Letter from Police regarding bailiff fraud

[danboy381]

Hi all , am trying to upload a letter from the police that is readable, but the images come up too small, even tho the pics are big enough.

 

have read all the help guides on CAG and nothing of any help

 

can anyone help and i will post now.

 

thx

db

[kiptower]

use photobucket dan

[danboy381]

great if you know what it is

[postggj]

and copy and paste the url in photobucket

 

just google

 

its free

[kiptower]

setup a free account

 

www.photobucket.com

[danboy381]

thx for your help - hopefully pics work below

[danboy381]

Edited December 23, 2009 by danboy381

[postggj]

cut and paste the url

 

use the upload link for message boards

look for generate html code

[JonCris]

NO

[JonCris]

 

 

Great this 'expert' doesn't even know the courts DO set maximum limits on bailiffs fees What a dipstick "The courts allow them to charge what they like" NO THEY DON'T pillock

[postggj]

thanks john

perfect

[postggj]

did a copper sign that or was it civilian staff

[danboy381]

[danboy381]

it was an inspector that signed it

[postggj]

inspector

 

god help us

 

they are there to uphold the law

 

what a joke

[JonCris]

Peels Rules of Policing:

 

• The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
  

 

• The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.
  

 

• Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
  

 

• The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
  

 

• Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
  

 

• Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient.
  

 

• Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
  

 

• Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
  

 

• The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
  

Where did it all go wrong I wonder

[danboy381]

Jon Cris - interesting post, but unfortuantely, the UK is now so corrupt that NO authority knows what the hell is going on.

 

Forget global warming, its just something to talk about. Efficient authority control is already in slow meltdown because NO ONE really knows what the hell is going on, and everything these days is made up 'on the day'

 

In other words, its all bull*hit mate.

[JonCris]

Oh yes they do danboy & it ain't good

[danboy381]

hmmm..oh yes... but you know what i mean tho...

[wonkeydonkey]

please tell me you are going to challenge this rubbish?

[danboy381]

Love to wonkey but not sure where to go next - fed up with fishing for minnows -

i love a good letter writing session, or indeed phonecall, but want to go to the top, and make as much noise as possible doing so

[danboy381]

I also asked the Inspector, - so i could be charged £50,000 fees for a £1,000 debt then?

 

The answer, - 'yes of course'

 

when its got this bad maybe we should all spend time whittling canoes from old pallet wood to escape this island?

[wonkeydonkey]

Love to wonkey but not sure where to go next - fed up with fishing for minnows -

i love a good letter writing session, or indeed phonecall, but want to go to the top, and make as much noise as possible doing so

 

Why not start at the top with support from the press, I think the Telegraph did an excellent job on the MP Expenses could they perhaps be persueded to investigate just how much in the dark our senior police officers are in understanding and interpreting the law.

[layer_cake]

I also asked the Inspector, - so i could be charged £50,000 fees for a £1,000 debt then?

 

The answer, - 'yes of course'

 

when its got this bad maybe we should all spend time whittling canoes from old pallet wood to escape this island?

Was his name Clouseau by any chance? Another incompetent, bungling buffoon!

[Nintendo Pü]

I am assuming you used the Happy Contrails police/bailiff crime complaint letter and you posted their reply. Do not phone.

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Thank you for your letter of [DATE] received by me today.

 

I regret my complaint remains unresolved on the following points you made in your letter. This is because your letter says the police is satisfied no criminal offence has been committed. There are four counts of fraud by false representation and all are well within the remit of Sections 1 to 5 of the Fraud Act 2006 and supported by a ruling Attorney General for England and Wales in the House of Lords on 20 April 2007. It is not for a police officer to rebuke an Act of Parliament in this way.

 

You mentioned Porterage, this I understand is transporting a debtors goods from one location to another and the bailiff compensated himself using the reasonable Costs clause in the legislation. Unfortunately the bailiff did not transport any goods, and by dishonestly charging a fee for work not done commits an offence of fraud by false representation.

 

You interpret the bailiff can charge whatever see they see appropriate, however the legislation only provides for reasonable costs, this means the bailiff needs to show an actual disbursement and does not provide for bailiffs to make a gain for himself of another. Judge Avent presiding over Culligan v s Marston Group said a bailiff who fails to give a breakdown of his fees cannot show it is reasonable costs. Since no goods were moved and no actual disbursements made, but if the bailiff charges a fee under the pretence it is reasonable costs commits an offence of fraud by false representation.

 

The bailiff was collecting from my company, and sought to obtain money from me personally and is pretending my personal property is property of the company, and intended to convert that property to his own use, for another. Again, this is fraud by false representation and may also be an offence under the 1968 Theft Act.

 

You indicated bailiffs have no ceiling for their fees they can charge to a debtor, this suggest the police accept a bailiff can demand unlimited money, and this negates the very purpose of having a police force – crime prevention. If this is the police interpretation of the law then anyone can purchase a debt, transfer it up and charge fees carte-blanche and defraud the public routinely and systematically by pretending their fees are reasonable costs knowing the police will tolerate bailiff crime.

 

I therefore ask this complaint is logged as being unresolved. I now request the crime is properly investigated. There is no reason why the police should looki for reasons to pretend no crime exists.

 

If the p;olice is still unable or unwilling to investigate the crime, please let me know with the reasons, and I will escalate the complaint to one of Perverting the Course of Justice with the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

 

Only if the police work together with the community can we end the pandemic of bailiff fraud.

 

Yours Truly,

 

Please keep us updated with your progress.