Latest twist in ongoing Sherforce nonsense - need some advice please.

[mashmallow]

I will check now,

 

Thanks

 

 

Mashmallow

[High Court Enforcer]

The levy fees for when goods are not removed are calculated as 5% of the value of the goods, although it is accepted by the Masters that this 5% of the sums due.

 

Nintendo Pu (or Happy Contrails as pointed out on another post) will have you believe that HCEOs can only charge pennies for collecting a debt of say £2000, no matter how many visits. He disregards the fact that some fees are applied under regulation 13.12 (Miscellaneous). In ohitsonlyme's detailed assesment the Master allowed many of these fees (and reduced some also) and these are for all to see on this forum.

 

He also claims that these fees have to be applied for in a costs order before they can be charged, but once again he is wrong.

 

When he was Happy Contrails he posted the same letter templates misadvising the forum and eventually costing at least one defendant I know several hundred pounds for nothing.

 

If you feel you've been overcharged, by all means ask for a detailed assessment and let the Master decide. If you have, like ohitsonlyme, you'll be refunded and get your costs. You can then parade your victory around this forum...

 

Oh, and postggj, I'm sure yoiu know where to find the regulations but if not please Google 'High Court Enforcement Officers Regulations 2004 Schedule 3 Regulation 13'

[High Court Enforcer]

Ive never understood the mentality of bailiffs.

 

How can it reasonable costs or sending a van to an address costs £300? He can fly to New York and back for less.

 

In other areas of law, there is prescribed mileage 40p a mile for tax reclaim purposes, and for HCEO maileage, the law provides 29.2 per mile limited to £25 per case for his costs. - So 29.2p per mile from the town hall to the debtors address equates a distance of 1027 miles travelled, the same distance from Central London to Krakow Poland.

 

I wouldnt call that reasonable at all.

 

Nintendo Contrails, you a wrong again

 

The maximum fee allowed is £50.00

 

At 29.2p per mile this equates to 171 miles total.

 

You must have spilt coffee in your calculator.

[hallowitch]

At 29.2p per mile this equates to 171 miles total.

 

from what point do they start the mileage from would it be for example from office of the hceo to the debtor home and back again (if they did not remove goods ) or to the place of storage if goods were removed

[ohitsonlyme]

The levy fees for when goods are not removed are calculated as 5% of the value of the goods, although it is accepted by the Masters that this 5% of the sums due.

 

Nintendo Pu (or Happy Contrails as pointed out on another post) will have you believe that HCEOs can only charge pennies for collecting a debt of say £2000, no matter how many visits. He disregards the fact that some fees are applied under regulation 13.12 (Miscellaneous). In ohitsonlyme's detailed assesment the Master allowed many of these fees (and reduced some also) and these are for all to see on this forum.

Please tell us what charges are allowed for 1 visit with no one in and no levy taken place and no writ served on the debtor

 

He also claims that these fees have to be applied for in a costs order before they can be charged, but once again he is wrong.

 

When he was Happy Contrails he posted the same letter templates misadvising the forum and eventually costing at least one defendant I know several hundred pounds for nothing.

 

If you feel you've been overcharged, by all means ask for a detailed assessment and let the Master decide. NO NO NO Dont ask for an assessment hearing ask for the SAR, pick it to pieces and then follow NPus letters to the police and issue a claim in the county court for incorrect fees (after LBA) this will then force the hceo to apply for the cost hearing and save you money, I believe that you could also get you CC fees back I forgot to ask in my case but it was this that forved the interpleader If you have, like ohitsonlyme, you'll be refunded and get your costs. You can then parade your victory around this forum...

I HAVE NOT BEEN REPAID MY FEES !!!!! or costs so unless you know something I dont I am continuing my pursuit of the OC and SF

My police investigation continues,( but too slowly for my liking) This will change as I am getting impatient!!

Again if you would like to meet (other than in court because you seem to know a lot about my case) the offer still stands

I also have not been parading victory simply stating facts that Sf charge fees that are not allowed in law and helping others that think they are victims of overcharging by whosoever

 

Oh, and postggj, I'm sure yoiu know where to find the regulations but if not please Google 'High Court Enforcement Officers Regulations 2004 Schedule 3 Regulation 13'

 

HCE I ask you many questions that you cannot or will not answer in relation to when and how a writ should be issued to a debtor and at what point a levy is valid and should be charged you are a clever person and clearly understand the issues involved

To date you do not answer any of these question and often only continue to snipe rather than guide us to the regulations

If you really want to improve your industry and in the long term have less problems clients and debtors why not help us by answerring the questions I pose or setting up a meeting so that together we can set the issues straight.

 

Onlyme and many others

[wonkeydonkey]

The levy fees for when goods are not removed are calculated as 5% of the value of the goods, although it is accepted by the Masters that this 5% of the sums due.

and how do they calculate this when they have not levied and do not know the value of the goods but still charge for the work?

Nintendo Pu (or Happy Contrails as pointed out on another post) will have you believe that HCEOs can only charge pennies for collecting a debt of say £2000, no matter how many visits. He disregards the fact that some fees are applied under regulation 13.12 (Miscellaneous). In ohitsonlyme's detailed assesment the Master allowed many of these fees (and reduced some also) and these are for all to see on this forum.

 

He also claims that these fees have to be applied for in a costs order before they can be charged, but once again he is wrong.

 

When he was Happy Contrails he posted the same letter templates misadvising the forum and eventually costing at least one defendant I know several hundred pounds for nothing.

 

If you feel you've been overcharged, by all means ask for a detailed assessment and let the Master decide. If you have, like ohitsonlyme, you'll be refunded and get your costs. You can then parade your victory around this forum...

surely it is a case of having your stolen money returned and this could not be described as a "victory" merely justice?

 

Oh, and postggj, I'm sure yoiu know where to find the regulations but if not please Google 'High Court Enforcement Officers Regulations 2004 Schedule 3 Regulation 13'

 

Thank you (in anticipation of a constructive reply)

[High Court Enforcer]

My understanding is this.

 

If nothing is levied then there is no charge.

 

However, unlike Certificated Bailiffs, HCEOs do not need to detail every item. A levy of the part is good for a levy of the whole. Therefore, if the HCEO lists anything he has technically levied on everything.

 

I would further argue that an HCEO can levy through a window, which would be deemed a 'constructive levy' by a Certificated Bailiff.

 

It is accepted by Masters that valuation fee is charged on the debt due as it is impossible to precisley value goods which will sell at auction.

 

Your money is not stolen. The HCEO applies charges that they consider are deemed justifiable and acceptable. If a Master decides they are unreasonable then they are refunded. I am aware of many detailed assessments where the Master accepts all the HCEO fees, but of course you do not hear about them on here.

 

Of course most debtors want to argue every fee (and dont want to pay any) but you must remember High Court Enforcement is the last of a long line of demands for the money.

[High Court Enforcer]

HCE I ask you many questions that you cannot or will not answer in relation to when and how a writ should be issued to a debtor and at what point a levy is valid and should be charged you are a clever person and clearly understand the issues involved

To date you do not answer any of these question and often only continue to snipe rather than guide us to the regulations

If you really want to improve your industry and in the long term have less problems clients and debtors why not help us by answerring the questions I pose or setting up a meeting so that together we can set the issues straight.

 

Onlyme and many others

 

Onlyme. Different HCEOs charge different figures for a 1st attendance under Fee 12. This is due to different companies having different running costs and different wage structures for their officers.

 

It does not matter if anybody is in the property, a levy can be done in the defendants absence.

 

The writ does not have to be served on the defendant either, like you keep stating.

 

A Notice of Seizure taking control of goods should be left on a first visit if nobody is in. This may detail speceific goods or list all goods on site to satisfy the sums due. The fees are applied at this stage, and rightly so.

 

I do not want or need to meet with you. You and some of you're fellow Caggers bitch and moan at everything I say in any event. No matter what I advise I get shot down.

 

You had your day in court and were awarded some of your fees back, incorrectly I personally think, but that was the decision of the Master on that day. If you had paid the creditor in the first instance you wouldnt have had a judgment issued against you. If you had paid the judgment you wouldnt have had enforcement officers in attendance.

 

But, whats done is done.

[Guest DebtWeary]

Both of my encounters with Sherforce have resulted in charges for levying, even though on neither occasion was I given a Walking Possession Order, which I understand is necessary to prove that one's goods have been levied upon.

 

I fail to see how the delivery of 3 pieces of paper by the HCEO in my case costing £815 could be deemed "justifiable and acceptable" by anyone. Rule 13 of the regulations is clearly abused, as they seem to use it for any inflated charges they choose. It is this greed that people take exception to. If HCEO fees truly were reasonable, you wouldn't see the many complaints that you get on this forum.

[Guest DebtWeary]

It's easy to be sanctimonious about paying your debts HCE, there are very many people out there who simply can't. Creditors can be very swift to use HCEO enforcement when they don't need to.

 

It seems the Regulations as laid down are subject to whatever interpretation that best suits lining the pockets of the HCEO company. Whatever way you try and justify their actions, it does not disguise the fact that they are just plain greedy and exploititive.

 

From what you are saying, the HCEO can apparently use his X Ray vision and assess saleable goods inside a property. You are saying they make assumptions, that they will charge for levying regardless. This makes a nonsense of the whole process. If this were true, then there would never be a need for an "abortive" writ, on which occasion the HCEO returns to the creditor empty handed.

 

Through the many threads on this forum, we are collectively trying to establish exactly what HCEOs can or cannot do. You just seem to be muddying the waters here.

Edited January 9, 2010 by DebtWeary
Further comments

[wonkeydonkey]

My understanding is this.

 

If nothing is levied then there is no charge.

But there was in my case....no levy,no van, no locksmith,but all nontheless charged for, oh and no paperwork until after payment made in full!

 

However, unlike Certificated Bailiffs, HCEOs do not need to detail every item. A levy of the part is good for a levy of the whole. Therefore, if the HCEO lists anything he has technically levied on everything.

Nothing listed not even a tin of beans...so I would be right in my thinking no levy was carried out..

 

I would further argue that an HCEO can levy through a window, which would be deemed a 'constructive levy' by a Certificated Bailiff.

 

It is accepted by Masters that valuation fee is charged on the debt due as it is impossible to precisley value goods which will sell at auction.

 

Your money is not stolen. The HCEO applies charges that they consider are deemed justifiable and acceptable but how can they charge in advance..surely when they realise they have/will not be doing the work on the day and at the time they should adjust accordingly to make the fees justifiable/acceptable? If a Master decides they are unreasonable then they are refunded. I am aware of many detailed assessments where the Master accepts all the HCEO fees, but of course you do not hear about them on here. Why should anyone have to be made to attend a hearing to hold onto what is, after all their own money, taken from them illegally, when all to often basic common sense will support their claim.

Of course most debtors want to argue every fee (and dont want to pay any) but you must remember High Court Enforcement is the last of a long line of demands for the money.

This sounds good in theory but in practice some may not even be aware

they are subjects of a ccj in the first place..sadly when an HCEO is on their doorstep they have little chance of proving it and will an HCEO give them the benifit of the doubt?

wd

[tomtubby]

It is no secret that one particular High Court Enforcement company receive more complaints than others and the fees charged by that are are simply "off the scale" ...and they know it.

 

There is of course Detailed Assessment but an application such as this is not easy for the vast majority of people and the prospect of appearing in the High Court is not one taken lightly.

 

Of great concern however is the fact that where some Masters allow fees others refuse them !! One Master who is very knowledgeable on the fees is Master Rose who I understand retired at Christmas and it remains to be seen what impact this will have.

 

Until a new fee scale is introduced under the TCE Act 2004 in April 2012 we will have to continue with the mess that we have at the moment.

 

For MOJ to establish a fair fee scale, I am aware of two HCEO companies who have provided MOJ with copies of Detailed Assessments as "proof" that the Masters have agreed certain fees that can be applied. Whether the debtor in these cases was present in court or had not understood the application is unknown.

 

That is why...with the agreement of clients, I have also provided MOJ with copies of Detailed Assessments to compare and if anyone on here wants to do the same, then please PM me and I will provide details. This could be of great assistance in getting MOJ to set a "fair " fee scale for the debtor and the HCEO.

[High Court Enforcer]

If the company you are talking about is who I think it is, I would advise that their fees are representative of the costs of running a National HCEO firm giving creditors the freedom to use them should they wish.

 

I liked Master Rose. On 3 seperate cases I was involved in he allowed each and every fee that was charged by me.

 

Why does everything have to be sent by PM, it's like little school kids whispering behind the teachers back.

 

Post your detailed assessments on here or are you scared they'll show the HCEO fees as legitimate?

[High Court Enforcer]

[/color]

This sounds good in theory but in practice some may not even be aware

they are subjects of a ccj in the first place..sadly when an HCEO is on their doorstep they have little chance of proving it and will an HCEO give them the benifit of the doubt?

 

 

wd

 

In my experience, this would be less than 1% of cases. Even if the debtor had moved from the original judgment address they would almost certainly have known about the debt and been chased by the creditor previously.

 

I know I sit on the other side of the fence but honestly, the people I deal with day to day are not the vulnerable/pennyless people this forum always suggests. Many are experineced fraudsters living a nice life by knocking everybody else. 75% of my cases are against businesses by the way. More often than not theyre also trying to hide behind different Ltd Co's also.

 

Anyway, any monies paid have to be held by the HCEO for 14 days anyway, under the 1986 Insolvency Act. During this period the defendant could request that the monies are paid into court pending a hearing.

[Guest DebtWeary]

 

I know I sit on the other side of the fence but honestly, the people I deal with day to day are not the vulnerable/pennyless people this forum always suggests. Many are experineced fraudsters living a nice life by knocking everybody else. 75% of my cases are against businesses by the way. More often than not theyre also trying to hide behind different Ltd Co's also.

 

Businesses are one thing, but it is pretty obvious that many of the complainants here ARE vulnerable and penniless. In my experience of HCEO mentality, they tar everyone with the same brush - that is, they presume that you are deliberately withholding from paying the debt. What is more, they exploit the ignorance of these vulnerable people and prey on their fear. A pretty shabby way to conduct a so-called business, I'd say.

[jimbo45]

Hi all

who IS this "High Court Enforcer"

He / she doesn't seem to offer anything other than DESTRUCTIVE CRITICISM.

 

People need helpful advice and links to proper case law - and in the RARE cases where it's better to pay up then we have to be told bluntly to pay up.

 

THERE IS NO PROVISION IN COMMON LAW FOR EXTORTION, EXCESSIVE CHARGES, LIES, THREATS etc etc.

 

Where Bailiff's are used there are most definitely Statuatory permitted charges and there are also RULES under which they must operate.

 

Caggers need particular advice on what to do where these rules are either clearly broken or where they *might* have been -- this is where help from the legal experts is required.

 

No Court exists in this country (yet thank goodness) that wants you to pay illegal amounts and most people would prefer a just settlement rather than none at all.

 

Of course debt is a nasty problem that won't go away -- but the rules for collecting it must be FAIR, CLEAR, and CONCISE -- for BOTH parties and when it obviously can't be paid in full other HUMANE, SENSIBLE steps need to be taken -- Not SS Storm trooper tactics with bullying people into extortionate fee paying -- especially as these people are probably least equipped to pay them in any case.

 

So High Court Enforcer -- Please either PUT UP or SHUT UP.

 

Cheers

jimbo

[ncf355]

In my experience, this would be less than 1% of cases. Even if the debtor had moved from the original judgment address they would almost certainly have known about the debt and been chased by the creditor previously.

 

I know I sit on the other side of the fence but honestly, the people I deal with day to day are not the vulnerable/pennyless people this forum always suggests. Many are experineced fraudsters living a nice life by knocking everybody else. 75% of my cases are against businesses by the way. More often than not theyre also trying to hide behind different Ltd Co's also.

 

Anyway, any monies paid have to be held by the HCEO for 14 days anyway, under the 1986 Insolvency Act. During this period the defendant could request that the monies are paid into court pending a hearing.

 

 

I'm sorry HCE but in that statement you have lost all credibility with me

 

Your comments above are just complete and utter rubbish

 

So you seriously expect us to believe that 99% of cases a HCE deals with are actively avoiding their debts when they are in fact fully able to pay?

 

As for the costs charged being those needed to run a HCE business - running the business at a ridiculous level of profit maybe (note - profit is fine, but the profit levels HCE's and the like must operate at and the fact part/a lot/majority of these fees are taken by intimidation (Intimidation as in "I have a court order, you need to pay or I will attempt to take your goods away") against often vulnerable people is beyond the pale)

 

In my one case alone just one (and the rather obvious) example was the £120/hour waiting charge for a person to sit in a van - which was beyond ridiculous - there is no way this can be justified when the individual charging only has basic occupation related qualifications gained from in employment training (as this is all I can see being required for such a role)

 

£120/hour is a rate more expected of a junior solicitor with a law degree and around 3-4 years experience behind him/her

 

 

I am at a loss to understand why you continue to frequent this forum as I for one feel you add nothing, a debtor could come on here quoting a total of £1200 charges on a £1000 debt for a situation where the HCE turned up, issued the writ and was paid (all within, say, 30 minutes?) and I fully believe you would comment this was a fair charge - so to my mind you offer nothing and merely serve to muddy the waters when others are attempting to help

 

[wonkeydonkey]

In my experience, this would be less than 1% of cases. Even if the debtor had moved from the original judgment address they would almost certainly have known about the debt and been chased by the creditor previously.

 

I know I sit on the other side of the fence but honestly, the people I deal with day to day are not the vulnerable/pennyless people this forum always suggests. Many are experineced fraudsters living a nice life by knocking everybody else. 75% of my cases are against businesses by the way. More often than not theyre also trying to hide behind different Ltd Co's also. I am a business and I did not know I had been placed into debt by my creditors own incompetence. When it was brought to my attention I disagreed with the amount allegedly owed and wrote to my creditor immediately, offering payment in full on their submission of a correct invoice..it transpired while I waited for a reply to that letter they had submitted a claim in CC.I knew nothing about this action as I never received a claim pack..I then received judgment and applied for set aside

within 3 days. The creditor was told this and went ahead with enforcement...from the date I was advised the amount was owed the claimant allowed 1 week before they took action..from the date I was aware they had been given judgment in default they allowed 72hrs before transfer to high court. I am not an experienced fraudster living a nice life while knocking everybody else nor am I a Ltd company. I am merely a victim.

 

Anyway, any monies paid have to be held by the HCEO for 14 days anyway, under the 1986 Insolvency Act. During this period the defendant could request that the monies are paid into court pending a hearing.

I can assure you my creditor was promised the money taken from me would be forwarded to them within 14 days I have that in black and white from within the SAR from Sherforce. This did not happen and nor was it suggested the money be paid into court pending a hearing. 4 months lapsed from enforcement until I was refunded in full so who got the interest on my £3000 during that period...not me.

wd

[wonkeydonkey]

Mashmallow, please read my posts. Most are constructive giving advice on how Bailiffs and HCEOs work.

Most caggers on here don't need advice on how Bailiffs and HCEOs work they have found that out...hence their reason for needing help. What they want is for someone to point out the irregularities in the fees they have been charged .. not someone to merely say "they look ok to me" "good on ya mate hope you get away with them"

 

as you object to them being called "fraudsters" would you agree they can been seen as "chancers" for they chance their luck they have found someone who just pays without question.

[ohitsonlyme]

Guys I personally have had enough pointless conversations with HCE I think it is time to ignore his comments as all we are doing is feeding his over inflated ego.

Communication in writing is always very difficult and whilst he may feel that he is being constructive I never seem to get a answers to the questions unless it is distorted in some way or other

 

LETS IGNORE THE HCE AND GET ON WITH LOOKING AFTER THE VULNERABLE

HCE will soon go away if we ignore him

I for one will not reply to his posts nor take any of his "advice" seriously as he cannot or will not even try to understand that charging £1000 for one visit and 2 incoming telephone calls is not acceptable

 

PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO ANY MORE OF HCE POSTS HE WILL SOON GO AWAY

Onlyme

[jimbo45]

Well at LEAST I've gone out on to the streets to help people from being EXPLOITED by people who ostensibly say they are "enforcing the Law".

 

WE are the people who are trying to ensure just that -- the law is OBEYED CORRECTLY and where there are grounds for dispute / non compliance then rectification is done.

 

Nobody can justify the harassment of Single Mums by Large heavily built men attempting to charge REDICULOUS amounts of money for relatively trivial offences -- how can one EVER justify a Parking ticket cost escalating up to 1,000 GBP or more for example.

 

If the Law was really simple then a Computer could dispense justice -- but we are Human Beings and often things aren't always what they seem.

 

And Mr H.C.E I just hope that one day you come unstuck a little bit yourself -- and see what YOU do when hounded by Baliff's and DCA's for a situation that you had almost no control over.

 

Anyway that's 'nuff said for me on this thread.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Edited January 9, 2010 by IdaInFife
removed quote from unapproved post

[High Court Enforcer]

I can assure you my creditor was promised the money taken from me would be forwarded to them within 14 days I have that in black and white from within the SAR from Sherforce. This did not happen and nor was it suggested the money be paid into court pending a hearing. 4 months lapsed from enforcement until I was refunded in full so who got the interest on my £3000 during that period...not me.

 

wd

 

I cannot answer this. I have no idea why your money was held without there being some kind of stay in place. The HCEO has a duty to pay out the creditor after the 14th day if unless ordered otherwise by the court.

 

With regards to interest, most client accounts are not interest bearing.

[High Court Enforcer]

ncf/onlyme, please ignore me.

[IdaInFife]

posts unapproved

 

please refrain from making personal insults