High Court Enforcement Officer - CCJ

[bottomburp]

OH has a CCJ. OH offered to make payments but heard nothing. Last week someone from High Court Enforcement Ltd (I'll call them HCE) appeared at the house, OH was out at work. I refused to let him in.

 

He left a letter making various threats and saying he'd be back

 

"I will GAIN attend between 5 working days [italics written in by hand] and may remove goods even in your absence"

 

and a yellow piece of paper with the registration number of my car written on it.

 

OH contacted the claimant and as discussed and agreed wtih the creditor sent a fax to HCE offering to make monthly payments and asking for confirmation that there would be no further unsolicited visits from them.

 

Today OH received a letter from HCE saying the offer of monthly payments has been forwarded to the claimants and that HCE will inform us of their decision shortly. It goes on to say that OH will incur a one off Payment Arrangement fee of £50. Is this correct?

 

It then says "In the meantime, we require you to make the first payment immediately and continue to do so as per your offer unless we inform you otherwise..." Is it correct to start making payments BEFORE they have been agreed?

 

Finally, and in my view most importantly the letter says "Should you offer be accepted, our Officer will be required to re-attend your premises to list assets to secure the debt on behalf of our Client. We will notify you in due course".

 

Are we right in believing that they cannot make us let them in? I have downloaded a letter from the Bailiff advice site but they site also says (with regard to High Court Enforcement Officers) "Nearly always they will first insist that a Walking Possession order is signed". They may like to/try to "insist" but do they have any legal grounds to do so?

 

OH actually wants to contest this CCJ but first wants to make sure that our possessions are safe (they are mostly mine, some left to me by my father and grandparents and I have few receipts because of the length of time I have owned them and how I came to own them).

[bottomburp]

67 views but not one answer

[lets fight bailiffs]

never let them in and never sign a WPO a ccj is not criminal and they cant force entry in to your house, but they can take the car,

if you have a good case to fight this then you need to go to the court and have it set aside this will cost you around £50 though but will stop further action from the HCEO

[bottomburp]

Thank you lets fight bailiffs. Very helpful. We are in dialogue with HCE and their client and seem to be getting this sorted (whilst preparing the application to set aside to original ccj).

 

They put my car onto the WPO which they left when they visited.

 

The car insurance and registration docs are in my name. The ccj is against OH. Presumably we need to "lift" the WPO (the car is the only thing on it) or we'll be paying 29p (I think that's what it said but don't have the doc to hand) per day till this thing is settled. Do we just write to them with the justification (copies of insurance and reg docs) and ask them to stop adding these daily amounts? Is there a special form?

Edited August 12, 2009 by bottomburp
additional info inserted

[hallowitch]

Do we just write to them with the justification (copies of insurance and reg docs)

yes send them copy's and ask them to remove all charges there is no special form

[lets fight bailiffs]

but if you read your reg docks they will tell you that they are not proof of ownership a sales receipt is the best way and insurence also will not count as it could be anyones car and you are just using it, but if you have a receipt and send the docs in that should do or any HP docs if you have them.

[Fair-Parking]

They'll attend to remove your goods even in your absence. Really?

 

Unless they have a court order signed by judge, specifying the date and time of their intended visit then will be committing burglary if they enter your house in such circumstances and without due written authority.

 

They wont ever get such a court order and they know that. They also know they are trying to gain pecuniary advantage by fraud.

 

Take the letter to the police and MAKE them listen, as it contravenes Section 3 of the Fraud Act 2006. (fraud via the use of false documentation). Remember that bailiffs are only ever members of the public and not law enforcement officers with the right of entry, and if they wish to act like yobs then then the police need to act.

[lets fight bailiffs]

They'll attend to remove your goods even in your absence. Really?

 

Unless they have a court order signed by judge, specifying the date and time of their intended visit then will be committing burglary if they enter your house in such circumstances and without due written authority.

 

They wont ever get such a court order and they know that. They also know they are trying to gain pecuniary advantage by fraud.

 

Take the letter to the police and MAKE them listen, as it contravenes Section 3 of the Fraud Act 2006. (fraud via the use of false documentation). Remember that bailiffs are only ever members of the public and not law enforcement officers with the right of entry, and if they wish to act like yobs then then the police need to act.

 

the police are very good at speeding fines ect but when it comes to HCEO they dont want to know not that they dont want to but it wont go past the CPS so it is not worth all the paperwork sad but true.

[Guest Thebailiff]

I wish ppl would stop leaving bad advice. If there is no one there and the officer attends, he can enter through an open window(downstairs, upstairs, attic window and even dog flap if he can fit)and unlocked door and remove goods there and then. If you have left your car out he can take that(they will do a dvla check and it will come back in anothers name so dont worry, they wont take it)

 

The letter tells the truth so no, the police wont listen and as its a high court writ, thew police are duty bound to assist in the enforcement of it. (for all you who question that bit, take a good read of the courts act 2003) HCEO are not bailiffs and the sooner its noticed the better.

[postggj]

what qualifications are needed to be a hceo

they must be vetted surly

[lets fight bailiffs]

yep by jack straw

[postggj]

so can a say, an unsutable person

being diplomatic

 

just get a job as a hceo

 

no questions asked

[lets fight bailiffs]

no they need some kind of law degree and are also vetted in a big way as far as i can see

[Guest Thebailiff]

Most hceo's have at least a law degree or equivilant and most of the guys they employ are on the ball.

 

A bailiff will take the fall if he f@@@'s up himself

 

A HCEO will take the fall if his nominated assistant f@@@'s up so they dont just hire willy nilly. most are ex forces or police, both will have clean histories with no criminal records for anything, very good with ppl and in no debt.

[wonkeydonkey]

hi the bailiff

A guy wearing a hoodie came to my shop, he threatened to take all my goods away if my other half didn't pay money he owed his boss, he threatend the staff working in my shop and said he was going to smash the door in and take everything. do you think he should be reported to the police?

[kiptower]

Yes

[Fair-Parking]

Either 'The Bailiff' doesn't know the law or he thinks that some very experienced people on this forum do not either.

 

Entering a house without the owners and occupiers being in attendance? Try Khazanchi v. Faircharm Investments 1998 wherein the High Court judge laid down specific principles preventing precisely that.

 

If the law relating to the requirement of a judge signing a court order allowing forced entry or signing an order stating that somebody will attend at a certain date and at a specific time to enter with or without the owner being there has also been changed, perhaps 'The Bailiff' might like to enlighten us as to when this was passed as statute.

 

The letter was a con and I suspect 'The Bailiff' knows that darn well. He seems to have forgotten that as a private citizen he has no more right of entry into an empty property than I have. We received a similar stupid and fraudulent letter here a few weeks back from Equita and having the advised that firm of the law, we have heard nothing since.

 

If it wasn't for the yawning, I might be surprised at such a climb down.

Edited August 14, 2009 by Fair-Parking

[danboy381]

'the Bailiff' you are wrong. You cannot attend a premises, see a window open, climb in, and remove goods without a court order. Whatever lies the bailiff pleads, it would still consitute a criminal offence.

 

Maybe you do this though, and thats why it won't be long before the law is rewritten on how bailiffs go about the business of collecting unpaid debts.

 

When you overcharge and rip people off with your fees; that will stop to.

[lets fight bailiffs]

well what can i say, the judge now holds a diary for every bailiff and tells them what time they can come round and on what day.

but it must be said a HCEO can enter through an open window a bailiff can't.

lets face it "The Bailiff" wont tell us the law of the land, but bailiff law (as they have there own)

[Fair-Parking]

Aye, but the judge made it quite clear where the boundaries lie. If the argument being put forward is that His Honour was wrong, then it isn't going to stand up. Nor does it help the current disjointed bailiff stance that they can carry on as normal given that nobody appealed the 1998 ruling preventing that.

 

I know that plain English is a difficult language for most bailiffs, law enforcement officers and other associated holier than thou's, but the judge's ruling stands, thus there is no entry and particularly no taking of property if the owner or occupiers of a property were not previously informed of the visit in writing and given a copy of the court order. Entry through an open window only is an entirely different proposition.

 

Entering through an open window etc may well be permitted if the house is empty but not if the person doing it did not give previous written notice of his visit and after obtaining a court order giving him authorisation for entry under these circumstances. However the removal of property remains denied. Now why would you want to enter a house through an open window if that wasn't your objective? You can always put a note through the letterbox.

[wonkeydonkey]

hi the bailiff

A guy wearing a hoodie came to my shop, he threatened to take all my goods away if my other half didn't pay money he owed his boss, he threatend the staff working in my shop and said he was going to smash the door in and take everything. do you think he should be reported to the police?

 

Ok if we now dress him in a smart pair of trousers, shirt & tie and he tells he is a HCEO (which he is not) but the facts of his actions stay the same do I still report him to the Police?

[lets fight bailiffs]

eather way way if he threatened me or my staff the window would be his exit

[bottomburp]

OK - sory if this is repeating old stuff but I'm getting a little confused here and a couple of questions seem to have been forgotten.

 

1. Does the HCEO have to notify us in writing that he intends to come and remove goods - whether they are inside or outside the property?

 

2. Can the HCEO remove goods even in our absence? If so can he remove them by entering our property through an open window? Or is he limited to goods which are outside?

 

3. Is it correct that OH will incur a one-off "Arrangement Fee" of £50 for agreeing monthly repayments?

 

4. Is it correct that OH should start making monthly payments BEFORE the amount to be paid monthly has been agreed?

 

5. Do we have to allow them into the property to enable them to fill out the Walking Possession Order even though we're negotiating monthly payments? (I ask this because of the advice on the Bailiff Advice website - "Nearly always they will first insist that a Walking Possession order is signed").

 

Thanks for your help. bb

[Guest Thebailiff]

If You Leave Your House Unlocked Or Leave A Window Open, We Can, With A High Court Writ, Enter And Remove Goods. Diff Rules Apply To Bailiffs And County Court Judgements.

 

If You Throw A Hceo Or Ahceo Through A Window, You Will Go To Jail/£5000 Fine For Assault On An Officer Of The Court And Impeding The Progress Of An Hceo. As Set Down In Courts Act 2003.

 

If A Hoody Called Into The Shop And Demanded Money Then Yes, Call The Police And Have Them Arrested. If An Hceo Or Ahceo Called In And Demanded Money, Then By All Means Call The Police But There Is Nothing They Can Do. The Hceo Or Ahceo Will Just Tell The Police Officer To Remove You From The Site Until He Is Finished. As Set Down In Courts Act 2003.

[Guest Thebailiff]

If The Goods Are Outside, Then No He Does Not Need To Give Proir Warning, But If They Are Inside Then You Would Have Had A Copy Of The Levy Which Is The Prior Warning.

 

If He Has A Levy Inside The House Then Yes, He Can Enter When You Are Not There To Remove Goods.

 

Yes Most Companies Including Insurance And Other Financial Companies All Add Financial Penalties For Arrangments.

 

As A Gesture Of Good Will, Payments Should Start Immediatly As This May Lead To The Claiment Being More So Inclined To Accept The Offer.

 

The Claiment Can Refuse An Arrangment At Any Time And Will Usually Ask For The Debt To Be Secured On Assets To Pay Off The Debt Should You Fail To Keep Regular Payments. So No, You Do Not Have To Let Them Levy Inside Your House, But The Claiment Is Under No Obligation To Accept An Arrangment.