Do I understand it right that because it was a Supreme Court judgement, the Judge involved has made a shed load of long standing legal/legislative consumer protections to do with contracts/contract law null and void?

You say they are renting the whole property under a normal residential AST - you could leave yourself or rather your Mother open to MAJOR trouble if you are coming and going and entering the property without "permission" and giving them 24 hours notice. Never mind the legalities of letting the Bailiff in - your presence there to let the Bailiff in without the tenants permission means they could turn round and hammer you in the courts. The fact they have broken planning permission, and you want rid of them makes no difference, until the Court agrees and signs the Eviction the entire property is Theirs, you own it, but the law classes it as their home. It sounds like you say you or your mother is living there at the moment? If either of you is, is it with the provable, ie written/text or recorded audio permission of the Tenants? Because if they know their rights, you are risking all sorts of trouble, they could argue if you cant prove either of you is now living there with permission that you have been attempting an illegal eviction, by moving in and thus "forcing" them out. Like I say, whether they live there or not, they are renting the whole property on an AST, and the Law says it is their home. Just warning you, because if they are "rogue tenants" they very likely do know their rights and the law, and could be "setting you up" for an expensive fall. It was on one of these programmes following Housing Enforcers, private and Local Authority, and one company takes people to court for eviction on Landlords behalf (expensive way to do an easy process I would think!) and the guy was saying the worry on the day of the hearing is the Tenants could pull out "anything" to try and delay the eviction, so you need to make sure you and your mother are bullet proof. Remember, if they went for an illegal or attempted illegal eviction angle, and proved it, that is a Criminal Offence, not just an expensive in terms of fines, compensation etc civil one. The Bailiff himself will be fine, but if you let him in, and your presence there could be considered unlawful, no 24 hours notice, permission from tenants etc, it could go badly for you, look how the courts would see it, a Tenant says my Landlord wanted to serve a legal notice, and just let himself in, then let a bailiff in to do it, the legal grounds for you would be shaky I suspect. Why are you using a Bailiff to give the notice? Seems an expensive way of going about sticking a letter on a desk, or handing it to someone. Court's seem to consider normal post a perfectly acceptable way of issuing legal paperwork such as an eviction hearing.

I don't think there was a "ruling" it was just becoming a problem as evictions began to rise, and Central Government pointed out to the LA's that they were "accidently" to give them the benefit of the doubt the rules and legislation governing their responsibilities when they have a duty to rehouse someone, the same sets of legislation etc that allows them to refuse a duty of care to people for becoming "intentionally" Homeless and so on.

No, your misunderstanding. the Local Authority has the lawful duty to rehouse the debtor, and there refusal to do so until an EA comes to perform the physical eviction was pointed out by central government as unlawful years ago, but LA's still persist, even though it basically means they then have a massive urgent rush to rehouse someone, sometimes at 4pm because of their own refusal to follow law. This is nothing to do with the EA, or the Landlord. So the LA's are basically forcing tenants to breach Court Orders, by not leaving as and when ordered by the court, but waiting for the EA.

Shame they aren't and weren't so quick to defend the rights of the vulnerable they are supposed to look after! I wonder if they have retrained their staff to accept the fact that the old days of a Bailiff not turning up for at least 2 months to perform an eviction are long gone, and most landlords are simply going via the HCEO route and getting it done in a couple of days. The refusal to rehouse until the Bailiff turns up and performs the physical eviction is unlawful anyway, and I believe Councils have been told off for it years ago, but simply ignored, as usual "Leading Beyond Authority" aka "Doing what we want, not what the Law says" I wouldn't be surprised if it also breaches Human Rights and who knows what other legislation, because they are forcing people to defy Court Orders, which is technically speaking, Contempt of Court, isn't it?

I am astonished, but someone has uploaded footage of the near mythical "Certificated Arrest Officers / Warrant Officers" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYQZAyfZlBw They claim they don't need to bring a Warrant - surely they would need to do so to prove their right to perform the arrest - a Jury would I imagine be hard pressed to convict someone who violently resisted, because they carried no evidence to prove they had the right to arrest them. 2 strangers, clearly not cops turn up and say "we are arresting you, we don'r have a warrant, but trust us, there is one" nobody sane is going to meekly put their hands out and say fair cop guv. Warning, the unseen woman deploys enough bad language to make a Sailor blush at some points of the footage. But is the WO correct? Do Magistrates Courts issue Arrest Warrants without signing anything, either physically or electronically? He seems to think he just gets told to go grab someone. Someone in the Comments make the interesting point that if they were correct, and acting within the law, they wouldn't be sat there arguing with 3rd parties, they would be putting the door in to search for their target. Sadly, she also sounds like another victim of the Freemen. She has a couple of other videos, where Police visit because she returned Council letters with very rude words, initials F and O scrawled on them. And she goes into full FMOTL ranting about administrative courts, bla bla.

I don't know the specifics, but there are videos of Locksmiths spending literally hours trying to get in by drilling the locks, despite being told the door is bolted at the start, and when they finally have to admit the only way in is to put the door in with a battering ram, the locksmith leaves. These are not Enforcement Agents, these are just blokes off the Street that the likes of British Gas Hire. MG is clearly bang on the money with what he says though, as the Locksmiths Always walk away, refusing to do anything further than drilling the locks. If he is asked for help by a Debtor in time to attend the Warrant hearing, he generally gets them thrown out, because Utility Companies are Perjuring the Magistrates Court, every single day, and yet, if NatWest or Tesco behaved the same way, they would face severe penalties. The Act they are using only allows Entry for 1 reason - they suspect the Meter is unsafe, or the Meter has been hacked to give free power/gas. MG gets the Debtors to turn up to court with an Electrician/corgi gas plumbers Certificate done that week as proof the meter is safe and untampered with, and thus, the Magistrates have no choice but to throw the warrant out. The drone going to Court knows full well he is committing perjury, he or she knows there is no safety issue, they are lying to a magistrate to get an entry warrant as once they are in, they can then fit prepayment meters against the householders will, but they cannot get a forced entry warrant just to go in and fit prepayment meters, hence why they perjure the Court and claim H&S issues. I am still stunned at the newest video where a Police Inspector is caught on camera discussing with the British Gas Gaffer "can my boys just put the door in for you now?" and he said that before he saw the warrant, and ascertained it was lawful, and without any knowledge whatsoever as he admits of the legislation involved. This is probably what has happened in South Yorkshire recently, Plod has offered and the BG Gaffer agreed. I have a suspicion that the Plod's think these guys are Enforcement Agents, but they are not The one thing MG is doing wrong, is where the Locksmith has damaged the door, he and the victims are trying to get the Locksmiths ID to sue for damages. I don't see why they are wasting time, whichever Utility Company contracted them to try and enter the property is equally and vicariously liable, so why chase around trying to find the identity of some 1 man show, when you can simply go to MCOL Online and begin proceedings against British Gas or whomever? Interestingly, the Locksmiths in these videos are always in small unmarked vans, whilst all the advice on the internet is to steer well clear of any locksmith who doesn't use a marked vehicle!! Which may explain a few things that come up in some of the videos, it's someones mate with a drill, not a proper locksmith - I did wonder why a proper, decent Locksmith who knows his trade and that he can only drill the lock, nothing else, on being told the door has been fitted with bolts would then bother drilling away for an hour or two.....

I hadnt noticed before, but in the Can't Pay episode with the Polish guy who hid his car in nearby pub car park, when they visited his house first and his missus answered, she tried to close the door, and the EA used force against the door to stop her doing so, another rogue EA for the books. I would love to see what "legal" excuse Grumpy will come up with explain how its perfectly legal, as I can't see how, or what he felt it gained him, unless he was planning on using force to smash through her and get into the house, like Pinner did.

If you have free time, look at the videos taken by a group in Lancashire/Cheshire who assist people who have recieved the 7 day warrant notice informing them their utility company is going to force entry to put in prepayment meters (they perjure Court by lying and claiming there is a possibility the meter is unsafe or has been modified to give free electric) The Utility Companies cannot use force to enter under that warrant, they can drill the locks, and that is it. Which is why the first bit of advice from MG and his team is to fit Bolts to your doors, as any attempt to use force to remove the bolts is beyond the warrant and the Locksmith could well end up in front of a magistrate himself. I have seen a few videos where the Police snuggle up with the utility companies head agent and start discussing whether it is possible for his officers to simply go in with their big red key, once it is obvious the locksmith isn't going to get through the door legally. South Yorkshire Police have actually done this a few times recently. So yes, damn right, Bent Coppers, they certainly arent fit to wear their uniform. I am pretty sure we have had cases on here where Plod has arrested them to allow EA's access. And there are threads up in the Brighthouse section where Plod have arrested debtors to allow brighthouse agents entry to "reposess" goods, something totally illegal. A bent Cop is a Cop who breaks the law.

The legislation does not class refusing to allow peaceful entry a an offence of Obstruction, regardless of who they are - otherwise We, CAB and any other decent help site/organisation would be screaming about it, as obviously thousands of debtors who know their rights would be getting arrested. Peaceful Entry is the key word, that power has not been changed, or removed, except to forbid entry via open windows, so the old rules still apply on this one, the right to not let them in. Iirc, they knew he was filming so they were trying to be fairly careful, otherwise the bent coppers would have arrested him to allow the HCEO to enter, its happening a lot at the moment, with Utility Warrants too.

If he had prior entry etc, then I imagine yes, the poster was Obstructing. He appears to be wanting peaceful entry for the first time, therefore he was acting outside his remit, and absolutely nothing can justify him making Obstruction threats if he has not made prior entry, wouldn't he still have to go to court and prove there are enough levied goods to satisfy the debt, so the Magistrate will allow an entry Warrant anyway even if had prior access?

So you don't believe the HCEO insisting that unless the Poster "Complies" and let's him in, he will have the Police arrest him for Obstructing an Enforcement Officer, is not acting outside his remit? You don't see any black mark against him for overstating/stepping his powers and making unlawful threats? No, we don't know the full story, but nothing can justify the HCEO stating what he did about Obstruction, just a sign that many of the bad apples are still there, in the barrel.

The Poster didn't deny access to the property, only from entering the house, so not sure why you bring that up. Don't see why you would need a search of the house is the householer provides documents, and the poster would have been nuts to allow him entry. I am astonished you are defending the behaviour of a Rogue HCEO caught on film threatening to have the accompanying officers arrest the guy unless he allows access, refusal to allow peaceful entry into the home is not obstruction. He just wanted entry without any care if there is proof the debtors lives there, he wanted in so he could demand with menaces that the poster or his mother paid the debt, despite it not being theirs debt.

Because even showing his ID would not have changed anything, its not his house. the HCEO wanted entry because thats the address on the writ, the HCEO even states whilst having a go at him for not "complying" that he still needs entry into the house.

No they don't. Bailiff's are not allowed to use force. Certainly not against a Debtor. IIRC one of the eyebrow raising elements of the new legislation was it had to specifically state they arent allowed to use force against Debtors.

I strongly suspect the Police are there because it's a black family. Look at the racist comment the copper makes, purely because the Poster is black "Well, your known to the Police....probably" on absolutely no information at all except the guy is black and has tattoos. And this from various videos is pretty standard Police behaviour, whether with Bailiff's or British gas trying to break into homes to fit prepayment meters, having lied to a magistrate to get a warrant. It is clear in the conversation, the HCEO has been before and spoken to the home owner, the posters Mother, and she has shown what evidence she had, but he is still trying it on, he wants entry as he is going to refuse to accept any "proof" and seize goods. This is daily life in poor areas these days. I am watching one of MG's videos of a british gas attempt, where they have broken the law by not sending the 7 days warrant notice, just turned up with Police, and the thuggish behaviour andf aggression of the BG agent is incredible.

Police and make a complaint about online Harassment. Then see who is laughing. And speak to some solicitors for free consultation

Just saw this on youtube. HCEO with High Court Writ Tells the video poster that if he refuses to allow him access then he will be arrested for obstruction! Suggest this guy needs serious retraining. Got to love the copper too "well... your known to the Police...probably" And erm, are the Police allowed to use the PNC to check identities of people for HCEO's? Misuse of the PNC surely. The victim, who isn't the person the HCEO was after seriously needs to do some formal complaints, and I have advised him to do so. Surely a criminal offence has been committed, threatening arrest for not allowing peaceful entry? The HCEO is outright lying about his powers, threatening arrest, and the Cops just backing him up.

And how many of my or your neighbours know of that specific act? I know full well they can, most people don't.

Bailiff's are getting attacked, more so since the new legislation came in last year. Do you really not think it amazing that a special type of bailiff whos job is arresting people the courts want has not yet been attacked? If you answered the door and some guy dressed like a security guard tried to arrest you, and when you ask "are you a copper?" and he says no, would you accept his word that he can arrest you, or would you resist, since to your knowledge "security guards" don't have any power of arrest?

What I am failing to grasp is what EU extradition law has to do with Courts issuing arrest warrants for non payment of a fine. Oh, an EAW could be used to get a fine evader who has legged it to Eire, say, but that is because evading fines is a criminal offence, and the EAW is there to allow the law to reach wanted criminals within the EU. I doubt the Council would be able to use an EAW to get someone who owes them council tax. It doesn't have anything to do with this subject, where a Bailiff is threatening to get the OP arrested. I would like Grumpy to provide some proof that Marston's have any input as to when someone gets arrested which he seems to be suggesting.

What on earth are you on about? A European Arrest Warrant is a Criminal Warrant that is used to trigger Extraditiion within the EU. In the UK, a special unit of the Met deal with the EAW's and travels around the UK Arresting the subjects of the Warrant, and flying them to the Country that is after them. It has nothing to do with Marstons or Bailiffs. I think you have misunderstood the posts here.

I am amazed Certificated Arrest Officers, or whatever they are calling themselves this week haven't been attacked and seriously injured and murdered by now. Their existence isn't common knowledge, the government appears to have suppressed as much information as possible on them in fact, so a person would have a good chance of proper doing a CAO over, and getting off on "I thought he was a burglar"

I would report it to the Police as Harassment, afterall that IS why they have done it, to harass you. Police take online harassment very seriously these days, and a Police Crime Ref etc would also be helpful if you sue. And it costs just a stamp to send them a Letter Before Action threatening to sue for a CCJ. Lots of lawyers do free consultation and so on, might be worth ringing a few and seeing what they say, the no win brigade would potentially take it up if they felt you had a good chance of success, or maybe even a local solicitor, and they would maximise your compensation.

Call them again try and run it the same as last time , but this time record it, so if necessary, you can show a Magistrate or the Court Fines Manager they are being totally unreasonable and unfair . In fact, I would contact court anyway and make a formal complaint that they are threatening you with arrest because you cannot pay and they are refusing to allow a payment plan. I strongly suspect from the sound of things is the payment was intentionally halted, or whatever they have done precisely so your bill can go up another 200+ quid, funnily enough, all in fees to Marston. But whatever you do, make sure you record ALL contact. I personally would contact the Court, make the complaints as above, (and covertly record it) so if it gets to the point that you are arrested, you then have a trail showing you werent refusing or being unreasonable, but it is Marston who have been. Also, Marston cannot get an arrest warrant, if they cant collect, they send it to the Court and the Court will decide how to proceed, so again, having that covertly (so they don't refuse to speak, and aren't watching what they say_ recorded call to the court reporting their behaviour etc is again proof as to who has been unreasonable.