JBW on BBC

[zigster]

Having watched the program "enforcers", I am struck that one of the bailiffs has been on another program about bailiffs. Is this some new breed of celebrity? And surely the foot in the door trick can't be seen as acceptable......

[mrsc]

Yeah I watched that too, I thought they wasn't allowed to do that foot in the door thing either.

[Guest 10110001]

They are and it's called the threshold manoever and considered as peaceful entry. It can set off an altercation between bailiff and debtor & turn messy.

 

I'm not impressed with the idea of bailiffs going round in vans as vigilante groups stopping and confiscating vehicles, extortion used to be illegal.

 

Once upon a time Dick Turpin was hanged - he was convicted of robbery - holding up passers by with a revolver and robbing them of money and their horse. Today its Bailiffs & policemen holding laser guns or ANPR devices doing it.

[mrsc]

I couldn't see the problem with giving the gardener back his car it wasn't on the lorry when he asked.

[Conniff]

Damn, I missed it and so wanted to watch.

 

Anyone know if it is repeated on their internet site and if so any chance of a link please?

[sillygirl1]

One a side note bout JBW - his age seems to change, in interviews he is anything from 24 - 28... and I would put him about 28. He didn't come across very well, notice they show sideways shots of him talking so you can't get visual prompts to the fact he is talking porkies...

 

The foot in the door should have been removed as requested but obviously is used by JBW to get the police round and help HIS case, rather than the debtors.

[dannyboy660]

I felt sorry for the guy arrested for 'stealing' his own car...how bizarre is that???

 

If I heard correctly at the end, he was released without charge, but I wonder if he still got billed for the tow truck which was called out??

 

Probably yes, but it hardly seems fair.

[mcuth]

They are and it's called the threshold manoever and considered as peaceful entry. It can set off an altercation between bailiff and debtor & turn messy.

 

So, if it's classed as "peaceful entry", does that mean they have the right to return later and use force? I'm also assuming that they should remove the foot if requested to by the resident?

 

I'm not impressed with the idea of bailiffs going round in vans as vigilante groups stopping and confiscating vehicles, extortion used to be illegal.

 

Must admit, that was quite shocking - I can't believe that bailiffs have been given such powers, riding around in a van equipped with ANPR and stopping vehicles away from the owner's property

 

Cheers

Michael

[Guest 10110001]

...but obviously is used by JBW to get the police round and help HIS case, rather than the debtors.

This TV program sent the wrong messages to criminals - dont use number plates, and contradicts the police maxim that they don't get involved in civil matters - assisting a bailiff in catching a debtor.

 

I recently wrote on LMAG after I was canvassed by a local councillor lobbying for support against police budget cuts, and the neighbourhood watch scheme was being put under threat.

 

The police never have a problem organising road blocks, car-jackings and civil matters and this indicates they have too much time on their hands, and to use thousands of pounds of hardware to become nothing more than a public nuisance in stopping & arresting a gardener for stealing his own car, this suggests they aren't as cash-strapped as they make out.

 

Neighbourhood watch is a vulnerable aspect of policing and cutting it is designed to get the public sympathy vote.

 

Not any more...

 

So, if it's classed as "peaceful entry", does that mean they have the right to return later and use force? I'm also assuming that they should remove the foot if requested to by the resident?

Bailiffs call this the threshold maneuver and they see it as peaceful entry, once a bailiff has entry, you cannot forcibly throw them out without the risk of being arrested for assault. I am told the Domestic Crime & Violence Act 2004 has a provision that enables a bailiff to use violence to gain entry. The warrant usually gives the bailiff a power to enter the property without the owners permission - and there is no obligation for the bailiff to show the warrant to the debtor.

 

It's an issue being addressed at government level at the moment because a homeowner cannot lawfully assume he is being burgled, and the Act prevents the homeowner to take relevant safety action to protect their family and property, and thus, subverting Article 5 and Protocol 1 of ECHR - right to security.

 

The government needs to tackle things differently, fighting crime with crime is fighting fire with fire, and it will never work. The government needs to look into WHY there are so many debts occurring in the first place, and handing out licenses to vigilante groups to trade in street crime is not the answer.

[tomtubby]

Good reply.

 

What I do not like about the programme is that it showed the shocking use of police as bailiff's "assistants".

 

I am sending Freedom of Information requests to a number of local authorities this morning and will post replies when I get them.

[caledfwlch]

I thought foot in the door didnt count as entry?? Or is it a tool in the hope that the thick ill trained police will agree with them and order the tenant/home owner to let the bailiff in?

[mcuth]

Bailiffs call this the threshold maneuver and they see it as peaceful entry, once a bailiff has entry, you cannot forcibly throw them out without the risk of being arrested for assault.

 

True - and the programme showed just how little the homeowner can do to prevent entry and how much the police will side with the person(s) trying to gain entry .

 

The thing that worried me more is that I understood that once a bailiff has entered the property peacefully, they then have the power to come back and force entry to seize goods at any time later. However if you've not given them peaceful entry, they can't do that. Like Caledfwlch, I didn't think the "threshold manoeuver" qualified as peaceful entry for this purpose (not sure whether levying goods on the first visit is also a requirement if they want to come back and force entry)?

 

I am told the Domestic Crime & Violence Act 2004 has a provision that enables a bailiff to use violence to gain entry. The warrant usually gives the bailiff a power to enter the property without the owners permission - and there is no obligation for the bailiff to show the warrant to the debtor.

 

But that's for bailiffs with warrants under that Act is it not - i.e. wouldn't apply to bailiffs with warrants issued by a court for non-payment of fines/debts?

 

Cheers

Michael

[pt2537]

Hmm very interesting thread

 

maybe my next topic of research:)

[caledfwlch]

:? Wouldnt Foot in the Door only count as Peaceful entry if you believe him/the police/give up and allow him to continue inwards?

 

If you refuse to open the door and stay there holding it against his foot, so to gain entry he would have to use brute force to throw the door open (probably hurting you in the process) then that is very unpeaceful entry?

 

I firmly believe that the new laws will create a major crime spree.

 

Bailiff breaks in, homeowner thinks he is being burglared, seriously injures the bailiff. So obviously to avoid that your bailiff will be shouting Bailiff, Bailiff, I have a warrant. So whats to stop criminals moving on from car jacking, to kicking in peoples front doors, pretending to be bailiffs..... :?

 

If it means that all forced entrys will have to have police accompanyment, then Civil Debt is no longer, erm Civil, it will be criminal, since it is enforced by the Police, who normally only have a right of entry to property if they believe a crime has been committed/life is at risk.

 

Still.... maybe the outcry will cause a rethink of the law once it begins being enacted, at the end of the day, the bailiff's most likely to use them will only use them against terrified single mothers and the disabled, they wont dare go against fit, healthy young homeowners/tenants.

 

Gov does not seem to have considered the fact that it may cause an even worse housing crisis as a side effect, when Landlords start evicting tenants, not too happy with front doors being kicked in and so on.

[noomill060]

I had considered giving the reason why bailiffs have had no authority in Northern Ireland since 1971.

[Guest 10110001]

But that's for bailiffs with warrants under that Act is it not - i.e. wouldn't apply to bailiffs with warrants issued by a court for non-payment of fines/debts?

 

I was flamed on this very forum for saying that bailiffs could not use violence of any kind, and I was directed to the Domestic Crimes & Violence Act SCHEDULE 4 (Powers of authorised officers executing warrants). Here which I was corrected and told gives a bailiff a power while enforcing a civil debt.

 

When I looked up the legislation & read it, it still did not give a bailiff a power to use violence in a civil debt, and the Act is an extension to the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.

 

In a document from Surrey Police - they call it by another name - entering by force.

 

So it seems that the legislation is open to interpretation.

[pt2537]

Hmm, interesting

 

having read the Domestic Crimes & Violence Act SCHEDULE 4 (Powers of authorised officers executing warrants) im still none the wiser, it has a very broad open interpretation doesn't it

 

im going to look at what Halsburys Laws Of England Says on the subject

 

surely they are not allowed to use violence? and where would this leave you with a claim under the tort of tresspass against the person

[mcuth]

I was flamed on this very forum for saying that bailiffs could not use violence of any kind, and I was directed to the Domestic Crimes & Violence Act SCHEDULE 4 (Powers of authorised officers executing warrants). Here which I was corrected and told gives a bailiff a power while enforcing a civil debt.

 

When I looked up the legislation & read it, it still did not give a bailiff a power to use violence in a civil debt, and the Act is an extension to the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.

 

I'd agree with your interpretation - I don't believe the DVCV Act (schedule 4) gives powers to a bailiff enforcing a civil debt. As you say, the DVCV Act amends the Magistrates' Courts Act and no civil debt would end up in the Magistrates' Court anyway since Magistrates' Courts deal with criminal offences. Relevant sections of Schedule 4 that I believe reinforce this (italicised words are my emphasis):

 

Entry to execute warrant of arrest etc

2 (1) An authorised officer may enter and search any premises for the purpose of executing a warrant of arrest, commitment or detention issued in proceedings for or in connection with any criminal offence.

 

Entry to levy distress

3 (1) An authorised officer may enter and search any premises for the purpose of executing a warrant of distress issued under section 76 of this Act for default in paying a sum adjudged to be paid by a conviction.

 

Use of force

5 An authorised officer may use reasonable force, if necessary, in the exercise of a power conferred on him by this Schedule

 

Cheers

Michael

[pt2537]

Hi, well i will be reading up on Halsburys Laws on Enforcement over the next couple of days and also Halsburys Tort

 

Edited..............

[mcuth]

Wow 10110001, the information in that letter is disgraceful (assuming the bailiff was calling to enforce a warrant of execution for a civil debt and hadn't gained prior peaceful entry, of course!) - I think that might even justify a complaint to the Police Complaints Commission!

 

Bailiffs and debt collectors : Directgov - Money, tax and benefits

 

From that page:

What bailiffs can and can't do

If County Court bailiffs come to your home, you don't have to let them in.

They can't force their way in on their first visit, but they can enter through an open window, or an unlocked door. Forced entry includes pushing past you once you have opened the door to them or leaving their foot in the door to prevent you closing it. Such action would make the whole process illegal.

 

 

Bailiffs trying to recover money you owe to HMRC are allowed to break into your home, providing they have a magistrates' warrant.

 

 

Bailiffs recovering unpaid magistrates' court fines, however, do have the power to force entry

Cheers

Michael

[mcuth]

Does anyone remember what JBW were "enforcing" when they visited the guy in the flats on the programme? Was it fines/parking tickets?

 

Cheers

Michael

[rambo]

What amazed me was to amount of police that turned up to the flat!, talk about waste police time.

 

As for the foot in the door, from directgov website;

"They can't force thier way in on thier first visit, but they can enter through an open window, or an unlocked door. Forced entry includes pushing past you once you have opened the door to them or leaving thier foot in the door to prevent you closing it. SUCH ACTION WOULD MAKE THE WHOLE PROCESS ILLEGAL.

"Bailiffs recovering unpaid magistrates courts fines, however, do have the power to force entry".

 

So the question is; can bailiffs stick thier foot in the door?, I would say NO.

[dannyboy660]

So the question is; can bailiffs stick thier foot in the door?, I would say NO.

 

Agreed.

 

The problem is you need witnesses to their wrongdoings. Fortunately for Mr xxxxxxxx last night, he now has several million, but it seems he was wanted on a criminal matter anyway which may have influenced the Police reaction to the events.

[ScarletPimpernel]

I wondered why, since the man at the flat had already (allegedly) threatened the bailiffs with violence, JBW didn't ask the police to accompany them in the first place, to prevent a breach of the peace.

[mcuth]

So the question is; can bailiffs stick thier foot in the door?, I would say NO.

 

That's what I always thought before looking into it further today (first time I've revisited this stuff for a while) - but it seems that it depends on what an "authorised officer" is enforcing as to the level of force they can use. Judging from the stuff I've looked at above, I'd say a summary would be:

Civil debt (presume this would include parking tickets since parking offences aren't a criminal act): No force, no foot in the door - peaceful entry required, cannot break in

Court (criminal) fines/Arrest warrant/Taxman: Reasonable force - can break in

 

Cheers

Michael