Jump to content


Vindictive County Court Bailiff Falsely Claiming Assault !!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5254 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

That is precisely my point !

 

The time wasting garbage described which is rammed down everyone's throat is exactly what stresses everyone out.

 

Collect enough 'stressors' like that and no one is immune from having a nervous breakdown.

 

That is what is so horribly wrong with Modern Times. It can be completely insane. [EDIT]

Edited by Rooster-UK
Unauthorised link removed.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

Your blog says you have been dubbed !? as someone with learning difficulties - yet you can drive a car. It could be colourful journalism.

 

If any of these claims are true then you may well be classed a vulnerable person for the purposes of civil enforcement. A vulnerable person means http://www.dca.gov.uk/enforcement/agents02.htm#part10

 

If you need help from a professional body in dealing with bailiffs then Z2K might be able to help. http://www.z2k.org/supporting-vulnerable-households

 

 

 

The Omnipotent Bailiff Co, Plc

Their Address 1

Their Address 2

Their Address 3

Postcode

 

DATE

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Re: Your visit to [1st LINE OF ADDRESS]

 

I write further to your visit by your bailiff. I write to confirm I am classed a vulnerable person for the purposes of civil enforcement as described in the published National Standards for Civil Enforcement Agents because [GIVE REASON].

 

Where a debtor falling into a vulnerable persons category is discovered by an enforcement agent, the matter shall be referred back to the court and no seizure of goods may proceed.

 

This document is delivered by Royal Mail and I deem it good service upon you by the ordinary course of post under Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978. It is your responsibility and in your best interests this letter is handed to the relevant person within your organisation.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

 

YOUR NAME

 

 

You should inform the council of your circumstances and ask them to take the case back into town hall administration.

 

 

 

Council Tax (Enforcements) Department

Invincible Borough Council

Address 1

Address 2

Address 3

Postcode

 

[DATE]

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

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

 

I write further to your visit by your bailiff and confirm I am classed a vulnerable person for the purposes of civil enforcement as described by the published National Standards for Civil Enforcement Agents because [GIVE REASON].

 

Where a debtor falling into a vulnerable persons category is discovered by an enforcement agent, the matter shall be referred back to the court and no seizure of goods may proceed. I therefore ask this case be taken back into council administration within seven (7) days of the date of this letter and confirm in writing to me at the above address.

 

This document is delivered by Royal Mail and I deem it good service upon you by the ordinary course of post under Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978. It is your responsibility and in your best interests this letter is handed to the relevant person within your organisation.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

 

YOUR NAME

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Contrails

 

I must be a bit thick or something; but I can't quite work out if your are taking the mickey in the weirdest way or actually being deadly serious.

 

Either way, I am unaware of being "dubbed as having learning difficulties" in my blog or anywhere else, so I can't quite understand what you are on about. It seems you have completely misread my blog or something.

 

Mind you, I was in Dubai in 1965 and I can imagine that spending too much time there could do some seriously strange things to your brain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

Lets start again, your original post says you have a speeding fine and proceedings became somewhat vexed.

 

Spamhead gave you excellent advice at then outset - contact a solicitor. The law says you are allowed a fair trial in all criminal proceedings. Have you spoke to a solicitor - he can have the enforcement action halted by making an application to the court.

Edited by Happy Contrails
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was fined £500 for failing to disclose that I was the driver, despite informing the court on at least three separate occasions.

 

Because of this I managed to have the case set aside and reheard and I was told the fine for £500 for 'failing to disclose driver's name' would be dropped.

OK, so you don't have the £500 fine, only the £60 + 3 points.

 

The first I knew of the bailiff being on my premises was when I went into the kitchen and this man appeared outside the house and grabbed an open window and said he was going to enter my house. He did not say at that stage he was a bailiff.

 

I encouraged him to remove his fingers from the window by shutting the window. The window did not shut on his fingers or trap them in any way. He simply removed them when he saw I was determined to shut the window.

 

He then screamed like a stuck pig "That's assault assault, I'm calling the police".

But I was worried the little varmint might have used the camera on his mobile phone which might have shown me sort of vaguely prising his fingers off the window which might give rise to technical assault.
you say that you only shut the window, and he simply removed his fingers, (so as not to get them trapped), then you say that he might have video evidence of you assaulting him (albeit only technical) as far from not laying a finger on him, you were prising his fingers off of the window.

 

It is foolish because it can easily be proven that it is a physical impossibility, what with the window being 7 foot off the ground and obstructions in front of it inside the house, the aperture awkwardly small making it impossible for hand or arm to protrude through it more than a few inches and therefore nowhere near any persons shoulder.
proven liars, (and you can prove he was lying ) cannot be credible witnesses, so he may have done you a favour here...

 

I mean, his statement to the police is false, and quite easy to prove to the police, just a photo of the window could prove this.

it's your word against his, he already lied.

you sound like you haven't accepted a caution, so the only course the police could take would be to arrest you and charge you and try to get a prosecution.

 

it's your word against his, he's already proven himself unreliable, so I'd say that you're pretty clear on that.

 

Of course I failed to note the identity numbers of the police at the time, although I suppose I might be able to retrieve them later if required. When you become agitated with things like this you simply don't think of the blindingly obvious.
Yes, the dispatcher would have records of what police were sent to the scene, they would have likely contacted the nearest car in the vicinity. this would be recorded. an FOI could get this for you.

 

Equally, I am not accepting the speeding fine lying down either.
They 'advised' me I had to plead guilty to speeding on the assumption the camera was correct. It I was there doing 8 mph over the 30 mph limit I had to be guilty and there was no point in pleading not guilty; it was an absolute, they said.; black and white. Guilty or not guilty of 38 mph.
And, if I was guilty to 38 mph, then that meant a mandatory fine of £60 and three points on the licence, regardless of any extenuating circumstances as detailed by me
The reason being, that I genuinely braked instantly I first saw a speed limit sign; that I had not been driving at excessive speed prior to that; that the sign was so close to the camera that it was clearly impossible to slow down in time as I genuinely discovered; and that if there had been other, previous, speed limit signs, I simply had not seen them by virtue of them being -

 

a) the small versions (almost certainly, or at least mostly) and,

 

b) visibility was so bad, there being a cloudburst of rain at the time, that it was almost impossible to see anything clearly out of the windscreen as even the windscreen wipers were failing to clear the windscreen - as commonly happens with excessive rainfall in storm conditions.

 

c) that no law can demand that anyone can prejudice their own safety and their lives and those of their passengers by giving a priority to peering at the side of the road to look for road signs of any kind at the expense of losing control of the vehicle by virtue of failing to concentrate exclusively on the exceptionally dangerous road conditions caused by a storm and almost zero visibility beyond the front the car.

 

...

 

So, if I am penalised, I will make every kind of fuss I can possibly muster. If possible, I will go to jail rather than pay a fine ( and ensure maximum publicity). But I suspect that will not be possible as there are devious ways the State can prevent this.

you say that you want to fight the speeding charge, and would go to prision rather than pay the £60 fine and accept the points.

you're already in a hole, stop digging!

take a rational deep breath, and look at what you've said.

 

the facts as you've put them so far...

you were going along a road at a speed, (not sure which)

you saw a 30 sign and realised that you were over the limit and brake.

but you go through the camera at nearly 40.

 

this implies that you were most likely doing more than 40 when you entered the zone.

unless the camera was hidden behind the road sign, (which would be unlawful), there are fairly set formulas that could say how fast you would have been going if you brake hard on a road and have slowed to 40 at a given point. (based on known braking distances etc).

 

You say that conditions were so bad that you couldn't see the small signs.

these are repeater signs, they remind you of the limit, not set a new limit zone, -so if there were repeaters that you didn't see then you were braking the limit anyway in the distance up to the larger sign... but in all likely hood the repeaters were actually saying 40, (it's be unusual to have 30 zone repeaters as 30 zones are usually marked with other characterising features, -such as regular lamp posts).

 

To make it quite clear, the density of the rainfall made it impossible to see the road signs most of the time.

 

It is not the duty of the motorist to slavishly follow legal stupidities at all times, even to the extent of causing death or injury rather than 'disobey' the law. The law does not demand that citizens kill themselves in the pursuit of obeying legal statutes to the exclusion of safety and freedom from danger and injury or death.

 

If this isn't a defence it just shows how much this nasty government has corrupted the law.

I fail to see how slowing down to an appropriate speed to the conditions would constitute a dangerous act, surely travelling at excessive speeds as you were would be more dangerous?

 

also 40 limit turning into a 30 limit might indicate that you were approaching a residential area.

 

anyway, it's not a moral judgement I'm passing. above I said stop digging...

 

lets say you do say this in court, what do you really think will happen?

you'll still get your £60 fine, you were clocked at nearly 40 and there is no way the camera would be that far out, even assuming that it was due for calibration. (you can request calibration dates of this camera to check this).

 

anyway, if you go to court saying that you were doing an unknown speed in a 40 zone, braked to ~40 in a 30 zone, where visibility was so poor that you couldn't see out of the windscreen because of monsoon type tropical rain, (bear in mind that you'll be telling the truth sworn in court), then don't you think that the charges against you might just be 'upped' to driving without due care and attention,

possibly even dangerous driving? -considering that the way that you describe the road signs I think that it's likely it was from a 40 going into a 30 zone at the edge of a residential area, on a dark night, with zero visibility, and you were still travelling with excessive speed, (which is documented by the camera)... there could have been people out and about etc..

 

It was interesting the 'legal adviser' informed me that failing to disclose the name of the driver was considered a more serious offence than speeding - hence the huge £500 fine. Curious that. It's more serious to thwart the government's money making scheme than speeding and possibly endangering people by virtue of dangerous driving !

yes, that'd be perverting the course of justice or something similar, it's a tad more important than speeding...

 

 

 

 

 

anyway, for the advice.

can you say exactly what happened? did you close the window, did he remove his hands himself, did you have to forcibly remove his hands? -the descriptions that you've given above are unclear.

 

have you accepted a caution?

 

if you haven't accepted a caution then I'd simply not worry, the police are unlikely to pursue the case due to lack of evidence.

 

As for the speeding ticket, given all I said above, if you go into court and say that you couldn't even see the road I don't think that it'll end well for you.

though as I said, you can ask for information about calibration dates service history etc for the camera.

 

if the camera is hidden behind a road sign then it's placed illegally, at least I think it is, most counties/police forces seem to set their own guidelines on this -regarding the paint on the boxes, but most have settled for cameras clearly visible reflective paint, cameras have to be clearly visible, not obstructed by signs or vegetation, and adequate speed camera warning signs.

it might be worth you tracing the route to find out all this.

if you can show that the camera is obstructed by the speed limit sign, or by tress, or that there simply aren't any warning signs that there is a speed camera ahead then you have grounds to fight the ticket because it's not issued within the guidelines.

 

(I believe that many people have successfully challenged the tickets issued by the cameras hiding in horse boxes etc).

 

you may have to say where you live for regional police force specific advice (or rather what the force issuing the fine is), I got a speeding ticket early in the year from Thames valley police, -thankfully they operate a education scheme (at their discretion) rather than just issue fines or points, more expensive than the fine (by £10), but my license is clean and I don't have to declare to insurers.

the information that I've given above is based on what I recall of the paperwork that they sent me saying the camera was bona fide legal, but if I wanted to dispute the ticket I could do so on those grounds as failure to comply would have invalidated the ticket.

 

 

having read your blog, I see a bit more on the speeding issue, the zone marker sets the speed you;re meant to be doing as you enter the zone.

 

if this is obscured by a blind corner you may be able to argue that the zone wasn't sufficiently sign posted.

 

but again, travelling at above 40 around a blind corner is the driving rain won't sound good on the record.

 

 

so questions are:

are the police pursuing the bailiffs claim any more?

have you been charged or accepted a caution for assault?

 

is your post asking for advice on dealing with the bailiff, fighting the speeding ticket, asking what to do about a bailiff trying to break into your house, asking what to do about a bailiff harassing you for collection of payment of fines that they can't legally collect due to the case being stayed, or advice on what to do about the police and their threats to break into your house?

(or a combination of the above).

 

 

the bit at the end (of your blog) about car parking fee's, I worked out that the inner city car parks near where I live were some ten times more expensive per square foot for an uncovered, unprotected square of tarmac marked by white lines than my safe comfortable secure house. I'm glad I'm not the only one who has issues with this!

Link to post
Share on other sites

danielr

 

A man after my own heart ! Your last paragraph ! You are the only other person I have heard who has made this calculation (as I have done) and I find it utterly insane.

 

One of the reasons I absolutely refuse to pay for parking as long as I think my car won't actually be carted away. I couldn't care less about the endless tickets I now get as I just throw them away and now even the bailiffs appear to have given up calling as haven't seen one in about two years.

 

Perhaps they're planning an alternative strategy of just 'nuking' me & my house sometime !

 

Now this nasty government has apparently changed the law to allow court bailiffs to actually use force to break into your house to retrieve court fines though, I am concerned this legislation will extend to parking tickets and possible all commercial debt recovery.

 

I am on the point of emigrating ( again) because I just can't stand what this country is becoming. It is ridiculous !

 

I first emigrated in the 1970's for the similar reason that drippy Ted Heath & his incompetents produced the three day week and power cuts all over the country which made the Uk a bit like a typical third world Balkan backwater today, where every one leads a medieval style life still.

 

Your other advice is clearly sound and that of a lawyer - although I see you are IT. I will come back back very shortly on the arguments which answer your 'devil's advocacy'.

 

thanks for your efforts - which I do find act to focus exactly what my arguments are. Watch this space. It will fascinate me to see if you can rebut them on behalf of a court.

 

See ya soon !

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the reasons I absolutely refuse to pay for parking as long as I think my car won't actually be carted away. I couldn't care less about the endless tickets I now get as I just throw them away and now even the bailiffs appear to have given up calling as haven't seen one in about two years!

 

Blimey. Whilst I agree with the cost of parking, you really are asking for trouble.

 

I hope you dont come bleeting on here when you've got a bailiff carrying your TV out of your house. Remember, it's not just cars they can seize...

Link to post
Share on other sites

ROcket i dont know whether you have balls of steel or just dont give a s*it.

 

A friend of mine is similar to you. He lives as he calls it 'off the grid' which effectively is exactly that, and yes, NO ONE bothers him anymore.

 

Maybe its the way everyone should go - as at this rate in approx 5 yrs time the government will know exactly everyones movements in car by tracker, and will bill you appropriately- not only that but every other aspect of your life will eventually be controlled by government.

 

I think eventually though, your car may just 'disappear' one day...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Equally, I am not accepting the speeding fine lying down either. I spoke to someone at the court to ask if I could fax them a letter instead of being present in person (it's 120 odd miles away). They said they were a qualified solicitor and titled 'legal adviser' (implying they could 'advise' me, but their job is obviously to provide legal advice to the magistrates not me, and to generally assist with gaining convictions and scoring brownie points as they do the dirty work of the State and persecute perfectly innocent motorists to extort money from them for Gormless Gordon Brown to squander.

 

'Legal Adviser' is the name for the clerks of the court at magistrates' courts. They are all qualified solicitors or barristers, and yes, their job is to advice the magistrates. However, they are not there to 'assist with gaining convictions'. Magistrates are there to give fair hearings to all cases, and don't have quotas to fill or anything like that. You seem to be questioning the integrity of the magistrates and their advisers, which seems rather harsh to me.

 

I still don't understand why you think you are not guilty of speeding. The rain is irrelevant, as you are required to drive appropriately for the road conditions at the time. You have admitted you were driving, and the car was doing 38mph in a 30mph speed limit.

 

It's unlikely you will get a £60 now, if the matter goes before the court. For doing 38mph in a 30mph limit the fine would be 25-75% of your gross weekly income, regardless of outgoings. On top of this you might have to pay the prosecution costs, which since you indicated you were pleading not guilty might be as high as £250, as they will have had to do more work. There is also a £15 surcharge added onto any fine. You'll also get the 3 points on you licence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Everyone !

 

I am absolutely dying to respond to all these posts, but it is 11 p.m. My 11 year old son fell asleep with all his clothes on two hours ago after a 1 .am. bedtime last night because of our visit to the world famous and unique six hour long Lewes firework celebrations which ended at about midnight. the poor b****r had to wake at 7 a.m. to walk two miles this morning too !

 

ALL roads to the town of Lewes sealed off last night by the police, they having learnt how to 'Kettle' demonstrators at G20 London demonstrations, with the occasional random beating to death of the odd innocent bystander like Ian Tomlinson this last summer.

 

This time they 'kettled' the entire town of Lewes in terms of preventing ANY car traffic from stopping any closer than 2 1/2 miles away and no parking beyond that anyway. Rather spitefully, they fenced off permanently designated parking spaces with crowd control barriers too, so as to prevent any passing cars using them for the exactly purpose they were put there for. i.e. parking. No cars in or out of Lewes then until after midnight. A bit totalitarian police state high-handed infringement of citizen's liberty, I think. Not what Magna Carta had in mind !

 

Anyway, that's another story. But a rather interesting one.

 

I've also had only four hours sleep each night for the entire week, so I now feel wide awake, completely high and physically incapable of doing anything or thinking properly at all.

 

On top of that I have been completely paralysed by the antics of central heating installers whose greatest skill lies not in installing central heating, but making quite sure I cannot use the kitchen for anything at all, or do anything else within the house - no phone calls (deafening wall drilling noises). No water, no heating, no computer use (electricity randomly on and off). No possibility of doing absolutely anything and, particularly, they make sure I am not allowed to even think of catching up on that sleep I need so desperately.

 

So I will answer posts some other day. I will, I promise.

 

So, I am a complete zombie really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't any stranger than many other threads .

 

If by strange you mean it veers off the subject of how to deal with poisonous bailiffs you would be right. The thread does ramble - particularly with my post about being too tired to respond.

 

But, me rambling on like that with a bit of verbal diahorea (I can never spell that word - and neither can the spell checker find it either !) is no different from many other people's postings on every forum because people do go way off topic and just ramble on - even if they stay on topic they will still ramble.

 

So nothing out of the ordinary here really at all !

Link to post
Share on other sites

about 400 years ago ,, you must get out and about more often :rolleyes:

NEVER FORGET

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Help Our Hero's Website

 

http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/

 

HIGHWAY OF HEROES

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/181826-last-tribute-our-lads.html

 

Like Cooking ? check the Halogen Cooker thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/218990-cooking-halogen-cookers.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...