Mardy bailiff and CTAX LO

[fwog]

Well just got another letter from BS (great abbreviation)

They're advertising the car and have given me till 5.12.08 to pay in full.

Dont they know there's a recession on?

 

any advise will be appreciated.

 

 

Otherwise, it looks like the kids will have to wait till Easter for their presents

 

Thanks

[scatz1972]

Is this for the 2002-2003 bill?

 

Have you tried offering the bailiff installments in writing? If not then if I was you then I would do this, and cc in the council tax dept and send everything recorded.

 

I know that ideally you dont want to deal with the bailiffs, but sadly they have levied on your car.

[scatz1972]

Also have you checked the details of the car that they have levied on, is it your car? you sure its not the car thats blocking your car in?

[scatz1972]

The only other thing that I can think of, is to check that the bailiff who levied on the car is certificated, there is a phone number that you can ring to check, I will have a look around to see if I can find it.

[chris600uk]

OK

So the best course of action will be to cough up the full amount even though they've visited once already and charged £24.50. I thought they could only charge £18 for the second visit?

As long as you think all the charges are valid, I've no option but to pay them. Could have done with a bit of leverage tho. Wouldn't they take instalments?

 

You are right, they can only charge £42.50 for two visits unless they levy.

They appear to have levied on your car.

 

For them this is a perfect scenario.

 

Either way you lose.

 

But there's no reason why you can't ask them what instalments they'd take, just don't expect a reasonable answer.

[fwog]

Thanks for all the replies...:grin:

 

Looks like im going to bite the bullet and pay it all up-front.

Just a question, what difference would it make if the bailiff wasn't certificated? Surely they wouldn't send out a letter advertising goods without properly recognised person auditing the items??

Also, would I be able to pay the council through their website? BS want a 4% handling charge for thier site

 

(slowly cries into keyboard)

 

Fwog

[fwog]

Is this for the 2002-2003 bill?

 

Have you tried offering the bailiff installments in writing? .

 

Hi scatz

 

No

and

no

 

The 2002-03 is still with the council, all I need now is for them to hand it to BS just before christmas:mad:

Im going to contact them and arrange a payment plan asap.

 

Didnt offer bailiff a paymant plan,Ive decided theyre too difficult to deal with and it will just be an option for them to rack-up charges.

If the council took it back debt and allowed a payment plan, then I would do it. But Ive not got that luxury anymore:|

 

Fwog

[scatz1972]

If the bailiff who levied wasnt certificated then the levy wouldnt stand. From October 1998 bailiffs have to have a certificate granted by the court to collect Council Tax. Tomtubby has said many times that there are numerous bailiffs working without certificates, she is the bailiff expert on this forum.

 

Make sure you send a payment plan today to the council for the 2002/2003 bill, send it recorded and stick to it, because the council wont think twice to pass it to the bailiffs.

 

ps. whats the handling charge for? are you paying by credit card or debt card.

Edited December 1, 2008 by scatz1972

[fwog]

Hi Scatz

 

 

They charge 4% on card payments over tinternet . The only other options are cheque (they get ur details) or postal order which will be about the same as card payment charge

 

Thanks for the response!

 

Fwog

[scatz1972]

What I was going to say was that they cant charge a surcharge to take credit cards, there is a case which states this...but it doesnt apply to debit cards. Thats why I asked (TT posted it ages ago, I wll have a look for it)

 

I have found this phone number, its the most recent one that is being posted in this section to check which court the bailiff was certificated in.

020 3334 6355

Edited December 1, 2008 by scatz1972

[Heathliver]

TO save you looking Skatz here is the info:-

I have spoken today with TT at Bailiff Advice Online and she had directed me to a Detailed Assessment hearing of December 2007 where the matter of the legality of a credit card handling charge was debated. District Judge Plaskow made the point very clear indeed that no statutory scheme exists entitling a bailiff company to make this charge . The defendant company argued that the charge should come under “reasonable costs and charges” as there was a cost involved in accepting this form of payment. This was rejected in its entirety by the Judge who even went so far as to say that “there are all sorts of costs. You even have costs of business rates on your premises…but you can’t pass those on and neither can you pass on credit card handling charges”.

Hope this Helps

[scatz1972]

Thanks heathliver , I couldnt find it.

[John Barry]

Thats why I asked (TT posted it ages ago...

 

I have spoken today with TT at Bailiff Advice Online and...

 

I would say someone is orchestrating posters on this forum to suggest a commercial site and taking discussions away from this site

[scatz1972]

I would say someone is orchestrating posters on this forum to suggest a commercial site and taking discussions away from this site

 

I think thats uncalled for...it certainly wasnt orchestrated, I was trying to help the OP. I wasnt the first to mention the surcharge for paying online, the OP did.

 

I see you have just registered with this site...so perhaps you have a grudge against TT?

Edited December 1, 2008 by scatz1972
order of words

[fwog]

Read that post and the poster after it disagreed for some reason. I dont think I will get away with the 4% charge, they aim to bleed me dry and are doing a good job of it:rolleyes:

 

One thing tho, the bailiff is registered ,I think, as he hasnt used his registered name on the siezure notice. I wont go into the details ,but the only bailiff registered for BS has the same last name,but not the christian name? Does this mean the siezure notice is invalid as the detials registered with the court service arnt the ones given by said bailiff on siezure notice?

If Im right, where does this stand as to charges and siezure notice?

 

Fwog

 

PS

 

Just to clarify..

They've been once already

So this is visit number two...

Do the charges in post#20 look right to you ? Ive been told there should be an £18 charge for a second visit?

 

Just want to get it all correct before I give the money to them

Edited December 1, 2008 by fwog

[Heathliver]

I don't know if this is what you want but it may help! Posted by our good friend WOW, please tweak any part to make it applicable, particularly as I'm not sure which stage you are up to (you need to let the bailiff company and the LA investigate before referring the matter to the LGO):-

Name of Council

Address 1

Address 2

Address 3

Address 4

 

[DATE]

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Re: YOUR NAME & ANY REF: Visit by your bailiff on [DATE]

 

I have had an opportunity to seek advice and I write on the understanding that case law rules an authority is liable for its bailiffs and you have made a factual error in your advice.

 

On [DATE] I have been charged £[amount] for the use of my credit card and standing orders and I now understand this contradicts Regulation 45(2) of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 as well as the decision handed down in a Detailed Assessment hearing by District Judge Plaskow. I also understand that defrauding a council tax payer in this way commits an offence under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 and the council may be criminally liable for assisting an offender in fraudulently obtaining a money transfers.

 

To settle this matter early I ask within seven days of this letter being [DATE] that you:

 

a) Refund me fees paid to your bailiff while acting under your instruction.

b) Pay me reasonable costs in seeking discovery of information and researching the legal background to the case, and:

c) Pay me reasonable costs for my administrative work and for receiving an over-zealous bailiff seeking to defraud me with bogus fees, and:

d) Pay me 8% Statutory Interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the daily rate of 0.00022% from the date money became due.

e) Make a written apology.

 

You have deliberately protracted the matter requiring me to seek legal advice I would not have otherwise needed. For the avoidance of doubt, if you fail to complete the above within seven days being [DATE], I will automatically file a claim in the small claims track without writing further and this may invariably involve further costs.

 

Your attitude to this matter indicates the council may be engaged in systematically and routinely defrauding council tax payers en-masse. I'll bring this matter to the attention of the Local Government Ombudsman.

 

This document is delivered by Royal Mail and I deem it good service on you by the ordinary course of post under Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 and therefore it is your responsibility and in your own interests this letter is handed to the relevant person within your organisation. I regret I am unable to discuss this matter by telephone or in person.

 

Yours Truly

 

 

[YOUR NAME]

 

 

Hope this helps!

[Heathliver]

I would say someone is orchestrating posters on this forum to suggest a commercial site and taking discussions away from this site

 

Just for the record I have already been throught his with another poster recently who appeared to have grudge against TT. They have only guest rights now. I can state that I have no commercial connection with TT or her site, I just know that she offers reasonable, measured and knowledgeable advice for free on this site. If any wishes to go to her site for more detailed and authoratative advice that is their decision! All I try to do is help OP's that come to this site to the best of my ability, as others helped me inthe past. Given the recent activity by bailiff companies against this site and the recent impugning of TT's name and advice, perhaps any orchestration is being carried out by those that have most to lose by posters following advice given here. Sorry to hijack your thread, rant over!

[fwog]

Flame away!

 

I love a good debate:D

 

 

 

 

Ps thanks for all the advise,

 

would like a little clarification on the bailiffs not using his registered name on the seizure notice...

 

Any four pennuth worth out there who knows please post. As if I can get his fees overturned, it would save me a hundred quid...

 

 

and Im sure you would like my landlord to have it rather than a bailiff:-D:-D

 

Thanks again...

 

Will be donating!

 

 

Fwog

[scatz1972]

Read that post and the poster after it disagreed for some reason. I dont think I will get away with the 4% charge, they aim to bleed me dry and are doing a good job of it:rolleyes:

 

One thing tho, the bailiff is registered ,I think, as he hasnt used his registered name on the siezure notice. I wont go into the details ,but the only bailiff registered for BS has the same last name,but not the christian name? Does this mean the siezure notice is invalid as the detials registered with the court service arnt the ones given by said bailiff on siezure notice?

If Im right, where does this stand as to charges and siezure notice?

 

Fwog

 

PS

 

Just to clarify..

They've been once already

So this is visit number two...

Do the charges in post#20 look right to you ? Ive been told there should be an £18 charge for a second visit?

 

Just want to get it all correct before I give the money to them

 

 

Im not quite sure I follow RE the bailiff and his name?

 

Its 24.50 for 1st visit where no levy is made. i.e you werent in. £18 for 2nd visit where no levy is made. If the bailiff charges a levy fee then they cant charge a visit fee.

 

For instance, a bailiff visits but you are out, its £24.50, he visits the 2nd time and manages to levy on your car then they can charge a levy fee, but they cant charge a 2nd visit fee.

 

The fees are set out at the bottom of this page from national debtline

 

National Debtline England & Wales | Debt Advice | Factsheet 02 Bailiffs And Council Tax

[Heathliver]

Sorry, got carried away and missed that bit. As far as I'm aware, all bailiffs collecting for Council Tax have to be certificated by the courts. You can write to the bailiff and ask for his certification details and double check with the court that he supplies. If he is not certificated the levy will be illegal and not stand.

[fwog]

Hi scatz

 

Im trying to do this without IDing the guy.

 

Ive checked on the register and cross ref'd his name against the people the guy works for. It threw up one surname. The Christian name on the register is completely different from the one on the seizure notice, surnames the same. So, does it mean the siezure notice still stands even though the registered name differs from the one on the notice from BS

[Heathliver]

Hi FWOG, good thinking by sending me a PM giving names! To answer in the open in my opinion as you say this is a legal document and it should have the bailiff's certificated name on it, not a foreshortened or anglicised version of it, as who knows who he might be in the eyes of the court. As this is a notice of levy for council tax all the criteria should be fulfilled and he should not be using an alias. I wait to see what others think but certainly under PACE this document would be disallowed. (Police and criminal evidence act)

[fwog]

You can see my point;)

 

If they want it by the book,so do I. Its only fair.

Might be worth giving them the money and then maknig a retrospective claim? Or is that a bit naughty (giggles evilly):grin::grin::grin:

[chris600uk]

One thing tho, the bailiff is registered ,I think, as he hasnt used his registered name on the siezure notice. I wont go into the details ,but the only bailiff registered......has the same last name,but not the christian name? Does this mean the siezure notice is invalid as the detials registered with the court service arnt the ones given by said bailiff on siezure notice?

 

Well that would suggest he isn't registered with BS then, which would mean the levy and any charges associated with that person are unlawful, and any action taken by him up to now invalid.

 

You need to be sure.

[fwog]

Hi Chris

 

 

The guy at the registrations office was sure theres only guy working for BS with this surname. That means hes either not registered or hes using an alias thats not recognised by the court(I think).

Am I right in making this statement? If so, the letter BS sent me is a complete load of twiddle-twaddle?

 

Any input would be appreciated.

 

Fwog