Is there a reason bailiffs don't sign documents

[binded]

Been wondering this for a few days as non of the documentation I have is actually signed by the bailiff that has visit, nor is it signed by anyone at the office when I've received posted materials. The only item that comes close to having a signature on is the levy of vehicles and even that is a squiggle rather than a signature (but I am sure that is permitted and not what I'm asking about).

 

Anyways I was wondering if there were any reason as to why they never actually sign documentation such as the distress warrants/final orders and letters from the company.

 

Trying to gain a bigger picture here to add to my knowledge of this.

 

Thanks in advance if anyone can answer.

[Guest Old_andrew2018]

I don't know maybe there is a reformed bailiff, who comments on the forum.

[Guest Thebailiff]

what sort of letter are you on about. the only thing a bailiff would need to sign is a levy if recovering rent or a reciept. thats pretty much about it. if its a normal levy for a bailiff recovering money for the county court or for the high court, then no, there is no reason for the bailiff to sign it. the only person that should sign a levy/walking possession form is the debtor and even then it does not matter if you do or dont!

[Ell-enn]

Probably so you can't name them in any complaint

[binded]

Gosh what did I start from a simple question:-|

 

I asked mainly as I followed suit by there example and the only things I have signed (not that it makes any difference) have been the official affidavit I did today infront of a solicitor and those to my MP.

 

I queried it as obviously to some extent the documents are what they say they are but "unsigned" are left to interpretation. This means as far as I know unsigned its not an official document (unlike my affidavit on lack of car ownership as I had to swear an oath at the same time as well).

 

The point I wondered was due to the "hand written" note I had on one of my letters from the female bailiff I had turn up that scrawled a lot of tosh for want of a better word stating she could take books, tools and vehicles and that she will. It is more of a threat, much as the wording in their letters are, however the fact they are not signed, made me ponder if it was indeed there way of nullifying the effect of the words. Whilst it maybes in black and white, the fact it is not a signed document, presumably means there must be a reason they don't sign them, when they are not factual documents and work on the intention of fear.

 

As I'm making a form4 complaint about the lady and her threats and mis-representation of information on fees on my account (of which I have her voice recording now on CD's for safe keeping, as well as her handwriting), not to mention a levy on vehicle not in my possession of which she's written a clamping proof out for me, NON of these have been signed. Not even the levy, its a squiggle (literally a z on the signed line, I find it hard to believe that is her signature she writes on official documentation). THUS back to the original question as I want to be forarmed for this should it come back to haunt me her paperwork means **** cos she didn't sign it (in which case its another why on earth are they allowed to do this).

 

So can anyone answer why don't they? not interested in the why they don't more the reasoning and legal implecations of why, there must be a reason other than "because" (I appreciate all the snippets given btw).

[Guest Old_andrew2018]

an interesting thread here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/221069-rude-marston-bailiff-clamped-2.html#post2447737

 

It might be that they dont need to sign, however I expect they are worried about legal action.

[binded]

Still doesn't expand on what I want to know (thats a pcn as well and having never had one of those realise from this forum the rules for bailiffs are slightly different) I work in an environment from not only a H & S aspect, but also a accreditation standard it all has to be signed, thus I find it odd a bailiff doesn't have to. However the point is I really do wonder why they don't.

 

I could go onto the next one I spied from that thread of "they know the charges are there and hope the customer doesn't realise and pays" theory or words to that effect. IF they know that its not lawful and and at court they would have to revoke those fees, how on earth or indeed why on earth do they add them. I guess its cos they're not regulated by anyone but themselves (the frightening aspect of it all).

 

Edited to add, who says they don't need to sign stuff, and why was that decision made.

[Guest Old_andrew2018]

True they need better regulation this is where the problems lies

[binded]

From your experience though is that something the trade wants? I know obviously from a way different work aspect that has nothing to do with finance from our benefit national (and indeed international ISO standards are not only the norm but you don't get the work unless you play by the rules). Wondering if its something those in such jobs would welcome with open arms. I've read the thread from 2007 about the request for forceful entry (frightening tbh) and that its review is due in 2012, but what happened if rather than that way about there was a standard legislation put in place, set letters they all had to use with set wording, signing more things, fees more comprehensive in place and not added unless correct for culpability?

 

Slighty off topic on my thread but genuinely asked

[Guest Thebailiff]

Still doesn't expand on what I want to know (thats a pcn as well and having never had one of those realise from this forum the rules for bailiffs are slightly different) I work in an environment from not only a H & S aspect, but also a accreditation standard it all has to be signed, thus I find it odd a bailiff doesn't have to. However the point is I really do wonder why they don't.

 

I could go onto the next one I spied from that thread of "they know the charges are there and hope the customer doesn't realise and pays" theory or words to that effect. IF they know that its not lawful and and at court they would have to revoke those fees, how on earth or indeed why on earth do they add them. I guess its cos they're not regulated by anyone but themselves (the frightening aspect of it all).

 

Edited to add, who says they don't need to sign stuff, and why was that decision made.

 

simply, because they can, returants add service tips but they are not legally allowed to ask for tips, garages often add and extra hours labour but they are not legally allowed to. alot of businesses try this sort of thing on to get more money. its not solely the problem of the bailiff trade.

 

with regards to signing "stuff", it all depends on what that stuff is. if its a rent levy then yes it has to be signed same as tax, and ill admit, i dont know off the top of my head if fines and so on have to be signed. but there are other types of levy that dont need to be signed like on high court writs. you just have the bailiffs name on it. if there is no name and no sig then i am pretty sure that no matter what the levy is for, its worthless. there has to be a name on there somewhere of the issuing bailiff or officer.

[binded]

Interesting see I learnt something written name has to be on it. Is there any definition then on the sort of signature they must use? At work I initial alot of stuff thats not compulsory but for quality it must be linked to whoever did a set task.

 

Guess I live in a village and the only places here serving meals are pub/bar based restaurants non as far as I know add bills (mind its a long time since I've afforded a meal out since I've had to fly solo with the kids). That said neither builders nor restaurants do the work on a courts bidding, thus the legal implications of there actions, thus its not strictly a good comparison (in my eyes anyways as obviously I'm on this section for bailiffs and not moaning about restaurants or builders )

[maroondevo52]

I have unapproved a number of post's in this thread as they were no help to the OP whatsoever

 

Personal insults have no place on this Forum.

Edited September 21, 2009 by maroondevo52

[Guest Thebailiff]

Interesting see I learnt something written name has to be on it. Is there any definition then on the sort of signature they must use? At work I initial alot of stuff thats not compulsory but for quality it must be linked to whoever did a set task.

 

Guess I live in a village and the only places here serving meals are pub/bar based restaurants non as far as I know add bills (mind its a long time since I've afforded a meal out since I've had to fly solo with the kids). That said neither builders nor restaurants do the work on a courts bidding, thus the legal implications of there actions, thus its not strictly a good comparison (in my eyes anyways as obviously I'm on this section for bailiffs and not moaning about restaurants or builders )

 

at the end of the day we are still private companies whether we are doing the bidding of the court or not. thats where the problem arises. but overall, its the same sort of thing, most companies do it but some are just more under the microscope than others.

[binded]

Yes but by being certified by the court would I believe make a substantial difference. Bit like me signing an affidavit, I'll admit I'm not sure on what the requirements past the bond are for a bailiff. However the fact the court certifies people, means there is some legal standing on how they are culpable, that in itself is different to a restaurant and builder, neither of which are taken before the law for their staff (no waitress is certified to be one, and whilst builders are getting more certified its for customer/H & S not court that they do this).

 

Oh and I work for a private company, as said nothing to do with finances (would be better paid if it were), but I'm still legally bound by set standards. Thus I find it really incomprehensible that they "can" and "because" obviously I'm looking at this far to analytically, but as said I want to make sure I fully appreciate the facts.

[Guest Thebailiff]

a bailiff is certificated and not certified. there is no thing as a certified bailiff although there are some that should be certified and sectioned at the same time.

 

all it takes to become certificated is to stand in front of a judge and answer questions on what you can and cant do. if you get them right, they stamp your certificate. the bond is what gets used to pay compo if there is ever a claim against you.

 

im not saying what the bailiff companies are doing is illegal, just that the court would frown on it and probally tell them to remove it from the debtors final figure or refund it if its already been paid. at the end of the day if you caught the garage over charging you, you would, if he refused to pay it back, take him to court at which point his companies liability insurance would start to stump up for compensation and so on. what im saying is the same as i have already said. there are some companies out there that will try it on, and while not breaking the law, come very close to stepping over the line. these are the ones that have dodgy bailiffs and usually lose in court when questioned on fee's and admin costs and so on.

[binded]

Nope thats a fine answer to the latter question all I'm after is the fees being correct. I'm a grown up (well I try) so appreciate all the above, I'm not wanting them to pay off my bill, I just want to pay what is correct.

 

Wondering if theres anything online about the requirements of signatures on items as I've not got the answer I wanted on that so shall have to google and dig in a different way I think. Could you tell me though if theres a code of practise anywhere online thats debter based rather than customer based for bailiffs? or is it not something thats set in stone as they work for the client and the debter is sadly a secondary function to that.

[binded]

Posted on another thread but relevant to this one too. This is for one company of what they expect of their bailiffs rather than the debtor or client. Personally found it interesting that they can judge from asthetics if someone is "vunerable" in situations such as single parent like me. Obviously its not a broad spectrum but I guess all work on a similar wavelength.

 

http://www.dkbcollections.co.uk/policies/bailiff-code-of-practice.pdf

[binded]

not heard of Ross and Roberts but they have it online as well.Ross and Roberts Ltd - Code of Practice

 

I note the ones that regulary come under the spot light for problems on this forum and others (rossendales/equita) do not have this code on their websites hmmm