Actually that's been my experience too... The Revenue are only really tough if they think you are trying it on - if they think you are genuine they will usually really try and help you if they can.

Your wife cannot be expected to sit in a wheelchair every waking moment, wheechairs are for transport not for relaxing in. Plus you need somewhere to sit. That should make the sofa exempt. If you receive benefit then the council MUST deduct £3.00 weekly from your benefit. If your income is sufficiently low to justify 100% council tax benefit then that is what you should be paying. Do not get caught by a fit of guilt - the amount owing previously is irrelevant - what matters is your situation now. It's really important that letters start flying into the bailiffs office, the council tax office with copies to your local councillor and your MP, you could really do with their help. This is outrageous, it's not simply wrong!

Well spotted!

But, if a judge refuses leave to appeal, that in itself is a ground for appeal. Although you'd have to have a pretty good case because I think it would start getting very expensive, with no guarantee of success. There, that's my bit of legal trivia for the day...

Oh yes... I wouldn't do it any other way.

As daft as this sounds, before you start any form 4 complaint you must have appeared to have given the bailiffs every opportunity to correct what they will say was simply an error. Even though we all know that's not true. So you must start writing to them, and build up a file of correspondence showing that they have behaved incorrectly. Only when that has not worked to you make a form 4 application to the court.

personally I would never miss a hearing that might potentially cause me financial loss. The bailiff will call at the appointed day and time - you can meet him and give him the keys. Oh yes! Can you imagine it! 24 hours after you're supposed to have left, what would happen if you then decided to squat there. They'd have a hell of a job getting you out They'll change the locks alright.....

24 - 19 = 5 24 divided by 5 = > 1/3 1/3 of 24 is 6. The reason for the maths is that unless you have paid more than 1/3 of the original debt on your agreement -- they do not need a court order to recover the car. I don't think that that is the end of it, I suspect that they have to find it first.

Good grief no! Unfortunately you remain responsible for the property until it is sold, at least that's the way it was explained to me. And once it is sold, if the proceeds of the sale are not enough to cover the outstanding debt, then the mortgage company have up to 12 years to pursue you for the debt. I think that is why our man at the Citizens advice Bureaux was recommending voluntary bankruptcy. His view was that it didn't really matter how little our house was sold for because if we went bankrupt it was then the mortgage lenders problem. I got the impression that he had very little sympathy for mortgage lenders.

Incidentally, we have just had a phone call from the mortgage lender or someone working within the firm to tell us that if we approach the court and asked for more time we will get between one and two months. I hope that helps, let's face it all they can say is no.

It's okay, I read it -- and no they cannot seize goods unless they are listed on the walking possession order. But that doesn't mean that they can't make another list, and I think most people know what I suggest they should do about that!

We are in the same position as you legally I think, and Derek at the cab found a legal reason to extend the warrant. We decided not to fight it because it wouldn't give us any control over the sale of the house. But if we had needed time to stay in the house, we would have made an application to the court, because you have very little to lose by trying, the caselaw he was going to rely on came from a ruling in 1996 CHELTENHAM & GLOUCESTER PLC (FORMERLY CHELTENHAM & GLOUCESTER BUILDING SOCIETY) v. ROBERT CHARLES BOOKER and SUSAN JANE BOOKER [1996] EWCA Civ 957 (14th November, 1996). As it happens I will be meeting the bailiff to give the keys back tomorrow.

I think that there is caselaw to say that the bailiffs are not allowed to pass any of these charges on. The problem is, it's only caselaw, and that means the bailiffs will charge it in the hope that you will not dispute it -- so they ask for a small amount which they will try to say is a reasonable reflection of the costs that they have incurred. That's why I always pay the council direct online, because they don't make these charges. IMHO 1 pound is the most you ought to pay when using a debit card I agree with ambershadow about that, and you shouldn't pay anything for using a credit card. If you want a definitive answer, you should contact tomtubby.

Whenever a company wishes to take payment over the phone for any product or service, they make an application to someone like Barclays merchant services. They are charged a percentage of each transaction, and the percentage they are charged is based upon the level of authorisation needed before each transaction is accepted. When I last made an application, their representative was very clear, he said that it was easy to get the service but not so easy to keep it. The card services have very strict policies about disputed transactions. Think of it this way, if every time we made payments over the phone (to anyone), and had to accept the risk that that person might attempt to take money from our account once they had details of our credit card -- we would very soon cease using that service. The merchant services dependent on our confidence in their system. So in a very long winded way, I'm trying to explain that although it may seem easy for someone (in this case a bailiff) to abuse the merchant services system, if there are enough complaints card merchant services will withdraw the facility, or, apply punitive charges to the account to deter their client from allowing it to happen again. That's why you have to take the trouble to do something about this, you have to make a fuss in writing no matter what they say to you. Good luck, Chris.

Are you able to make payments? If so you could have the eviction warrant suspended. At the present time I am told that the courts are looking for ways to avoid repossessions resulting in evictions. I am in this situation myself, and I found that the local cab was very helpful indeed, although most of the legal information came from this site.

Let's see if I understand this, you were entitled to council tax benefit but you weren't aware of that. once you became aware of it you made a claim, and you are now receiving council tax benefit. If that is so then you should not now be subjected to enforcement action by the bailiffs, and your account should have been handed back to the council. So not only did the council hand the account to the bailiffs, but the bailiffs have been into your house and presumably you have signed walking possession agreement, is that right? Actually it's exactly that easy, but unfortunately that won't be the end of the matter, because they'll have the right to come back into your house and make a list of anything else that is not exempt; unless of course you have already sold it to a third party. I don't think that your account should have been passed to the bailiffs in the first place. In all this time have you had any contact with the council?

According to the national guidelines you would appear to fall into the "vulnerable" category. This is an extract from the guidelines: 6. DISTRAINT EXEMPTIONS – VULNERABLE PERSONS
(COUNCIL TAX) 6.1 The bailiff company must at all times assess the personal and financial circumstances of the debtor. 6.2 The following class of persons should not be subject to distraint action: - (a) Persons who display evidence of possible mental impairment. (b) Persons with a profound sensory disability (seriously impaired sight or hearing). © Persons (or the partners of persons) who are suffering a serious illness or who are terminally ill. (d) Persons who have suffered the recent bereavement of an immediate family member. (e) Persons who are frail due to old age or disability. 6.3 In all the above circumstances, cases should be returned to the Council. Costs incurred by the bailiffs to be in accordance with the agreed scale.

Is there any news?

That doesn't sound right, I think it's a case of them never having done one, you really need to speak to tomtubby

I hope my post has not caused any offence, I hold my views honestly and they are based on my experience. The only point that I would like to go back over, is the matter of Bailiff Review; whether intentional or not this information is actually available on the web, admittedly not every council distributes this information on the Internet, and now that you've raised the question about access to that information I am left wondering how it got there in the first place. Having said that, the information is out there and does show that councils who conduct such reviews (and I believe that all do) are fully aware of the extent of the reported misbehaviour of bailiffs. I doubt that we will agree on a number of issues, and that is as it should be; but I'm very glad that you have joined the site, because people need a balanced view. Chris.

While I can understand where ctman is coming from, that is not the overall impression I get from the many threads I have read since I joined this forum in 2007. Although this sounds reasonable, the fact is that any person who has missed a payment for the third time is unlikely to be able to pay in full, and if this happens in the early part of the financial year, they are likely to be faced with enforcement action even if they are able to pay off the whole council tax bill by the end of the financial year. From what I have seen, that happens more often than it should. I think you are being unfair, there may be people that you have come across who have been "trying it on", but it seems to me that most of the people who come to this site help are definitely not trying it on. Quite often the people who ask for help find themselves in a pickle because of personal tragedy, illness either mental or physical, or because they have lost their jobs; and many posters have commented on the unhelpful attitude they have encountered when in contact with the council. I sincerely hope that you never find yourself in such a desperate position. I cannot agree with you, the council tax (administration and enforcement) regulations, are very clear about when and how and why bailiff fees should be applied. Sadly many bailiffs not only misrepresent their powers, but they also falsely claim fees when they have no right to. The regulations do not provide for letter fees when collecting council tax arrears, I think you are getting mixed up with parking tickets. Oh I wish that that was true for everyone, and it may be so for anyone who contacts you personally, but it's surprising how many people have made agreements with their council, kept to them, and then found the bailiffs knocking at the door. We don't hear of many people receiving the benefit of the doubt very often. The council have a contractual relationship with the bailiffs, so once an account has been passed to the bailiffs it cannot be returned unless the account holder fulfils the criteria. Anyone who pays the bailiffs online, when they could just as easily pay the Council online is a fool. The bailiffs will deduct any charges that they think are owed to them, the council will not. As for risking three months in jail, that is simply ridiculous, unless the council can prove that the debt spend the money he should have paid in tax on a holiday to the Bahamas -- otherwise jail is unlikely. Councils throughout the United Kingdom, carry out surveys on the effectiveness of the bailiff services that they use; and those Bailiff Reviews which are available to the public through the Freedom of information act, show that councils are well aware that a significant proportion of bailiffs act incorrectly or illegally. It's worth pointing out, that council tax arrears nationally represents approximately 1% of the council tax liability. The bailiff industry is worth £6 billion, and represents money that should have been paid to creditors or councils, but that is lining the pockets of the owners and shareholders are bailiff companies. In an ideal world, we would all be able to pay our share of the tax that the country needs to keep services running, but in a liberal democracy such as ours we have to accept that there are some people who are unable to pay it. Adding to their misery is not going to make it any easier for them to pay.

Incidentally, you are in business and it's very different from the world most people live in, it's meaner. So on that basis, why are you worried about someone elses debt? They certainly won't be worried about yours.

Company, as in Ltd Company? Depends if it's the company debt or your debt. If it's the companies debt and then they can seize the companies assets as far as I know. If it's your personal debt then they can't.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings but now that they have been in they have the right to force entry if they have to. That includes breaking open any locked door to search, naturally they don't expect to have to open a safe, but theoretically they have the right even if they are unable to do it. Depending on where it is and what type it is, that may prove very difficult indeed without the expensive assistance of a specialist. So if you can't find the keys the average bailiff is likely to huff and puff and walk away, especially if he/she is told there's nothing in there of value anyway - BUT DON'T COUNT ON IT - if theyve been once already and seen the safe, they might just turn up with a road drill if that's what it takes. Once you leave the new tenant would be wise to change the business name and that includes the sign over the door. Providing the premises are clearly under new management the new retailer shouldn't have any problems from a reasonable bailiff.

Well the arrears of £140 were owing to the council so thats gone. But the £476.50 (not £1070 ) is a different matter. I would begin at the beginning and complain about the levy upon the HP Car, because that is the foundation on which they built their fees and actions. You should get a statutory declaration witnessed by a solicitor to say that the car does not belong to you, and write to them asking for the return of the money incorrectly levied. They'll refuse of course giving some reason but that's ok, post back when you get that reply. Make sure a copy goes to the council asking them for the money as well.