Then he can attend the proceeding and ask the judge the petition be struck out because there is no contract between the debtor and the DCA. The debtor only has contractual obligation to pay the original creditor who needs to be named as the petitioner. Unless the DCA holds a legal charge for the debt the court has no obligation to bankrupt a debtor for consumer debt for which there is no contract between himself and a debtor.

I would be surprised if a DCA petitions bankruptcy, its expensive and creditors form a line and a DCA falls low in priority. You are only dealing with county court bailiffs or HCEO's. Find out if your case had been transferred up (min £600) and fortunately bailiffs in this case have no power of entry without permission to a property for the purposes of enforcement. They dont have the same power of entry as council tax and court fines. Let the debt pass 6 years and it becomes a nullity under Section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980. You might be best seek advice in the debt forums.

I dont rely on wikipedia. Hearsay in English law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia You forgot to give credit where credit is due. Perhaps you should read this article. Plagiarism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Counsel for the defendant can use comments on this forum to undermine the proceedings by exposing the state of mind of the claimiant. They can even contend the claimant to be a vexatious litigant by publishing case information before the proceedings have concluded.

Perish the thought!, i'm a pupilage barrister and working as a nightclub DJ and podium dancer on the London club circuit to make ends meet. Working for B&Q lacks appeal. b/f did most of the kitchen and i did the complaining. With the credit crunch, driving down costs is important at the moment.

If this is litigation in progress i suggest deleting this whole thread. Naming the defendant, trial date and court is a bad idea.

Thats not how liability orders are processed. When legislation was drawn up, judges complained they were being used as rubberstamps so it was reworked to use magistrates to issue liability orders. They cost less money and stipendiaries cost nothing. Police only execute a warrant for arrest to being someone before the court for a committal proceeding. They do get a fair hearing and are given opportunity why they havnt paid, it's often something simple such forgetting to claim a benefit or didnt live at the charge address.

It looks like you are on some vendetta. Your efforts are better placed elsewhere.

Tony, i've read your documents again and I speak from experience (work experience at NPAS) as well as from legislation. The TEC cannot stop enforcement because the bailiff is appointed by the council. But TEC is letting you put your case before a district judge for two reasons. To satisfy Article 6 of ECHR which guarantees a fair trial in civil and criminal proceedings. The examiner at TEC has looked at your case objectively and adhered to legislation without deviation. He/she found the ticket is valid and the fine is lawfully due. From experience, if you go before a District Judge (use Form N244) unrepresented the judge will advocate for you and the likely ruling will be the ticket is upheld but will be rolled back to its original state and you will only pay the original £40 fine. Ask for your costs, you wont get them if you don’t ask. ##NO GUARANTEE## this is the correct prognosis. Good luck.

sean, you have made this thread nearly as long as yours. Please quit with your pointless remarks. I see a moderator intervened with your previous slate on me.

A document issued by a magistrate on application by a council pursuant to Section 33 of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 and authorising enforcement action to be taken for recovering an unpaid debt. Ditto Section 33 of the Child Support Act 1991.

A council will need another LO to start enforcement for another liability. If the same bailiff is in charge of both LO's then he needs a separate levy for each LO. A council can ask for an LO encompassing more than one deb not exceeding £15,000 in total. I suggest seeing a doctor in urgency and ask him to get the council to halt enforcement by declaring you a vulnerable person for the purporses of civil enforcement. The Doctor might charge you a fee because letters like these cannot be prescribed on the NHS. Then offer the council a repayment structure you can afford.

Read the website, they talk about county court bailiffs. Not certificated bailiffs. Your own thread describes a one-off experience with bailiffs. I have been put before a judge (and often the same judge) on a Section 8 enough times for the judge to know me by my first name and recognise me shopping in Waitrose! Everytime a threshold complaint the word is unreasonable and the judge dismissively tosses the complainants Form4 over his desk. The judge never says unlawful. County court bailiff collecting a CCJ is not the same.

Thats the correct advice. Only if the bailiff has reasonable cause the believe the vehicle belonged to the debtor at the time of levy. If they are wrong then the bailiff can face a civil action jointly with the authority. Bailiffs should act dilligently.

If crossing the threshold is unlawful then every bailiff doing it would lose their certificate.