Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I used to post regularly in order to provide factual information (rather than advice) but got fed up with banging my head against a brick wall in so many cases when posters insisted black was white and I was writing rubbish. I have never posted anything which was untrue or indeed biased in any way.  I have never given 'advice' but have sought to correct erroneous statements which were unhelpful. The only username I have ever used is blf1uk. I have never gone under any other username and have no connection to 'bailiff advice'.  I am not a High Court Enforcement Officer but obtained my first 'bailiff' certificate in 1982. I'm not sure what records you have accessed but I was certainly not born in 1977 - at that time I was serving in the Armed Forces in Hereford, Germany (4th Division HQ) and my wife gave birth to our eldest.   Going back to the original point, the fact is that employees of an Approved Enforcement Agency contracted by the Ministry of Justice can and do execute warrants of arrest (with and without bail), warrants of detention and warrants of commitment. In many cases, the employee is also an enforcement agent [but not acting as one]. Here is a fact.  I recently submitted an FOI request to HMCTS and they advised me (for example) that in 2022/23 Jacobs (the AEA for Wales) was issued with 4,750 financial arrest warrants (without bail) and 473 'breach' warrants.  A breach warrant is a community penalty breach warrant (CPBW) whereby the defendant has breached the terms of either their release from prison or the terms of an order [such as community service].  While the defendant may pay the sum [fine] due to avoid arrest on a financial arrest warrant, a breach warrant always results in their transportation to either a police station [for holding] or directly to the magistrates' court to go before the bench as is the case on financial arrest warrants without bail when they don't pay.  Wales has the lowest number of arrest warrants issued of the seven regions with South East exceeding 50,000.  Overall, the figure for arrest warrants issued to the three AEAs exceeds 200,000.  Many of these were previously dealt with directly by HMCTS using their employed Civilian Enforcement Officers but they were subject to TUPE in 2019 and either left the service or transferred to the three AEAs. In England, a local authority may take committal proceedings against an individual who has not paid their council tax and the court will issue a committal summons.  If the person does not attend the committal hearing, the court will issue a warrant of arrest usually with bail but occasionally without bail (certainly without bail if when bailed on their own recognizance the defendant still fails to appear).   A warrant of arrest to bring the debtor before the court is issued under regulation 48(5) of The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 and can be executed by "any person to whom it is directed or by any constable....." (Reg 48(6).  These, although much [much] lower in number compared to HMCTS, are also dealt with by the enforcement agencies contracted by the local authorities. Feel free to do your own research using FOI enquiries!  
    • 3rd one seems the best option, let 'em default, don't pay a penny, nothing will happen, forget about all of this. As for Payplan don't touch them with a bargepole, nothing they can do that you can't, and they will pocket fees. A do it yourself DMP is pointless as it will just string out the statute barred date to infinity.
    • Because that’s what the email said. Anyway it’s done now. Posted and image emailed.    im doing some reading in preparation for defence but I will need my hand holding quite tightly by you good people.  I’m a little bit clueless
    • why do you need adobe...use a pdf online website. all for now...no get reading up and do not miss your defence filing date no matter what. post it up in good time no!!    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

discriminatory and racist remarks from a client, what to do?


tifo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5703 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Is he in a business that is regulated or part of some association?

 

Some regulated industries have behavioural traits requirements. If he's part of an association maybe they have the asme thing?

 

Or what about the local chamber of commerce?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe they would be libellous and racist as they are directed towards me because of my ethnicity. The same comments would not be relevant to a caucasian.

 

maybe i can report him to companies house? i may give them a call.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or as I said, filter his e-mails to bin. Why keep on reading them? You don't want to do business with him anymore, you don't want to read his insults anymore, so file to bin and forget him!

 

You have no legal recourse that I can see, and he will keep on getting under your skin... IF YOU LET HIM. So don't. Walking away IS the only way to "win" this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My head agrees with bookie but I am a vindictive swine so I would let him e-mail you more and more then you might have a case for harrassment. Dont think they are racist as such but derogitory yes, fine line but not crossed with those examples, if you say its been going on for quite some time then it will start to have a racist element so keep the evidence then hand it to the police.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe they would be libellous and racist as they are directed towards me because of my ethnicity. The same comments would not be relevant to a Caucasian.

 

maybe i can report him to companies house? i may give them a call.

 

Defamation

 

They aren't libellous. Firstly because he hasn't circulated them to other people, and secondly, because even if he had, the comments are not sufficient to impune your reputation.

 

Lets look at what you've reported he said:

 

desperado. £xxx in your account. i hope it will solve all your financial problems.

 

He has implied you might have financial problems, but on its own that isn't necessarily libellous. How much was the amount? Suggesting that £500 might solve your financial problems would be clearly tongue-in-cheek. £2,000,000 may not be. Is your reputation specifically dependent upon your liquidity - it's unlikely to be unless you work in finance or a position of trust (such as a judge, member of parliament etc.)

 

even my office cleaner has more decency when asking for payment

 

This doesn't defame you because comparing you to a cleaner doesn't damage your reputation. Conversely though, his office cleaner has been defamed, because he has indicated that the cleaner doesn't have any decency.

 

.... you are behaving like a b*****d".

 

Ineloquent, but not libellous - he's saying that you behave like someone who was born out of wedlock, or that you behave like a person that other people have a tendency to dislike. Unless there is some other context; for example you are a clergyman and your religion isn't tolerant of sex out of wedlock, this isn't enough to be libellous.

 

"would you like me to pay u in {foreign currency name}. I have a lot left over from my last trip ... I have just come from {country name} and {country name} and had some notes".

It could quite legitimately be taken as a sincere question, and as someone else has posted he could allege you'd had a conversation leading to him asking this.

 

Racism

 

The comments could easily be taken as racist. That however is not sufficient for them to be criminal in nature. The criminal laws relating to racism, excluding those for sport etc, basically provide two particularly relevant offences for racism, one being public order, the other harassment.

 

His comments are not a public order offence because they were not made in public. If he'd posted them on a forum, they could have been considered a public order offence in principle. However, for the offence to be complete the statement would have to be such that a person of reasonable firmness would have been alarmed, harassed, or distressed by the statement. To be honest, I'm not sure that such a person would have felt alarmed, harassed or distressed because of them.

 

His comments are not yet harassment because he hasn't made enough of them. If he continues to make them, they might well become so.

 

HTH

If I've been helpful, please add to my rep. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i suffered similar comments by a landlord,via text message. I showed them to the police and he was paid a visit to his place of business, questioned and given a fixed penalty notice of £60. I can't remember the specific name of the offence, but it was something about using a communications device to intimidate or cause offence. I know it vague, but it was 2 years ago.

 

It caused him major ructions at work (he was the financial director of a company) and it hit him in the pocket and reputation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you're right gyzmo ...

 

 

 

i'll refuse to do any more work for him, but he'll just email the same again in retaliation. If he knows nothing can be done, what's to stop him spamming me again and again with these comments?

 

That then becomes harrasment and a totally different ball game - there is effective remedy against harrassment, but dont incite him to harrass you - ignore him, hold your head up high and keep all emails that are sent to you and whatever you do dont respond to them. If it does happen go to your local police and report it. I will try find the links regarding protection from harrassment etc. Please note that all Police forces in the UK are supposed to take racial harrassment seriously indeed our Police website points to that as a one of their number one priorities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will try find the links regarding protection from harrassment etc. Please note that all Police forces in the UK are supposed to take racial harrassment seriously indeed our Police website points to that as a one of their number one priorities.

 

Thanks, i have the harassment law details, s.40 etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has implied you might have financial problems, but on its own that isn't necessarily libellous. How much was the amount?

 

This doesn't defame you because comparing you to a cleaner doesn't damage your reputation. Conversely though, his office cleaner has been defamed, because he has indicated that the cleaner doesn't have any decency.

 

It could quite legitimately be taken as a sincere question, and as someone else has posted he could allege you'd had a conversation leading to him asking this.

 

The amount was less than £200 (yes, i do work for this but it was a deal agreed a few years ago and i kept to it) and it does not in any way solve my financial problems.

 

I have been defamed because he is saying the cleaner has more decency than me, implying that cleaners have lower decency than most people and i am lower than that.

 

I live and work in the UK, have done all my life. I hold nationality by birth. I do not work or live on any foreign country, therefore any other currency than Pounds Sterling is no use to me. The comment was made because of my ethnic origins. In that sense it is based on race only.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The amount was less than £200.

 

A statement of that amount would not be sufficient to be defaming, because nobody would take seriously someone saying that £200 (or indeed less) would solve all of your financial problems.

 

Further:

 

They aren't libellous. Firstly because he hasn't circulated them to other people...

 

 

I have been defamed because he is saying the cleaner has more decency than me, implying that cleaners have lower decency than most people and i am lower than that.

 

But he implied that to you, not to someone else.

 

He can say what he likes to you if it is about you, and it will never be defamatory. It's when the comments are made to other people. This is why the comment is defamatory of the cleaner (because you are a third party).

 

I live and work in the UK, have done all my life. I hold nationality by birth. I do not work or live on any foreign country, therefore any other currency than Pounds Sterling is no use to me. The comment was made because of my ethnic origins. In that sense it is based on race only.

 

I don't agree, it could reasonably be taken as sincere. If it had been worded differently, it could have been unequivocally racially motivated; but in that form it isn't. Bear in mind that allegations of racism (criminal) must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt exists.

Edited by seftonview

If I've been helpful, please add to my rep. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

[/left]

 

 

 

I have been defamed because he is saying the cleaner has more decency than me, implying that cleaners have lower decency than most people and i am lower than that.

 

 

His cleaner. That's not cleaners in general.

 

Do you know the character of his cleaner?

 

Just pay a visit to the police with your emails as any other route will be costly and with little chance of success.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but we've all had to deal with stuff like this in our lives that's hurt our feelings, whether we're black, white, brown or whatever colour or race. Just forget about it and him and move on. It's not unique to you because your ethnic or whatever. Youre wasting your time and energy thinking up ways to get back at him. Move on and forget about him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but we've all had to deal with stuff like this in our lives that's hurt our feelings, whether we're black, white, brown or whatever colour or race. Just forget about it and him and move on. It's not unique to you because your ethnic or whatever. Youre wasting your time and energy thinking up ways to get back at him. Move on and forget about him.

 

Seconded.I can't believe you have let it rob you of a whole week nearly.

 

Not very nice,granted, but if you have a look at a few of the threads on here you will find lots of us who would gladly swap places with you if that was all we had to worry about.

 

We might then be able to answer the phone & not hide when the postie is spotted.

 

MOVE ON.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We might then be able to answer the phone & not hide when the postie is spotted.

 

MOVE ON.

 

Yes, OK. I'll let it be for now.

 

If you look at my other posts and threads, i'm not exactly solvent and have more problems to worry about than this. I do answer then phone now because it's enjoyable talking to them and do wait for the postie to bring me my next lot of write offs (unenforceable agreement) and bank charges payments.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...