Jump to content

Peterbard

Registered User

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    10,493
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Peterbard last won the day on November 1 2019

Peterbard had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,079 Excellent

About Peterbard

  • Rank
    Gold Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

3,920 profile views
  1. Hi Just a thought, but are they still permitted to share the data after such a long time?
  2. They could not have visited earlier(legally) without sending an earlier NOE, like the one produced here. Ask them for a copy of the earlier notice, and details of when it was sent. As it is, you are now at compliance stage, and only the compliance fee of £75 is due. You need to write/email to the authority and tell them that you had no idea the liability order had been applied for, or that indeed money was owed, as you had left the area. Copy the Bailiff in. If the authority take it back, which they should IMO, they should cancel all enforcement fees.
  3. Hi You need to get on to the authority also, there are various statutory letters you should have received from them prior to any further enforcement(bailiffs). You should have been warned for instance that the a liability order was being applied for. I take it you had moved out by the time the liability order was issued in 2017? With respect to DX, that letter is way out of date, and really should not be used. If you have proof you moved before the liability order was made, like your new CT bill. Offer to send a copy. Ask them to withdraw th
  4. Lol. Yes I remember seeing this as an original. No interest permitted on a CCA debt like this Unless it is under the courts act, post initialising proceedings. section 69 county courts act.
  5. Your SAR to the CRA, should show the default being issued and then taken off. In fact some of the CRA have a facility to show historic entries. Creditors should not be assigning un-defaulted accounts to debt collectors, because a DCA do not have the facilities to maintain the accounts if the debtor remedies by paying up before termination Everyone who encounters this should complain as loudly as possible IMHO.
  6. Yes absolutely its called reversing the burden of proof, I believe. As DX says, if you dont respond properly, there is nothing to stop them taking proceedings, the court will not interfere.
  7. The situation is, that your correspondence, if it is to reset the SB start date would have to state an intention to pay. If the debt had already gone past the six years, it cannot be re started.
  8. As I feared the raving looney parties have picked this up to bolster there idea, that you can pay the court direct to avoid fees. No not at all. In this case a warrant should not have been sent, because the debtor had not been given the time to remedy under the Courts act.(ten days). Nothing to do with bailiffs. Quite a rare occurrence. After the warrant is properly received by the bailiff, they have the power to enforce, all payments will end up with them, no matter who you pay, and they will remove their fees. A similar claim was made in the high cou
  9. Yes good. I did mention the 10 ay ting earlier, although i did think you were referring to an agreement with the Bailiff, if I must be honest. Unusual for the fine officer not to send the ten day notice, as he is the one who creates the warrant. But all's well that ends well. It again goes to show that you should talk to the creditor or/and the bailiff, and not, as others are advised to do, ignore them. Well done
  10. The initial £75 Fee is separate to the the enforcement charges under fees regulations, in that the bailiff is due to be paid on endorsement of the warrant by the EA, prior to enforcement. It is not part of the pro rata payment under section 13 of the fees regulations. In any case the OP says he had already defaulted on repayment to a plan set up by the bailiff, the bailiff would not have to send another NOE in that case, neither do they have to acknowledge failure to keep to the terms of the agreement. They will, in my view, quite rightly, enforce forthwith.
  11. Hi yes their are communication's from the court before the warrant is issued. from the fines officer for example, giving ten days to pay, but after the warrant is signed for , the debt comes under the TCE and its provisions. I think the OP is considerably past that stage.
  12. Hi I am afraid you have been misled initially. The Compliance fee, is due from when the warrant is received by the bailiff, not from when the notice is sent. As you quite rightly say it is to cover expenses which may include searches etc, these would have to e done before the NOE was posted to you. Stages of enforcement for which fees may be recovered – enforcement other than under High Court writs 5.—(1) The relevant stages of enforcement under an enforcement power which is not conferred by a High Court writ are as follows— (a)the compliance stage, which compris
  13. Absolutely, 45002. A contract like that is not a lease, there is no statutory protection, no law to say what is included. You need to examine it carefully before you sign.
  14. I am sorry, but without seeing the contract, and knowing what is on it or what effect it has, it is impossible to say.
  15. We have to have all the facts of course, otherwise we cannot give proper advice. Sadly, in my opinion the EA has it right this time, by the 18th , the car had been sold. The bailiff can say you failed to update your address, which is an offence by the way. The car was seized on a highway, so they would have left it for two hours with a notice, then they entitled to remove it. The notice you received(valuation) seems to cover all the requirements of part 39 and 40 of the act. They should notify you of course of the current financial situation, how much
×
×
  • Create New...