Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


25 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Indeed a crappy situation for everyone, those currently on holiday, those who are being kicked out of hotels, those who have had holiday and wedding plans trashed, and those like yourself who are owed money from either Gift Cards or an EU261 claim. Not to mention the staff at Thomas Cook. The Executives are to blame for this mess, the ones who are paid hundreds of thousands of pounds a year and are supposed to have the business acumen to run a business successfully. You couldn’t make this rubbish up that this company went under with multi billion pound debts.
  2. I should imagine your only option now is to register with the official receiver as a creditor. Whether you’ll get anything back is another matter, and most probably not the answer you we’re looking for. Sorry.
  3. It turns out the treasurer gave a member the debit card and PIN, the treasurer never asked for the return of the debit card over the period of approximately 24 months , neither did the treasurer resign their role. Innocent members of the group realise, while the mis-appropriated funds is down to one person alone, they cannot help believe the overall negligence remains with the treasurer, as the person whom mis-appropriated the funds should never have been placed into the situation they were placed for such an extended amount of time. The treasurer never asked for the return of the card, nor did they request a stop on the card.
  4. I can't really go into matters too deeply as there maybe onlookers to the matter. In a nutshell legally who would become accountable for mis-appropriation of funds? The Treasurer solely or other members of an organisation? It has since been discovered the treasurer gave direct access to funds via a debit card and PIN number which allowed the mis-appropriation to take place. Does liability rest with the treasurer as fiduciary, or the person whom mis-appropriated the funds? Sorry for the smoke and mirrors post.
  5. Coughdrop you said you had some thoughts, any chance of passing on what those thoughts are. Got a call from the LA today stating they want nothing less than £314pm, there is absolutely no chance on earth we can pay that amount, even when they had attachment to our earnings we wasn't paying that much, so not a chance. I've today setup two standing orders to be paid each fortnight at a rate of £7.40 each so the LA with be getting £14.80 each fortnight regardless if they like it or not. One thing a friend mentioned is if the LA do continue to increase our indebtedness due to sending orders to different enforcement agents, would it be worth pursing the LA authority through the Small Claims track to recover any fees added to our account? In a nutshell what happens when an enforcement agent doesn't collect and the orders are returned to the LA, do the £75 fees get wiped or do they remain? And what is stopping the orders being presented again for another set of £75 fees to be added, which would increase our debt. Would it be reasonable to pursue the LA using the Small Claim track, as because our reliance on benefits it wouldn't cost us to issue a claim, at least it would end up in front of a judge, and a win on our part would no doubt send a clear message to the council that I'm not going to tolerate their behaviour especially when my wife's mental health is a real concern for me and her GP.
  6. Between 2010 which was when the accident occurred and 2014 when my wife left work there were attachments to my wife's earnings, as my post above there have been attachments in place since around 2005. We've been making payments where we can, since late 2014 the debt stood at just over £4000, in the original agreement we should have paid around £374 by now but we've managed to get £500 off the debt, but the council wants more, which wasn't agreed by the Ombudsman. It's this fact that is annoying us, an agreement was set and then the goalposts moved.... Totally wrong.... We have never ever got into a conversation with a Bailiff, they have called and we have never communicated with them, in fact we have totally ignored them, the only reason what has rattled me this time is my wife's attempted suicide and I feel this will push her over the edge just as we are beginning to get somewhere with the mental councilling, hence why my wife's doctor has written a strongly worded letter.
  7. OK, I'm going to have to explain the full circumstances of how all this mess came about, I didn't want to but it looks like I'm going to need to because it's beginning to look like we were massively negligent in amassing almost £9000 of CT debt. And there is every chance the council will identify us by my post. I'll start from the beginning so there is no confusion. Me and my wife married when we were quite young. Our first child was born in 1994, and our second child was born in 1997. All was good up until 2002, our youngest son was born in 1997 was in the kitchen when he suddenly collapsed without reason, we called the ambulance and he was rushed to hospital, this was the day which would be a turning point in our lives. He was diagnosed with a Bicuspid Aortic Valve, and Stenosis of the Aorta and Pulmonary Arteries. In a nutshell his Aortic Valve wasn't opening and closing properly and his Cardiac Arteries were narrower than they should be. By this time me and my wife were losing quite a substantial amount of time from work, and in 2003 this is when we began to get into difficulty with our CT, which has plagued us ever since. Our LA were sending attachment of earnings to our employers but we were basically loosing so much time from our employers due to our sons illness they were getting peanuts basically. We had applied for discretionary CT reductions due to our circumstances but we got nothing, we literally had a child who could drop dead at any moment and our LA couldn't care less. Over the years our sons health worsened and while we did get some reduction in CT benefit because one us had to leave work and myself reduced my hours so I could attend hospital with my son it was still a large liability each each year, which the LA were still trying to attach to my salary but in return still getting peanuts. In March 2010 me and my wife had our car accident, I was injured mainly below the chest and my wife injured above the chest including her head. I lost my job as a result of my long term injuries, and my wife was off work for 6 months but luckily her employer kept her job open for her. I underwent back surgery 4 weeks after the accident to remove my lamina to relieve pressure on my spinal cord. In January 2011 I underwent a second round of back surgery to remove disc fragments (Discectomy) from 2 levels and had the holes widened (Foramenotomy) where the nerve roots pass at 2 levels, also in November 2011 our son underwent major open heart surgery to have a procedure performed known as a Ross Procedure, where they switched his Pulmonary Valve to his Aortic position, and gave him a donor Pulmonary Valve. The surgeons also addressed the problems with his narrow arteries, he was in intensive care for 3 weeks kept asleep with his blood pressure kept as low as possible giving the stitches holding everything together time to heal. Within 3 months our son had made a reasonable recovery, his life was out of danger but he is still plagued by shortness of breath, he has regular check ups and will require more surgery as he get older. My wife continued in her job as long as she could up until 2014, when she was diagnosed with Fibromyalgia and Focal Dystonia of the hands, as well as being diagnosed with depression. This is why the council are kicking up a fuss, because they have nothing to attach to other than our benefits. They've had it good for 11 years, and because it's going to take another 10 years to pay they don't like it. In a nutshell Bailiff Advice our LA has managed to recover £5300 over a 13 year period, so by means have we ever refused to pay. We have done everything to try and reduce our liabilities including asking for reductions, even our welfare rights adviser who had setup our benefit claims has tried to get our CT liabilities reduced in light of our difficulties since 2003, yet Sandwell MBC are CT vultures, while some councils will show at least some morality, you haven't a chance in hell if you live in Sandwell. Citizens Advice are so surprised the LA have pursued this so aggressively, in fact it was Citizens Advice who recommended bankruptcy to be rid of it once and for all, but I want to pay it even if it takes a lifetime....
  8. 1. I don't believe we have any non priority debts, such as mobile phone contracts, HP, or catalogue debts. 2. We are both in the ESA Support Group on IR ESA. 3. The only two items red flagged by CAB were shopping and household sundries (Cleaning products such as washing powder, Personal hygiene, etc), also our electricity bill was flagged as a monthly over spend of around £40. But as explained we have an electric hybrid car which we charge up for local journeys which cuts the petrol bill drastically. But we provided the actual bills from First Utility to confirm our monthly spend. 4. The overspend CAB highlighted was £40 per week on food, which does seem excessive, but we provided receipts from ASDA to CAB and they could clearly see out food items are mainly pre-prepared vegetables and meals as well as gluten free foods for myself. Neither me or my wife smoke, we have never smoked. And drinking is a total no no with our medication, so there is no spend in that respect.
  9. The income and expenditure was prepared by CAB, they prepared the income and expenditure on a spreadsheet. We took along all our benefit letters of entitlement and 6 months worth of bank statements, so they could build up an average of what we were spending. So our income and outgoings has been verified and is easily verifiable, and is not just figures pulled out of the air. Some red flags were highlighted mainly our food bill, but as explained earlier me and my wife rely on pre-prepared foods as she suffers from focal dystonia of the hands and I have issues with moving hot pans due to my mobility. I also suffer from coeliac disease which in itself is an extra expense in sourcing glutten free foods which are generally more expensive. However a letter from my GP explains my intolerance to glutten. Our electricity bill is also £30-40 higher than expected, however we have a plug-in-hybrid Motability car which we have also backed up with proof, but additionally our fuel bill for petrol is less as £35 in petrol lasts 7-8 weeks. So that balances that out. We've sent the income and expenditure to the LA along with the proof to explain the red flags. To be honest we've provided them with everything they've asked for and a whole lot more.....
  10. Quote Originally Posted by Bailiff Advice I would assume that there is a great deal of 'history' with your various accounts with the local authority and this would be evident by your earlier reference that an attachment to benefits was not put in place as too many agencies etc were involved in your case. Would you mind letting us know why the council are so adamant that an attachment against benefits is not appropriate. The reason why I ask is because, I was assisting with a query yesterday where a single mother wished to complain to the Ombudsmanicon about her local authorities refusal to make a deduction order (instead of referring her case to bailiffs). It was only after a lot go questioning, that it transpired that the reason for the refusal was because she was not in receipt of sufficient benefits to make an attachment !!! PS: An attachment to benefits may only be applied to certain qualifying benefits. Could it be that neither of you receive the applicable benefit? Also, how many Liability Orders are outstanding? The reason they are being so pig headed is because we have been told they can only send 1 liability order for attachment which is £3.70 per week. I have offered to set up a fortnightly standing order £7.40 when our ESA is paid, which means they will be getting £29.60 per month which is within our income and expenditure. But I have only offered this if they send one liability order to the DWP. Me and my wife receive ESA as a joint income related claim, I have spoken to the DWP and have asked them if there is any good reason why a liability attachment wouldn't be paid and I was told if the DWP receive an attachment notice then they will make the deductions. So there are no problems on that front. I am unsure how many liability orders we have pending, to be honest I coildn't even guess, I will phone up the LA and find out
  11. Thanks for the responses guys. The last time bailiffs had the accounts were 18 months ago which is around the time the Ombudsman made their decision, however when the Ombudsman made their decision the LA recalled the accounts and wiped the enforcement agents fees. The 14 day notice is due to expire any day now, so I would say it will only be a matter of time before an enforcement agent arrives, however I am trying to keep communication open with the LA but so far they won't budge, they have had copies of the letter issued by my wife GP along with a list of her medication. However our complaint is still in progress with the council so not sure if they will push ahead with enforcement agents while our complaint is outstanding. I would have thought the LA would be walking on very dangerous ground if they did push ahead while a valid complaint remains unresolved especially when they went against the advice of the ombudsman last time. My question should it be relevant how long it takes a debt to be repaid, as long as its being repaid? Especially when vulnerability has been made aware. The chronic illness which me and my wife suffer from is never going to improve, the LA should be mindful of that fact.
  12. To answer the questions previously asked..... Q1. Are you working? A1. No we were both injured in differing ways in the car accident, my wife suffered neurological injuries, she also suffers from focal dystonia of the hands and fybromyalgia. I suffered lower back trauma which required a laminectomy, discectomy and foraminotomy at levels L3/L4, L4/L5 and L5/S1. I suffer from severe sciatic pain due to nerve root trauma and use Fentynyl, Amitriptyline and Pregabalin to help with the neuropathic pain. I also suffer coeliac disease. Q2. Have you put together a Income & Expenditure? A2. Yes this was done by Citizens Advice Bureau, which highlighted some red flags due to excessive amounts spent on food and shopping. Our food bill is higher as we have to spend extra on pre-prepared foods, ready meals and gluten free foods due to my coeliac disease. The council have been made aware in a letter from our GP about our dependence on ready meals and my coeliac disease. Q3. Have you had an initial Notice of Enforcement from Bristow & Sutor? If so, have you offered a payment proposal? A3. Not yet but we had previous dealing with B & S when the Ombudsman last got involved, they were unwilling to help and wanted the balance settled in 6 months, which is impossible. We offered attachment to out benefits last time but they refused, after us ignoring them for 6 weeks the debt was returned to the council. We're basically back to a 14 day notice. Q4. Has B & S visited your property? A4. Not yet, the Ombudsman has told us we don't have to and shouldn't let them in if they turn up. Q5. Have you provided B & S with a copy of the letter from your wife's doctor? A5. The letter has been sent to the council, so they can't say they haven't been made aware. Q6. How much do you owe against all these Liability Orders? A6. Almost £3500.00 Q7. Are you paying this years council tax (2016/7) A7. Nothing is owed this year, we receive full CT benefit. The council agreed to deduct from benefits when the Ombudsman last got involved, however we believe to many people were involved in handling our case at the council and it appears in the confusion someone over ruled someone else and the agreement went up in the air, hence why we are back to square one 18 months later. A very good friend has recently suggested bankruptcy or a DRO, and has offered to fund the double bankruptcy. But to be honest I would rather pay what is owed. It just seems the council would rather cut off their nose to spite their face. Our excess income each month is just under £40.00 from the income and expenditure, I realise this will take 10 years to pay back. But surely this is better than a bankruptcy as we have no disposable assets.
  13. You are indeed correct these debts are very old, some date back to 2003. We have asked the council to attach these to our benefits so we don't have to worry about having to pay them, they just get taken. My pain problem is when my wife takes a turn for the worst every thing else has to come second, and while she's in hospital that in itself causes extra expense which will put a strain on any arrangement I can make. I need an arrangement in place which I know is going to be steady and not change without warning and is not going to be put at risk when my wife health worsens and she has to go into hospital for mental therapy. I know it may be frowned on by not willing to negotiate with bailiffs, but in past experience no bailiff has ever been understanding to my wife's attempted suicide, I simply can't allow her to become distressed. The reason why I ask if a magistrate can decide, as who decides if a committal to prison is relevant. Surely that decision is under took by a magistrate to commit or not. Surely they must be able to frown upon the local authority for not even attempting to make a attachment to benefits. We have provided also income and expenditure to the council who questioned some red flags on our spending, mainly our food bill, which is almost double what the council were expecting. Our problem is because we are both disabled to varying degrees we depend much on ready and pre-prepared meals which are more expensive, this isn't through choice it dictated by our personal needs, for one main reason I suffer from coeliac disease and gluten free pre-prepared meals are highly expensive, the council fails to simply realise this.
  • Create New...