urgent in court tomorrow-lost-you need to read this

[Fair-Parking]

From what you have said, neither had any right of entry. Indeed from the evidence either they do not understand the law or they showed a callous disregard for it.

 

I'll put my money on the fact that if any 'warrant' is produced in court tomorrow, it won't be stamped by a court. And if not, the who did produce it? AND WHEN? - prior to their visits? Or prior to this hearing? Private bailiffs do have a habit of typing them up in their own office with the intention of setting out to defraud people via sections 2 & 3 of the Fraud Act 2006.

 

Appointed by the court? There can be only interpretation of that - he tried to make you think that he officially represented a court. Certificated only means that the court has registered him (or licenced if you like) as being a private bailiff. It doesn't mean for one minute that he carries out duties on the court's behalf. They have their own bailiffs for that. Private bailiffs work on commission and real court bailiffs are salaried by HMCS.

[I've got no money]

Can I ask what it is that you are in court for tomorrow?

[kel123]

Complaint against bailff(s) and their actiions

 

I submitted a form 4 against 2 bailiffs who work for Bristow and Sutor

 

The paperwork went before the judge who ordered an hearing

 

The hearing is tomorrow

 

Please notice that I am not saying too much because anything said on here gets back to Bristow & Sutor???????

[citizenB]

Sounds pretty scary. Good luck in court tomorrow

[kel123]

thank you CB

 

The court has already told me that I have got to tell my side of the story and that I have got to present them with all paperwork. so if I have done my job correctly luck shouldn't play a part because they have broken alsorts of rules and guid lines. Although a little bit of luck will help

[tonycee]

Good Hunting Kel123.

 

We have to stand up to these BA****DS.

[I've got no money]

Its' not that scary so don't panic - so its' a complaint against a bailiff - its' difficult to comment too much without knowing more - could you post a copy of your form 4 but delete anything that identifies you.

 

As far as hearings generally go the basic rule is that if you allege something you have to prove it - either by giving first hand evidence or calling a witness.

[kel123]

I will post everythink tomorrow win or loose

 

I can prove it alright and not just my say so, Out of the something like 6 areas tomtubby as put in his sticky, they have committed 5. The only thing I cannot claim is falsly taking after payment. Basically they have broken every rule in the book from conception to death so to speak

 

Just a pitty it will not effect B&S - although it just might?

[Fair-Parking]

Hope it went well today. I wish I had known it was Bristow & Sutor. I still have a letter on file dated February 1982 that you could have had a copy of relating to an incident in which not only did Bristow & Sutor illegally gain entry to a house via deceit (in those days they used to say that they 'were from the council and wished to discuss rates', rather using today's tactic of 'I'm a court bailiff').

 

Having gained a cheque by lying and intimidation they left saying to a lone and innocent woman with a 2 year old - 'I hope that has spoiled your day'. Needless to say the cheque was stopped and the letter I refer to was sent to Sutor himself. They never were paid and they never went back.

 

I also wrote B & S in November 2005 and told them exactly why their bailiffs has no rights of entry into property and why they should never use the 'court bailiff' and 'court documents' routine, so they know they are acting illegally and that they have done so continually for 26 years at least.

 

So no, regretfully I don't think they are going to change. It's just another flow of water off a duck's back to them.

 

Their problem is that they haven't moved with the times and that people are much more world wise now than back then, mainly due to forums and other communication methods including having instant access to the law via the internet.

 

No, these dinosaurs still delude themselves into thinking that we are as stupid as they are.

[kel123]

For those who don't know I was in court today following my complaints using form 4 - suggestion: you need a barrestor

Well were do I start – crawled out of court with my tail between my leg.

Have you ever been sh**ged by a judge, yes, rolled over, rogered and left to cry, well I have been today.

And if the judge is correct then the stickies on here and on other forums are incorrect and need to changed pdq.

It was on the court order that I had to attend. I did not realise that I had to be the prosecution in this case. And that I was going to have to go in the witness box swear an oath and be cross examined by the judge. The judge put up an argument and agreed with himself and made a ruling. He interrupted me to stop me talking and thinking he would not allow me to go through any of my prepared material, as I said he rolled me over, rogered me and left me to cry, Not a very nice experience I can tell you. And to top it off having to drive a 60 mile round trip with a slipping clutch.

So

9: 20 parked the car

9:30 arrived at Worcester Crown Court/ County Court. I was informed that we were in court 4 due to start at 10:00. I asked if the judge would allow me to play the 999 call. The clerk set it up just in case he agreed

10:30 went in to court to be told to go out again as the judge has something personal to attend to. 5 men in total were with the other side

10: 47 Called back into court

The Judge came in and dealt with 2 of the other men first, they were from Bristow and Sutor, this is how it went:

Mr PPPPP to the witness box please, say after me, I swear……… then the judge said you are up for renewal is everything corrected that you have written here, yes came the reply and he signed the form

Mr QQQQQ to the witness box please and the judge said is everything correct and apologised because he hadn’t been sworn in, he was sworn in and he asked if everything is correct that you have written here- yes- and he signed the form and said you can go.

This left the two bailiffs that dealt with me and a man at the back. I was sitting on the right hand side of the court and the others on the left.

OK I have complaints against 2 bailiffs said the judge one of them I have no intention of dealing with as there is no complaint to answer for. I asked the judge why because he attempted to collect Council Tax and he was not certified The Judges reply was, I am satisfied that it was part of his training and that a qualified Bailiff was with him. I said but he is claiming on the form that he signed that I am collecting…. and surely that is against legislation. I have said Mr kel123 now take the witness box. I said I had prepared my testimoney and would he like a copy, He gave a FIRM NO!

(now tell me I’m incorrect but doesn’t that make a mockery of being certified)

Now things went from bad to worse

What is your complaint

Your Honour if I may run through the events the complaints become self evident

No Mr kel123 What is your complaint against this bailiff

(luckily I had prepared a list)

that the bailiff made an unlawful entry in to my house by pushing me as I tried to block his entrance. He pu (He interrupted)

You say here (he read from my letter of complaint. When he wanted you to hear he was sharp when he didn’t he bumbled) Now I will put you right (he pull out a document he read from it saying it’s from Taddler and Waldorf He bumbled that bit)

( he then explained it’s meaning)

If an entrance is open then the bailiff can walk in and you have no right to stop him, he is not trespassing and he cannot be done in England and Wales for trespass while about his duty that includes your garden. Further more if a door is unlocked he can by turning the handle walk in. if he finds a key he can unlock the door and walk in. He cannot however break in or use force, or put his hand inside to remove an obstacle such as a iron bar.

But your Honour he did use force he push me out of the way, It says in the Department of constitutional affairs, National standards for enforcement agents, that (he interrupted me)

Yes I know but I have said Mr kel123 that you have no rights to block him. Now what is your complaint about this bailiff

(I am now becoming shell shocked)

That the bailiff did not introduce himself nor did he offer when asked to give his name or turn his badge around nor did he show any letter of authority to collect Council Tax on behalf of Walsall Council as per the DCA, NSfEA.

He looked at the bailiff and said is this true what you have written here (he read out the bit of the bailiffs statement that said he was never asked for documentation or to turn his badge around) The bailiff replied yes

I said my wife asked him 3 times to show his ID badge it (he interrupted me)

Is she in the court and he looked around and said well that’s that then

Here is the copy of the letter your honour

(he looked at me in disgust as I handed it to him) you want me to read this

Yes, it is a statement of truth and signed by her and it is with the court

(he read it and looked at me puzzled)

It is also on the 999 tape, which I stated in front of the bailiff to the police that I didn’t know his name and he is not will to tell me or show me any paperwork

But that is you Mr kel123, you know he was a certified bailiff

No your honour only till after he had entered our house and he replied to me while I was on the 999 call he said I have a warrant legal action, I am a court appointed Bailiff

There you are he has told you he is a certified

No your honour he said he was a court appointed bailiff which is different from a certified bailiff and (he interrupted again)

They are the same, end. Sit down Mr kel123

But sir there is more their fees are not correct.

This is for you to take up with Bristow and Sutor

Your honour this is part of the complaint. The first demand signed by the uncertified bailiff should have been £124.50, £100 Council Tax and £24.50 first visit not the £181 as stated and the second visit should have been £142.50 that’s £100 council tax, £24.50 first visit and £18 second visit. Their has been no walking procession fee so the other fees are incorrect

(I am getting really p*ssed off now and I am going at the Judge who appeared to be backing off)

(the judge now looks to the man at the back of the court)

(the man stands up and starts saying about the charges he walks to the front of the court and asks to approach the judge says yes and the man explains that the charges are legitimate, I hand the judge the Inventory of seizure and say it is unenforceable because I have not signed It and therefore these fees are unlawful)

The judge says I am satisfied that that the charges are correct because there has been lawful entry in to the property now sit down Mr kel123

(As I walk back to my seat the man from the back comes forward again and hands the judge a document saying precedence in ? v ? and sat back down)

(The bailiff was asked to take the witness box and was sworn in)

The judge asked the bailiff is what he had written here correct, the bailiff said yes and it appeared that the judge signed the bailiffs statement while saying good. I was given the opportunity to now cross examine. I though what’s the use the judge as already destroyed my claim so it will get me no were, so I said no.

The judge now summed up basically repeating what he’d already said

11:37 arrived back at the car.

The next bit has nothing to do with cag but it is something that hit me while I was writing this and I think I am going to have to get legal advice.

The judge seemed to have everything ready to kick what ever I said into touch and stopped me going were I wanted to go?

When we were called in the first time I got my paperwork out and the cd of the 999 tape. We were then asked to leave and that we will be called back in. A few min after this the clark came out to me and asked if she could get the CD ready just in case and could I come and give her the disc, I said it is on the table, she said she couldn’t just take it I have to give it to her, so I went back into the court room and handed her the tape. Now I am wondering if the crafty B******d had a look at my papers and listened to the tape?????

Any suggestions on what I should do

The CD player is now in a bag along with my papers just in case (finger prints) also I wonder if I can SAR the county court to get the CCT footage of court room 4 between 10:30 and 10:45.

Kel

How do I feel – screwed and abussed

[kel123]

Not a lot of replies - whats up shell shocked or disbalief

 

I have been incontact with NDL and they are investigating the rights and wrongs and if it is appealable, they are getting back to me on Monday. I am not one to give up that easily i'll bring the lot down if needs be because one man can make a difference.

 

To satisfy myself and to bolster my deflated ego I have checked and this judge is 100%, 180 degrees away from reality. Direct.gov say pushing passed is forced entry, Bailiffs must be certified to collect council tax, NDL have said that there is a difference between certified and court apointed bailiffs and because it was an ilegal entrance then it is 24.50 and 18 only.

 

But the implications by this judges ruling are enence

[WWOW]

If an entrance is open then the bailiff can walk in and you have no right to stop him, he is not trespassing and he cannot be done in England and Wales for trespass while about his duty that includes your garden. Further more if a door is unlocked he can by turning the handle walk in. if he finds a key he can unlock the door and walk in. He cannot however break in or use force, or put his hand inside to remove an obstacle such as a iron bar.

 

I wonder if His Honour knows he is contradicting official Police advice.

 

 

Making a factual error is grounds for an appeal.

[kel123]

Looks like the worcester judicary accept what ever B&S say and give them absalute power and we all know what that leads to. This is why B&S bailiffs are so cocky knowing that the the judge will say "is this correct what you have written" and accept it no questions asked. Don't forget I have seen this first hand, 3 times.

 

My intentions are

 

1) to write to Garath Thomas and ask for an official inquirey into B&S and the Worcestershire judishary (wish I could speel) although it is muted that they already are?

2) to lobby my own MP when I find out who it is

3) to appeal if posible on the grounds of incorect interpretation of legislation and my personal treatment at the hands of this Judge

 

after this Europe then America (because they seem to be dictating our action) then even if I have to die to talk to God (who I understand works in a chippy in manchester)

[ukaviator]

Sorry to see you had a very bad day in court kel. I will flag this up to the site team to read.

[Fair-Parking]

Before I make my point on this, can I ask the moderators what happened to the original thread containing all the posts that led up to this hearing? At the moment there is only half the picture now available to read.

 

Can we have them back please and under this thread?

 

Thank you

[Fair-Parking]

Sorry I can see that the original thread is still here though the heading has been truncated, hence the inability to spot it. However I do feel that as this is the same subject albeit with before and after sections, it would benefit us all if they were combined to give an overall picture in one collective thread.

[I've got no money]

Fair Parking is right - it may be that the decision is open to appeal but all of the information needs putting together.

[Bookworm]

2 threads merged.

 

Edit: 3 threads merged, found another one

[Fair-Parking]

Thank you Bookworm.

 

I'm still unclear as to what exactly happened in court, though the outcome seems clear enough. Perhaps if I gave an insight into my experiences, it might help a little.

 

First, when I put points to B & S in my letter of November 2005, they failed to answer and thus by their inability to show any good reason why I was incorrect in my assertions, maybe and somewhat unwittingly, B & S confirmed that they already knew that they had no right of entry, let alone a forcible one.

 

With regard to Friday's hearing, I get the feeling that it was the judge and not B & S that argued that a bailiff has the right to push past a person if a door is opened. This is the point that B & S failed to put forward in answer to my letter of November 2005. The wearing of steel capped boots also suggests that the bailiff intended to force entry by premediated means come what may.

 

I must admit that I too suffered a similar fate of not being allowed to put my case by a recorder in Redditch County Court back in 2004. She either interupted or just diverted the hearing away from my points.

 

However I have also been in another court when a judge tried to do the same and to this day I don't know why I acted the way I did, but I found myself telling the judge that if he didn't listen to me and if he didn't allow me to put my case forarwd I would walk out and he could come to any decision he liked, because by then I would already putting an application in for another hearing based on his prejudice. Blow me, it did the trick.

 

So yes kel123, do appeal. Your grounds for appeal being that you were never permitted to put forward your case. However maybe you need some help in presenting your case second time round.

[kermit2482]

Good on that Judge, wish their were more like him whom realise that you lot whom dont pay, really must pay and stop whingeing about having to pay!!!!!

[kel123]

To put it as clear as I can

 

The judge, Stopped me presenting my case? by interupting me when I started to talk. He then put up an argument about what I was going to say, He confirmed that what he was saying was correct and then made a ruling that agreed with what he said. I have omitted alot of the interupts because it was pointless because I said two/three words and he stopped me

 

e.g. (Me black him red as the writing gets bigger raise the level of your voice and sharpen the tone)

 

What is your complain?

 

Your honour if I may run through the events the complaints become self evident

 

No Mr kel123! What is your complaint against this bailiff

 

That the bailiff made an unlawful entry into my house by pushing me as I tried to block his entrance. He puYou say here "He asked if he could come in and discuss the situation with regards to the community Tax I owed to Walsall MBC. I said a firm no and agreed to discuss it with him at the door. I explained that I thought there had been a mistake because Walsall council had included the £100 I owed in with this years bill. And that I was prepared to sort it out with them the next day. He said that he needed to see the bill to confirm this. I said wait there and I’ll fetch it for you to see. As I was turning away he said can I come in again, I turned back saying no! to see him coming in through my front door. I blocked his path and he pushed me at least 4 ft into my dining room about 6 ft in total."

Now I will read from ??????? (it was tatler guide to ??? or some thing like that when he didn't want you to hear he bumbbled, he read out a couple of paragraphs and then said) Now I will tell you what that means! If an entrance is open then the bailiff can walk in and you have no right to stop him, he is not trespassing and he cannot be done in England and Wales for trespass while about his duty that includes your garden. Further more if a door is unlocked he can by turning the handle walk in. if he finds a key he can unlock the door and walk in. He cannot however break in or use force, or put his hand inside to remove an obstacle such as a iron bar.

But your Honour he did use force he push me out of the way, It says in the Department of constitutional affairs, National standards for enforcement agents, thatYes I know but I have said Mr kel123 that you have no rights to block him. Now what is your complaint about this bailiff!

But sir It clearly says that a certified bailiff cannotWhat is your complaint about this Bailiff Mr Kel123

 

Please believe me He made sure that I knew exactly were I was and who was boss

He made the following rulings

1) it is acceptable for a non certified bailiff to collect council tax as long as it is part of his training

2) Forced entrance does not include pushing anyone out of the way and an individual can not block entrance. That if a bailiff finds a key he can unlock the entrance and enter.

3) Private certified bailiffs are the same as court bailiffs

4) And that it is acceptable to include fees that may be for actions that may take place in the future and claim them.

5) while about his duty a certified/court bailiff cannot be done for trespass

[kel123]

Kermit 2482

 

you clearly have not read the thread. Paying is not nor never has been an issue.

 

The issue(s) are 1,2,3,4,5 in my last post

[kermit2482]

You are a classic example of the people whom really get my hackles up, you didn't pay the council tax fully and yet when a bailiff comes a knocking the first thing you do is cry wolf and call the police, what right do you have if you have not paid fully for this service????

Edited June 22, 2008 by kermit2482

[kermit2482]

Kermit 2482

 

you clearly have not read the thread. Paying is not nor never has been an issue.

 

The issue(s) are 1,2,3,4,5 in my last post

 

 

The bailiff was doing his job and you dont like it!!! Sorry if that sounds harsh but thats the way i see it, its normal score for people whom are in the wrong to cry wolf and i have seen it so many times and i know from poersonal experience what lies MOST people in this situation come out with, Again might sound harsh and this is not personal but its fact!!

[Fair-Parking]

Kermit - you may have committed a faux pas, for if that was a veiled reference to me, it may benefit you to know that I was the Claimant at Redditch. In English, I was the one owed money.

 

Maybe my observational skills are not quite up to standard, but I was under the impression that this thread was now about being unable to put a case before a court before being constantly interrupted by the judge

 

You must live in a strange world if you imagine that justice is best served by not being able to present a case in court because a judge won't let you say anything.

 

Clearly this hasn't happened to you..............yet, so in the meantime listen to the voice of experience. You may need it yourself some day.