Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'bailiff'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 546 results

  1. I need to serve a section 8 notice, I'm on the premises & can open the door to allow them to serve the tenants notice. The residence is a private residential address. I'm already staying on the premises, & I can open the door from the inside, & allow the bailiff in to serve notice. Is this legal? The tricky part is, I dont have a tenancy agreement to prove I live on the property, but I can prove I'm the landlord. & the tenants still have a tenancy contract AST on the property. Basically can the tenants claim forced entry, or something, if I allow a bailiff entry to serve notice?
  2. Hi, I have just managed to pay off one lot of council tax to a Marston bailiff, and he will shortly chasing me for another £3k. He did have a long wait before to get paid including six fruitless attendances. He is a nasty bitter individual, which I assume is par for the course, and after our initial telephone conversation I will only contact him by text, so I have a log of everything. In our exchange of texts I have always remained polite, despite being called a liar by him on several occasions. Now, the notice they have sent is unlike the last one. It does not ask me to contact their office but to ring my favourite bailiff by Saturday 14th with payment of proposals. I had intended to text him tomorrow to offer £250 a month for 12 months with the last payment slightly more to clear the full balance. These would be paid on the 29th of each month as next year is a leap year. He has mentioned he will not text me again. Can he insist on me calling him - he does make my skin crawl? Can he also refuse/ignore my offer allowing the debt to default and add another few hundred on top for this. Thanks for any advice, Sara
  3. Hi all, I'm hoping someone can give me some advice. Due to being something of an overgrown child, I have run up council tax arrears. Having been struggling financially recently, I have been taking something of a head in the sand approach to this, telling myself I would deal with it once my finances had settled down, which of course has not happened. I have therefore been ignoring letters from the council, which has led to this situation. I received on Thursday an Enforcement Notice from Equita bailiffs acting on behalf of the council, which is dated 09/10/15. This informed me that the Magistrates Court had granted a liability order against me on 14/08/15, and that I have until 17.30pm (sic) today to pay the amount in full (£3345) or to agree a payment arrangement. This shocked me somewhat, so I made contact with the company yesterday in order to try and sort something out. The gentleman I spoke to was less than helpful, demanding a payment of £850 immediately and, when I queried if he considered this reasonable he replied: "what were you expecting to pay, like a hundred a month? nobody would ever pay off their debts would they, eh?" I have complained both to the company and the council about this attitude, but that's sort of irrelevant as I have no way of proving this conversation took place. I spent the rest of the afternoon attempting to get in touch with the council to no avail. I'm in the fortunate position that my parents are able to help me with this, and they have transferred £1000 to me (and will help with the remainder of the debt), but I'm unsure exactly what is the best way to use this money. Ideally, I'd prefer to pay the council as opposed to the bullies from Equita - I can do this at the Post Office this morning. However, I suspect that this will not be enough to prevent a possible visit from the bailiff tomorrow, before I can get in touch with the council on Monday. Having looked back through the correspondence from the council, I have received 3 reminder notices in June (one for each financial year for which I owe money), giving me a deadline to pay and stating that if I did not make payment or arrange a payment plan by this date the council will "commence legal proceedings without further notice". The total amount stated on the reminder notices comes to £2,251.05, however - is it possible they've added on the total amount for council tax for this financial year to get the £3345 claimed on the enforcement notice? There is no breakdown on the enforcement notice itself. The next correspondence I received from the council is dated 17/08/15, and is an enforcement notice informing me that the liability order was granted and that if payment was not received by 02/09/15 they would instruct enforcement agents to recover the debt. I have NOT received any letter informing me in advance of the date of the hearing - I'm assuming this should have been sent to me in order to allow me the chance to defend myself? Regardless of any procedural error the council may have made or the complaints I have made to Equita and the council, I'm not sure whether to make a payment direct to the council or to do it via the bailiffs - from what I read part payment is not enough to stop them coming out, as they can then whack the visitation fee on top? Ideally I don't want a potential bailiff visit hanging over me tomorrow, but I can't see any way of preventing it given I can't get in touch with the council until Monday. Any advice would be most gratefully received - I appreciate this may be a bit of a ramble so if anything needs clarifying, please just ask. Many thanks, Ruaridh
  4. The following press release has been issued today,1st September; New Professional Association founded for Certificated Enforcement Agents. Following the implementation of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 in April 2014, and a year of consultation with Certificated Enforcement Agents, a New Professional Association has been launched to represent Certificated Enforcement Agents and will be known as The Certificated Enforcement Agents Association (CEAA). It has been formed by Enforcement Agents for Enforcement Agents, representing those that act on the front line of enforcement and hold a current certificate under “The Certification of Enforcement Agents Regulations 2014”. For further information please refer to our website http://www.ceaa.co.uk
  5. This week yet another person has been found guilty in court of cutting off a vehicle clamp and unfortunately this case is yet another one where the 'ownership' of the vehicle is highly questionable. In brief, the individual attempted to justify his action on the basis that he claimed to be the 'owner' of the vehicle that had been clamped. He stated that he had not received any documentation in relation to the contravention. On this point he would have been telling the truth given that all statutory notices are by law sent to the 'registered keeper' (this is the person whose name appears on the V5c....commonly called the log book). For reasons that are very unclear, the defendant transferred his vehicle into the name of his flatmate and both he and his flatmate were recored as joint drivers on the vehicle insurance!!! It is cases such as this one that are the root cause of enforcement companies and local authorities viewing 'interpleader' and 'third party' claims with such suspicion. The legal position is that unless clear proof is provided, the registered keeper is deemed to be the owner of the vehicle. I will post details of the relevant legislation in the next post.
  6. This relating to a court fine I received 3 year ago for a train fine, something I actually completely forgot about until marstons got involved any help would be very appreciated. 25.2.14 Removal notice stating Client HMCTS I attended your address today at 15.53 to arrange payment under the terms of a warrant issued on behalf of the above client. Despite pervious notices this matter has not been settled, which means the costs are increasing and I therefore urge you to contact me on the telephone number below immediately I spoke to her on the 25.2.14 stating that I had lost my job through no fault of my own a few weeks ago and only just started claiming JSA(not proud, worked since 13) but it was my 21st coming up and would be able to pay the £701.95 with my birthday money. Unfortunately 5 days before my 21st my cousin past away so as you can imagine I didn’t have a birthday and through no fault of their own most of the family forgot, so I was unable to pay the fine. On the 21.3.14 I received a marston card through the door saying the usual. I have a distress warrant issued against you by magistrates court, I will be re-attending your premises with a locksmith if necessary. I phoned the bailiff explained what had happened over my birthday and said I would be in contact in the next few days. On the 28.4.14 I received a text from the bailiff saying “as you have failed to make payment on your court warrant we will now be authorizing an arrest warrant with court, you have had more than enough time to sort this out of witch you have failed. I replied “I could still not make the payment, I am still claiming jsa as haven’t found a job but do have a job lined up looking to start 27.5.14. I can make regular payments but since the start I have just been told it’s not good enough She replied “I am afraid it would have to be paid in full as I cannot hold off action any longer otherwise you could be looking at going to prison” I replied “surely it can’t lead to prison, as I am agreeing to pay it back but I just need to pay it in installments till I start working again” This was the last message , I have not received anything back and as you can imagine im starting to panic a little bit. I know I should of done something about this back in march but it is a very scary process and sometimes it is easier to put to back of your mind. PLEASE PLEASE HELP!!
  7. Under section 68.1 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunal Courts & Enforcement Act 2007 it is a very serious offence to obstruct a bailiff. Last week yet another debtor was found guilty of this offence but even more seriously, he was also found guilty of assaulting the bailiff (the bailiff required stitches to his nose). The debt was in relation to an unpaid penalty charge notice. Bailiffs attended the debtors property to request £422. It would seem that previous visits had also been made and on one of the visits, he had sworn at the bailiff before driving off. It was on the 4th visit that the incident occurred. During the one day trial the debtors solicitor claimed that his client had suffered a stroke before the incident and this had led to him being unable to raise his left arm. Unfortunately for the debtor, the medical papers handed to the magistrates did not bear out the stroke claims stating only that Mr Gara had complained of 'weakness' in his arm. After deliberating for 45 minutes, magistrates convicted Mr Gara of assault by beating on March 3rd and also of obstructing a lawful enforcement agent on the same occasion. The presiding magistrate has requested pre sentence reports to be prepared before sentencing at the next hearing on 17th September. http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/news/15681/Bailiff-attacked-by-Thatcham-taxi-driver.html
  8. Hello everyone .. I need your advice on a peculiar situation I'm in now. Two weeks ago I received a notice of removal from a bailiff for a debt of £1030 owed to the City and County of Swansea. I went to the bailiff's office they said it's about 3 parking fines from last year. I don't own a car, a driving license and I don't even know how to drive. I went to the council they said there is a car registered in my name and my address. I went to DVLA and filed a complaint that I am not the owner of the car. DVLA said it will take three weeks to process. My guess is someone with the same name but different address is the owner of the car. Both the council and DVLA have a previous address for me which I know nothing about. I arrived in the UK one year ago to study and I have only one address which is a room in a house shared by other students. I filled a TE7:TE9 form and I stated that I am not the owner of the vehicle and I live only in one address. I attached my tenancy agreement, my visa with the entry date on it, my police registration certificate with my address that I registered as soon as I arrived. I also attached a letter from my landlord that this is my only address and that I don't own a car. The bailiff action is now on hold. I received a copy of the council's letter to TEC, the council rejected my application and they request the court to change the address on the warrant to my address claiming that I am the same person and I changed addresses. They ignored all the evidence that I submitted and argued that I didn't submit any evidence from DVLA. When I went to DVLA the first time they said the registration number doesn't exist in their database, and I stated this in the TE7:TE9 form. But when I went again I discovered that they have mistaken the number zero for a letter O and there is actually a car registered with my name. But this was too late to include in the TE7:TE9 form. The council states in the letter that "although it is apparent that I might have not received correspondence from them it's my responsibility to make sure I receive mail after a change of address". I am worried that TEC will also reject my application and approves the council's decision, should I seek a legal representation? Any advice will be appreciated ... Thank you
  9. In April 2014, significant changes were made to the way in which bailiffs can enforce debts. Most importantly, the fees that can be charged are fixed and transparent. The following page is an overview of the new regulations. Terminology The Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 modernise terminology. The terms levy, distress or distrain are now known as the process of ‘taking control of goods’. A walking possession agreement is now called a Controlled Goods Agreement and bailiffs are now known as enforcement agents (although they can still be referred to as bailiffs). Warrants of execution (in particular for road traffic debts) and warrants of distress (for Magistrate Court fines) have been renamed warrants of control. With debts enforced via the High Court, the centuries old term of a writ of fieri facias (writ of fi fa) has been renamed a writ of control. Enforcement Agent Fees The Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 also came into effect in April 2014 and with the exception of ‘writs of control’ (enforced via the High Court), the following fees apply to all debt types (council tax and non domestic rate arrears, local authority issued penalty charge notices, magistrate court fines, child support agency arrears and rent arrears). Compliance Stage Fee: £75 Upon receipt of an instruction from the client, the enforcement company must send a Notice of Enforcement to the debtor. The notice must provide the date of the notice and the date and time by which full payment or a payment arrangement must be set up. This strict period of time is referred to as the ‘compliance stage' and must by law provide a minimum period of seven ‘clear days’ before an enforcement agent may visit the property. The compliance fee of £75 is payable for each Liability Order or Warrant of Control. Enforcement Stage fee: £235.00 (plus 7.5% of the value of the debt that exceeds £1,500.00). If full payment or a payment arrangement is not made during the Compliance Stage (or a previous payment arrangement is broken), the case will progress to the ‘enforcement stage’ and an individual enforcement agent/bailiff will attend the property for the purpose of ‘taking control' of goods. This fee becomes payable at the time of attendance. If the enforcement agent is enforcing more than one Liability Order or Warrant of Control against the same person, he may only charge one enforcement fee (of £235). He cannot apply ‘multiple’ charges. Sale stage Fee: £110.00 (plus 7.5% of the value of the debt that exceeds £1,500.00). This fee shall be charged when an Enforcement Agent attends the premises to remove goods and makes preparations for the sale of goods. It is important to note that additional charges may also be applied relating to the removal. These include storage and locksmith’s fees. Forms and Documentation The new regulations provide a series of statutory forms that must be used by the enforcement agent. Full details of all forms and the information that must be provided on them can be viewed here. Making a payment proposal The legislation provides a strict period in which to make payment or to negotiate a payment arrangement without the need for a bailiff attendance. This is referred to as the ‘Compliance Stage’ and begins with receipt of the Notice of Enforcement. If full payment cannot be made within the strict time period outlined in the notice, (a minimum of seven ‘clear days’) then it is vitally important to contact the enforcement company to make a payment arrangement. Most companies will readily agree to accept an arrangement over a period of 3 months (and possibly even 6 months) depending on the individual circumstances. Providing the enforcement company with a simple Income and Expenditure calculation at this stage may be of assistance. Failure to make payment (or to agree a payment arrangement) during the compliance stage will lead to a bailiff making a personal visit to ‘take control’ of goods. This visit will incur an enforcement fee of £235 as outlined above. Vulnerable debtors Far better protection is given to vulnerable debtors under the regulations. One example being that a vehicle displaying a disabled badge is now exempt from being taken by a bailiff. Secondly, and most importantly, Regulation 12 of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 makes provision to protect vulnerable debtors who may have been unable in the early stages to seek advice (from the local authority, magistrates court, debt counsellor/debt charity etc) about the debt. If a bailiff makes a personal visit (which incurs an enforcement fee of £235) and identifies a debtor as ‘vulnerable’, then Regulation 12 provides that he should give the person a chance to seek advice prior to removal of goods. If he fails to do so, the enforcement fee of £235 is not recoverable. An enforcement agent will not know in advance whether a person is ‘vulnerable’. It is therefore vitally important to make the enforcement company aware of any ‘vulnerability’ at the earliest possible stage (during the compliance stage) and where possible, to provide some form of documentary evidence. Times of day when a Bailiff/ Enforcement Agent may visit The enforcement agent/bailiff is allowed to visit the property seven days a week (including Sunday) between 6.00 a.m. and 9.00 p.m. He is not allowed to visit on Bank Holidays and Christmas Day Items that are exempt from being taken by a bailiff As outlined above, if full payment or a payment arrangement is not set up during the ‘compliance stage’, the account will progress to the ‘enforcement stage’ and a personal visit will be made to ‘take control’ of goods (hence the name of the regulations). In reality, the enforcement agent will be seeking full payment of the debt. If this is not possible, then he may ‘take control’ of none exempt goods. The regulations provide a list of exempt items that cannot be taken into control by the bailiff. The following are the most important: Items or equipment (for example, tools, books, telephones, computer equipment and vehicles) which are necessary for use personally by the debtor in the debtor’s employment, business, trade, profession, study or education, except that in any case the aggregate value of the items or equipment to which this exemption is applied shall not exceed £1,350; Clothes, beds, bedding, furniture, household equipment, items and provisions as are reasonably required to satisfy the basic domestic needs of the debtor and every member of the debtor’s household. Cooker or microwave, fridge, washing machine, dining table and dining chairs to seat the debtor and every member of the debtor’s household. Land line telephone, or a mobile phone. Domestic pets and guide dogs. A full list of items that are exempt from being taken into control by a bailiff can be viewed here. NOTE: Motor vehicles are the most common item to be taken by bailiffs. A separate post is provided below on this subject.
  10. Hi all, I have had a recent run in with a bailiff and im posertive he hasnt followed the correct rules for taking control of goods, im not wanting to debate whether im right or not! i would just like to know the correct way of complaing about it. the complaint would be at the bailiff and possible his company as they were aware of his actions? thank you.
  11. The Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 was introduced on 6th April 2014 and to coincide with this regulation, the Ministry of Justice updated the previous National Standards. It must be stressed here that although the National Standards arenot legally binding, the government’s intention is that they are intended to be used by all enforcement agents, the enforcement companies that employ them, and the creditor (in most cases the local authority or HMCTS) who use their services. A link to the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014 can be read here and listed below are selected parts that could assist anyone facing bailiff enforcement. Creditors responsibilities 8. Creditors should act proportionately when seeking to recover debt, taking into account debtors’ circumstances. 12. Creditors must not issue a warrant knowing that the debtor is not at the address, as a means of tracing the debtor at no cost. 20. Enforcement agents must not be deceitful by misrepresenting their powers, qualifications, capacities, experience or abilities, including, but not restricted to; • Falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when legally it cannot be taken by that agent. • Falsely implying or stating that a particular course of action will ensue before it is possible to know whether such action would be permissible • Falsely implying or stating that action has been taken when it has not 21. Enforcement agents must not act in a threatening manner when visiting the debtor by making gestures or taking actions which could reasonably be construed as suggesting harm or risk of harm to debtors, their families, appointed third parties or property. 23. Enforcement agents, for the purpose of taking control of goods shall, without the use of unlawful force, gain access to the goods. The enforcement agent must produce all relevant notices and documents, such as controlled goods agreements, that are required by regulations or statute. 24. Debtors must not be pressed to make unrealistic offers and should be asked to consider carefully any offer they voluntarily make and where possible refer to free debt advice. 25. Where a creditor has indicated they will accept a reasonable repayment offer, enforcement agents must refer such offers onto the creditor. 27. Enforcement agents must not act in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor, either deliberately or negligently (that is to say through lack of care) Complaints/Discipline 45. The complaints procedure should be set out in plain English, have a main point of contact, set time limits for dealing with complaints and include an independent appeal process where appropriate. A register should be maintained to record all complaints and complainants should be notified of the outcome of disputes. Information and confidentiality 52. Enforcement agents should, so far as it is practical, avoid disclosing the purpose of their visit to anyone other than the debtor or a third-party nominated by the debtor, for example an advice agency representative. Where the debtor is not seen, the relevant documents must be left at the address in a sealed envelope addressed to the debtor. 53. Enforcement agents should make debtors aware of the possible additional costs of enforcement which will be incurred if further action becomes necessary. If a written request is made, an itemised account should be provided. Times and Hours 55. Enforcement agents should be respectful of the religion and culture of others at all times. They should carefully consider the appropriateness of undertaking enforcement on any day of religious or cultural observance or during any major religious or cultural festival. 56. Enforcement action should only be carried out between the hours of 6.00am and 9.00pm, or at any time during trading hours, unless otherwise authorised by a court Mode of entry 57. Enforcement agents should not seek to gain peaceable entry to premises under false pretences; for example asking to use the toilet, or to use the telephone. They should be clear as to why they are seeking entry to the premises. 59. Enforcement agents must only use a door or usual means of entry to enter premises. 60. A power to enter premises by force exists for the execution of High Court and County Court debts at business premises or at any premises where an enforcement agent is enforcing criminal penalties. This power should only be used to the extent that it is reasonably required and only after the debtor has been warned that the power exists and the consequences of a wilful refusal to co-operate. 61. A power to re-enter premises by force applies to both residential and business premises where a controlled goods agreement is in place and the goods remain on the premises but the debtor has failed to comply with the repayment terms of the controlled goods agreement. This power should only be used to the extent that it is reasonably required and only after the debtor has been given notice of the enforcement agent’s intention to re-enter. Goods 64. Enforcement agents should not remove anything clearly identifiable as an item belonging to, or for the exclusive use of a child (person under the age of 16) or items clearly identifiable as required for the care and treatment of the disabled, elderly and seriously ill. 66. Enforcement agents should take all reasonable steps to satisfy themselves that the value of the goods taken into control to cover the sum outstanding is proportional to the value of the debt and fees owed. 67. Enforcement agents should not take control or remove goods clearly belonging solely to a third-party not responsible for the debt. Where a claim is made, the third-party should be given clear instructions on the process required to recover
their goods. Multiple warrants 69. Where enforcement agents have multiple warrants for a single debtor, an enforcement agent must take control of goods, and sell or dispose of these goods, on the same occasion except where it is not practical to do so. Vulnerable debtors 72. Enforcement agents must withdraw from domestic premises if the only person present is, or appears to be, under the age of 16 or is deemed to be vulnerable by the enforcement agent; they can ask when the debtor will be home – if appropriate. 73. Enforcement agents must withdraw without making enquiries if the only persons present are children who appear to be under the age of 12. 74. A debtor may be considered vulnerable if, for reasons of age, health or disability they are unable to safeguard their personal welfare or the personal welfare of other members of the household. 75. The enforcement agent must be sure that the debtor or the person to whom they are entering into a controlled goods agreement understands the agreement and the consequences if the agreement is not complied with. Bailiff enforcement National Standards 2014.pdf Before Printing the PDF TIP If you DO NOT wish to print Page 1 (Cover Page) of the PDF, please ensure to do the following: Ensure you go to your Printer Settings and set it to 'Print from Page 2' (this way Page 1 (Cover Page) should not print out). Note: This will save you Ink & Paper
  12. The bailiff regulations (that came into force on 6th April 2014) provide a simplified fee scale that is the same for arrears of council tax, non domestic rates, local authority issued penalty charge notices and Magistrate court fines. How much are the bailiff fees? Compliance Fee: £75 This fee is added to the debt as soon as the account is passed to the enforcement company by either the local authority or the magistrate court and will appear on the Notice of Enforcement. The ‘amount oustanding’ will therefore include the Compliance fee of £75. Enforcement Fee: £235 (plus 7.5% on amounts exceeding £1,500) If full payment or a payment arrangement is not agreed during the ‘compliance stage’ the debt is passed to an individual bailiff/enforcement agent. When he makes a personal visit to the property, an ‘enforcement fee’ of £235 also becomes payable. How is the ‘amount outstanding’ calculated? The new regulations state clearly that the ‘amount outstanding’ includes the amount of the debt from the local authority or the Magistrate Court and the enforcement agent fees (and costs) calculated up until the dtae of payment. Making a payment arrangement. After the debt has been passed to the enforcement agency, a Notice of Enforcement will be sent and the ‘amount oustanding’ will include the Compliance fee of £75. The letter (NoE) must state a date and time by which payment (or a payment arrangement) can be set up. This is referred to as the ‘compliance stage’. All companies should be willing to accept a sensible payment arrangement during the ‘compliance stage’ and in most cases; will accept a payment plan over a period of 3 months and in some cases, 6 months. It is worthwhile providing a simple Income & Expenditure with the payment proposal. Due to the strict time frame, payment proposals should be set up either over the phone or by email to the enforcement company. It is at the 'compliance stage' that any 'vulnerable' circumstances should be brought to the attention of the enforcement company and evidence provided. Payments made will be split on a ‘pro rata’ basis. As outlined above, once the debt has been passed to an enforcement agent, the ‘amount outstanding’ includes bailiff fees. Of significance is the fact that the regulations state that when a payment is made, it must be split on a ‘pro rata’ basis with the Compliance fee of £75 being deducted first, and the balance split between the debt to the either the local authority or the Magistrate Court (in respect of court fines) and the remaining bailiff fees. Making payment direct to the council or the Magistrate Court. As outlined above, once the debt has been passed to the enforcement agency, the ‘amount outstanding’ includes bailiff fees. Following a Notice of Enforcement or a personal visit, some debtors may decide to pay the council or the magistrate court direct in the belief that in doing so, they can avoid paying bailiff fees. In the very early days of the regulations (April 2014) this method of trying to avoid bailiff fees may have worked but now, very rarely (if ever) succeeds. Generally, the local authority will immediately advise the enforcement company that a payment has been received by them, and the enforcement agency will allocate that payment in line with the following example: Example of how payments are allocated: Liability Order/Magistrates Court fine issued for: £525. Notice of Enforcement sent and with Compliance fee of £75 added, the ‘amount outstanding’ increases to: £600 If full payment or a payment arrangement is not set up during the ‘compliance stage’ the account is referred to the enforcement agent/bailiff for a personal visit to the property. An Enforcement Fee of £235 is added and the ‘amount outstanding’ increases to: £835 Payment is made direct to the local authority/magistrates court of £525 (being the amount of the Liability Order /or court fine). The Compliance stage fee of £75 is deducted at source and the balance of £450 is split on a ‘pro rata’ basis with approximately 70% being allocated towards reducing the debt to the creditor (ie: the local authority or magistrates court) and the remaining 30% allocated towards reducing the bailiff fees. Can the bailiff take enforcement action to recover 'his fees'? As outlined above, once a warrant has been passed to the enforcement agency, bailiff fees becomes legally due and the ‘amount outstanding’ includes bailiff fees. The enforcement regulations have made it a statutory requirement that all payments should be split on a ‘pro rata’ basis. Accordingly, unless the ‘amount outstanding’ (which includes bailiff fees) is paid in full, the warrant has only been part satisfied and enforcement action can legally continue. It needs to be made clear that paying the local authority or the magistrate court direct does not mean that the warrant has been satisfied. All that it means, is that a part payment has been made against the amount outstanding. It is as simple as that. Note: It is important to be aware that with magistrate court fines, if payment is made to the Magistrate Court (either in person or online) after a warrant of control has been issued, all courts now forward the entire payment to the relevant enforcement company so that the enforcement company (and not the court) can deduct their fees in accordance with the ‘pro rata’ provisions as outlined above and allocate the balance towards the court fine. Setting up a payment arrangement and whether you can pay the court or the council direct -------.pdf Before Printing the PDF TIP If you DO NOT wish to print Page 1 (Cover Page) of the PDF, please ensure to do the following: Ensure you go to your Printer Settings and set it to 'Print from Page 2' (this way Page 1 (Cover Page) should not print out). Note: This will save you Ink & Paper
  13. Hi I need some urgent advice. Can a HCEO take my car which is on finance? V5 is under name but I believe that its not proof of ownership? If answer is 'Yes' to my question than what rights a HCEO will have if I sell my car to my spouse or my company of which I am sole director and shareholder, is that any good? Any replies would be highly appreciated.
  14. There are many reports of debtors being arrested for obstructing a bailiff (Section 68.1 of Section 12 of the Tribunal Courts & Enforcement Act 2007) or more commonly; for removing a car clamp but it is rare to read a report about a debtor being injured during a bailiff visit. This particular press article featured on SCOOP yesterday. The background to the matter is that the debtor (a young mother) had been fined for using a TV without a valid licence. The balance of the court fine was £200. For reasons that are not known, she did not deal with the debt at the Compliance stage (when the fees were just £75) and accordingly, the debt was passed to an enforcement agent. It would seem from the article that bailiffs were attempting to apply a wheel clamp to her vehicle and upon witnessing this, the debtor admitted that she started 'running around' her car 'like a crazy woman in a panic'. Foolishly (in my opinion), she then picked up one half of the wheel clamp and flung it across the garden towards the gate. Following this, a struggle broke out between her and the bailiff and it was later discovered that she had suffered a broken bone in her wrist from the incident. Police are investigating and examining footage from the bailiff's body-worn camera. A neighbour volunteered to pay the debt of £525 to avoid her vehicle being taken. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/mum-claims-bailiff-broke-wrist-10008184
  15. In order to keep the Bailiff forums a bit tidier it was decided to provide a new section where those who wish to discuss - provide information or press releases could do this. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?474-Bailiffs-and-Enforcement-Industry-General-discussions This will allow those new threads where people are asking for specific help, to be more visible. It will also make searching for information or discussion threads easier to locate. The new section is open to EVERYONE, even those visitors who are not registered. Links for those who are already subscribed will still work. We will also provide signposts in the CAG library for the new section. When posting in the new section, it would be beneficial to others to make it quite clear in the thread title or in the first post if this is to be a Discussion thread, inviting others to take part or if it is an Information thread which caggers should take note of and perhaps even follow for updates.
  16. In order to keep the Bailiff forums a bit tidier it was decided to provide a new section where those who wish to discuss - provide information or press releases could do this. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?474-Bailiffs-and-Enforcement-Industry-General-discussions This will allow those new threads where people are asking for specific help, to be more visible. It will also make searching for information or discussion threads easier to locate. The new section is open to EVERYONE, even those visitors who are not registered. Links for those who are already subscribed will still work. We will also provide signposts in the CAG library for the new section. When posting in the new section, it would be beneficial to others to make it quite clear in the thread title or in the first post if this is to be a Discussion thread, inviting others to take part or if it is an Information thread which caggers should take note of and perhaps even follow for updates.
  17. hi all im new to this site and would really appreciate as much help a i can get this morning 28/08/2015 i had a knock at the door which turned out to be a bailiff collecting council tax arrears from 2012 to 2014 ive had no letters from the council about any arrears or any from this company the company is called sheriff and penny private bailiffs limited there registered office address is 152 halesowen road, cradley heath, west midlands b64 5lp company reg No. 4900240 they have a po box 11614, edgbaston, birmingham, b16 9zg under there name on a letter he gave me he told me he wanted £649.66 or he was going to take goods like tv computers etc etc and would also take my car which is my partners, he wanted proof of the log book which i refused to get i did not let him in, i was able to use my size to keep him stud well back from my front door i told him ive never had any letter from the council about this debt which he replied that i should have i told him there is no way i can pay that and offered to pay a minimum payment of £20 a month he refused very rudely demanding i pay him £150 by cash or card to him then pay £50 a month which i still could not afford his reply was pay it or basicly loose goods he said he will gain access via the police to take goods from my house at which point i had to make sure my 2 young kids of 7 and 9 was no present i also asked for a breakdown of the bill as i said thats not all council tax surely he said no its 2 accounts 2012 to 2013 and 2013 to 2014 council tax outstanding is £264.66 enforcement fee is £235.00 and 2 compliance fee of £75 each account he also said any visits will be £110 each time but he said the next visit will be with a van and a trailer to remove goods and the car he demand he will return on tuesday 1st september to collect either the full amount or the £150 or he will bring police so he can take goods and the car i hope someone can help with this as he has rang me again whilst i type this to remind me he will be returning tuesday many thanks in advance
  18. How will things be affected if an Enforcement company sales Director becomes Vice Chair of the BPA? Do you want to know more? if so catch up on this here http://rossandroberts.com/about-us/news/featured/bpa-south-west-group-elects-adrian-lardner-as-vice-chair/ "Adrian Lardner, Ross & Roberts’ Sales & Marketing Director has been elected as Vice Chair of the British Parking Association’s (BPA) South West Group."
  19. If there is a dispute regarding goods that may have been seized by bailiffs and the debtor considers that those goods should not have been taken as they were considered (for one reason or another) to be exempt, then the regulations provide that there is a proper and FREE procedure that should be made under section 85 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Unfortunately, it would seem that debtors are wrongly making application to the County Court for injunctions and so far, we have yet to see one succesful case. Instead, there are many cases now being reported where debtors are having substantial cost orders made against them (in one case last week a debtor was ordered to pay the local authorities costs of £3,200. Details can be read here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?445251-Goods-on-HP-a-Judge-says-they-can-be-sold(8-Viewing)-nbsp Today, I have received details of yet another failed injunction but most importantly, the Judgment makes very clear (yet again) that the wrong procedure was used and the claim has instead been transferred to a District Judge at another court pursuant to CPR 85.7(5) for further directions. Details will follow in a moment.... PS: It should be noted that in this particular case, it would also seem that the wrong party had issued the proceedings.
  20. Over the past few months a large number of Facebook pages have been set up (mainly by Sovereign Citizen/Freeman on the Land activists). A common feature of these pages is the use of highly dubious methods of 'beating the bailiff'. The most common feature, and one that is sadly costing debtors dearly is the advice to refuse to speak or correspond with the enforcement agent and instead, to pay the amount of the actual 'debt' (Liability Order, parking penalty notice, court fine) direct to the creditor (minus bailiff fees of course). From further reading it would appear that the reason for refusing to 'engage' with the enforcement company is that by 'engaging' the debtor becomes a 'joinder' and therefore is agreeing to a 'contract' being entered into (a daft Freeman on the Land theory and one that has no basis in law whatsoever). A rather worrying suggestion that I have seen on quite a few of these sites recently is the advice to debtors to make a complaint about bailiff fees to the Magistrate's Court under the provision of Regulation 1 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980. This is novel idea and one that again is being sold by 'Guru's' and has no basis whatsoever in law. Of course as with all such scams, there is no evidence whatsoever of any court 'successes'. This is despite the highly inaccurate 'claims' on these Facebook pages that once the summons is laid before the Justice of the Peace that the Justice will either issue a summons directed to the bailiff requiring him to appear before the magistrates' court to answer the information or more ludicrously; that a warrant would be issued ordering the bailiff to be arrested and brought to court to answer the charges. A copy of a recent 'template' is provided in the following post.
  21. This looks horrendous. http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Bailiff-inadvertantly-recorded-attacking-woman/story-26657418-detail/story.html
  22. I received an "Attendance Notice" yesterday and finally got through to the bailiff this morning. He declined my offer of 4 monthly payments as my previous arrangement had been broken and required full payment or he would have to seize goods/cars. I explained that I suffered from angina and had several recent attacks and I was self employed but he said that was no excuse as he had never complained when he was suffering with cancer. I have to call him again later and don't know what to do, I do not have the money to pay him.
  23. Dear Sir/Madam, I work in health care. While working I received a phone call from enforcement officer who had court order to seize my assets to recover debts. Now having said this, let me begin with this - never asked for any debts and nor have borrowed any money from banks. I still don't even own car or house. Fortunately no educational loan either. Following this initial shock and support from senior colleagues who understood my situation kindly offered to help and contacted the officer. Came to realise that there was overpayment from nhs in 2012 for which they had send notifications and orders to Old address which again is staff accomodation no longer lived since 2012. The court sent enforcement officer to seize my debt. Further to this, it was myself who contacted my employer in 2012 that they were paying me when I was not working any longer for them. I was waiting to pay them back. After 2012 , I had changed 4 addresses due to work and this organisation never bothered to ask me or obtain information. They seem to have been corresponding to old address and then sent notifications from the court to the same address and court sent bailiffs behind me. After all this they found me in some other address and called me with threatening messages to seize my assets ( dont have much ). Now in the eyes of the court I have to pay interest and court charges for no knowledge of what was happening with sudden bolt from blue. They have messed up my credit report and asking me to pay private solicitors because the stage is too late. I am lost for words here. Also type - 'Barts overpayment error' in google please ( it s not letting paste link here ) This trust is notorious for bullying and harassment of staff members ( please type Barts nhs bullying) - it affected my personal health too. My points are - I definetly owe this overpayment, I had decency and courtesy to tell them they overpaid and was waiting for them to contact me either by email instead of sending notifications to wrong address ( staff accomodation where they can physically check If I still lived or not and tried to send me notifications before Enf Officer embarassing presence and unnecessary tensions created in life for which I had to take leave resulting in thin staff in already overstretched nhs.
  24. Hi, hope you are all well? hopefully somebody can give me a bit of advise please I had court papers arrive last year at my previous address, wrong name it states my maiden name and incorrect spelling of my Christian name also Mrs not miss I Have joined noddle and its saying I had a ccj for this only in June this year I submitted my defence requesting any signed agreements, receipts and proof I owe this money , I received nothing again , moved house and forgot about it Now I have received a bailiff letter to my new address from court stated I have 7 days to pay 2k , I don't owe this person anything , how can I stop this , will I request to court to get stayed help? I have just been reading and found this site , I really hope one of you nice people can give me a bit of advise please. Thanks for reading
  25. Hi All I am a first time poster. I had a charge for not paying my fine for the congestion charge, and tbh have let the thing snowball to the point that Task enforcement arrived this morning and clamped my car on private property (driveway) and sneakily slipped a bit of paper and drove off. I did ring them and offered to pay half the fine as this is all i have. But heh hoo they denied it. Points. The car is on finance I did and always have a removal of implied access of entry. She acknowledged this when i told her. Thank you for time.
×
×
  • Create New...