Jump to content

ik303

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About ik303

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Thank you all for the replies. I very much appreciate all the replies I have received! I have sent a complaint letter to the bailiffs and they have replied to me. Let me make clear that there was only one visiti on 15/02/2011 that I am aware of since I was in the house and answered the door. I talked with the bailiff and agreed to pay the first debt in full right there and then through debit card. I also agreed to pay the second debt some time in the next week. He called me on 25/02/2011 and I again gave him my debit card details and paid the second debt in full. In that single bailiff visit, the bailiff did not enter my house, did not make a list of any belongings (no car/any belongings at the front of the house) and did not levy/take anything with him. I wrote a letter of complaint stating that I had been fraudulently charged with various fees and requested a return of £407.50 (all fees excluding one fee visit of £24.50). Today I received Rundle & Co's response: ===================================================================== Case #2 (Council tax debt for period 01/04/09 to 28/09/09): I can confirm that we received instructions from our client (a London Borough) on 25 January 2011 advising you of our ivolvement and requesting that you contact us to arrange payment. As we received no response to this letter our Bailiff attended your property on the 2nd and 3rd February 2011. Our Bailiff was unable to make contact so a notice of attendance was left at each visit. As no contact had been made with us to resolve this matter your file was passed to our enforcement Bailiff Mr... who attended your property on the 15th February 2011. Our Bailiff levied on your goods in order to secure the debt for our Client. A levy fee and an attendance fee were applied to your account for this visit. In view of the above information we are satisfied that the fees charged are in line with current regulations and with the actions taken by our Bailiff. I can confirm you made a payment of £1168.13 on the 15th February 2011 which was for the full amount outstanding. Case #1 (Council tax debt for period 29/09/08 to 31/03/09) I can confirm that we received instructions from our Client (a London Borough) on the 25th January 2011 to enforce upon a Liability Order granted to them by the courts in relation to unpaid Council Tax. This was passed to us with a balance outstanding of 1054.43. We sent a letter to you on the 26th January 2011 advising you of our involvement and requesting that you contact us to arrange payment. As we received no response from this letter our Bailiff attended your property on the 2nd and 3rd February 2011. Our Bailiff was unable to make contact so a notice of attendance was left at each visit. As no contact had been made with us to resolve this matter your file was passed to our enforcement Bailiff Mr... who attended your property on the 15th February 2011. Our Bailiff levied on your goods in order to secure the debt for our Client. A levy fee was applied to your account for this visit. In view of the above information we are satisfied that the fees charged are in line with current regulations and with the actions taken by our Bailiff. I can confirm that you made a payment of 1271.93 to our Bailiff on the 25th February 2011 which was for the full amount outstanding. I must advise you that the fees charged for the first and second visits are statutory fees and are chargeable per Liability Order as set out in current legislation. A levy fee is applied to each account however the attendance fee was only initially applied to one account but as it was necessary for our Bailiff to re attend a further attendance fee was then applied to the other account. An attendance fee is added to the account when our Bailiff attends to remove goods if necessary. The fee is not applied on the basis of attending with a van but the Bailiff will have made all of the relevant arrangements to faciliate a removal if required. We are satisfied that all correct procedures have been followed and the fees charged reflect the action taken by our Bailiff. We do not therefore feel any refund is appropriate. Rundle & Co. ======================================================================== You see that they claim it is OK to charge for two visits on both accounts even though only one visit ever occured. In addition they claim it is OK to charge double van/attendance fees and double levy fees even though nothing was ever levied/removed and I paid my debt as soon as I was asked to. This has been very distressing and I would very much appreciate if you could advise on the best course of action. I am really fed up with these guys. I appreciate all the help! Regards, ik303
  2. Thank you very much for the replies. ploddertom, the breakdown including dates: Council tax debt for period 29/09/08 to 31/03/09: (25/1/11) Debt : £1,054.43 (25/1/11) (2/2/11) Visit fee 1 : £24.50 (3/2/11) Visit fee 2 : £18.00 (15/2/11) Levy fee : £55.00 (23/2/11) Attendance/Van : £120.00 Total : £1271.93 Council tax debt for period 01/04/09 to 28/09/09: (25/1/11) Debt : £953.63 (2/2/11) Visit fee 1 : £24.50 (3/2/11) Visit fee 2 : £18.00 (15/2/11) Levy fee : £52.00 (15/2/11) Attendance/Van : £120.00 Total: £1168.13 As you can see visits relating to the two collection orders happended on the same day. Do you think they can charge for both of them separately, making me pay for each visit twice? thanks
  3. Dear all, I owed a total of £1,923.06 to Camden council: £ 969.43 (council tax for period 29/09/08 to 31/03/09) £ 953.63 (council tax for period 01/04/09 to 28/09/09) I was totally unaware of this debt until I was contacted and visited by a bailiff from Rundle&Co who had taken on my debt. The first visit occured in the first weeks of February. I was away from home and was left a message to contact him. The second visit occured in the last week of February. The bailiff visited me and started bullying me into paying the debt immediately etc. I agreed to pay to the debt by direct bank order. Anyway, I ended up paying a total of £2,440.06: £ 1,168.13 (council tax for period 29/09/08 to 31/03/09) on 17 February 2011 £ 1,271.93 (council tax for period 01/04/09 to 28/09/09) on 28 February 2011 meaning that I paid £517 extra in unspecified bailiff fees. Recently, I requested a breakdown of the fees paid and they replied: Council tax debt for period 29/09/08 to 31/03/09: Debt : £1,054.43 Visit fee 1 : £24.50 Visit fee 2 : £18.00 Levy fee : £55.00 Attendance/Van : £120.00 Total : £1271.93 Council tax debt for period 01/04/09 to 28/09/09: Debt : £953.63 Visit fee 1 : £24.50 Visit fee 2 : £18.00 Levy fee : £52.00 Attendance/Van : £120.00 Total: £1168.13 I understand that the levy fee relates to making a list of my property. This never occured. In addition, I am not sure what the van fee relates to but I am sure it is a fraud charge. Also, why is the debt in the first case increased by £85.00?? Is this a standard bailiff practice to also increase the amount of debt? In addition, is it OK for them to charge twice for the same visit? (The bailiff's visit was related to two separate debt collection cases). My question is this. What is the best route to take in challenging these charges/fees and getting my money back? since seeing this breakdown of fees and reading several other threads on this forum I understand that this over/fraud charging is a standard practice by bailiffs and I have no intention of allowing this! thank you very much for your help! Much appreciated
×
×
  • Create New...