Another bailiff charges problem :(

[Mr0zero0]

I have studied many previous posts relevent to bailiff charges and have been very impressed with the advise being given.

I have decided to start my own thread as my situation spreads over a long period of time which makes it fairly complicated. I hope someone wont mind going over the same topics in relation to my unuiqe problem. It isnt so much i cant pay but in principle should i pay!

I will start from the begining and try to speak plainly.

 

I lived in a property leaving on the 8th nov 07. The landlord informed me he had notified the council. I still owed for 1 months coucil tax which i was unaware of.

I didnt pay any council tax again until i moved into a new property in april 08 as i was staying with family.

On setting up payment i was told i already owed nearly £400 on my previous address as their records show i didnt move out untill april 08, 4 months after i had! I was told the matter had already gone to a debt collection company (rossendales) and i would have to pay them plus charges for a visit to my previous address on the 6th feb 08 (wasnt even living there). Wasnt even aware of any coucil tax owed!

 

I was told if i could prove my actual move date the bill would be reduced.

I phoned my old landlord and he sent a letter and phoned them informing them of this date.

I phoned myself a few days later to check and was told no corespondance took place.

Another letter was sent by the landlord but regretibly i never took copies of either.

I assumed this would have been recieved and almost forgot about the issue.

 

Then on the 28th sept 09 i recieved a bailiff removal letter through the post over a council tax issue but with no bill details. (Second visit)

I promptly phoned the council and was told no evidence of my move date had been recieved so the matter had been left with the bailiff's.

I then had to take time off work to visit my old landlord a long distance away and took the letter to the council office by hand and didnt leave until their computor systems were updated.

I moved house again.

I then recieved my reduced bill 11th nov 09 (the 1 month i did owe) plus court charges. I was told i had to settle this with the bailiff's as i had to cover their charges aswell.

I asked rossendales for a bill and so on 7 dec 09 they sent me a final reminder for £148.84. This wasnt to bad but still twice what i really owed in council tax!

I decided to phone the council again and managed to get them to take off the £37 pounds court costs. I asked if i would get another bill and was told she would tell them to send me one (although i have no evidence of this and they denie the conversation took place!)

I now should have phoned the bailiffs myself to check and settle payment but i waited for the bill as i wanted the time to buget in the payment.

 

On the 20 jan 10 the bailiffs attented my new house and left me another removal notice asking for £236.84. I questioned this figure but couldnt get anything out the bailiff office and had to deal direct with the bailiff. I phoned him and asked for a breakdown of the bill in writing. He told me this was not possible. He told me over the phone instead:

 

£24 for 1st visit, £18 for 2nd visit and £24 plus £110 van charge for 3rd visit. £59.84 for the actual council tax (figure not correct)

 

All three visits were to different addresses.

I took another day off work to hope to resolve the issue.

I managed to get a 2 week hold on the account to gather funds (really i wanted to investigate further!)

I Spoke to the council and was imformed it was a bailiff isssue and to speak to them. I told them i wanted to pay the council tax i owe only as i am contesting the bailiff charges. This they let me do.

 

I spoke to rossendales again to question the charges (maily the van charge). I said no levy or agreement has been made so how can you charge for van attendance?!

Apparently levy can be made on the day and to any nearby vehicle! eh? Is this true?? They actually took levy on some random pickup i had never seen before! They also didnt leave anything except the bailiff removal notice with no breakdown of charges, no enforcement regulations stating their powers and no council authorisation and bailiff certificate numbers.

 

The next day at work I get a phone call from the bailiff saying i had gone behind his back by phoning the office and contesting the bill so he has clamped my car (the car i actualy own this time) which is to be towed today if i didnt pay the full charges in 20 mins! after which i would be charged additional charges for tow truck etc. Nightmare!

There was nothing i could do but to get a good friend of mine to go to my house and pay the bailiffs the full amout.

 

Im no expert on this which is why im here but surely i havnt recieved the proper procedure.

I want my charges refunded to me plus compensation for all the phone calls and time take off work trying to resolve the problem. Is this un-realistic??

After reading other threads im fairly in tune with the law etc but am interested to know what action other people would take.

Sorry for long complicated post.

Many thanks for reading

Steve

[hallowitch]

find out from the council exactly how much you owe them

add £24 for 1st visit, £18 for 2nd visit pay this to the council tell the council this is council tax arrears and bailiffs 1st&2nd visit fees

 

send a letter to the rossendales telling them what you have paid to the council and if the bailiff wants to pursue you for levy fees and van fees for a vehicle that is not yours then you will be happy to file a form 4 complaint as you are aware of the fact that they can preform a dvla check to confirm ownership of the vehicle levied

 

the letter you send to the bailiffs copy to the council

the letter you send to the council send copy to the bailiffs

send all letters by recorded delivery

[Mr0zero0]

Thanks for your replie.

After the 3rd visit i payed the coucil the £69.34 i owed them. My friend paid the £177 charges to sop them taking my car . I was happy to pay the £24.50 and £18 for the first 2 vists to rossendales but not another £24.50 and £110 van charge on a 3rd visit where they took levy on the random pickup.

The bailiff told me he couldnt check himself and i had to prove the pickup wasnt mine. When he came back the next day he asked a nieghbour which was my car. once he knew, out came the clamp and along came the phone call so i had no other choice but to pay (thanks to a friend). If i can get back the 3rd visit van charges back i would be very happy.

Currently working on letters

thanks for your help

[ploddertom]

Thanks for your replie.

After the 3rd visit i payed the coucil the £69.34 i owed them. My friend paid the £177 charges to sop them taking my car . I was happy to pay the £24.50 and £18 for the first 2 vists to rossendales but not another £24.50 and £110 van charge on a 3rd visit where they took levy on the random pickup.

The bailiff told me he couldnt check himself and i had to prove the pickup wasnt mine. When he came back the next day he asked a nieghbour which was my car. once he knew, out came the clamp and along came the phone call so i had no other choice but to pay (thanks to a friend). If i can get back the 3rd visit van charges back i would be very happy.

Currently working on letters

thanks for your help

 

Can I get this right.

 

You paid the Council direct after the Bailiff made a 3rd visit to you? He then clamped your car after you had paid - how long after?

 

My interpretation of this is the Bailiff levied on a vehicle that clearly was not yours - a simple DVLA check would have revealed this. You paid the Council direct but he then clamped your own vehicle - if this is true then he should be in serious doo-doos, I would contend this was illegal and your friend who paid should do a chargeback on their card if that is how they paid.

 

Write to Rossendales asking for a statement of your account + screenshot - they may reply asking for £10 but this request falls outside Data Protection so is not needed. They are obliged to furnish this information. Copy the Council in. When you receive it go through it with a fine toothcomb and nitpick.

 

When you can ascertain when & where the overcharging took place formally write to the Rossendales asking for a refund of your money - give them 7 days. Copy the Council in as well but this time point out failure to refund will result in the Council being named as co-defendants in any further action.

 

After the 7 days are up if there is no refund forthcoming issue a N1 in the County Court against them.

 

PT

[Mr0zero0]

Thanks for your good advise. I will carrie out your suggestions.

Yes on his 3rd visit he charged me £24.50 visit fee and van/attendance fee of £110 on top. No paper work at all left with me except the distress warrant with a hand written total.

How can he charge that without doing a levy first?

He did a levy on this day on a nighbours car. I was told this was enough to charge me the van fee.

How can you charge a van fee on a car levy?? There was no reason for him to attend in a van. He has never seen any of my possesions or anything i own that would fit into a van, let alone a whole car!

 

After this visit i managed to get a hold on the account for 2 weeks to buy me some time. I agreed to pay the full amout at the end of the hold.

I then paid the council the origional oustanding council tax but not the bailiff charges.

 

The next day i get a phone call at work from the bailiff saying i had gone behind his back by talking to the office and he has now clamped my car (on a public highway) and will have it towed within 30 mins if i didnt pay up in full.

I had almost no choice but to have my friend pay him (in cash).

He found out from a nieghbour which was my car. Surley he cant clamp a car he hasnt levied first?!

 

Do bailiffs have the same power when only trying to collect the biliff fees and NOT council tax if the council tax has been payed just leaving the fees????

[josephbloggs]

if there is only 42.50 outstanding for the first and second visits, and the amount was paid to the council before the levy, then they cannot enforce fees alone. they can only ask for the 1st and 2nd 42.50. therefore they should not have included the levy fee and enforcement fee(van charge) in with the amount.

if the amount was including the debt, then they can do a levy and charge the 1st(24.50) 2nd(18.00) levy(24.50-as debt under £100) and van fee(110.00-dependent on size of debt and local authority).

so you should contact the company explaning this and ask for the levy fee and van charge back.

and i see what your saying about why did they have to come along in a van, but remember companies can claim the vat back on vans.

[Mr0zero0]

The levy was made on nighbours car before i paid outstanding balance to council (excluding all charges). This was done on the same day as the 3rd visit. There were only the total fees left to pay when he came the next day and clamped my car (not the car he levied).

 

Can a bailiff make levy on a car and charge van fees on the same day?!

 

Dose he have to leave the relevent paperwork enforcing this?

 

Is he allowed to clamp a car he believes to be mine without contacting me first?

 

Can a levy be made on a car and be clamped on the same day?

 

Is this procedure correct:-

 

06/2/08 1st visit (£24.50)

 

28/9/09 2nd visit (£18.00)

 

20/1/10 3rd visit (£24.50 plus £110 van charge and levy made on nighbours car, not mine)

After which i payed remainder council tax but no bailiff charges.

 

21/1/10 4th visit (My car clamped and demand made for full payment of all bailiff charges or more fees would be added and car would be towed)

 

If theres nothing wrong here then i do apologise but it just dosnt seem fair and legal to me.

I have never met the bailiff in person, just spoke on the phone. I offered to pay for the first 2 visits but i wasnt happy with paying van charge. This he said was not exceptable.

 

many thanks

[Mr0zero0]

Hello is there any kind people out there willing to answer my questions on the above post please.

I have letters ready to send but could do with some more opinions first

 

thanks

[hallowitch]

I will do my best to answer what i can

 

 

Can a bailiff make levy on a car and charge van fees on the same day?!

no

Dose he have to leave the relevant paperwork enforcing this?

yes a bailiff levying goods must leave a notice of seizure of goods & inventory this list the goods Levy and the fees added

Is he allowed to clamp a car he believes to be mine without contacting me first?

if the bailiff Levy's a car and leave notice (as above) then the debtors would inform the bailiff that the car does not belong to them

However if the bailiff didn't leave a notice he could do a dvla check to confirm ownership

Can a levy be made on a car and be clamped on the same day?

I don't think so have a read of this

In the Central London County Court - Case No 8CL51015 - Anthony Culligan (Claimant) v 1. Jason Simkin & 2. Marstons (Defendants). Before District Judge Advent 9th & 24th September 2008

 

Mr Culligan challenged the bailiffs fees & charges imposed by Mr Simkin and Marstons when levying distress and seeking to remove Mr Culigans car for non-payment of a Penalty Charge Notice issued by the London Borough of Camden.

 

The Judgment goes a long way to clarify exactly what a Bailiff can charge for levying distress. Bailiffs have always sought to charge for fixing an immobilisation device by clamping a vehicle, and an attendance to remove. These charges in Anthony Culligan's case were £200 (£100 for the clamp and £100 for attendance to remove). The Bailiffs have argued that the Fee Regulations permit them to make a charge for levying distress (that is 28% on the first £200 demanded, and for removing goods, or attending to remove goods where no goods are removed, reasonable costs and charges). Bailiffs have claimed that the costs of putting on a clamp, etc. are costs to be included in attending to remove where no goods are removed, if payment is made before the vehicle concerned is removed.

 

 

 

 

DJ Avent, after considering Case Law and Statute, has found that the purpose of putting on a clamp is to "impound" the vehicle and is not part of the costs of removal. This is because:-

 

1. The Bailiff's obligation is to secure the vehicle, and the simplest and easiest way to do this is to "immobilise" it so it cannot be driven away. This is effectively the equal of impounding the goods.

 

2. The Fee Regulations provide for a distinction between the levying of distress and removal of goods. There is a gap between the two stages. The purpose of this "gap" is to allow the debtor to make payment of what is due after the first stage.

 

DJ Avent says at paragraph 50 of his Judgment:-

 

"Accordingly, in my judgment the bailiff should not and, as a matter of law cannot take any steps to remove goods until he has given the debtor a reasonable opportunity to pay what is due at the time of seizure. This being so I cannot see that Form 7 can or should include any costs of removal. Mr. Simkin included on the Form 7 he produced for Mr. Culligan the sum of £100 in respect of the immobilisation device. If, as the Defendants now argue, that was part of the removal expenses, it should never have been included in Form 7".

 

The District Judge went on to find that the application of the clamp falls within the act of levying distress and does not form part of the removal process, whatever the Bailiff's Contract with Camden says.

 

The Bailiff also charged Anthony Culligan £100 for the " reasonable costs " of removing the vehicle (although the vehicle was never actually removed) in that a tow truck was called and actually arrived at Anthony Culligan's home. Because the Bailiff produced no evidence as to how the charge had been arrived at he was unable to show that it was reasonable.

 

The District Judge in his conclusion says:

 

"I am also conscious that my findings in this case ... may have wider consequences and may cause problems for bailiffs because they will not be able to charge for immobilising a vehicle as a separate charge but must include it within the cost of levying distress. To do otherwise would, in my judgment, be unlawful... I would also add that if the Defendant or either of them in the light of this judgment now continued to apply such charges in the manner in which they have done up to now and, specifically, charge fees of £100 for applying an immobilisation device then that would amount to conduct which may well then found a legitimate complaint because in my judgment it would be unlawful....".

 

What this means in effect is that Bailiffs who continue to make unlawful charges may be guilty of misconduct and have their Certificates removed.

 

You should know however that Marstons obtained permission to appeal from the District Judge. His reasons for granting the permission were :

 

"The bailiff was following the practice in force for 15 years. No one has challenged the right to charge for wheelclamping before.

My decision that they cannot do so (at least to the extent that they have charged until now) not only affects the London Borough of Camden but also every Borough with de-criminalised parking.

 

Accordingly, it has significant local and possible National implications and that is a compelling reason why an appeal should be heard"

 

Finally, Camden now as a matter of urgency, need to revise their Contract with Bailiffs such as Marston, to take account of the District Judge's Judgment generally, and in particular to remove the authority to charge a fee for an immobilisation device over and above that provided for in the Statutory Fee Regulations.

[Mr0zero0]

An excelent replie thankyou.

It sounds like my bailiff friend hasnt done his job correctly! I will be sending off my letters recorded delivery today.

The fact that he has charged me £110 van charge on the same day he made levy on a car i do not own is bad enough.

The fact i pretended not to be at home on this day and saw with my own eyes that he came in a car is even worse.

I have no proof of this as i didnt realise he was chargin a van fee until he had gone so i didnt take photos etc.

Im as stubbon as they come and will go all the way to retrieve back the £110 as a matter of principle.

I cant use the fact he didnt arrive in a van as i cant prove it. So i will use the fact that the regulated procedure wasnt carried out and i was refused any paperwork im entitled to before i was forced to pay.

[hallowitch]

do you still have a copy of the the notice of seizure of goods and inventory (if you received it ) it actually says on it

 

AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE THAT unless the said sum is paid together with expenses of this Distress within FIVE DAYS from the date hereof they will be sold according to law

 

THIS gives you 5 days days to pay the debt

[Mr0zero0]

I never recieved a notice of seizure. All i was left is the bailiff removal notice - magistrates liability order/distress warrent. Paymen due in 48 hours.

 

I had no warning he would return the next day and clamp my car in my absense. A car in which he had never seen before and had no previous levy.

[fluffy_bunny]

 

Do bailiffs have the same power when only trying to collect the biliff fees and NOT council tax if the council tax has been payed just leaving the fees????

 

NO they have no powers whatsoever and can only act as debt collectors once the LO has been discharged

 

Also the maximum VISIT FEES that can be applied are £24.50 for first visit and £18.00 for second visit - they CANNOT charge for a 3rd visit !

 

Have they referred to a Head H fee at all?

[Mr0zero0]

Head H fee?

Not sure what this is. No reference made.

 

I offered to pay the first and second visit fees only but my offer was swiftly rejected.

 

I have just posted letters to bailiff company and the council asking for a bill breakdown.

Having already asked for this many times on the phone, Im not to hopefull i will recieve this as it would be proof on paper that they made mistakes.

My best case senario is they will realise this and refund me all charges made on the 3rd visit.

Fingers crossed

[tomtubby]

Head H fee?

Not sure what this is. No reference made.

 

I offered to pay the first and second visit fees only but my offer was swiftly rejected.

 

I have just posted letters to bailiff company and the council asking for a bill breakdown.

Having already asked for this many times on the phone, Im not to hopefull i will recieve this as it would be proof on paper that they made mistakes.

My best case senario is they will realise this and refund me all charges made on the 3rd visit.

Fingers crossed

 

The statutory fees as laid down by Parliament do NOT provide for a Head H Fee !!!

 

I would suggest writing to the local authority to ask them to confirm whether they have permitted their bailiffs to charge this fee and if so...why !!!

[Mr0zero0]

I have no paperwork stating a Head H fee.

No paperwork at all stating any fees

 

I think i must have got under their skin at the council offices as i recieved today the bill concerning my present propertys council tax and just seven days to pay in full! (Not related to previous problem)

 

Is it resonable for me to request that i only pay this once i have been refunded the £24.40 and £110 charged on the 3rd visit??

(letters have already been sent)

 

Or shall i pay up to keep them off me back and continue to push for a refund?

 

thanks

[YANO BEMUSE]

The statutory fees as laid down by Parliament do NOT provide for a Head H Fee !!!

 

I would suggest writing to the local authority to ask them to confirm whether they have permitted their bailiffs to charge this fee and if so...why !!!

 

 

 

Head H is a fee that can be charged by bailiffs enforcing Council Tax or Non-Domestic Rates. It can be charged if goods have been seized (or levied on) but payment is made before they are sold.

 

For Council Tax, it was introduced in the Regulations made in 1993. Originally it was to cover only the cost of advertising the sale but in 1998 this restriction was removed so that it could cover anything.

 

I think the change in 1998 was an error by whoever drafted the amendment. All the changes made at that time followed a lengthy consultation but I don't recall reading anywhere why that particular change was made.

[Mr0zero0]

Ok but what if I was charged this fee pluss van fee on the same day a levy was made on a car which isnt mine.

 

Surely a baliff cant just turn up in a van with no previous levy and charge me for it!

When i questioned this i was told that levy was made the same day on a vehicle parked outside my house! (not mine)

Surley the fact that levy was made on absolutely no property i own whatsoever would mean the 3rd visit fees and van charge are void?

 

Is it up to the bailiff to prove a vehicle is mine before he can levy on it and charge me van charges?

 

He told me it was up to me to prove it wasnt mine which is difficult when i have never seen such vehicle before!

 

Thanks everyone for your help with my problem.

 

I understand its not at all clear cut these grey areas and it seems so many laws and legislations out there completely contradict each other!

[YANO BEMUSE]

A bailiff can levy on (or seize) only your goods. (The goods may be owned jointly with another person.) The legal position is that if a bailiff levies on another person's goods, the true owner must make the claim.

 

Bailiffs cannot charge for attending to remove goods unless there is a levy. (This is unlike some other types of enforcment where its possible to charge for attending to levy and attending to remove where neither takes place.) When a bailiff makes a levy, an attendance to remove fee could be added immediately.

 

If a bailiff levies and then you pay in full, the bailiff could add a fee under Head H.

 

If the bailiff levies on goods that belong to someone else, when the true owner's claim for the goods suceeds the levy is cancelled. The bailiff cannot then charge you for levying on someone else's goods.

[tomtubby]

if there is only 42.50 outstanding for the first and second visits, and the amount was paid to the council before the levy, then they cannot enforce fees alone. they can only ask for the 1st and 2nd 42.50. therefore they should not have included the levy fee and enforcement fee(van charge) in with the amount.

if the amount was including the debt, then they can do a levy and charge the 1st(24.50) 2nd(18.00) levy(24.50-as debt under £100) and van fee(110.00-dependent on size of debt and local authority).

so you should contact the company explaning this and ask for the levy fee and van charge back.

and i see what your saying about why did they have to come along in a van, but remember companies can claim the vat back on vans.

 

JOSEPH

 

I am sorry, but this is dangerous advice and is WRONG.

 

The bailiff can indeed enforce if the bailiff fees remain unpaid. This is complicated but I will try to explain and the following is also the reason why I will ALLOWS say that you SHOULD NOT pay a local authority direct.

 

With council tax the statutory regulations state very clearly that from all payments made BAILIFF FEES are first deducted.

 

Lets assume that a Liability Order was issued for £500 and a bailiff had made two visits to a property when nobody was at home and he had left a letter. The bailiff can charge £24.50 for a first visit and £18.00 for the second visit ( £42.50). The debtor then immediately pays a sum online to THE COUNCIL of £500 .

 

However, this payment DOES NOT discharge the Liability Order because the local authority are under a legal obligation to make sure that from this £500 they pay the bailiff his fees of £42.50 ( this is because with council tax bailiff fees are deducted FIRST).

 

The effect of this is that the debtor has really only paid £457.50 TOWARDS the Liability Order leaving a balance of £42.50 to pay.

 

He has therefore NOT paid the Liability Order and the bailiff is legally able to then levy upon goods for this balance.