phone on Monday and see if they've done it yet, then Tuesday, Wednesday and so on. Just keep pushing. You're coping with a distressing situation very well.

It's unfortunate it takes 4 or 5 posts to mention NOE's, when I don't believe it was even an issue at the moment; that's why the threads end up so very long, but as long as you get what you need, that's the important thing. What you need is the DRO!

As for the other comments, sorry if I've offended some of you by asking so many questions, it's just that this matter is important to me and I want to do everything I can to protect myself. There has been conflicting advice even in this thread. For example, I was told that I'm worrying too much about the car being taken, then I now find that they can take the car from here... so I was right to be worried! Good job I didn't just take the first piece of advice and disappear off the forum.

 

But thanks for the information, I know where I stand a lot better now. Car is moved, they won't get access to the flat, been in contact with the Sheriff's office and they recommended getting the DRO company to call them. Sent them an email this morning asking them to do that, hopefully it'll be ok. All I can do now is wait.

Yes, it does get all the points into the arena and therefore gives a broader picture of the situation.

It is a public forum and people do have different ideas of course.

Anyway I believe you have arrived at the correct course of action.

let us know how you get on.

The issue is ostensibly resolved now, so I can raise something as a point of interest.

This is the recent advice from the sheriffs office

 

"The Notice of Enforcement must be sent or delivered to the debtor personally, giving them 7 clear days (excluding Sundays and bank holidays) to pay the sums due in full, at the place, or one of the places, where the debtor usually lives or carries on a trade or business."

 

http://thesheriffsoffice.com/high-court-enforcement/further-information/enforcement-fees-and-stages

 

The TCOG regs say the same

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/regulation/8/made

 

©by delivery by hand through the letter box of the place, or one of the places, where the debtor usually lives or carries on a trade or business

 

 

More importantly they say that the notice must be given to the person. It is another case of loophole searching but in practice the point of the exerciser is that the notice should arrive in the hands of the debtor, this is the intent and this is what has happened here.

 

If there was a chance of the debtor not receiving the notice because of change of address, then yes another notice would have to be issued, but if he had then he could not avoid the debt by this method.

Was the NOE, "delivered to the debtor personally, giving them 7 clear days (excluding Sundays and bank holidays) to pay the sums due in full, at the place, or one of the places, where the debtor usually lives or carries on a trade or business?"

I appreciate this is likely to be seen as looking for a loophole which is why I didn't mention it earlier. However, the legislation states what it states. It's hard to misread really.

It's interesting to note that other current advice from the Sheriffs Office states a new NOE would need serving - obviously this would not be a problem if they know where the debtor is.