Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'enforced'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • 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
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • 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
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums


  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web


  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start




Found 19 results

  1. Good morning everyone, I have been asked by my ex-wife to help her after she got a letter threatening her with bailiffs, She got herself into debt with EE and of course because she was dealing with depression she started to "bury her head in the sand" The consequence is that The lovely Leeds Losers (aka Lowell) have got involved, I only became aware of this situation after she got a letter from the county court, saying that they were about to get the bailiffs after her. My question is, why have they only chosen to partially enforce the judgement, this is something I have never heard of before? because of her depression etc she is not sure she received a letter of assignment etc, would it be worth having a go at getting the judgement set aside(however I have paid the amount they enforced, just to stop her having to deal with bailiffs) Many thanks in advance
  2. Just the basics if anyone has any experience here please: I work for a private sub-contractor providing transport logistics, servicing the NHS. I come into no contact with patients or healthcare professionals, but do have to move equipment that has been in hospitals. I don't want to have a HepB injection. I was told by my line manager that as a 'duty of care' issue they can 'force' me to have the injection. I refused. My objectionable manager took great delight in telling me this will be gross misconduct. Despite the confrontational language used, I imagine the end-story of this stand off will be my manager telling me if I don't have it I will be sacked, rather than him holding me down and forceably stabbing me with a needle? I've worked for the company for three years. I refuse to have the injection. It is not work critical. I've offered to sign a waiver. Can he sack me? There's nothing in my employment contract originally signed in 2015 about my continued employed being dependent upon being stabbed with unproven viruses, etc. Any advice. I'm tempted to go in all guns blazing, but..
  3. Hi A Germany collection agency is trying to collect debt of about 1,300 euro from my son. I would like to know will it affect his credit rating in Canada and can the German collection agency take my son to court in Canada? and what is the consequence if he leave the debt unpaid? The collection agency keeps adding interest and different fees in the total amount, is this legal? Can my son just paid the original debt amount? the original debt was about 1700 CAD Many thanks in advance.
  4. Despite the new bailiff regulations having been in force for over 18 months, it is very worrying to see that a number of the 'Beat the Bailiff' Facebook pages continue to advise the public that if an enforcement agent is enforcing a judgment that has been transferred to the High Court, that the agent cannot charge VAT on bailiff fees. Such information is inaccurate and highly misleading. In April 2014 the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 were introduced and provide for statutory fees that can be charged by enforcement agents. In relation to county court judgments transferred to the High Court for enforcement, the statutory fee scale provides that the enforcement agent can charge the following fees: Compliance fee: £75 First enforcement stage: £190 (plus 7.5% on amount over £1,000). Second stage enforcement: £495 Sale or disposal fee: £525 plus 7.5% on sums over £1,000 The Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 were laid before Parliament on 4th January 2014 and came into force on 6th April 2014. It was not until shortly after the regulation had been laid in Parliament that HMRC finally resolved the issue as to whether or not VAT should be added to bailiff fees. On 26th March 2014 (two weeks before the regulations came into effect) the Ministry of Justice released their official guidance on VAT. This followed official HMRC approval and agreement. HMRC amended their internet guide a short while after.
  5. This week, I received response back from Restons for my Halifax credit card debt, for a case which is already in court. But in their response they provided an approximate date of credit card agreement and said '... Halifax card agreement entered into by the defendant on or around 22 August 2011...' Can they still get a judgement without providing an original date of credit agreement. They provided a reconstituted credit agreement with some dates at the bottom but they do not match with the date they mentioned above.
  6. I am receiving letters and phonecalls from a debt collection relating to an old debt from ROI. I left the country some years ago, and no judgment was obtained in the Irish Courts. Can they now enforce it over here without a judgment? I am due to go on Maternity (statutory) so I definitely cannot afford to pay anything, even though I don't recognise the full value of the debt now being claimed. What do you advise?
  7. Ok here is the deal. Around Feb 14 - We had a parking fine in Swansea council car park. Appealed to the council, got rejected. Went to the court (TEC) and the amount reached £82. Andrew James got involved, TEC helpline suggested I do an out of time application. Somebody from Andrew James visited the business premises to inform us that we need to pay £392. He went away that time without much hassle. Did out of time application but the appeal was rejected. Amount o/s at this time - £82 I spoke with Swansea Council who didn't accept the payment and told that I deal with Andrew James. I took a chance and posted a cheque for £82 to the Swansea council with Parking Ticket ref on the back of the cheque - Jan 15. Council banked the cheque and it cleared. Somebody from Andrew James came again to the business premises (owned and operated by a Limited Company) in Feb 15 to pay or they will take goods. Informed that it has been dealt with the council. He went away. 17 March 15 - Two bailiff's arrived at the business premises and didn't leave. Police were called but didn't do anything. Bailiff's started removing Ltd co's good and told us that they are aware that we have paid council the £82.00 but must pay another £420.00 there and then in cash or they will take half the shop away. I didn't agree and they started moving the items in front of many customers. To save embarrassment, we took cash from the till (£420.00) and they took the cash, gave the receipt, said thanks to the police for not doing anything and went away. Same day, I MCOL'd a £420 + court fee on Andrew James Limited and the claimant was my Limited Co. A few days ago their solicitors wrote to me to advise me that they shall be their legal rep in the court and they need particulars of claim. They also requested to know why the limited company has started the claim and not the "individual" on the TEC warrant of control. Any advise would be kind.
  8. Hey guys need a point in the right direction with a situation as regards to returns to work after a period of illness. Basic summary can elaborate further if required. OH is FTE with a 37hrs per week contract, been there approx. 4 years. Due to ongoing medical issues was recently (and generously I think) given a 4 week period of best described as rest leave which was fully paid and without the need for medical certification as was at the suggestion of the employer. Idea was then to return to work next week however following a review meeting yesterday they have stated that they feel it will be better to return on reduced hours of approx. 27 hours per week for a month. This is despite OH feeling ready to return full time but as its only a month is reluctantly happy to do this despite the reduction in take home pay and this again will be reviewed at the end of this period. My question(s) are can the employer insist in reduced hours for this period and possibly future periods despite there being no medical note suggesting a phased return and her wanting to work her contacted hours? If they can insist on this is there an obligation then to pay the contracted hours rather than the suggested working ones based on this would be their decision not supported by the employee or on recommendation from a doctor? Thanks in advance guys/girls my HR knowledge is way out of date and to be honest in any phased return I have dealt with in the past usually resulted in the employee being paid the contracted hours regardless of hours worked during it.
  9. Hi ALL Just a quick one, i'm on a zero hour contract, hours set one week in advance, on the day of your actual shift if it is quiet, the mgrs are now forcing people to finish early, are we not contracted to that shift? are they allowed to force you home early, and the flip side in theory they can make you stay late as well, essentially they can do anything they want to do....is this right? any advice appreciated thanks guys! x
  10. Our company has had a long-standing arrangement that staff can work from home, for at least two days a month. After this it is generally at the manager's discretion, but it is very rarely declined on the basis that a home-based employee that is working is better than an employee that is not. I suffer from rapid cycling bipolar disorder, and have on several occasions had to take extra work-from-home days due to anxiety issues preventing me from leaving the house. Our systems are all online, and I can usually be almost as productive. As such, my previous line manager (who now manages the department) always recommended I work from home rather than drag myself in and make things worse, potentially leading to actual time off. The new line manager has now brought in rules for home working; the main one being that 24 hours must be given in all cases. If not, the day must be taken as holiday or sick leave. He has informed me separately that I do not need to give this notice, as I don't usually get this much myself! However, he has also notified me that my performance has to match the rest of the department to 'justify' allowing me to work from home instead of enforced sick or holiday. I appreciate that they are probably allowed to force you not to work, but I just don't understand the logic behind it - surely the company is better off with me working, albeit not in the office, than not working at all?
  11. Hi Guys, I hope someone can help. I will be as clear as I can - the long and short of it is that I appealed a parking ticket as I was unaware that I had one until the baliffs came calling. All paperwork was sent to my old address so I did not get the opportunity to sort it out. The council dont want to know and I had a hearing at my local court to which they threw my appeal out. The baliffs are demanding £497 (for a £25 ticket) - I have written a letter to the baliff company as advised on one of the forums and stated that guidelines state that where the baliffs are dealing with a vunerable household (ie me) - they should refer it back to the council. I am currently not working as I have been made redundant (and having worked the last 20 years of my life solidly) - and am claiming income support for the first time in my life. I have now received a letter back from the baliff company stating that 'simply benig unemployed and in receipt of income support does not necessarily mean that you are a vunerable person in respect of enforcement action.' The letter goes on that the NSEA is not a legal binding instrument but guidance only. They are therefore going to continue enforcement action. I honestly cannot afford to pay them - the only real asset I have is my car and since we live 11 miles from school and essentially in the middle of nowhere I need trasnsport. there are no buses or trains here and I have three children. I am really worried now and would appreciate anyones help. Thanks so much.
  12. Looking for help / advice on this please. My daughter works at a care home in Scotland (17yrs). Early in 2011 doctors found she had arthritis in her spine and prescribed her painkillers. She informed her employers as they have what they call a “hoist” to move. This is a two person job one to push & one to guide. A risk assessment was carried out and it was decided it was ok for my daughter to just guide the “hoist”. The last week in June 2012 all staff at the home had their yearly assessment. At my daughters assessment she was asked if her back was ok and if she was still on painkillers. Reply was yes to both as she had not been of with any back problems this year. Second week of July 2012 my daughter was due to start night but she had a phone call from her employers telling her not to come in as they felt she was not able to carry out her job because of her back and that she should see a doctor and be signed of work. She was also informed that if she came to work she would not be allowed in. Effectively suspending her in my view. On seeking legal advice (Citizens Advice) she was told 1) they can’t do that 2) do not hand in a sick line 3) they have to pay her. My daughter informed her employers of this who then told her she would not be allowed back to work until she had been seen by an independent doctor and as this could take several months she should see her doctor and be signed of, also that she would not be paid until after that. In an ideal world she could have just said no to that but as everyone knows we all have bills to pay so she was left with no option but to see her doctor and be signed of and receive sick pay. She eventually saw an independent doctor on 2nd Nov.2012 who declared her fully fit to work. She returned to work on the 26th Nov.2012. She has been told she can claim for lost wages as it was her employers who took it upon themselves to say she was not fit for work and would not be paid, so therefore putting her under pressure to see a doctor and be signed of so that she would some income. Grateful for any advice on how to proceed (or not) with this. Citizens Advice say it depends on here contract.
  13. I have a question about an issue that my employer is proposing to enforce on myself and my colleagues. Due to a recent situation where staffing levels fell short the management are proposing to enforce a contact change whereby employees may be compelled to provide shift cover with little or no notice. This would impact on the personal lives of myself (as a single parent) and my colleagues in similar ways. Is this proposed change to our contracts legal and is it something that can be imposed upon us considering the problems it will inevitably cause to all our personal lives?
  14. Hi - Im new to this but need some advise ref my employer. I have over 20 yrs continuous service with my employer. Recently they bought over a failing competitor, but made the ex-owner a director / my new boss with my existing employer. The business is doing well and we do not have enough staff at the minute to cope with the current workload. My department have all been advised we are to have our contracts changed and effective wage cuts imposed, by way of "department restructure". This was initially advised via a 1 to 1 meeting with the director who advised my post was effectively being made redundant (even though my duties & resposibilities will be exactly the same as before apart from my job title.) and it would be best for me to accept a change in my contract to accept the pay cut. When I spoke to the HR dept to ask what my redundancy options where I was told this was not the case and I was not being made redundant - confusing to say the least. No other department in the business is being targetted for any contract changes which makes me suspect this is a director whim to look good in front of the board and save money. He has stated if we do not agree to the changes he will be forced to "let us go" and as we refused a resonable offer to change contract we wont be entitled to any redundancy. This is having a very unsettling effect on what was an efficient and loyal department. Has anyone any xperience of such actions or advice for me?
  15. Hi All, I was hoping for some insights into my predicament About 2.5 years ago I moved back to the UK from Australia with a substantial amount of credit card debit. I have been paying off the minimum payment for the last 2.5 with the exception of the last 6 months as I have been unable to make the minimum repayment due to reduced earnings (resulting from a chronic back issue). As such, Westpac has sold the account to Recoveries Corp who demanded the full amount ($23,001.26) by the 16th October 2012. I was unable to make this payment and therefore the debt will be referred to Mason Black Lawyers. I am able to offer them $450.00 per month to pay off this debt and am yet to hear if this is acceptable..... If these payment terms are not accepted, are you able to advise which legal steps Mason Black Lawyers will take to recover the debt from the UK? I am in the UK and am therefore not able to attend an Australian court. Any advice is much appreciated. KR, L
  16. Hi everyone, hope i have posted in the correct area ! i have been searching these forums for many months but keep reading conflicting information. I am emigrating to AUSTRALIA in June 2013 ,cant let this opportunity go by ! My story is i have had 2 operations in 6 months and have been on the floor ,never thought this would happen to me as i am the only bread winner in the family ! I have basically defaulted on 2 credit cards £4000 and £2000 ,now i really dont like running away from my commitments but i am now in a low paid job and cant see any way out !!!!!! What i would like to know is are these agreements enforcable in OZ ???? I have come to an agreement with both lenders and have been paying something every month one is halifax the other is RBS although the Halifax have demanded the whole balance via DEBT COLLECTORS BLARE OLIVER AND SCOTT. Can i avoid a CCJ on both ? do i just give them a P O BOX NO when i get there ? how am i on the legal side of things ? I understand that if a CCJ is issued it is for EVER! ANY HELP PLEASE WOULD BE GREAT, thankyou TIM.
  17. Hi, I need some advice for my friend. She has been repaying a bailiff £50 pm but de-faulted and hasn't paid since April. She recieved a letter stating they would be visiting her on 31/08/12 if she does not pay £300 now. She rang them to try to arrange something but they told her if she doesn't pay the £300 and then £50 pm there after they will be visiting her property with the intention of gaining access to remove goods with the aid of the police. She stupidly let them in the first time and she signed WPO. Any advice would be greatly appreciate as she is in a little bit of a state.
  18. Hi All. Apologies if posting in wrong forum, couldnt find anything similar elsewhere. I am basically looking for some advice to make sure I dont leave myself open to further issues. For the record, I am, and all action, is Scottish based. Following my divorce back in 2004, it was decided that the legal expenses were deemed payable by me. The Scottish Legal Aid board then demanded payment (£3447.21) and I explained at the time I was in no position to pay, with barely enough income to allow me to eat at the time. They sent a chap to my house, who filled out a form with me, pretty much confirming my position at that time. I have never heard anything since from the Scottish Legal Aid Board. Since then, I have spent the last 6 years desperately trying to clean up my credit records, pay off all my debts, and try to return my life back to some sort of normallity, which for the main part, I have managed to do. I was even able to eventually get myself a mortgage (albeit from a "fringe" broker with higher than normal interest rates), and bought a small 1 bedroomed property, perfect for me. Then the bombshell! It would appear that a schedule of inhibition was granted on the 4/06/2005, which would prevent me from selling any property or land unless this legal aid debt was paid. I had no idea whatsoever this inhibition schedule had been granted until last week and even when I did eventually sell my small property back in 2009, nothing was brought up, mentioned, or apparant then. Last week, completely out the blue, a Sheriffs officer appeared at my current property and posted through the door a copy of this very inhibition notice. He then chapped both my neighbours doors asking where I worked, what vehicle I drove, when was I likely to be home etc etc. All pretty embarressing for me. Natuarally I called the number on the attached letter, and was surprised to find it was for the expenses awarded against me back in 2005. I explained I had no idea this inhibition had been granted, and asked why they simply hadnt written to me? They said they had written to me back in 2010, and the letter was signed for by (an ex girlfriend who lived briefly at this new property whilst I was working up North for a few months). I genuinely knew nothing about this. I can only assume the letter was set aside, and was perhaps accidently disposed of before I had a chance to read? Despite explaining this, I have been told to pay the full amount by close of business today, or this order will be enforced - affecting my credit rating etc. The total amount is £3672.37 which is the original charge, + serving fees of £114.48, + charge fees of £110.68. This will all but wipe out my entire savings which I have managed to accrue over the last two years or so (after finally paying off all my debts) through hard work and being extremey careful with my money. I just feel I am back to square one again, and wish I had known about this from the start - and was given a chance to come to some agreement in terms of paying this up. At very worst, a fair portion of it may have been paid by now. Should I, (indeed can I?) challange the order and risk my credit status all over again, or should I simply pay the lot and be left with nothing again? Or should I pay the expenses and challange the fees? Im not sure what to do here - but not thinking clearly due to the shock of it all. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
  19. Hi everyone i hope i have posted in the correct forum ! I have just defaulted on 2 credit cards and owe money on my overdraft due to long term illness last year and again this year . i am dissapointed with myself and will take what evers coming ! although in about 18 months i have a fantastic opportunity to emigrate to OZ no returns !!!!! and what i would like to know is would these debts be ENFORCABLE in OZ ??????? the amounts are £4000 with RBS £2000 with halifax and a £2000 overdraft with HSBC . I only work part time (20) hours for £6.50 an hour and when i get back to work this will take me about 10 years to get straight ! I am trying to negotiate with the crediters at the moment ,looks like i will only be able to make a TOKEN PAYMENT . I was hoping to keep them sweet until i jet off but are CCJs transfered to other countries or is there any agreements in place????? already done some swotting on here but i am confused and the banks have had a lot of money out of me over the years thanks for your help TIM
  • Create New...