I'm sorry I have not been thinking about these matters for a while but judging by what you are saying, no levy by the HCEO took place. Therefore no levy fees could be charged. When you say you went to the High Court on an interpleader, was it the HCEO fees that were reduced or the original amount claimed? If it was the fees they must have been taxed by a High Court Judge. Is this the case? Sorry to ask so many questions but it is not clear what has happened.

The trouble with all these things that you must do it in writing and it becomes a paper trail exercise.

He is talking BS. This may apply to criminal fines but up to now it has not been extended to non criminal matters as the Government cannot find a watchdog to oversee the bailiffs. Misrepresentation of powers and isuing threats against a person I think! Try reading this and look on the National Debtlines site and at the stickies about bailiff powers here. http://www.dca.gov.uk/enforcement/agents02.htm

Presumably the charges are on one account. Why the £160 enforcement fee? According to PK they did not have entry. And the bailiff fee should £42.50 at the most. Another avenue to follow would be to find out if the charged visit fees for each liability order when making one visit. They cannot do this under a decision made last year.

Sorry aboutthe length, feels like war & peace

You say you wrote to the LA to notify them about a change in address, do you still have a copy and did they ackowledge receipt of this. I ask because the council should notify you before applying for a liability order and before referring the matter to the bailiffs. As far as I am aware only in unpaid criminal fines can an order be issued to break into a house or in eviction. If you had signed a Walking Possession Order and the bailiffs had been in your property could the bailiffs break into your house (only in the most extreme cases), so Rossendales are overstating thir powers. If a bailiff had called at your house you would have found a letter or similar left at your property to notify you. If as the bailiffs had claimed, they had made 2 visits (which I find very doubtful), the maximum they could charge would be 1st visit fee £24.50 and 2nd visit fee £18.00, a total of £42.50. If they had levied on a vehicle outside your property, a seizure notice should have been posted through the door (although some are sticking the notice on the car or no notice at all - this is an illegal levy). These charges can only be applied if a court certified bailiff is in attendance as only certified bailiffs can act on Council Tax liability orders. The bailiff is guilty of not identifying himself, behaving aggressively, assault by trying to push inside your house, overstating his powers, issuing threats leading you to fear that may come to physical harm and fraud. He was in breach of the guidelines laid out and agreed to by the national body (I will post a link at the bottom). Unfortunately you will find that the police not to be interested in pursuing an action against the bailiff or indeed of even investigating the matter. You have been defrauded but the best way of recovering your monies is by letters of complaint about the behaviour of the bailiff to the council and Rs. First write to Rs and ask for a full breakdown of costs charged to you by the bailiff. If they are not forth coming with this you serve a Standard Access Request (SAR) asking for a screen dump of your account. This may cost you £10 (the maximum that can be asked for). In the meantime tackle the LA overthe way they actioned the liabilty order and the bailiffs without notifying you. Copy in the collections department, the claim department, Rs and your local councillor. Also point out the illegal behaviour of the bailiff in this letter and tell them that they are resposible for his actions and for any overcharge on the fees. The LA may decide to refund all your fees but don't hold your breath. Once you get a reply from Rs, you will have the evidence for taking them to the Couty Court to recover your money, make the LA joint defendants as they are liable as well. You might want to put in a Form 4 complaint aboutthe bailiff but think hard about this as the judges are not patient with those that mess them about. Hope this helps. I was going to include the advice given to officers by Devon & Cornwall Police but it has been removed from the website. If anyone wants it, PM me as I downloaded as a pdf file. Department for Constitutional Affairs - Enforcement - National Standards for Enforcement Agents

Just thinking about the advice to give, about to go out, will post in about 1 hour. Hope that ok?

Hi Wabco, I'll try to help. The 1st & 2nd visit fee are laid in statute. You could argue that they only visited once if you can prove this (you can ask for proof but they usually lie about this). If no levy was in place (make sure they did not levy on your car when on drive etc.) all other fees cannot be charged. It does sound as though they are trying on. Of course id the bailiff is not certified that called, they can't charge a penny. Hope this helps!

Oops my space bar is sticking! Despite what ill informed councils say, the charges are laid out in statute.

Hi Pinkmini, To ease your mind itis laidout in council tax legislation the fees that can be charged. £24.50 for a first visit and £18 for a second (this is for England, I believe it is £22 & £16 in Wales). They cannot charge for anyother visit (or letters) unless they make a levy (walking possession agreement) although a lot levy on vehicles parked outside the house whether you own them or not. The general advice is to park vehicles well away from the house and preferably sell them (for a small amount) to someone you trust. Don't forget to change ownership at the DVLC and change insurance into the owner's name. Do not open your doors or windows to them as if they gain access they then have the legal right of access at a later date. Read the stickies at the top of the bailiff's page.

There has been a ruling stating that a bailiff can not charge for the use of a credit card (December 2007). As far as I know this also applies to Debit cards but TT was waiting for this to be clarified. I know this ruling does not apply to High Court Enforcement Officers but the threat of taking a credit card charge for taxing was enough to make them refund it.

One of these days I'll get this text formatting sorted out!!!!!

Hi FWOG, here is a useful link that lays out guidelines for agreed good practice, signed up to by Councils and trade organisations:- Department for Constitutional Affairs - Enforcement - National Standards for Enforcement Agents hope it helps

I presume that Lamb to the slaughter appears to have little sympathy for any one on the receiving end of the bailiffs given recent posts! One wonders why Ltts is posting on this kind of web site?

HI Dazza, I think you have got caught up in your water companies new policy of taking old debts through the High Court by an action of Fi - Fa. Please read this link as it will give you useful information :- National Debtline England & Wales | Debt Advice | Factsheet 31 Dealing With Debts In The High Court You could apply to the High Court for an order to stay execution but in your case from what you have said, it should be possible to challenge the original application to the County Court. If A******* Water hold you liable they should supply you with all the details and you could put a N244 into the court. If you would like some advice on this matter, please PM any personal details to me. Do not post as these companies are known to read this site.

NO they can't charge you for 4 visits as they are very well aware after a ruling by a costs judge (TT originally posted this). They are supposed to supply a breakdown of costs with each pieceof paper they leave and as far as I am aware can not refuse to supply a breakdown when requested (although most do)! As no WPA or levy is in place (please advise me if otherwise) they can only charge the basic £24.50 (1st visit) and £18.00 (2nd visit).

Hi FWOG, good thinking by sending me a PM giving names! To answer in the open in my opinion as you say this is a legal document and it should have the bailiff's certificated name on it, not a foreshortened or anglicised version of it, as who knows who he might be in the eyes of the court. As this is a notice of levy for council tax all the criteria should be fulfilled and he should not be using an alias. I wait to see what others think but certainly under PACE this document would be disallowed. (Police and criminal evidence act)

Sorry, got carried away and missed that bit. As far as I'm aware, all bailiffs collecting for Council Tax have to be certificated by the courts. You can write to the bailiff and ask for his certification details and double check with the court that he supplies. If he is not certificated the levy will be illegal and not stand.

As the bailiff has levied illegally on your father's car, he needs to swear a stutory declaration that the car belongs to him and that thebailiff had been informed that was the case before levying. This will invalidate the levy and associated fees (the bailiff only did this as it subsyantialy increases the fees he can charge). Your father needs to send this to the bailiff company and a copy to the LA. I hope this helps.

Just for the record I have already been throught his with another poster recently who appeared to have grudge against TT. They have only guest rights now. I can state that I have no commercial connection with TT or her site, I just know that she offers reasonable, measured and knowledgeable advice for free on this site. If any wishes to go to her site for more detailed and authoratative advice that is their decision! All I try to do is help OP's that come to this site to the best of my ability, as others helped me inthe past. Given the recent activity by bailiff companies against this site and the recent impugning of TT's name and advice, perhaps any orchestration is being carried out by those that have most to lose by posters following advice given here. Sorry to hijack your thread, rant over!

I don't know if this is what you want but it may help! Posted by our good friend WOW, please tweak any part to make it applicable, particularly as I'm not sure which stage you are up to (you need to let the bailiff company and the LA investigate before referring the matter to the LGO):- Name of Council Address 1 Address 2 Address 3 Address 4 [DATE] Dear Sir/Madam Re: YOUR NAME & ANY REF: Visit by your bailiff on [DATE] I have had an opportunity to seek advice and I write on the understanding that case law rules an authority is liable for its bailiffs and you have made a factual error in your advice. On [DATE] I have been charged £[amount] for the use of my credit card and standing orders and I now understand this contradicts Regulation 45(2) of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 as well as the decision handed down in a Detailed Assessment hearing by District Judge Plaskow. I also understand that defrauding a council tax payer in this way commits an offence under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 and the council may be criminally liable for assisting an offender in fraudulently obtaining a money transfers. To settle this matter early I ask within seven days of this letter being [DATE] that you: a) Refund me fees paid to your bailiff while acting under your instruction. b) Pay me reasonable costs in seeking discovery of information and researching the legal background to the case, and: c) Pay me reasonable costs for my administrative work and for receiving an over-zealous bailiff seeking to defraud me with bogus fees, and: d) Pay me 8% Statutory Interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the daily rate of 0.00022% from the date money became due. e) Make a written apology. You have deliberately protracted the matter requiring me to seek legal advice I would not have otherwise needed. For the avoidance of doubt, if you fail to complete the above within seven days being [DATE], I will automatically file a claim in the small claims track without writing further and this may invariably involve further costs. Your attitude to this matter indicates the council may be engaged in systematically and routinely defrauding council tax payers en-masse. I'll bring this matter to the attention of the Local Government Ombudsman. This document is delivered by Royal Mail and I deem it good service on you by the ordinary course of post under Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 and therefore it is your responsibility and in your own interests this letter is handed to the relevant person within your organisation. I regret I am unable to discuss this matter by telephone or in person. Yours Truly [YOUR NAME] Hope this helps!

Hi, your parents must write to Rossendales at the address given and state that you neither live at this address nor have any property at this address. This is purely a contact address. If they feel able, swear out a statutory declaration stating the above and get it witnessed by a local solicitor or the local County Court (the court will do it for free normally). In the accompanying letter they need to also state that they expect no further visits from the bailiffs and that they have no financial resposibility for your debts. Send a copy to the instructing LA stating that Your parents are holding them responsible for the behaviourof the bailiffs and will not hesitate to seek compensation if they attempt to bully or browbeat your parents or attempt anything that is not laid out in statute. *The bailiffs have no right of entry. *They cannot legally levy on any goods that are not yours (any fees and levy can be set aside with a Stat Dec).

TO save you looking Skatz here is the info:- I have spoken today with TT at Bailiff Advice Online and she had directed me to a Detailed Assessment hearing of December 2007 where the matter of the legality of a credit card handling charge was debated. District Judge Plaskow made the point very clear indeed that no statutory scheme exists entitling a bailiff company to make this charge . The defendant company argued that the charge should come under “reasonable costs and charges” as there was a cost involved in accepting this form of payment. This was rejected in its entirety by the Judge who even went so far as to say that “there are all sorts of costs. You even have costs of business rates on your premises…but you can’t pass those on and neither can you pass on credit card handling charges”. Hope this Helps

Hi, to answer you questions 1) there has been a decision by a Costs Judge on the matter of 2 fees for one visit. It was decided that the bailiff can only charge one fee per visit no matter how many LO he is collecting on. 2) On credit card charges there has also been a decision, this is an extract from a letter TT wrote for me :- I have spoken today with Mrs xxxxxx at Bailiff Advice Online and she had directed me to a Detailed Assessment hearing of December 2007 where the matter of the legality of a credit card handling charge was debated. District Judge Plaskow made the point very clear indeed that no statutory scheme exists entitling a bailiff company to make this charge . The defendant company argued that the charge should come under “reasonable costs and charges” as there was a cost involved in accepting this form of payment. This was rejected in its entirety by the Judge who even went so far as to say that “there are all sorts of costs. You even have costs of business rates on your premises…but you can’t pass those on and neither can you pass on credit card handling charges” I hope this is of some help to you.

Hi Mummy83, hope we will be able to help. First let me say I am no expert, you need TomTubby for that but she will need some information. Did you receive a summons and did you put a statement of means in with your defence? Is the money they are trying to collect a court fine or is it a County court award (it is important toknow if it is a civil matter or a criminal such as parking ticket, traffic offence, TV licence)? I think I am right in saying that you can pay over 6 months but I stand to be corrected, and as you are on benefits under the National Standards for Collection agents you will be classed as a vunerable person.