Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by aggrieved1

  1. Hi, Sorry I may be a day late on this one. .. perhaps not as I am aware of Newlyn's tactics and have posted a few threads. My dealings with them are also for Canterbury Council Tax, and currently I have an upcoming meeting scheduled with both the head of council tax at Canterbury and Newlyn's Client Manager because of their outrageous behaviour and charging and I have been in touch with a reporter from the Times who is waiting for the outcome of the meeting to write a further article. My advice is to do the following to get them held off very quickly: Contact the Canterbury Local MP - Mr Brazier (I have met with him several times for Canterbury City Council Tax Collection and he is concerned about Newlyn's practices so may be able to fast track a response out of the council). He has been instrumental in sending letters for my case to the chief exec of Canterbury City Council and was responsible for halting a lot of Newlyn's silly behaviour. Send a recorded letter to Newlyn and email them a copy and if possible fax a copy all at the same time, requesting a breakdown of their fees... . I guarantee they will be incorrect and even would go as far as fraudulent. Demand times and dates when they have visited your property. This most certainly won't exist and the fees will be wrong. By emailing and sending them a letter and fax, you will most certainly get them to hold the account for a minimum of 10 days. In my case, they had added over £300 of bogus fees which when challenged they maintained for a long time, even though it then transpired they had levied on a car which not only wasn't ours, but according to the DVLA doesn't even exist. These fees were subsequently revoked. When I pressed them further on their visit days and times and requested paperwork to prove their visitations, they allegedly had a system error which mysteriously deleted all the relevent paperwork. As a result you can understand why Mr. Brazier MP and Canterbury City Council have some serious concerns about their practices in our area. Thirdly, send a recorded letter, fax and email to council tax dept. again outlining the problems you have.. . I would of thought you could be classed as vulnerable (with the DMP etc.). Again whilst this may not force their hand in the first instance to withdraw the debt from Newlyn, it may certainly buy you some time with the account on stop whilst you work out a battle plan. Good luck and I'll be more than happy to discuss further my case if it is relevent to yours. In the meantime remember.... Unless Newlyn have already been in your home, they have no right to do so. They can bang and holler on the door as much as they like but you don't have to let them in. And if you do have a car, park it a 5/10 minute walk away and there is pretty much bugger all they can do. The text messages you have received saying we will vist XYZ are likely just a scare tactic and the bailiff is highly unlikely to attend at the text message time - I have at least 10 of the messages stored on my phone, and not one of them was adhered to.
  2. Hi Ploddertom... On this occasion not Coventry, although I have read with great interest some of the articles in relation to Coventry as similar tactics appear to have been used there in the past.
  3. Firstly a big thank you to all who post on this forum. I have been a lurker for a while garnering information which has helped me win my case against the over charging by Newlyn bailiffs. My story is below, but I am looking for information from others (particularly where Newlyn have been involved with council tax collection) as I have a meeting with my Council's Head of Council Tax, myself and a representative from Newlyn's Client Management Team to attend following and I quote 'the grave concerns that the Head of Council Tax has' and would like me to raise the issues directly with Newlyn. As you'll see I have more than enough to 'bang them to rights' but if others have similar stories I'd love to see them wriggle in their seats a little bit more! To cut a long story short in the first instance we ended up in the position where we owed £300.00 to the council and couldn't pay. Obviously they applied and got the Liability order and instructed Newlyn accordingly. No arguments so far. Next thing we know... Newlyn's added the best part of £400.00 in fees for- two visits, a levy fee, and attendance to remove fee, a Sch 5 Head H fee... all without any correspondence or visits. (My wife is full time at home with our children so would have known if they had attended). I phoned and challenged these fees and Newlyn claimed of course to have levied on a vehicle and claim to have left paperwork accordingly. (They hadn't.) I ask them to quote the vehicle registration number as in any event our vehicle is on Hire Purchase and I explain that they can't levy on vehicles on HP etc. etc. They quoted me a registration number, not belonging to me, but during subsequent investigations this vehicle does not even exist! I put all of this in writing, demanding a copy of the levy etc. and eventually am told that the vehicle levy was correct but to resolve my complaint they'll drop the levy fee. (Note: still not supplying a copy of the levy or evidence of their visits.) More letters backwards and forwards... including in one of them they claim in black and white they are allowed to levy on Hire Purchase vehicles where the burden of ownership is with the debtor! Eventually I demand very clearly a copy of the levy and proof of visit and they write back that they are right, everything was done correctly but there has been a 'system error' and they cannot supply copies of the paperwork, surprise, surprise. I have sent copies of all correspondence to the council and my local MP highlighting all of the untruths and outright lies that Newlyn have told and, in the Council and my local MP's defense they are so concerned they have arranged a meeting with me, the council and Newlyn to discuss these issues hence my request for information, whilst at the same time pulling back the account from Newlyn and writing off all fees applied therein. There are many other points that Newlyn have lied about in plain black and white and given enough interest I'll be more than happy to upload all the correspondence appropriate.... but as per my original request I would love nothing more than to sit down with the rep from Newlyn and present him or her with a great big file of complaints! Look forward to your comments and thoughts.
  4. Thanks for all your help so far. I have uploaded a picture of the letter to here postimg.org /image /yymjpxtw3/ (sorry you'll have to remove the spaces as I can't post a URL) My main complaints are: Alledged visits without letters left (my wife is home full time). Levy on a car which firstly was quoted as registration number that doesn't exist, subsequently discovered that vehicle does not exist according to DVLA. Claim by Newlyn levy is valid anyway. Refusal to supply name and certificate info of bailiff who has allegedly attended Charge of levy fee, attendance to remove and head H fee all on same day and confirmed in writing. Refusal to hold account whilst complaint taken up with local council, MP and Newlyn (they only hold it when they have to have time to consider responses.) I will shortly be able to post more of the ridiculous letters and lies of Newlyn. Thanks again for your help.
  5. Hello all, Firstly thank you to all of you for your invaluable help on here. Just a bit of background .. . I have an ongoing dispute involving my local council, MP and bailiff company.. . I have been reading here your very helpful posts to other people over the last couple of months and will in the fullness of time put the full details of my story on here, as it will highlight the lies and deceipt of a big bailiff firm, which I know many others have suffered at the hands of and the subsequent reduction of some very large and 'fraudulent fees' charged by said bailiff firm, however because of the possibility of further legal action would like to avoid specifics. this bailiff firm claimed recently to have levied upon a vehicle for council tax, and subsequently charged levy fees and attendance to remove fees against that vehicle. I questioned the vehicle upon which they levied as our own vehicle is on a hire purchase agreement and was given a registration number that not only isn't ours, but according to the DVLA doesn't even exist. However I would like to know from someone more knowledgable than me on here please how much basis of truth there is in the following statement from the bailiff company in question: 'I must take this opportunity to clarify your misunderstanding regarding legislation surrounding the seizure of a vehicle which has been obtained on Hire Purchase; you may not be aware we are entitled to seize goods where there is an element of ownership of the debtor. With goods on finance there is a point in time when ownership of the asset passes to the debtor or that it maybe that the finance company are prepared to waive their interest as long as any outstanding balance is settled from the sale proceeds. Either way we are entitled to pursue assets if there is potential ownership by the debtor' 'Please be advised that whilst the act of levying by our bailiff was correct, in this case I have removed the Levy and associated fees from your file, total £184.50 in an effort to resolve your complaint' Your thoughts are welcomed, as this goes against my understanding briefing paper/ stnadard notes SN04103 of the commons library on 'The current regulations of bailiffs' specifically the following part: 3.4 Limits on a bailiff’s powers to seize goods A bailiff cannot seize goods belonging to anyone other than the person named on the distress warrant. For example, the bailiff cannot take goods which belong to the defendant's partner. A bailiff cannot seize goods subject to a hire purchase or rental agreement (however, goods on credit sale can be seized because they are deemed to belong to the debtor). Any goods which the bailiff takes must be likely to fetch money at auction. Bailiffs will not remove goods if they think that they will not fetch enough to pay something towards the warrant after the cost of removing and selling them at auction has been paid. By law, bailiffs cannot generally take:  items or books which the defendant needs for his job or business, such as tradesman's tools or other equipment necessary for personal use in employment or business (however, a bailiff acting for Poll Tax, Council Tax, VAT and Tax may be able to do so);  essential household items which the defendant and his family need (such as clothing or bedding);9  items which are leased, rented or are on hire purchase agreements; or  goods which may have already been seized by bailiffs acting under another warrant By law, bailiffs also cannot take:  cars which are bought on hire purchase; or  equipment which does not belong to a business (for example, office furniture, machinery and vehicles which may be leased)10 Many thanks for your help in advance.. . and I hope that very soon I can post the full details of this case once all parties involved have seen sense. Aggreived!
  • Create New...