Jump to content

bladeboy

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About bladeboy

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. So, so typical of an industry out of control and that no one seems to care what they get up to. This is essentially fraud since all the bailiff has done here is to 'levy distress' and the fees for this are capped and subject to statute in the Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts order as amended. The fee he can charge will be in the region of the Penalty Charge plus £28.00 and that's all.
  2. You were given good advice from the Debt Advisory Service. If you have no assets to speak of, Bankruptcy is a very good option for you and this legally halts all enforcement action by any unsecured creditor that's pursuing you. It also draws a line under all of the debt and you cane then move on. It will also halt the hassle from the High Court Enforcer. If you had your own home - that is to say you had a good junk of equity in it - then bankruptcy might not be the best option should you want to keep it but given your situation and providing you can front the debtor's petition fee then go for it. No stigma these days so don't worry there.
  3. Sorry, but re paragraph 1, this is WRONG!!!!! Bailiffs may ONLY enter 'peaceably' and with the 'permission' of the occupier. This permission may be implied - as in a front door being left open - but if the debtor finds a bailiff has just entered his hallway then it is perfectly lawful to ask the bailiff to leave and they must comply. Until the bailiff has actually started the process of compiling an inventory then they must leave. The case law in this matter is: Khazanchi v. Faircharm [1998] 2 All ER 901 and Snook v. Mannion [1982] Crim LR 601 The 'threshold move' in this case, under the circumstances you describe, is nothing more than a 'forced entry' and as such is trespass. Under the circumstances you could forcibly resist the baillif attempts to enter the property and focibly eject them using 'reasonable force'. Using 'forced entry' even goes against the National Standards forn Enforcement Agents. The case law for 'forcible resistance' is: [1968] 1 All ER 1154; (1880) 44 JP 781 & (1894) 58 JP 350. As is usually always the case, through ignorance more than anything, the attendance of the police in these cases is more hinderance than help. Officers at the scene will usually side with the bailiff and attempt to put pressure of the debtor to let the bailiff in. THIS IS WRONG. The role of the police is to 'prevent a breach of the peace' and not to assist in the recovery of civil debt. The aforementioned words are very important in wording your complaint to the police and the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). Here the police have assisted in an 'unlawful entry' since the bailiff does not have a power on entry per se. Complain to the police and the Bailiff Regulators. Copy the IPCC into the complaint to the police and make sure the local officers know you have done this. As far as I see it, unless the bailiff at the time was able to produce a part completed and accurate inventory to prove peaceable access have been obtained then it's difficult for them to actually claim that the entry was lawful.
  4. Have you paid the money and are seeking to recover it? If so, fire off a letter before action and, assuming they ignore it (they usually do) issue a claim through the small claims track in county court. I did this and, armed with the statute law, won my case and got a refund. The advantage of the small claims track is that your exposure to costs is very limited.
  5. As previously stated, there is NO POWER OF ENTRY for the bailiff and they know this! Given that they have limited powers they will bluff and misrepresent their powers. They will nearly 100% of the time inflate their fees like all bailiffs - just seems that no one seems to care that this is a widespread practice in the industry. Don't let them in.
  6. Indeed, on the basis of what I have read on here would just go the 'small claims' county court route and not be exposed to costs - apparently going the form 4 route can expose you to costs and it seems there is little to be gained from complaining there. I went the county court route with a bailiff firm and won.
  7. Complete crap, they have no power of entry and they know this hence the threat re the police. The police would only ever attend to prevent a breach of the peace and would not attend as a matter of course to assist a private bailiff recover a civil debt. In these cases, especially re parking fines, the usual bailiff tactic is to 'levy' or seize the car, which is usually outside the property and this is an easy way to enforce the debt. However, from what you say so far it does not appear that such a tactic is open to them here. Bailiffs powers are very limited and it appears that virtualy all firms train new recruits to bully, bluff and blatantly lie in order to circumvent the obstacles. Worse still, they will almost certainly have loaded the bill/debt with bogus and non-statutory fees such 'van fee' attendence fee' - well know tricks of the trade that are fraudulent in a criminal sense. OK, don't under any circumstances let them and complain to the council (issuing ticket) that the bailiff is completely misrepresenting their powers and abusing their authority.
  8. Bankcruptcy my arse! The creditors petition will cost them around £1,000 and then they lose control of the debt - it passes to the official receiver! Don't worry about that, they won't do it. It's all part of the bully boy tactics. All they want to do is to get you scared into borrowing off friends and family to pay them. ********s
  9. Every time I read about bailifs on here it is due to them either threatening to do what they can't legally do or overcharging! When is the governernment going to get a grip on this industry!! As the above poster has stated, there are very view circumstances under which a bailiff can force entry into a property. One of them is collection for Magistrates Court fines and the other is Inland Revenue Debts where a special warrant has been applied for.
  10. Can you confirm this was a parking fine? If so, you need to complete a Statutory Declaration. Get the form from the HMCS court website and fill it it in. It's in PDF format. You'll need all the details of the original contravention, PCN number, date, time and location. You'll also have to outline why you are unaware up to this point of the matter generally. Go to your local county court to get it 'sworn' for free or expect to pay £5.00 at a local solicitors office. Send the forms recorded delivery to the Northampton County Court - details are on the form itself. This will freeze all enforcement action and the bailiffs should be notified of this. If not, and they turn up, go outside to speak to them and tell them that you have completed and sent off a stat declaration. Don't sign anything and don't let them into your property. Their fees are bollocks, but we'll get to that later. PS: how many parking tickets, one?
  11. Don't be surprised if they reject that, come round to your property and either clamp any vehicle there or bang on the door threatening that they will force entry. This is an industry completely out of control and they just keep getting away with it. All firms see to routinely charge outside the scope of the relevant statutes. You may end up having to pay the amount charged and then pursue through the small claims court, as I did. By the way, I won! OK, for penalty charge notices the fees that can be recovered are governed by the 'Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts Order' amended in 2003. A quick google search will outline a table with the exact fees but for sending a letter, the amount permitted is in the region of £11.20. This cannot increase until the first visit to 'levy distress' is made so for them to say that the amount 'has now gone up to...' is, frankly, complete bollocks and they will know this. However, the complete arrogance of the bailiff firms is disturbing and indicative of the fact that other than court action (which most people just won't bother with) they have absolutely nothing to worry about. In addition to the penalty charge you should have a letter fee of £11.20 and what they have done with this first visit is 'attend to levy distress when the levy is not made' - this carries a fee cap of £28.00 The 'visit fee' and 'attedance/removal fee' are complete bollocks. They are not mentioned in the statutes and are therefore cannot be charge for. VAT can ve charged on the lesser amouts that the statute permits. Let us know how to get on with that 'offer' and then we'll take it from there.
  12. Also, you MUST buy the book by Patricia Pearl advertsied at the top of this site Small Claims Procedure - a guide. It's a very good book and will prove to be an excellent reference for the whole process. I love it.
  13. Have you sent a formal 'letter before action' and actually written letter before action as a header for the letter? This should be a simple, bullet-pointed outline of the facts of the case and how much you should be refunded and how you have calculated that figure. The rules for this 'pre-action conduct' are outlined in ANNEX A of the Civil Procedure Rules. Point out to them them that they have 14 days to respond to your letter before action and that if they chose to ignore it they are contavening Paragraph 4 of ANNEX A of 'the rules'. What this means is that it gives the court discretion re costs since failure to respond to a letter before action can be deemed to be 'unresonable behaviour'. State that you'll be inviting the court to consider this. Wait 14 days, then bang the claim in. They'll either defend or pay up. You ok putting particulars of claim together?
  14. What Baloney! The assessment process can cost you dearly, or more than the small claims track, as there is no pressumption to 'no costs' on the assessment process. The only way you can be stung for costs in the small claims track is if the court/judge deems that you have acted unreasonably and in your case with properly compiled Particulars of Claim that simply won't apply. As High Court Enforcer knows, it's far more profitable to blag and make up fees and exploit debtor's lack of knowledge.
×
×
  • Create New...