keep getting bailiffs and demands but they are going to the wrong address

[andrew_1305]

For the last couple of years we getting final demands and summonses (sp?) being delivered to our address by mistake (meant for the same number and road name but the next village about a mile away). We've even had bailiffs call but have always redirected them to where they should be.

 

It's no longer amusing as we had yet another one, delivered by hand first thing this morning. As there was no return address my wife decided to open it to try and contact whoever it is to say stop coming to the wrong address.

 

She had quite a shock when she read the contents as it was a notice of removal of goods if payment was not received within 24 hours and a notice of siezure of goods and inventory, which goes on to list our cars (in fact the notice says they have siezed them but they haven't as we both drove to work today).

 

Now she's phoned the contact number on the letter and told them they are coming to the wrong village (I blame satnav - one make actually reports our address as in the next village, tomtom says we don't exist) and they have said "Ooh sorry we'll put a note on the account". That however doesn't inspire a lot of confidence, especially seeing as we are both out at work all day and my 17yr old daughter is in the house on her own.

 

The person they are after owes council tax just over £1000 but this isnt us.

 

What can I do to ensure this stops?

[hallowitch]

phone the council

[andrew_1305]

we have...

we phoned the council, they said we needed to deal with the bailiffs and wouldnt discuss the case as we are not the debtor

 

we phoned the bailiffs who said we'll put a note on the file, whatever that means

 

we also phoned the county court where the judgement must have been serverd who said they would tell the bailiffs to back off and get the right address.

 

none of which has left us feeling confident someone won't turn up in the dead of night and take the cars

[hallowitch]

have you been in touch with your M P

[andrew_1305]

No, not been in touch with him, although i doubt he would have time to do something (assuming he would bother) given that the bailiff's letter gives 24hours to pay before they sieze the cars

[hallowitch]

we phoned the council, they said we needed to deal with the bailiffs and wouldn't discuss the case as we are not the debtor

all i can suggest is sending the council an e-mail putting them on notice that you are holding them fully reasonable for any actions the bailiffs take regarding your cars clamp /removal that are now subject to a levy

 

we phoned the bailiffs who said we'll put a note on the file, whatever that means

Don't want to worry you but i would not be happy with this and would phone them again or e-mail if you can get e-mail addy and ask for conformation in writing

what bailiffs company is this

[UK27]

It's easy for me to say but there is nothing to worry about, the bailiffs are calling your bluff in the belief that they are at the right address. The law provides good protection for people in your position, the first thing to remember is not to get "stroppy", call the bailiffs and explain the error of their ways and you should find the situation resolved. They have effected "constructive distress" which incidentally is illegal, however not even the bailiffs are stupid enough to come along and take the car without checking the registered keeper and assuming you are not the debtor then you have nothing to worry about.

[Fair-Parking]

The council can't discuss this? Bullfrog!

 

Seems to me that your council like many before, simply do not wish to make decisions or to take on responsibility for their own irresponsible laxity.

 

They are the ones responsible. It is they who have set the lap dogs on to you and it is surely they who have the wrong address on their file. They are the ones who have involved you through their own incompetance and as a result, disrupted your life. They owe you an explanation for that and an assurance that it won't happen again. That's the least they can do. Make them discuss this

 

UK27

Oh yes, they are that stupid. Happens all the time as threads on this site will tell you.

[andrew_1305]

I finally got through to someone in the council who recognised the seriousness of the issue and accepted that it was something they should do something about (this was yesterday).

 

The council havent set the dogs on us, per se, they have set the dogs on the "right" person it's just that because our addresses are so similar and sat nav cant tell the difference between the two even though there is a 1.5 mile gap, the bailiffs have kept turning up at the wrong address. Even the address on their documentation is correct, and we have had to show them proof that the address on their documentation is not where they are standing when they do show up

[seanamarts]

Just shows that they REALLY are numpties.. It amazes me that some of them can actually read.. most cant count:p

[sweep1]

A similar story to this appeared in the Mail on Sunday (23-08-09 Financial section p56)

 

For those who are unable to view the image and as the story has not yet appeared on the MOS web site yet...

 

 

Reader writes:

 

I am sending you a copy of a letter from bailiffs ROSSENDALES.

They have got the wrong address and I have made my views perfectly clear to them.

I understand from the police that they cannot force entry. However,no matter how many times I read their letter, I cannot see that they intend to comply with the law and in my absence they would simply break in.

this has caused my wife and me great worry,but in other hands it could have caused much greater concern.

 

Tony Hetherington replies:

 

The letter,which was hand delivered by Rossendales is headed "Bailiff Removal".

It claims you owe council tax and adds "I have attended today with the intention of removing your goods and chattels as are necessary to discharge the above debt and any additional enforcement costs incurred"

The Letter,signed by "bailiff in charge" Tracey Stone, continues:

"I will re-attend at your address at my convenience and may REMOVE goods even in your absence"

Ms Stone ends by warning that if you fail to contact her at once,this will be taken as a deliberate refusal to pay

 

Yet none of this has anything to do with you. Ten miles away from you home there is a road of the same name,but with a different post code.

That was Ms Stones intended target and ROSSENDALES blames her cars Satnav for taking her to your day.

The Firms letter clearly threatens that Ms Stone will return and seize goods, even if you are away. If you had been on holiday, you would not have received her letter or called her, so how would she gained entry, except by breaking in?

 

The answer is that the threatening letter is based on a bluff or a lie.Unless they have a court order,baliffs are like vampires- they can only enter your home by invitation,but once you have invited them in,they can come back.

I asked ROSSENDALES to comment and it admitted that it had no intention of forcing entry into your home.It was just trying to scare the debtor into paying. With poor grace though,it added that its threat to enter you home 'is not misleading when directed towards the right person'.

 

ROSSENDALES has given you a written apology,but again it is less than complete with the firm insisting 'that the letter which our bailiff left was not addressed to you and there is no reason that you should feel threatened by it'

 

All I would say is that I would have felt threatened. If someone is stupid enough to deliver a threat to the wrong address,they are stupid enough to try to seize goods from it.

ROSSENDALES tells me it has NEVER seized someone's goods by mistake,but somehow I do not find this 100 per cent reassuring.

 

********************************************************************

For reference. Tracey Stone is a certificated bailiff (exp 11/03/2010 for ROSSENDALES LTD)

[Fair-Parking]

This as clear an admittance by a bailiff firm that they know the law and that they have no intention of acting within it. The MoS has stopped short of calling this what it is - attempted fraud by false documentation - (Sec 3 of the Fraud Act 2006). As a result Rossendales can hardly stand behind a moribund defence that it was not their intention to extract money by falsely claiming a legal right to a payment thay they they knew never existed. That is the definition of fraud.

 

Loved the useless piece where Rossendales blamed the householder for feeling threatened by their threat.

 

I guess their brains are too highly tuned for the rest of us to appreciate.....