Need some advice please - Sherforce again!

[High Court Enforcer]

Excuse me? Do you even know the rules under which you supposedly operate? These are HCEO Rules, determining their actions and powers. This rule determines how an HCEO may raise a "Miscellaneous" charge not covered elsewhere in the regulations. Sherforce seem to add most of their charges under this rule - what does that have to do with the defendent??

 

The you for putting DW right PT.

 

It would appear you were wrong DW. I accept your apology however.

 

DW, as I said before, you did not pay the creditor, not even when judgment was issued and only when the HCEO was involved.

 

You say nothing was levied. HCEO's do not have to list every item that is seized. Indeed, a levy of part is good for a levy of the whole. If the HCEO levies on your flower pot and a TV he can see through the window then by definition, all goods belonging to the defendant at that property are seized and in control of the HCEO.

 

You've now paid Sherforce anyway by initially trying to defraud them and paying the claimant direct. You now need to pay the balance of what is owed to the claimant before Sherforce return to remove your goods and charge you accordingly.

 

I believe you can pay online at www.sherforce.net

Edited January 27, 2010 by High Court Enforcer

[ploddertom]

The great problem with Sherforce and some other companies is that they load all their fees before anyone has even left the Office. They use an all encompassing piece of paper that says they have seized all goods when in reality they haven't a clue what if any goods there are for seizing. I have seen instances of them claiming for locksmiths then claiming for the locksmith to be cancelled when clearly there was never cause for one in the first place, the same has been true for van attendances, valuations etc etc. If they were fairer in the first place then there would not be so many arguments about their fees. It is for this reason the "activity report" is a MUST.

 

It is as if someone has sat in their office and thought of as many different scenarios as possible, thought of a number and thrown a dice to get a price. Then they list them all together send Mr Numpty out to collect and as long as the debtor doesn't query all the extraneous charges then as Delboy says they have a nice little earner. Bear in mind that what goes on in these forums is only a very small minority of what happens in the real world. No offence intended but what about all those whose first language isn't English!

 

PT

[Guest DebtWeary]

Ploddertom, I understand the challenging of charges ok. But how else could Rule 12 be interpreted?

 

"For any matter not otherwise provided for, such sum as a Master, district judge or costs judge may allow upon application"

 

The HCEO raises his statutory charges, described in detail in the preceding rules in Schedule 3. So far so good, The only question relates to whether the HCEO actually carried out the actions he has charged for under these rules.

 

So, now we come to Rule 12. If the HCEO has a mind to raise further charges, not already covered in the preceding rules, he lists them all under Rule 12. So, the question is, the rule clearly states that the sum has to be applied for, and allowed, in accordance with the decision made by the relevant judge.

 

How does this happen? When does this happen? What is the actual process? Would Sherforce arrange a hearing for every Writ they are charged with executing, and say "We wish to charge £1700 under Rule 12 of the HCEO Regulations". Or at some point in the past, did they make an application to the relevant judge for ALL future writs?

 

Now, if someone could enlighten me as to what they think this rule ACTUALLY means, if it is not what I have just said, then I would be extremely grateful!

[ploddertom]

The you for putting DW right PT.

 

It would appear you were wrong DW. I accept your apology however.

 

DW, as I said before, you did not pay the creditor, not even when judgment was issued and only when the HCEO was involved.

 

You say nothing was levied. HCEO's do not have to list every item that is seized. Indeed, a levy of part is good for a levy of the whole. If the HCEO levies on your flower pot and a TV he can see through the window then by definition, all goods belonging to the defendant at that property are seized and in control of the HCEO.

 

I have to disagree here as the levy must still be completed properly, that from a Master I appeared before.

 

You've now paid Sherforce anyway by initially trying to defraud them and paying the claimant direct. You now need to pay the balance of what is owed to the claimant before Sherforce return to remove your goods and charge you accordingly.

 

I believe you can pay online at www.sherforce.net

 

 

PT

[ploddertom]

Ploddertom, I understand the challenging of charges ok. But how else could Rule 12 be interpreted?

 

"For any matter not otherwise provided for, such sum as a Master, district judge or costs judge may allow upon application"

 

Probably it is not written properly but they could actually include a fee for "Scratching his bum while waiting for calculator to calculate" - extreme I know but if that appeared for a charge of £150 then you would rightly challenge and if not removed could take it to court - the wording is in the

".................such sum as a Master, district judge or costs judge may allow upon application" - they may or may not allow it.

 

The HCEO raises his statutory charges, described in detail in the preceding rules in Schedule 3. So far so good, The only question relates to whether the HCEO actually carried out the actions he has charged for under these rules.

 

So, now we come to Rule 12. If the HCEO has a mind to raise further charges, not already covered in the preceding rules, he lists them all under Rule 12. So, the question is, the rule clearly states that the sum has to be applied for, and allowed, in accordance with the decision made by the relevant judge.

 

How does this happen? When does this happen? What is the actual process? Would Sherforce arrange a hearing for every Writ they are charged with executing, and say "We wish to charge £1700 under Rule 12 of the HCEO Regulations". Or at some point in the past, did they make an application to the relevant judge for ALL future writs?

 

Unfortunately it is them who charge and you who challenges, some may be removed or lowered by Complaint to the HCEO or if they refuse go before a Master. The more knowledgeable Masters know a great deal some seem a bit intimidated by the HCEO - read Onlyme's story.

 

Now, if someone could enlighten me as to what they think this rule ACTUALLY means, if it is not what I have just said, then I would be extremely grateful!

 

PT

[Guest DebtWeary]

HCE, you have selectively ignored the main points I have raised and, as usual, taken the opportunity to be sanctimonious and judgemental.

 

I have set out the facts as I see them regarding Rule 12. As you are apparently so knowledgeable, perhaps you would do me the honour of explaining what you think this rule means.

 

Regarding levying, if you had taken the trouble to read what I have posted here (and elsewhere in other posts) the details of my encounter with Sherforce, you will note that nothing was levied. My car was taken, then it was released 5 hours later. Neither the client nor Sherforce have explained why this happened.

[Guest DebtWeary]

Thanks PT, but how and when does the charge get allowed in the first place? This rule says that the HCEO has to ASK before charging. It doesn't say that the HCEO sticks anything he likes under Rule 12, and then it is left to the debtor to challenge it.

[High Court Enforcer]

HCE, you have selectively ignored the main points I have raised and, as usual, taken the opportunity to be sanctimonious and judgemental.

 

I have set out the facts as I see them regarding Rule 12. As you are apparently so knowledgeable, perhaps you would do me the honour of explaining what you think this rule means.

 

Regarding levying, if you had taken the trouble to read what I have posted here (and elsewhere in other posts) the details of my encounter with Sherforce, you will note that nothing was levied. My car was taken, then it was released 5 hours later. Neither the client nor Sherforce have explained why this happened.

 

DW, it doesnt matter what I say does it. You will believe what you want and what others tell you on here.

 

I suggest, you do what you want, ignore the HCEO and shout fraud to the Police with onlyme as long as your little voices will last.

 

Good luck with it all.

[Guest DebtWeary]

A fairly typical response, HCE, when you apparently don't have answers to questions.

 

I will do what I think is right. And I will do everything in my power to stop those who would exploit the vulnerable and cause such misery.

[ohitsonlyme]

DW keep up the good work but IGNORE the idiots

 

SF had no PROOF of costs and this is why they can be beaten in an interpleader, you have already said that they have got charges on your costs that they have put in and later rescinded and because you now have the bit btween your teeth I am sure you will beat them.The only problem is that you are now on a knife edge that can put strain on you and your family.

I dont have any answers for you only that you have the support me and of many here on CAG and although doomsayers think the policve arent interested I know they are and I am like a dog with abone so I wont let go

Like me you are more than prepared to be fair but not prepared to be cheated

 

onlyme and many many more

[ploddertom]

Thanks PT, but how and when does the charge get allowed in the first place? This rule says that the HCEO has to ASK before charging. It doesn't say that the HCEO sticks anything he likes under Rule 12, and then it is left to the debtor to challenge it.

 

Simple - if you don't challenge then it's allowed. After all you only challenge what you don't agree with. It is only your own interpretation that says the HCEO has to apply first!

 

PT

[Guest DebtWeary]

PT, I do not see how else this rule could be interpreted. It's included within the Schedule that specifies what an HCEO can and cannot charge. To me, it is saying that the responsibility rests with the HCEO who has to ask the court before charging them. If it didn't mean that, then it makes nonsense of the preceding rules. Why have very precise rules that say what the HCEO can charge and then follow them with a "catch all" rule that is saying they can charge what they like without reference to anyone. That doesn't make sense. It does make sense if they have to apply to the court first.

 

I have already asked the HCEO Association what they think it means, as well as Sherforce. We'll see what they have to say.

[ploddertom]

Ignoring the other posts for a while and getting back to the main problem.

 

I appreciate you had the Charges breakdown sheet but have you had any others - specifically I've referred to the "activity report" - this is very crucial to your case. Alternatively have you done a Subject Access Request on both them and your Claimant. £10 each but may be worthwhile.

 

PT

[Guest DebtWeary]

PT, I have asked Sherforce for a detailed justification and explanation of their charges. I am waiting to see what, if anything, they come back to me with.

 

I haven't considered doing the SAR for the Claimant - that would be interesting indeed with all the messing about they have indulged in during the last week!

 

If I don't hear from SF tomorrow, then I shall go on to the next phase!

[Guest DebtWeary]

Thanks OnlyMe, I really appreciate the support.

 

Throughout all this, I have been trying to establish exactly what the law says on these matters. Hence my interest in the HCEO Regs and other relevant legislation. Sherforce and their ilk go to great pains to make their documentation and their actions sound legal. I am questioning the entire basis for how they operate and trying to get to the bottom of it all!

 

You're right, it's about fairness.

 

Keep rockin!!

[ploddertom]

PT, I have asked Sherforce for a detailed justification and explanation of their charges. I am waiting to see what, if anything, they come back to me with.

 

If as a simple letter I don't think you will get much back bar the usual spiel, you need to force their hand.

 

I haven't considered doing the SAR for the Claimant - that would be interesting indeed with all the messing about they have indulged in during the last week!

 

If I don't hear from SF tomorrow, then I shall go on to the next phase!

 

PT

[Guest DebtWeary]

Thanks PT, I intend to pin them down, don't you worry!

 

The more I think about, the more I feel like putting all this to the media. But I need more evidence first!

[High Court Enforcer]

You're right, it's about fairness

 

Fairness would have been to pay the creditor the money you owed.

[Guest DebtWeary]

Judgemental as usual, HCE. If I could have paid, I would have paid. SF assume that you won't pay when you can't. Then they add insult to injury by doubling the debt with their fees. Don't talk to me about fairness.

[Guest DebtWeary]

To illustrate my last post, this taken from the Sherforce site:

 

"Shergroup knows that the threat of removing certain items makes the "Won't Pay" debtors take notice. Its powers of enforcement are very real when it threatens to take those all-important status symbol items away.

Shergroup chief executive, Claire Sandbrook, said: “Judgment creditors will be pleased to know that threats of having those high-value items seized can encourage almost immediate payment."

 

The world is not full of "Won't Pay" debtors.

[wonkeydonkey]

Until you send a SAR you are working in the dark trying to identify what charges are legal and what are not. It has already been explained by PT a SAR will give you a minute by minute account of what the HCEO supposedly did and what the support team sitting back in the office decided was the appropriate charge for doing /not doing that act. ...when you get all this ONLY THEN you can really start to fight back...and of course caggers who have trodden this path will be able to advise you of the next step. PLEASE send a SAR and you will find it the best £10 you have ever spent!!!!

 

WD

[Guest DebtWeary]

Hi WD, thanks for that, yes I understand the importance of the SAR, and that will be what I do next, if I get nothing back from SF (which seems the likeliest thing to happen!). At the same time, I am trying, as I said, to get to the bottom of how the law and the regulations work. Some job!!

 

DW

[wonkeydonkey]

Hi WD, thanks for that, yes I understand the importance of the SAR, and that will be what I do next, if I get nothing back from SF (which seems the likeliest thing to happen!). At the same time, I am trying, as I said, to get to th e bottom of how the law and the regulations work. Some job!!

 

DW

If it helps to get you a good night sleep then I can tell you even my Solicitor and a close family friend who is a Barrister will tell you the "law surrounding HCEO charges does not exist to be understood merely be identified by interpretation", so just go for the SAR and all will be much clearer and give you a motive to move forward and then you can unravel

the mystery.

Sherforce monitor this site and so far will be smiling at your apparant confusion and searching to define the law and regulations. now wipe the smile off their faces and really give them cause for concern.;)

WD

[Guest DebtWeary]

Thanks WD, your friends seem to have hit the nail on the head! This new bill that is supposed to clarify the whole enforcement area should be interesting, once they can sort out the regulations that go with it!

[ploddertom]

Hi WD, thanks for that, yes I understand the importance of the SAR, and that will be what I do next, if I get nothing back from SF (which seems the likeliest thing to happen!).

 

Send £10 fee by Postal Order and make sure they understand it is for SAR and not to reduce your debt to them. They have 40 days in which to comply, for any failure you can issue a N1 in the County Court for compliance. I suggested earlier you do the same with your Claimant - it may resolve how your car was returned!

 

At the same time, I am trying, as I said, to get to the bottom of how the law and the regulations work. Some job!!

 

DW

 

PT