Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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 
        • 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

Council Tax Arrears & Enforcement Officers


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5416 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

Oh dear! Just finished watching that ourselves - reality TV's a growing art, if thats what you'd call it, but stranglely, it's very addictive!!

 

Enjoy your vodka/irn bru & thanks for the heads up on the other threads. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Please help me. Having major problems with bailiffs and council combined!

 

Can anybody answer me "If bailiffs have a liability order, can they enter your home by force, or is it still the same old story of that you have to open the door to them?"

 

I'd appreciate a helping hand again!!:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that - nice to know there's still life on this planet!:rolleyes:

 

Just been looking it all up myself and think I've answered it - unless it's income tax arrears, which it isn't, then they cannot enter my property by force. I'm definitely not stupid enough to leave a window or door open either!:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a liability order from unpaid council tax. From what I read on the internet last night, they can only break in if issued with a "warrant of execution" by a county court, of which they have to notify us of their intent before they come anyway.

 

I hate what these guys are doing to poor people - frightening people who cannot afford to pay anything, through no fault of theie own. I really don't know how Gordon Brown hasn't looked into their illegal procedures. My original debt, according to the bailiifs, was £1296.80. Miraculously, it is now only £1046.80 - a difference of £250!!

 

Now, how can they get away with that?!:mad:

 

They should all be shot!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

for a bailiff to force entry to your home they must have a walking possession agreement listing goods in your home

 

p5 Forcing re-entry

The law upon the rights of bailiffs to force re-entry to premises in order to remove

goods previously seized has recently been clarified. In Khazanchi v Faircharm

Investments; McLeod v Butterwick [1998] 2 All ER 901 the Court of Appeal held that

bailiffs may only force re-entry where they are being deliberately excluded from

premises. It will thus be necessary in most cases for the bailiff to notify the debtor in

advance of the date and time of the visit in order to remove. If the debtor is then

absent from home, or refuses entry, force may be employed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Hallowitch, long time!

 

Did everything you said, wrote letters and emails to everyone in the council and my MP, still no-one wants to know! It's an absolute joke!

 

As it stands now, the bailiffs have posted through another liability order saying that they are going to force entry and that that is a totally legal thing to do!:mad:

 

How dare they scare people with their bullying tactics, bloody leeches, the lot of them.

 

Have started paying the council now regarding the outstanding council tax arrears and not heard anything to the contrary, so as far as I'm concerned, Chandlers Limited can go swim for their commission!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

As it stands now, the bailiffs have posted through another liability order saying that they are going to force entry and that that is a totally legal thing to do!:evil:

 

do you mean a walking possision agreement

 

its the council that go to court to get a liability order against you not the bailiffs

have you missed payments for more than one years council tax

 

  • Liability orders: preliminary steps
    33.—(1) Subject to paragraph (3), before a billing authority applies for a liability order it shall serve on the person against whom the application is to be made a notice ("final notice"), which is to be in addition to any notice required to be served under Part V, and which is to state every amount in respect of which the authority is to make the application.
     
    (2) A final notice may be served in respect of an amount at any time after it has become due.
     
    (3) A final notice need not be served on a person who has been served under regulation 23(1) with a reminder notice in respect of the amount concerned.

  • Application for liability order
    34.—(1) If an amount which has fallen due under regulation 23(3) or (4) is wholly or partly unpaid, or (in a case where a final notice is required under regulation 33) the amount stated in the final notice is wholly or partly unpaid at the expiry of the period of 7 days beginning with the day on which the notice was issued, the billing authority may, in accordance with paragraph (2), apply to a magistrates' court for an order against the person by whom it is payable.
     
    (2) The application is to be instituted by making complaint to a justice of the peace, and requesting the issue of a summons directed to that person to appear before the court to show why he has not paid the sum which is outstanding.
     
    (3) Section 127(1) of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980[14] does not apply to such an application; but no application may be instituted in respect of a sum after the period of six years beginning with the day on which it became due under Part V.
     
    (4) A warrant shall not be issued under section 55(2) of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 in any proceedings under this regulation.
     
     
    (5) If, after a summons has been issued in accordance with paragraph (2) but before the application is heard, there is paid or tendered to the authority an amount equal to the aggregate of—
    • (a) the sum specified in the summons as the sum outstanding or so much of it as remains outstanding (as the case may be); and

    • (b) a sum of an amount equal to the costs reasonably incurred by the authority in connection with the application up to the time of the payment or tender,

    the authority shall accept the amount and the application shall not be proceeded with.

     

    (6) The court shall make the order if it is satisfied that the sum has become payable by the defendant and has not been paid.

     

     

    (7) An order made pursuant to paragraph (6) shall be made in respect of an amount equal to the aggregate of—

    • (a) the sum payable, and

    • (b) a sum of an amount equal to the costs reasonably incurred by the applicant in obtaining the order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL your welcome the bailiffs fees are £42.50 this is all they can legally charge you because the have no walking possession agreement (hope you are still hiding your car ) if i was you i would pay this (if you want to ) and tell them to sod off as you are paying the council direct

 

goggle this

The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992

Edited by hallowitch
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...