Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello Caggers,   I've been trying for years to get an old EE account wiped off my credit file. It was opened in 2013 and almost immediately defaulted but was shown as "Payment Arrangement" ever since. I contacted EE by telephone in 2022 and was advised it had not been wiped because therte was still £69 owing, so I paid it and thought it would correct once the CRA's updated their reporting cycle.   However, it has still not been removed. I made a formal complaint on 27/03/2024 and have had contact with the executive team who advised that  "EE account 106985089 has now been deleted from the Credit File as it failed to close as it was reporting the payment arrangement set up despite, as advised this failing which should have resulted in a further default showing.  Please be advised the deletions we have completed take 24 hours to update if a paid service is used to view the Credit File. If the customer uses one of the free services to view the Credit File, the recordings update in 24 hours but the changes can take up to 30 days to be visible on a new copy of the Credit File. I have requested compensation and been advised by EE that another team are looking into this. That was almost 2 weeks ago and there has been no contact since, despite me chasing it. I do not want to go to court and would rather settle this amicably. However,I have been advised that I might have a claim for aggravated damages due to the length of time the incorrect reporting has been on my file and the fact that I told EE about this issue and paid the demanded outstanding amount of £69 almost 18 months ago. Should I just wait for EE to reply or should I start building my case against them? Is their statement admissible as evidence of their blame or do I need to dig a bit more? I made a DSAR which was initially rejected as having no data found yet. I trawled my e-mails from 2013 and found the account number and mobile number, so I'm now awaiting the result of my 2nd attempt at DSAR. I have very little in the way of proof of actual loss except a mortgage refusal e-mail from HBOS in 2015. I have also had high interest loans and credit over the last 10 years but again cannot directly attribute this to this one specific error. There were other items on my credit file that could also have contributed to a low credit score too and I'm not out to cash in on anything. I want to make sure I don't end up shooting myself in the foot for any obvious reason and would appreciate any help from anyone who has had similar experience with breaches of DPA.
    • Noted. Keep an eye on the other threads here including the update a few hours back by Rob Carr.
    • dont need statements. nor std info sheets. EVERTHING else  dx
    • they have 6mts else it dies. ................. BUT yet again today you've posted on someone else's thread posts now moved here. please keep to your OWN THREAD!! now to date you've not bothered to reply to our questions so we CAN help you.    
    • Update: tfl is taking me to court I'm trying to get an ooc claim from them but they have not been replying to my emails. 
  • 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 
      • 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 Help us put Rossendales OUT OF BUSINESS


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5220 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

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks

That's VERY HELPFUL

 

The Post also on Devon and Cornwall Police guidelines in the Sticky section in this Forum is good as well.

 

Once again thanks -- I'm not a Lawyer and rather late in life (until relatively recently) have always been earning Good Money --not HUGE but decent.

 

I'm new to this stuff and just finding out the unbelievable B/S "Ordinary People" have to put up with.

 

Having Lived and worked in various countries including France and seen how people will NOT put up with B/S in those countries I'm NOT going to LIE DOWN and be trodden on by these bullies just because I'm back in the UK.

 

If this nonsense were to happen in France before you could even say the word Bailiff the whole village will turn up and support you - even the gendarmes are OK if obvious injustice is taking place - doesn't matter if you don't speak much French and come from another country -- you are in their village and "there for the grace of god go I" is a thought that passes in their minds -- The Fro--ies are fine --wish we had the same "Civic spirit".

 

Cheers

jimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

"ordinary people"???

Hi Woody

 

No disrepect intended here - what I meant was that after a reasonable time of earning good money where all these sort of problems were non existant for me I find myself now having to deal with these types of problems that HUGE swathes of people have to handle every day - probably the majority who one way or another are struggling to pay bills / mortgages etc etc whilst these BAILIFF **** try and make their odious living by employing SCARE TACTICS against people who they think will be easy prey.

 

The vast majority of people (including myself) have very little experience of the Law --especially being at the receiving end of this type of B/S and it's THANKS to sites like this that help us through what is a real minefield.

 

I still have trouble in believing that a lot of this stuff goes on. - I'm over 60 now and always had been bought up to think Britain was a fair and decent society -- as I'm nudging towards "Senior Citizenshio" I'm not so sure anymore.

 

Anyway let's push on -- if we cause enough clogs into Bailiff Council Tax collection systems we might get the whole wretched system reformed. (Note of course much as we might not like it TAX in one way or another will have to be paid - and for that we need to get the Politicians to institute fairer taxation systems -- however that's another story -- all we can do here that current systems for collecting tax comply 100% WITHIN THE LAW and report those that don't).

 

Cheers

jimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

i've also posted a similar note on the "Legal Issues" but it's probably more appropriate here so excuse if this is a "Cross or Double Post".

 

What is the sitaution where 2 or more Men Bailiff's turn up whether or not they have the right of entry and there is only a Single (Lone) woman in the House

 

If I were a Single woman I would not like to admit a strange man - let alone 2 of them into my home.

 

The Police (for their protection as well as that of the woman) always have a WPC present when dealing with women.

 

Is there any LAW on this in the case of Bailiff's and Lone Women

 

(Guidelines are NOT LAW - LAW is covered by REGULATIONS).

 

In Fedual Britain I suppose the Bailiff's would in those cases where they have the right of entry still have the right - but if I were a Lone woman I certainly wouldn't want them in whether they had the right of entry or not.

 

I saw that Young guy from LBW smirking all over his face on "The Bailiff"s on TV last night -- I'm fit and strong and I certainly wouldn't like to deal with him in the proverbial "Dark Alley".

 

I've looked over the Net and can't seem to find any info on this.

 

I'm sure Lone Women don't ALL have perfect payment track records - if you are a Lone woman what do you do if 2 men turn up.

 

BTW I've complained to the BBC and other channels about "The Bailiff's -- NEVER have I seen "The other side of the case expressed" -- Your right NOT to let them in, excessive illegal charges, thuggy tactics etc etc.

 

This is almost the 21st century version of "Grandma's knitting on the Steps of the Guillotine" or Tyburn Public Hangings

 

Seems we haven't progressed very far.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Providing the debtor is over 18, the Bailiffs have a right to enter peaceably.

 

Oh and if it's any consilation, the BBC show is laughable from my side of the fence also. Not a true representation of the industry at all. You're probably wasting your time compalining though as the show finished several years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi all

 

Happy new year to everyone.

 

Just before XMAS (typical of this whole type of Industry - Baliff's / DCA's etc trying to extort HUGE amounts of uauthorized fees from people to enhance their Xmas bonuses) Rossendals had added a Whopping 297 GBP on to my bill of 590 GBP back Council tax with a nasty threatogram saying they were going to Break in / Change the locks etc.

 

I wrote to Rossendales - asking for

 

a) Their statement of Fees and

b) The legal mandate they had of threatening a break in / Locksmith use.

 

I mentioned as well that I have adequate video and phone recording equipment to verify when and if any "Visit" took place and am aware of the Fees that are allowed to be collected.

 

Got back a reply -- "Not our business -- that's the responsibility of the Bailiff - you must contact him directly.

 

I don't normally do this but I rang Rossendales and quoted the account number and said could you please give me a breakdown of Fees.

 

The woman on the other end could only mouth a single sentence over and over again -- You must contact the Bailiff directly--- --Even when I asked a question "This guy works for you doesn't he -- what sort of Firm is it that doesn't have any control over its employees / sub contractors.

 

Still the same 6 words in an almost not understandable "Darlington" Accent

 

You must contact the Bailiff directly.

 

Anyway I left a message on the Bailiff's mobile phone saying - You have attempted to levy unathorized charges and threaten "aggrevated tresspass" as well as attempting to extort money. I intend to report YOU personally to the OFT and Humberside Police as well as attempting to have your company removed as a business by Companies House as it is obviously not being run in a manner appropriate to a registered business.

 

I am also reporting you to the various court certification bodies to have your certification removed as you have obviously strayed well outside the Law.

 

Guess what

 

Got a Letter back from the City couincil saying I could pay the tax back to them in 2 instalments provided I pay the "2 visit" fees (41 GBP)".

 

Well however you look at it 41 GBP is better than 297 GBP and what's more they have (the City Council) acknowledged that they are looking at their tax collection procedures with a view to ensuring all collections comply strictly within the law and people are not subject to undue harassement.

 

Well I've paid BOTH instalments - so finally these people (?) are off my backs -- but what ****.

 

Without info from this excellent Forum I probably would have been suckered into letting these low lifes in and having to pay out really extortionate charges -- now with a bit of Luck we might have got one less city council using Rossendales.

 

I'll keep you posted on the "Bailiff Removal" and Rossendales Company House Registration. At the very least we might be able to get the directors barred from being co directors again.

 

Cheers Have a DCA and Bailiff Free New Year

and thanks Caggers

 

Jimbo

Edited by jimbo45
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work there!

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done well done:)

 

I hope you have encouraged more people to stand up tp the "system" snd the industry that needs a complete overhaul.

 

wd

 

Hi there

I've spent a few days in the wet and cold near the City Hall advising people of how to stand up against these **** when dealing with overdue Council Tax and excessive charges -- was only "moved on once" and that was because I was ostensibly "obstructing" the entrance to a Councils "Customer Care (??) Centre" . I Just moved back another 30 metres and carried on.

 

 

Also showed people using a laptop about this excellent site.

 

We all have to pay tax -- and it's of course not nice - but sometimes people DO get into genuine difficulty and in these cases all collection methods should be FAIR, COMPASSIONATE and above all WITHIN THE LAW.

 

Charging outrageous fees and threatening to use powers they don't have just destroys whatever little credability there is left in the system.

 

In the 21st century threatening a lot of "vulnerable" people with strongarm (and illegal) tactics more appropriate to the Mediaeval period is totally out of order for a so called "modern democracy" like Britain.

 

Note to anybody with unpaid CT -- you will have to pay it eventually unless you can get relief -- but above all NEVER EVER LET THE BAILIFF'S IN. You don't have to and provided you are willing to pay something TO THE COUNCIL - NOT THE BAILIFF'S you WILL NOT BE SENT TO PRISON.

 

Offer to pay the council something -- even if they refuse - and DO NOT LET THE BAILIFF'S IN.

 

Ensure that when you empty your Bins the doors are locked -- this is a favorite time for them to enter as people think -- oh it's only a few seconds while I push the bins into the street.

 

Hide your Car as well if you have one. (Park a few streets away).

 

If the bailiff actually rings the bell Don't answer or even speak through the letterbox etc -- 100% totally IGNORE.

 

If they look threatening and won't leave quickly call the Police. The Police will not let the Bailiff's in without a valid court order (and forced entry is not permitted for Council Tax).

 

Eventually the case will go back to the council --if more people refused to deal with bailiff's or only pay the permitted fees then the whole process could be tidied up much more fairly.

 

Once again I can't stress this too much too much -- NEVER EVER let them in. Once they've been admitted "all bets are off" and you've pretty much given them the keys to the kingdom.

I'm not sure what the charges are here and the whole area of "Walking Possession" etc is a minefield. Once they've been admitted they CAN come back again and BREAK IN if they have to.

 

So again --PLEASE NEVER EVER EVER LET THEM IN.

 

Happy new year everyone.

Cheers

jimbo

Edited by jimbo45
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done, the more people who complain directly to the authorities on the scandal of bailiff charges the better.

 

It was an unlicenced bailiffs actions which helped me find CAG and sort my longer term problems out, three years later there are two payments left on a debt... and then I am debt free and intend to stay that way.

 

I am not in the least bothered about my credit rating, I don't want nor need credit any more so i can live within my means and still have 'luxuries' such as the odd weekend away and broadband internet.

 

Fighting the bailiffs is a very depressing thing to do but needs to be done, they are not invincible as they think and the more councils wake up to the fact that they are causing more problems the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

Happy new year to everyone.

 

Just before XMAS (typical of this whole type of Industry - Baliff's / DCA's etc trying to extort HUGE amounts of uauthorized fees from people to enhance their Xmas bonuses) Rossendals had added a Whopping 297 GBP on to my bill of 590 GBP back Council tax with a nasty threatogram saying they were going to Break in / Change the locks etc.

 

I wrote to Rossendales - asking for

 

a) Their statement of Fees and

b) The legal mandate they had of threatening a break in / Locksmith use.

 

I mentioned as well that I have adequate video and phone recording equipment to verify when and if any "Visit" took place and am aware of the Fees that are allowed to be collected.

 

Got back a reply -- "Not our business -- that's the responsibility of the Bailiff - you must contact him directly.

 

I don't normally do this but I rang Rossendales and quoted the account number and said could you please give me a breakdown of Fees.

 

The woman on the other end could only mouth a single sentence over and over again -- You must contact the Bailiff directly--- --Even when I asked a question "This guy works for you doesn't he -- what sort of Firm is it that doesn't have any control over its employees / sub contractors.

 

Still the same 6 words in an almost not understandable "Darlington" Accent

 

You must contact the Bailiff directly.

 

Anyway I left a message on the Bailiff's mobile phone saying - You have attempted to levy unathorized charges and threaten "aggrevated tresspass" as well as attempting to extort money. I intend to report YOU personally to the OFT and Humberside Police as well as attempting to have your company removed as a business by Companies House as it is obviously not being run in a manner appropriate to a registered business.

 

I am also reporting you to the various court certification bodies to have your certification removed as you have obviously strayed well outside the Law.

 

Guess what

 

Got a Letter back from the City couincil saying I could pay the tax back to them in 2 instalments provided I pay the "2 visit" fees (41 GBP)".

 

Well however you look at it 41 GBP is better than 297 GBP and what's more they have (the City Council) acknowledged that they are looking at their tax collection procedures with a view to ensuring all collections comply strictly within the law and people are not subject to undue harassement.

 

Well I've paid BOTH instalments - so finally these people (?) are off my backs -- but what ****.

 

Without info from this excellent Forum I probably would have been suckered into letting these low lifes in and having to pay out really extortionate charges -- now with a bit of Luck we might have got one less city council using Rossendales.

 

I'll keep you posted on the "Bailiff Removal" and Rossendales Company House Registration. At the very least we might be able to get the directors barred from being co directors again.

 

Cheers Have a DCA and Bailiff Free New Year

and thanks Caggers

 

Jimbo

 

EXCELLENT WORK !!

 

HOWEVER.....

 

A couple of years ago, I wrote to over 100 local authorities for copies of their contracts with bailiff etc and I also asked each council how many complaints they received concerning their respective bailiffs companies.

 

The vast majority stated that they received one, two or a maximum of three complaints !!! That is ALL ...

 

This is because a "Complaint" is only registered as a "Complaint" IF...AND ONLY IF...it is headed as a "Formal Complaint" and addressed to the Chief Executive's office.

 

Please ensure that you do this.....and this applies to all viewers on these forums.

 

PS: The Local Government Ombudsman's have also confirmed to our office that this should be done ( in particular if you are considering forwarding a complaint to the LGO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is because a "Complaint" is only registered as a "Complaint" IF...AND ONLY IF...it is headed as a "Formal Complaint" and addressed to the Chief Executive's office.

 

Please ensure that you do this.....and this applies to all viewers on these forums. .

 

The public are not made aware of this and thus, the official statistics cannot be treated as a reliable count of the genuine number of complaints.

 

 

A couple of years ago, I wrote to over 100 local authorities for copies of their contracts with bailiff etc

 

There is not much point writing to 100 authorities for individual contracts they have with their bailiffs. The text of the contract is drafted at the Local Government Association. You will get 100 near identical contracts and a waste of £1000, the Freedom of Information Act fee is £10 per request.

The next generation Nintendo Wii - the Nintendo Puu

Link to post
Share on other sites

The public are not made aware of this and thus, the official statistics cannot be treated as a reliable count of the genuine number of complaints.

 

 

 

 

There is not much point writing to 100 authorities for individual contracts they have with their bailiffs. The text of the contract is drafted at the Local Government Association. You will get 100 near identical contracts and a waste of £1000, the Freedom of Information Act fee is £10 per request.

 

In fact I did not pay any fee at all and also many of the contacts are very different indeed. What was surprising is that a very large percentage of local authorities do not have any Contract at all and neither do they have a SLA.

 

One council that springs to mind is Hammersmith and Fulham !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll keep you posted on the "Bailiff Removal" and Rossendales Company House Registration. At the very least we might be able to get the directors barred from being co directors again. Jimbo

 

Under what grounds do you think you'll stand a chance of removing the company from Companies House or the getting the Directors banned? None, I'd say.

 

If an individual bailiff has misrepresented himself then your beef should be with the court that certificated him....

Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact I did not pay any fee at all and also many of the contacts are very different indeed. What was surprising is that a very large percentage of local authorities do not have any Contract at all and neither do they have a SLA.

 

NP, TT is right. The tendering process means that most contracts are significantly different, allowing different fees etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is council tax collection, the bailiffs fees are set by legislation, no contract can subvert legislation in this way. Councils cannot agree reasonable costs because they have no way of know the make-up of those costs in advance of the work being done.

The next generation Nintendo Wii - the Nintendo Puu

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hammersmith, and others such as Croydon and Merton have often employed their own civil enforcement who work from the town hall iteslf. They wouldnt need a public sector contract.

 

Merton are a law unto themselves !!

 

 

In the case of Hammersmith they were at that time using a well know bailiff company !!

 

With the new regulator being the SIA we are going to find that many local authorities will be taking more of the bailiff work in house. This will provide another source of additional revenue into the local authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is council tax collection, the bailiffs fees are set by legislation, no contract can subvert legislation in this way. Councils cannot agree reasonable costs because they have no way of know the make-up of those costs in advance of the work being done.

 

Different councils allow different van charges....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Merton are a law unto themselves !!.

 

Dont we know, I found this screen-capture taken from Mertons website funny as fcuk, and even more hilarious seeing it disappear from the internet as quick as a flash the minute a claimant stuck it front of a Judge.

 

merton.JPG

The next generation Nintendo Wii - the Nintendo Puu

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...