Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

40 Excellent

About 1970

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. What is this country coming to? Anyway, I can't offer much advice but there are plenty on here that can - you're in the right place. Soon enough someone will be along to guide you. You'll probably need to provide a little more information - especially dates. Were the fees all charged on the same day? This must be the most agressive abuse of process I've seen. 1970
  2. Was Jacobs, visited me as Swift while still registered as Jacobs, now no longer appears on the register for either.
  3. Hi, With my on-going complaint to the LA which I suspect will end up with the LGO I'm including issues I have with the bailiff's certificate. Firstly he was unable to produce a certificate. With the help of CAG I found where to check his certificate and found that while he was acting for one company he was actually certified with another company. I have complained directly to the bailiff firm and they replied with the following: (Note, the bailiff called at my home on the 6th Nov 2007) Reply from bailiff firm: The position is that at the time Mr X applied for his certificate in or around April 2007, he was employed by another company. As stated above, Mr X's current employment with the company commenced in June 2007. Mr X wrote to Liverpool Court on the 6th July 2007 requesting a new certificate showing the company as his employer. A response was not received and a chasing letter was sent on Mr X's behalf by Mrs X of the company on 7th September 2007. Mr X was, therefore a Certified Bailiff at the time in question. We can also confirm the Mr X was employed by the company and that a certified bond was in place from 8th June 2007. So there we have it. None of it make sense to me. If Mr X had still not got his certificate by the 7th September 2007 how could a certified bond have been in place on the 8th June. I notice also that it simply says they chased the court in September. It doesn't actually say when the court replied and when his certificate was actually issued in the new company name. When he called at my home in November he was unable to show a certificate and the register confirm that he worked elsewhere. Are they at fault here or does it not matter what company is identified on the certificate? Cheers 1970.
  4. Ok, all looking good with my supporting information. This is very likely to go to the LGO so I am also in the process if obtaining further info from other councils that have stopped their contractors charging the head H fee etc.via FOI. Another matter which came up during my investigations is that a bailiff that called on my was certificated but for a different comapny. He started working for swift and had asked the court to change his certificate but began acting for swift before the court had made the changes. Does this have any implications? Would his bond have been invalid at the time? Worth adding to the complaint? 1970
  5. I was informed there was a fee of £20 but I disputed it. The bailiff took the charge anyway and wrote on the form "c/p disputes bailiff fees" I was at work at the time and my wife was at home with the bailiff so over the phone I sorted it just to get him out of the house for my wifes sake.
  6. Sorry about that, here are the goods: Microwave Dining table Dining chairs TV 3 seat sofa 2 seat sofa arm chair washing machine
  7. Also, I have a response from the bailiff in writing explaining their use of the fee.
  8. Hi PT, The document I have is two sided, on the front it says notice of seizure of goods and inventory which lists his fees and the goods he itemised when gaining entry. On the back it says walking posession agreement and has terms and conditions along with the regulations for fees. So, on the front the charges are: Debt £1323.76 Levy to scale fee £62 Attending with a vehicle with the view to removing £200* Walking posession fee £12 Removal fee where no sale takes place £24.50* Payment made by credit card on the spot £400 (they only credited £380 to the account as there was a £20* charge) Balance due £1222.26 with an agreement to pay in 30 days (which I did). The items with a * are the ones I deem unlawful and intend to claim back. This was the first and only visit. I sent a SAR and there are no other charges on this account - ie first visit fee which in my view should have been the only fee for this visit as I paid £400 there and then and followed up with a full and final payment 30 days later. 1970
  9. thanks PT. Very clear. To clarify, following a SAR I noticed a £24.50 fee appear on the account some months after the account was paid in full. I questioned this and was told it was a fee where no sale takes place - in other words, Header H fee as you describe above. I shall have them for that too. Many thanks.
  10. Many thanks everyone for your input. I now have some good references in regard to multiple visit fee's which I shall include in my documentation to the LGO. The final issue is the vehicle fee. In my view there should be due process and each stage of the process attracts a fee of some description. Upon a single visit, the bailiff charged me a visit fee, levy fee and a fee for attending with a vehicle with the view to removng goods. There was also a no sale fee. How did he know there were goods to remove? What right did he have to remove goods if I had not already signed a WP? Are there any references or case references in regard to vehicle fees? The fee charged was £200.00. Multiply this by an approximate 5 visits a day over monthly period then each bailiff could afford to purchase a new van every month. This does not represent reasonable costs. I've challenged swift on this matter and they claim reasonable costs also includes company overheads. On the first visit surely there should be a visit fee and a levy. If the walking posession agreement is not honoured then the bailiff has the right to return with a vehicle at my cost to collect the goods listed on the WP. Correct? Thanks. 1970
  11. Hi, Long story which has been going on for years and I have posted here before. However, my situation is coming to a head now and would like clarification on the following: Multiple fees. I had 3 liability orders. Bailiff attended in regard to all 3 on one visit. I was charged a fee for each even though it was one visit. Is this lawful? Attendance with a vehicle fee. On one account (seperate visit to the above) a bailiff attended and I signed a walking posession order after paying £400 on the spot and agreeing to pay the rest 4 weeks later. On the walking posession order he left, he charged a "attendance with a vehicle fee with the view to the removal of goods" of £200 along with a levy fee, a walking posession fee and a no sale fee. Can this fee be charged? I dont think he had any intention of removing goods, just wanted money or an arrangement. 1970
  12. Hi, Short version: Remortgaged last year. Solicitor took over 3 months to complete the remortgage. Solicitor admits in email they made mistakes and apologises for errors and offers partial refund of fees. In my original written instructions I made it very clear that the remortgage had to happen fast as I was paying an interest only mortgage at 12%. Chased them loads of times. Never got replies. Had to do some of the work myself. Was promised a completion date 3 times, all of which failed. Solicitor delays caused me to make 3 additional payments to the old mortgage company at £1400 a time. Had these payments gone towards my new mortgage at least I would have been paying off the capital. After the remortgage, the solicitor chased me for a a signed copy of an occupiers document. Due to me sending it back late my new mortgage company charged the solicitor £300 for the delay. Solictor has sent me a claim form for the £300. My arguement is: They delayed and cost me £4200 in interest payments. I delayed and cost them £300. Therefore, do I have a counterclaim for £3900? ie the cost of their delays less the cost of my delays? Thanks, 1970.
  13. postggj - any further thoughts on the agreement?
  • Create New...