Jump to content
  • Content Count

    4,653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Bailiff Advice last won the day on July 8 2016

Bailiff Advice had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,259 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. The first thing that you need to think about is your vehicle as this would be the item that a bailiff would be looking to seize. How much is your car worth and is it on finance? Next, you should contact the enforcement company and request that they send you a NEW Notice of Enforcement. The reason why they must do this is because, regulation 8 (1) of the Taking Control of Goods specifically states that such a notice must be sent "to the address where the debtor usually lives" When the new notice arrives, the amount should be £173 will will include bailiff fees of £75. As long as you contact the enforcement company straight away, you will be able to enter into a short term (usually around 3 months) payment arrangement.
  2. For visitors reading this thread, the specific regulations regarding a 'review' are outlined under item 6.3 of the Practice Directions supporting Part 75 of the Civil Procedure Rules which state as follows: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part75/pd_part75#6.1 6.3 Attention is drawn to the limited powers of a district judge where a request is made to review an order of a court officer refusing an application for further time for filing a statutory declaration or witness statement. Any review of that order by a district judge will only be a review of the decision to refuse the application for further time for filing a statutory declaration or witness statement.
  3. As your application has (not surprisingly) been refused, you are able to 'seek a review'. Such applications are in fact, few and far between and the reason for this is twofold: Firstly, there is a court fee of up to £255. If you are in receipt of qualifying benefits, you may be exempt from paying all or part of the fees. Secondly, in seeking a 'review' the District Judge is VERY limited indeed into what he can consider. What you CANNOT do is to try to 'improve' your Out of Time application by attempting to introduce statements that you had not included in your ORIGINAL applications. That is a fact. Accordingly, your 'new comments' outlined above can be ignored. The Judge would only be able to 'review' what you had initially stated on your PE2 and PE3.
  4. I know that you now realise that you had not provided anything like enough of an explanation to justify the cancellation of the debt, but I am curious as to WHY you provided so little information. PS; Please don't beat yourself up about this because well over 65% of Out of Time applications are REFUSED and almost all rejections, are due to the same reason that yours has.....lack of information to support the cancellation of the debt.
  5. Unfortunately, Out of Time witness statements and statutory declarations are applications that motorists submit to the Traffic Enforcement Centre without so much as knowing what these applications are for and what information should be recorded on them. In simple terms, an Out of Time Statutory Declaration is a request for consideration to be given to CANCELLING the debt registration (including bailiff fees) because something had gone wrong at an earlier stage (such as; documentation being sent to a wrong address). If the application is accepted, the local authority will then issue a NEW penalty charge notice to your correct address. You would then be able to pay the charge at the earlier discounted rate. On both the PE2 and PE3 there is a 'reason' box. What information did you provide in both these boxes?
  6. If you do call Marston's they will not be allowed to discuss the debt with you. I would suggest that you respond to the letter by email to advise that your boyfriend does not live at your address and instead, provide them with his correct address.
  7. Can I just be clear, the paragraph does NOT say that they will enter your property while you are not home. That particular sentence has been used by enforcement companies for many years and what it means is that goods can be removed in your absence from your driveway or more rarely; your garden. The most popular item for an enforcement agent to remove is a motor vehicle.
  8. Can you please respond to let us know the EXACT wording on the hand delivered letter (where they state that they will enter your property whether you are there or not)
  9. The amount that you paid seems odd. If this debt had been for an unpaid Dartford Crossing toll, the amount that you have been asked to pay at visit stage would be £425. If the debt had been an unpaid Merseyflow toll (for using the Mersey Gateway Bridge) then the amount would be £380.
  10. The following is an extract from the above mentioned High Court judgment:
  11. So, the important question is: How did the CAB arrive at these alarming figures? The answer......they simply carried out a short survey and relied upon responses from 277 individuals. More later on......
  12. Furthermore, Citizens Advice claim that their survey supposedly found that: 6% had seen bailiffs use force to break into homes 21% had experienced an intimidating phone call 24% of people polled had an affordable payment offer rejected 17% experienced a threat to break in, (excluding magistrate court fine enforcement) 3% experienced bailiffs entering the home when only children were present 12% of cases report bailiffs visiting the home outside ‘reasonable hours’ of 6am and 9pm 19% report being charged VAT on top of bailiff fees 24% report being told that a payment arrangement could only be set up if an enforcement agent makes a personal visit.
  13. Scroll to the bottom of the above link and you will be taken to a CAB Blog entitled: Bailiffs are Breaking the Rules and They are Getting Away with It. Since last November, there is just ONE 'example' of a bailiff 'breaking the rules'. https://wearecitizensadvice.org.uk/bailiffs-are-breaking-the-rules-and-theyre-getting-away-with-it-eb1d920548e0 That page has received 62 'thanks' (which CAB refer to as 'claps'). None are from the public. They are from these 4 people: https://wearecitizensadvice.org.uk/bailiffs-are-breaking-the-rules-and-theyre-getting-away-with-it-eb1d920548e0 So, what EVIDENCE are Citizens Advice relying upon to substantiate their bizarre claim in this page that in the past TWO YEARS, they have found that 2.2 million people report being contacted by bailiffs and more that a third of them (850,000) people....have experiences bailiffs breaking the rules. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/policy/policy-research-topics/debt-and-money-policy-research/a-law-unto-themselves-how-bailiffs-are-breaking-the-rules/
  14. Thank you Micheal for starting the thread. The Taking Control of Goods Regulations were introduced in April 2014 and by now, the government had pledged to undertake a Three Year Review. Instead of focusing on the much needed and long overdue changes that are necessary to improve the ways in which debts are enforced by bailiffs, the tax payer funded 'advice sector' (Citizens Advice and Stepchange etc) are using this consultation to YET AGAIN, pursue their own policy agenda which is to force the Government to appoint an Independent Regulator. Worse still, they are looking to achieve this.........by misleading the public and government with false and misleading data. The following page from the Citizens Advice website is a good example: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/our-campaigns/all-our-current-campaigns/bailiff-reform/
×
×
  • Create New...