I had a response to my email: I would confirm that I am asking for this matter to be registered as stage 3 complaint. I have copied in the Chief Executive’s Personal Assistant to this email. We will review the matters you raise and advise you of your appeal rights and contact details for the Local Government Ombudsman in our response. Short and sweet!

This is what I finally sent: Dear Mr Stevens, Thank you for your reply. I refer to my original email and complaint. I believe the Levy and attendance fee issued on the same visit to be unlawful: Most bailiff fees are set in legislation when a fee can be charged is also set in legislation A Bailiff attends to levy your goods if he Does not get a levy he can charge a 1st visit fee only £24.50 bailiff makes a 2nd visit does not get a levy he can charge a 2nd visit fee only £18 no further fees can be added to the debt unless he levy goods no matter how many times calls Bailiff attends the property and manages to get a levy on goods (car) on this visit he can charge a levy fee if a walking possessions agreement is signed he can charge a fee of £12 (levy fee is worked out on a sliding scale therefore depends on the amount of the debt ) there is no such fee as an attendance fee there is an attendance to remove fee that cant be charged the same day as the bailiff levy's goods (until the bailiff gets a levy he has no goods to remove ) The next fee following the levy would be the attendance to remove fee when the bailiff returns to remove the goods previous levied Legislation states Reasonable costs and fees incurred http://www.bexley.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=3028 &p=0 C: For one attendance with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods (where, following the levy, goods are not removed): Reasonable costs and fees incurred Could you please explain how you believe that the levvying and charging for levvying and whilst on the same visit attending to remove and charging to remove be logical or legal? Simply put, he has either attended to levy or he has attended to remove goods he has previously levied upon, he cannot attend to do both and charge for both. Central London county court - Case No 8CL51015 - Anthony Culligan (Claimant) v 1. Jason Simkin & 2. Marstons (Defendants 2. The Fee Regulations provide for a distinction between the levying of distress and removal of goods. There is a gap between the two stages. The purpose of this "gap" is to allow the debtor to make payment of what is due after the first stage. DJ Avent says at paragraph 50 of his Judgment:- "Accordingly, in my judgment the bailiff should not and, as a matter of law cannot take any steps to remove goods until he has given the debtor a reasonable opportunity to pay what is due at the time of seizure. Could you also now please advise me how to take my complaint to the LGO as I feel my complaint is not being understood or getting any closer to a final resolution. Furthermore I request that you now escalate this complaint to the CEO of the council and confirm this by copying him in your response. Regards

I am about to respond to the council with this: Thank you for your reply. I refer to my original email and complaint. I believe the Levy and attendance fee issued on the same visit to be unlawful: Most bailiff fees are set in legislation when a fee can be charged is also set in legislation A Bailiff attends to levy your goods if he Does not get a levy he can charge a 1st visit fee only £24.50 bailiff makes a 2nd visit does not get a levy he can charge a 2nd visit fee only £18 no further fees can be added to the debt unless he levy goods no matter how many times calls Bailiff attends the property and manages to get a levy on goods (car) on this visit he can charge a levy fee if a walking possessions agreement is signed he can charge a fee of £12 (levy fee is worked out on a sliding scale therefore depends on the amount of the debt ) there is no such fee as an attendance fee there is an attendance to remove fee that cant be charged the same day as the bailiff levy's goods (until the bailiff gets a levy he has no goods to remove ) The next fee following the levy would be the attendance to remove fee when the bailiff returns to remove the goods previous levied Legislation states Reasonable costs and fees incurred http://www.bexley.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=3028 &p=0 C: For one attendance with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods (where, following the levy, goods are not removed): Reasonable costs and fees incurred Could you please explain how you believe that the levvying and charging for levvying and whilst on the same visit attending to remove and charging to remove be logical or legal? Central London county court - Case No 8CL51015 - Anthony Culligan (Claimant) v 1. Jason Simkin & 2. Marstons (Defendants 2. The Fee Regulations provide for a distinction between the levying of distress and removal of goods. There is a gap between the two stages. The purpose of this "gap" is to allow the debtor to make payment of what is due after the first stage. DJ Avent says at paragraph 50 of his Judgment:- "Accordingly, in my judgment the bailiff should not and, as a matter of law cannot take any steps to remove goods until he has given the debtor a reasonable opportunity to pay what is due at the time of seizure. Could you also now please advise me how to take my complaint to the LGO as I feel my complaint is not being understood or getting any closer to a final resolution. Any changes needed or advice?

Thanks Outlawla, I see this and understand but I get the feeling the council either havent got a clue or are pretending they dont in the hope I will believe them! Has any one got a simple plain english way of putting this that they cannot ignore?

So I sent this to the council: I have read through your response and feel that it is much the same as a I have stated to you regarding events times and charges albeit a few details. Instead of resolution to a complaint it reads more as a statement from the bailiff. You have not covered the point of the complaint that a £250 attending to remove fee was charged on the same visit as a £57 Levy fee was charged. This is as far as I am aware is not procedure or lawful. A removal fee cannot be charged on the same visit as levy fee. A removal fee can be charged when he returns after levy to remove goods. Please could you investigate these points? These are the main points of my complaint and I dont feel these have been covered or resolved. This was the response I got: I have reviewed the Council Tax regulations and I cannot find any regulation that prevents the two fees being charged during the same visit. A Levy has to be undertaken before a fee for “an attendance with a view to remove goods” can be charged, but nothing preventing this being at the same visit. So what next? Any advice? or is my complaint dead in the water?

So high all, been a bit of a delay updating. So I have had responses from council and court. He is registered so that clears that up. The council sent me a long paper letter via snail mail and seem to have given up on email. It basically confirms everything I have said about dates and times charges etc and then concludes that nothing wrong was done and I should return the attached income expenditure form and he will broker a deal with chandlers on my behalf. So, is that it? or what next? I will send the form and make an arrangement to pay the outstanding council tax, but nothing is said about paying the fees.

I have emailed bromley CC and asked for his details too.

Thanks, I'm sure this will be useful. I have asked the council and Chandlers to confirm his certification and I will text him tomorrow if I don't get an answer.

I have emailed the head of revenues and asked him to confirm but I am a bit aprehensive about making direct contact with Mr G*****

Look what I got today from the CB register: Good afternoon, Thank you for your e-mail. There is a Mr G***** on our database but his certificate, granted at Bromley County Court, expired on 11thFebruary 2012. You may wish to contact Bromley County Court to see if another application has been granted.

I think thats pretty clear. They still havent noticed the attendance fee is less than on the paperwork!

I emailed them and asked them just to confirm a couple of details today, this was the response: Thank you for your email, I can confirm that the levy and attendance fee was charged on the same day, the levy fee was charged for levying on goods and the attendance fee was charge for the attendance to the property with the intention of removing goods and chattels. I can also confirm that the attendance fee applied was £250.00. Regards

The only thing listed was the car on the drive!

I recieved this response from Chandlers: Thank you for your email, The below visits were for reference ******. On Reference ******* the visits are as follows: The certificated bailiff Mr C***** attended the property for the first time on the 01/07/2013 with the intention to levy distress, as no response was received a letter was left and a fee of £24.50 was incurred on the account. On the 15/07/2013 the Certificated Bailiff Mr A******** attended with the intention to levy distress for a 2nd visit, after receiving no response a letter was left and a fee of £18.00 was incurred. As we still received no response, on the 24/08/2013 the Certificated Bailiff Mr G***** attended with a van with the intention to remove goods and chattels. On this date he levied upon goods, for this lawful course of action a £57.00 fee was incurred. For attending the property with a van with the intention to remove goods a £250.00 attendance fee was incurred as no response was received. Please find attached a copy of the Walking Possession Form that was filled in by Mr G***** on the 24/08/2013. Regards Chandlers Limited I have no record or letter regarding the second visit and any one spot the difference between the amount of the attendance fee on the 24th?

Ok, I see, but charging it at the same time as a Levy fee. Is that allowed?