Jump to content

sweep1

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

32 Excellent

About sweep1

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Speaking of threatening bailiffs ,anybody remember Sean James the Repo Man from the Channel 4 Series of the same name?. He was not happy when a bailiff turned up at the house and was quite happy to make threats against the bailiff, although if you watch the video which Sean himself recorded, he was not happy about the way the bailiff had been towards his mother http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OafqV3djnLY&list=UUOGIDFz3b3HPRLxfvo2cl2A
  2. DVLA dont prosecute for "failure to update address", the police will and do report the offence of failure to update address details. The attached FOI request for example shows that in 2013 Police in Scotland recorded 1814 offences of failure to update address. Although slightly off topic, the further two FOI requests, Mellor and Brundell show that the DVLA receive a substantial amount of money from drivers for a variety of offences
  3. Interesting topic Enforcement of a debt against a unincorporated trustee body Interesting to see that HMRC consider "However, charity trustees (who may also be members) have a greater role and have a duty to act prudently in administering the affairs of the charity and are responsible for ensuring that a charity fulfils its legal obligations. As such, trustees can be held personally accountable for properly determined liabilities of a charitable trust in most instances." http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/dmbmanual/dmbm585220.htm It appears from a brief reading of this http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/detailed-guidance/protecting-your-charity/vicarious-liability-of-a-charity-or-its-trustees/ that trustee members could be held personally liable for the debts. I can`t understand why the solicitor has said the trustees cannot be held liable,my understanding is that if the body cannot meet its liabilities, the trustees at the time of the action can be sued and held liable. Any one or more of the trustees will hold legal title to any assets of the body https://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedKingdom/Local%20Assets/Documents/Industries/uk-charity-charitable-incorporated-organisations.pdf
  4. Under current regulations (for applications after 29 July 2013) The Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission (CMEC) for a single child will still use a "net calculation" for assesment. and as morally wrong as it may be,the ex -partner has used this to their advantage. The following links may be of interest http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed113401 http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed104950 On a personal note, the issue of person(s) being self-employed whilst working for a company is something I know HMRC have been known to take a dim view of (IR35) http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ir35/guidance.pdf
  5. Those of you with OLCI may be interested in the following announced today from the creditman website Pre pack deal saves jobs and protects courses at OLCI Construction Training May 6 2014 Allan Graham from KPMG Restructuring was appointed administrator of OLCI Construction Training on Tuesday 6th May. Immediately on appointment, the administrators sold the business to the group that includes Engineering Real Results Limited, which will deliver the ongoing training to students. All 77 employees transferred to the purchaser as part of the deal, which will also ensure that studies are not disrupted for over 3,000 current students enrolled on courses. OLCI Construction Training is a leading provider of plumbing, electrical, gas and green energy training, with 13 centres across the UK. Allan Graham, administrator and restructuring partner at KPMG said: “After suffering an extended period of financial losses, OLCI was unable to meet its commitments to creditors and in early April had a winding-up petition presented against it. The directors took the decision that insolvency was unavoidable and consulted KPMG to help find a solution that would best protect the interests of students, creditors and employees. KPMG conducted an accelerated sales and marketing campaign and the pre-pack sale secured ensures the best outcome for all parties.” The business was sold for an undisclosed sum. http://www.creditman.biz/uk/members/news-view.asp?newsviewID=19864
  6. An interesting topic. The current regulations are not as clear as they could be and could land someone with a large bill. What about those people who "rent" their driveway space, should the person renting the driveway to another be held liable to the rentee for the subsequent cost of the lost vehicle and the cost of court expenses. In this case, what level of proof would an EA accept that the vehicle parked on the debtors driveway is not the debtors but the third party? What about people who have a company car? These are often on lease via their employer, the employee is unlikely to have little more paperwork than an insurance certificate from the leasing company. The leasing agreement often stays at "Head Office" What about people who have cars on hire from a hire company? What about people who take "Chattel Mortgage" against their vehicle? (Logbook loans and the like) In the above cases, none of the above will be clear to anyone that the goods (vehicles) CLEARLY do not belong to the debtor. TCGR2013 appears to offer little cost effective protection to either the EA or the debtor should a "mistake" occur
  7. I suspect the programme in question will now be seriously "watered down" and simply an 30 min feature about the activitys of bailiffs and the new rules introduced on sunday. The company in question did this afternoon release a statement about tonights programme http://www.jbwgroup.co.uk/news/2014/jbw-statement/
  8. http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/enforcement-officers/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf The link will work if you hover your mouse over the link and wait briefly, then left click to view the pdf from the justice.gov.uk website or select the whole link below, copy and paste into the url bar http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/enforcement-officers/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf
  9. I have also read the website in question and its claims about "bogus" or "fake" warrants. I also have serious concerns over the advice given about paying fines at the court ATM after a bailiff has attended to enforce the distress warrant and then claiming that the fine is discharged ie No Enforcement fees payable. For those of you who would like a read of the current legislation the following links will be of interest. A Full list of Offences where fines can be issued by Magistrates http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/MCSG_Update9_October_2012.pdf Part 52 as in force of 27th October 2013 Enforcement of Fines and other orders for payment http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/criminal/docs/2012/crim-proc-rules-2013-part-52.pdf As you can see from Part 52, although a person can pay at the court under Part 52.3 "the fine", it makes no reference to a Court ATM as being a authorised person and as such if the fine has been issued to bailiffs enforcement costs become payable by the defendant.
  10. As reported from the hertfordshiremercury website, http://www.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk/Cheshunt-and-Waltham/Suspended-sentence-for-bailiff-who-stole-10k-from-Waltham-Abbey-debt-collection-firm-20130923104950.htm. Although things may be on the up for the UK with press reports that the UK is coming out of recession it appears that not every one can get themselves out of debt, even when they themselves are involved in the business of collecting debts on behalf of creditors. A BAILIFF who stole nearly £10,000 from a debt collection company in Waltham Abbey has been spared jail. Gary Walker, 43, of St Edmunds Close, Gorleston, pleaded guilty to theft by employee and fraud by abuse of position between October 2011 and July 2012. Walker is now in a wheelchair after a series of mini strokes and also being electrocuted, Chelmsford Crown Court heard that he lost £1,450 of the Marston Group’s money on his way to the bank, and fearing he would be sacked, borrowed cash from a loan shark to cover it up. But when he missed one repayment, the interest escalated and he was threatened. Walker borrowed £3,000 from the loan shark but ended up repaying £8,000. Events spiralled out of control and he was caught out when a Marston client claimed he had already paid a debt. On June 29 last year a defaulter reported he had paid £620 and not the £20 recorded on a receipt handed in by Walker. A full investigation showed £13,972 had been stolen of which Walker had repaid £4,272. On Thursday last week, recorder Duncan Atkinson imposed a nine-month prison sentence suspended for two years with two years’ supervision. He said Walker had betrayed his employer’s trust and the public’s and laid open to risk defaulters from whom he was collecting fines and council tax. The judge said he could take a lenient approach because of Walker’s low risk of re-offending, previously impeccable character and ill health. He said he had not made any financial gain by what he had done and found it hard to live with the shame. Mitigating, Stuart Cowen described Walker as “the most unlikely bailiff”. He said: “He robbed Peter to pay Paul. “He was taking money but it never went back to him.” The Crown is seeking to confiscate some of Walker’s assets to recoup the loss. Read more: http://www.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk/Cheshunt-and-Waltham/Suspended-sentence-for-bailiff-who-stole-10k-from-Waltham-Abbey-debt-collection-firm-20130923104950.htm#ixzz2jDy3V4GC
  11. TomTubby, May I ask what clarification? CIVEA LTD : Company No. 07512697 CIVEA LIMITED 513 BRADFORD ROAD BATLEY WEST YORKSHIRE UNITED KINGDOM WF17 8LL is as WD stated now dissolved 18/09/2012 CIVIL ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION LIMITED 513 BRADFORD ROAD BATLEY WEST YORKSHIRE WF17 8LL Company No. 07605050 is still active However and rather interesting is that civea.co.uk is registered to yet another company at the same address Domain name: civea.co.uk Registrant: The Association of Civil Enforcement Agencies Limited Registrant type: UK Limited Company, (Company number: 3210173) Registrant's address: Victoria Mills 513 Bradford Road Batley WF17 8LL United Kingdom and companies house show this Status: Active - Proposal to Strike off Date of Incorporation: 10/06/1996 Country of Origin: United Kingdom ACEA was the original "body" for the bailiff industry before they combined with CIVEA.
  12. CIVEA as a "body" does appear to still exist. At the same address is also registered the following company: Name & Registered Office: CIVIL ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION LIMITED 513 BRADFORD ROAD BATLEY WEST YORKSHIRE WF17 8LL Company No. 07605050 Status : ACTIVE Date of Incorporation : 14/04/2011 Accounting Reference Date: 31/01 Last Accounts Made Up To: 30/04/2012 (TOTAL EXEMPTION SMALL) Next Accounts Due: 31/10/2013 Last Return Made Up To: 14/04/2013 Next Return Due: 12/05/2014 However, It appears that CIVEA is failing to comply with the Business Name Act 2006, in that it is not correctly displaying at all who CIVEA actually is.
  13. Stephen Leslie Dean, who is a currently certificated bailiff http://certificatedbailiffs.justice.gov.uk/CertificatedBailiffs/searchPublic.do?search=stephen+leslie and also a listed current director of a kent based bailiff company was convicted and given the suspended sentence for allowing his dog to be " dangerously out of control in a public place" Stephen Dean caused a Canterbury student to fear for her life when she and her mother were mauled by an alsatian let loose by the former police dog handler. The full story as reported in November 2012 http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kentonline/news/2012/november/8/dog_attack.aspx Mr Dean certificate is due to expire 12/01/2014
  14. My Apologies if this has been posted before, but as this forum deals with Bailiff issues, the following may be of help and provide a clear (albeit detailed) explanation of how bailiffs and HMCS should perform when recovering unpaid court fines. http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/85933/response/217629/attach/4/Schedule%204%20contract%20specification.pdf or http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/information-access-rights/foi-disclosure-log/courts-tribunals/outstanding-court-fines-annex-a.pdf Schedule 4 Specification for the provision of private enforcement services Having read either of the above, you may wish to take note of the following http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmpublic/criminal/071122/pm/71122s04.htm in which Clause 57 having been ammended and added requires that where the court or its officers are informed or discover that a convicted person falls or is likely to fall into a vulnerable category any warrant of distress issued will be suspended and returned to the court for further consideration
  15. Not required if the Bailiff or HCEO has correctly levied on goods. Read the following High Court Appeal. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1998/471.html This particular High Court Appeal Judgement gives very good detail as to exactly what stage a Bailiff or HCEO can re-enter a property to remove goods after a correct levy. (No permission required from the Court)
×
×
  • Create New...