Jump to content


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2467 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 guys 1st post :)

 

My mother has an outstanding debt with bailiffs for Council Tax.

She had an agreement with bailiffs to pay it off and defaulted after 2 payments as she could not afford it.

 

Now they want the amount in full.

They say they have requested for 'Commital to prison' which scared my mother until i explained it to her. They do not have a 'Controlled Goods Agreement' at all

 

I have today disputed the amount as the bailiffs starting balance doesn't match what is owed to the Council.

 

To be clear this is before any alleged fee's from the bailiffs themselves.

It is just the 'starting balance'.

 

I intend to pay it for her in a couple of weeks when I have the money together

BUT I do NOT intend to pay the bailiffs fee's.

 

Instead, what I intend to do is pay the Council in one payment via online payment what my mother owes them. Leaving the fee's with the bailiff's!!

 

If I pay the Council,

then the debt can't be passed back to the Council as the fee's would be theirs and theirs only.

 

My intention then is, on Common Law grounds, is that I get my mother to say she doesn't consent to these charges from the bailiffs. Which is a total of £310. They are only claiming this money under the 'Control of Goods Act 2014'.

 

Now, when the bailiff's are only left with their fee's and no actual debt - would she able to refuse consent? As an Act is only governed by consent.

 

The other option is to just leave them with their fee's and ignore them. As it is a Civil matter - and without proof of claim - they can't actually do anything.

 

I reach out to you guy's for answer's on this.

 

Am I right to think I can get one over on the Bailiff's this way?

 

They have very naughty attitudes when she calls them BUT seem very polite to me when I call! I would LOVE to get away with this :D

Edited by jpreston666
Link to post
Share on other sites

if you have had an enforcement notice

and

they have subsequently attended

then you have FFES

and you cant get out of them

 

you've come directly to the bailiff forum.

I suspect you've also see n the discussions forum?

 

its debated their to death already.

 

IMHO you already know the answer.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?463050-Bailiff-fees-and-the-correct-procedure-to-follow-if-a-debtor-pays-creditor-direct.(2-Viewing)-nbsp

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the link Sir :)

 

Also, if I pay nothing to anyone and the Council get the debt back - would the fee's be waived that way or would the Council 'take on' such fee's?

 

I forgot to put this in my original post (duh)

Edited by jpreston666
Link to post
Share on other sites

you cant get of the fees sorry.

 

 

I think reading between the lines

you've been visiting these freemen of the land twaddle sites re your 'common law' comment..bad move ..sorry.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find you quite an angry person full of sarcasm. Have I offended you? You have already answered on my original post. No further comments are needed from yourself thank you. I have the time to wait for someone else's reply. Someone that maybe know about consent to Acts and can further elaborate. I have come here for help not ridicule.

 

If the debt goes back to the Council will they 'take on' the bailiff's fee's?

Link to post
Share on other sites

they will pay the bailiff from what you pay them

the fees still exist

end of sorry

 

 

they employed them but go complain yes.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is passed back to the council the fees will be void.

 

How ever you have to catch the payment in between, before they are passed on to another EC.

you will have no notification, when this happens.

 

The council will not help out and let you know.

 

Good Luck

 

Leakie

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find you quite an angry person full of sarcasm. Have I offended you? You have already answered on my original post. No further comments are needed from yourself thank you. I have the time to wait for someone else's reply. Someone that maybe know about consent to Acts and can further elaborate. I have come here for help not ridicule.

 

dx and I don't always agree on details.

However, I have NEVER doubted their good intent, nor had reason to question the basic gist of their answers.

 

They (correctly, IMO) wondered if you had been influenced by FMOTL style advice, and (again correctly, IMO) warned against it.

 

That isn't sarcasm : it is a warning.

 

You are free to take or leave the advice given.

However, there is no point in asking for advice and then getting 'snotty' just because the advice you get doesn't match with what you hoped to hear.

 

I suppose it comes down to whether you actually want advice, or mere validation of your pre-formed views.

 

I'm not here to validate your lunacy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...:kiss::kiss::kiss:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Warning FMOTL can seriously damage your financial wellbeing.

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

I find you quite an angry person full of sarcasm. Have I offended you? You have already answered on my original post. No further comments are needed from yourself thank you. I have the time to wait for someone else's reply. Someone that maybe know about consent to Acts and can further elaborate. I have come here for help not ridicule.

 

If the debt goes back to the Council will they 'take on' the bailiff's fee's?

 

Playing a game of "getting one over the bailiffs" or attempting to 'get away' with paying bailiff fees is one thing, but using your mother as a pawn is something else all together !!!

 

From reading between the lines, your mother received documentation from an enforcement company and made a payment arrangement. She then defaulted on that arrangement. Bizarrely, you seem to consider that even though your mother defaulted, that the bailiff should not be entitled to their fees. Very odd indeed.

 

DX100 has been a Site Team member for over 10 years, and like most of the regulars on the 'bailiff' section, he is pretty quick at picking up on posts that have the ability to turn threads into 'debt avoidance' arguments.

 

PS: If you are intent on using your mother for your 'debt avoidance' plot, you may be interested to read the following thread;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?477808-Paying-the-creditor-direct-to-avoid-paying-bailiff-fees-has-landed-a-debtor-with-a-%A37-000-cost-order.(3-Viewing)-nbsp

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Today I can confirm that the £235 costs have been scrapped (Not the £75). Many thanks to you guys

 

All I had to do was question who sent the letters for the Enforcement fee. 2 weeks ago I asked the bailiff for evidence of him coming round dropping the letter off.

 

He bluntly said 'Well, you got the letter didn't you?" I quipped "What letter?, do you have evidence that would stand up in Court?"

I then made a complaint to the office via phone and email, and also asked for a full breakdown of fee's.

 

Today we received a letter (without the breakdown) which stated how much we now owed. This letter has one thing missing from previous dealings - the Enforcement fee. It has been removed!!

 

All in all i am now happy to pay :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

well we didn't ask...

nor did you tell us that you hadn't received the notice..

 

 

if we had of known that

then we would have advised you are still liable for the £75 fee not the £235

 

 

well done

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I havnt commented on this thread as its not my field of knowledge but feel I have to comment on your comments, as a admin member here, I and many others devote many hours of our free time helping people, I am pleased that you got the result you were looking for and happy that you could re-visit to thank members who tried to help you,

Edited by Andyorch
edited
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading through this it seems that there were no enforcement fees due anyway, I cannot see where it says the bailiff called, perhaps I missed it.

 

The initial fee" the compliance fee was paid by the OP together with the original judgment sum, isn't that all that was due?

 

He has, of course, paid the initial fee to the bailiff.

 

"To be clear this is before any alleged fee's from the bailiffs themselves.

It is just the 'starting balance'."

 

The compliance fee is due to the bailiff on the receipt of the account, of course, if you ask for a break down from the bailiff it will include the compliance fee.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

The compliance fee would have come off the first payment.

 

Is there another thread on this, I can't ee anything on here about a visit.

 

"Today I can confirm that the £235 costs have been scrapped (Not the £75). Many thanks to you guys"

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but in the first post you sad the letter was "sent". It is not unusual for a bailiff to contact a debtor and tell them that they had defaulted on the arrangement, and also to threaten the an enforcement fee, which would become due if the matter was not rectified.

 

As for the compliance fee, surely the balance would have been taken out of the amount you paid?

 

A little confused regarding the second letter, as none is required at this stage.

It may be the case, that the EA decided to drop any further enforcement once the balance of the compliance fee and the sum due to the authority was paid, this is not unusual. Good on them for doing it on this occasion, if that is what happened.

They were under no compulsion to do so if a visit had been made.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

the op has not been here for a week gentlemen

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Point taken. DX

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...