Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder

Bailiff Advice

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Bailiff Advice last won the day on July 8 2016

Bailiff Advice had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,265 Excellent

1 Follower

About Bailiff Advice

  • Rank
    Gold Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thank goodness that you saw sense and visited this forum instead of taking notice of sites that encourage debtors to pay a creditor direct. Since 2014 when bailiff regulations were overhauled, such debt avoidance tactics (trying to avoid bailiff fees by paying creditors direct) always FAIL and a visit fee WILL be added and legally so as well. What you should focus on, is getting the County Court judgment either removed (depending of course on when judgment was entered) or alternatively, getting the judgment marked as satisfied.
  2. As you had contacted the bailiff after a personal visit, then it is usually always the case that full payment is required. As you do not have a car, and have not allowed the bailiff into your property, the bailiff can do very little but to accept a payment arrangement that will see the debt paid by the end of March (as agreed by the council). Suggest to the bailiff that you can make payments weekly (or monthly) of £xx that will see the debt cleared in the timescale agreed with Islington Council. State also that you do not have a vehicle and that there is nobody that can assist you with paying the debt.
  3. If Islington Council are happy for the debt to be repaid by the end of April, then it is for THEM to inform Phoenix. The enforcement company are acting in the capacity of agents for the council. However, given your take home salary, I would suggest that you would struggle to get the debt paid by this time. All councils require outstanding arrears to be repaid by the end of the financial year (end of March) before new council tax bills are issued so it is not surprising for the council to have said this to you. The time when a payment arrangement should have been made would have been on receipt of the Notice of Enforcement from Phoenix. By not doing so, you have also incurred an 'enforcement fee' of £235. The problem that you also face is that when a personal visit is made, the PURPOSE of the visit is to either obtain FULL PAYMENT or alternatively, to 'take control' of goods. Do you have a car in your driveway ? If so, this is at risk of being seized.
  4. In fact, the debt is NOT at Compliance Stage at all. I will try to explain as simply as I can but please excuse the fairly long explanation!! Prior to 2014 when the Taking Control of Goods Regulations was introduced, it had been a legal requirement for all local authorities to send a '14 day letter' to council tax payers once a Liability Order had been obtained. If payment had not been received after the 14 day period, the account could be passed to bailiffs to enforce. In 2014, the requirement for councils to send the '14 day letter' was revoked. Despite this, there are many councils that continue to send this letter........... and there are other councils that request that such a letter is sent by their bailiff company. This is more common in the run up to Christmas. Most importantly, such a letter (commonly referred to as Notice of Issue of Liability Order) is NOT a statutory notice and cannot and must not be confused by the statutory Notice of Enforcement (NoE). At the NoE stage, a Compliance Fee of £75 may be charged. Most importantly, the NoE must by law state the time AND date by when payment must be made in order to avoid a personal visit. At the NoE stage, you may also set up a payment arrangement. Secondly, you should contact the council asap to advise that you will be moving in February. The Liability Order will then be REDUCED by approx one month.
  5. Could you respond to the above. Also, what was the reason why both you and your husband wanted to see camera footage?
  6. Camera footage can be very problematic and the Information Commissioners Office have issued guidance on this subject. Most importantly, any request for camera footage would need to be made by the debtor...and that would be your husband. If the footage included you...then that should be removed. If children are present, then the bailiff must ensure that any filming not include them. Did the council specifically state to the bailiff at the time of the visit that they would be happy to accept repayment of your account over a period of 6 months. It would be usual for councils to specify a period of time for repayments in their contracts between the council and bailiff company. Could this be what the council were referring to? The bailiff did not 'actually' take control of any items and neither did he list any items on a Controlled Goods Agreement. Instead, he unplugged a TV (which is a very common threat I's afraid). I am presuming that he indicated to you that he would take the Range Rover. If you had provided evidence that the vehicle was in your name, then I would be very surprised if he would have taken the vehicle into control.
  7. Apologise for not responding sooner. Clearly, as you had defaulted on repayment of your court fine, a warrant had been issued and passed to Collectica to enforce. As such, you should have received a Notice of Enforcement from them outlining that they had received instructions from the court and requesting either full payment or proposal for a payment arrangement. At that stage, the bailiff fees would have been set at £75. Did you receive such a letter? However, before Collectica would have been instructed, the court should have sent you a Further Steps Notice. This is a legal document and would outline the 'further steps' that the court would be taking if you did not pay the amount required within a period of 10 working days. Did you receive this letter and if so, what date was it dated?
  8. I have been posting on CAG for over 12 years and in each post, I try to provide advice not only to the person posting, but to anyone else that may have a similar enquiry and view the thread via Google searches. For this reason, please do not take my criticism personally. As I have outlined in my earlier post, if your husband had addressed this debt on receipt of the Notice of Enforcement, he would have been able to enter into a payment arrangement spread over a period of 6 month. Given your financial circumstances, this would have greatly assisted your family and most importantly, would have meant that you would not have had to also incur the 'enforcement fee' of £235. That additional fee would have been avoided. Lastly, I have posted many times that it is usually the 'threat' of goods being removed that usually leads to full payment being made. This is precisely what has happened in your case. If you still believe that you have grounds for complaint, then the correct route is for your complaint to be made to the local authority. If you are unhappy with their response.....then you may indeed request that CIVEA review the matter.
  9. The problem here is that as the debt is in your husbands sole name, then any 'vulnerability' would need to apply to him and NOT to you. So many people use Google searches when faced with a bailiff visit and sadly, it appears that you have taken what you may have read on the internet as the gospel truth. It would be for your husband (as the debtor) to outline HIS vulnerability, and to explain HOW it affects HIM in DEALING with a bailiff visit. Secondly, you have mentioned about the bailiff failing to show you the 'warrant'. As this is a Liability Order, then there would not in fact be a 'paper' warrant. However, if a warrant had been issued, it would NOT be addressed to you. It would be addressed to THE BAILIFF and would permit HIM to enforce the debt. Another problem with google searches, it that you were wrongly of the opinion that a warrant would need to be signed. Any such requirement, was revoked by law many years ago.
  10. I have copied some important comments from your post. It would appear that the amount that the bailiff had been requesting was approx £1,600 and that at the time of the visit, you were able to offer half the sum (of £800). Most importantly, you have stated that you had been aware that the council had passed the debt to Equita and that you had received previous letters from them but that you thought that you 'had time to deal with it'. I will address this point first: The initial notice that your husband would have received would have been called a Notice of Enforcement and outlined on this notice would have been the precise date AND TIME when either full payment OR A PAYMENT ARRANGEMENT must be set up. At this point, Equita would have been able to (and this is agreed by the council), set up a payment arrangement over a period of up to 6 months (which, is an unusual and extremely generous period of time). Clearly, you failed to approach Equita within the legal timeframe outlined on the Notice of Enforcement. Without a payment arrangement being in place, the bailiffs were under a legal obligation to make personal visit to the property. Most importantly, the visit is NOT in order to make a 'payment arrangement'. The purpose of the visit is to 'take control of goods' or accept full payment. You appear to be under the impression that the bailiff should have made a Controlled Goods Agreement once allowed into the property. This is not the case at all. In fact, such agreements are not at all common. As the debt had been around £1,600 and given auction values (which are approx 10% of the actual amount of the item), the bailiff would have needed to list items of around £10,000 (or more). Secondly, with the debt being in your husband's sole name, the bailiff would be tasked with attempting to establish which items are solely owned by him and which are joint. The choice on whether or not to enter into a Controlled Goods Agreement is with the bailiff himself at the time of the visit. You have also mentioned 'vulnerability'. Once again, this should have been brought to Equita's attention long ago (on receipt of the Notice of Enforcement). Furthermore, vulnerability would only apply to the debtor (your husband) and not other family members. He would need to provide some documentary evidence. You have mentioned that he is self employed so any 'vulnerability' would have been difficult to establish.
  11. You mentioned in an earlier post that you had defaulted on the agreed payment arrangement and that on 28th October you received a 'letter from the court' dated 28th October. What was this letter about? What date was given on the letter? Can you just be a little clearer regarding your above comment concerning the 30th October. Did you receive a bailiff visit that day or a letter in the post?
  12. Incorrect advice I'm afraid. In most cases, the forms are witnessed by a solicitor. A fee of £5 is charged.
  13. At the time that the vehicle was seized, a warrant would have already been issued against your ex partner. Most significantly, the warrant 'binds' the goods (in this case, the car). In simple terms, this means that the vehicle cannot be either sold or transferred. If it is, (which is what has happened), then the vehicle CAN be seized. As your ex partner was the registered keeper at the time of the various contraventions, then sadly, he is the person responsible for paying the debts. As such, it would be for him...and not you....to submit Out of Time witness statements. He would be able to make such applications on the basis that he had not received any of the statutory notices. In doing so, he would need to outline the reason WHY he would not have received any notices. As I understand it, there were five separate parking contraventions. Therefore, there would have been a total of 15 letters from the council (Notice to Owner (NtO), Charge Certificate and Order for Recovery). In his Out of Time application, your ex partner really should have elaborated on the reason WHY he had not received these notices. Instead, he has simply stated this: 'No Notice to Owner was ever received by myself, I WORK AWAY AND HAVE A 'COA' ONLY. Your ex should have provided far more detail as to WHY he did not receive the notices. For example, was he working abroad? How long was he working away for? Did the person in charge of the 'care of' address notify him of correspondence? How often did he return to that address? Taking the above into consideration, I would be surprised if his applications were to be accepted. It normally takes approx. 4-6 weeks to receive notification of the decision. Did your ex provide the 'care of' address in his application? If so, has he taken steps to ensure that correspondence reaches him?
  • Create New...