Question re Walking Possession Agreement

[eliza2705]

Hello All

My OH signed a WPA in August 2008 at our previous address. The bailiff didn't gain entry and levied on a hired car in the driveway. Nothing other than the car was levied. I have made a complaint to the council as the bailiff has been threatening to come and force entry using a locksmith. The head of revenues/collections at the council spoke to me and said the fact that a hired car was levied is "irrelevant" and that the WPA is valid because my OH signed it! Hallowitch has helped me a lot and I thought I knew my rights after all the reading I've done on this site and the help the caggers have given me. However, I was totally bamboozled by the Head of Revenue's statement that it was irrelevant what was levied as the debtor's signature is all that is needed for the WPA to be valid!! Is it just me or is that a load of b*****ks! I feel I'm going around in circles here.

 

Oh and another thing...I read somewhere (but can't remember where..or even if I flippin dreamt it) that a WPA is only valid for 6 months. Does anyone know if this is the case?

 

Also, the bailiff levied on a brand new car (hired) worth approx £13k for a debt of £400!! Surely it's illegal for a bailiff to levy upon goods which are obviously valued at an amount far in excess of the debt?

Thanks in advance for any replies

x

[eliza2705]

I should also point out that this same person accepted an offer of payment to be made weekly direct to the council using online banking and yet I STILL received the bailiffs letter threatening to remove goods tomorrow!

[hallowitch]

The head of revenues/collections at the council spoke to me and said the fact that a hired car was levied is "irrelevant" and that the WPA is valid because my OH signed it!

 

 

 

of course it its its a load of bull a bailiff can only levy goods belonging to the debtor a hired car does not belong to the debtor

It is very much relevant the reason that goods are levied is to secure goods against payment if the debt is not paid the goods are removed and sold

they cannot remove and sell this car as its a hired car

 

the fact that your OH was duped into signing it is also relevant (as his knowledge of written English is limited)

 

I would get back in touch with The head of revenues/collections and tell him you are not happy with his reply and you are escalating your complaint to the chief executive of the council and the local government ombudsman

[ploddertom]

Hello All

My OH signed a WPA in August 2008 at our previous address. The bailiff didn't gain entry and levied on a hired car in the driveway. Nothing other than the car was levied. I have made a complaint to the council as the bailiff has been threatening to come and force entry using a locksmith. The head of revenues/collections at the council spoke to me and said the fact that a hired car was levied is "irrelevant" and that the WPA is valid because my OH signed it!

 

Of course it was signed under duress!

 

Hallowitch has helped me a lot and I thought I knew my rights after all the reading I've done on this site and the help the caggers have given me. However, I was totally bamboozled by the Head of Revenue's statement that it was irrelevant what was levied as the debtor's signature is all that is needed for the WPA to be valid!! Is it just me or is that a load of b*****ks!

 

Correct

 

I feel I'm going around in circles here.

 

Oh and another thing...I read somewhere (but can't remember where..or even if I flippin dreamt it) that a WPA is only valid for 6 months. Does anyone know if this is the case?

 

From a Post on another thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by impecunious

Just a quick thought - is there a time limit on WPOs being valid? 6 months?

 

If a walking possession has been issued and no payments made under it for a few months then the bailiff almost certainly would be seen to have abandoned the goods and it would therefore no longer be valid.

Also, the bailiff levied on a brand new car (hired) worth approx £13k for a debt of £400!! Surely it's illegal for a bailiff to levy upon goods which are obviously valued at an amount far in excess of the debt?

 

If it's the only thing available then it's held to be acceptable.

 

Thanks in advance for any replies

x

 

As the car was not yours they could never have seized it anyway so I agree with everyone else that the levy was therefore invalid and all charges for it should be removed. I think you may have to force the issue here by saying you now indeed are going to submit a claim into the County Court naming Bailiffs and Council as defendants. One way of doing this is to fill in Form N1 on the HMCS website, print it out, scan it and send a copy to both Council and Bailiffs. Then give them 7 days.

 

PT

[dx100uk]

Hello All

My OH signed a WPA in August 2008 at our previous address.

 

- then the WPA is invalid at your new address.

 

The bailiff didn't gain entry and levied on a hired car in the driveway.

 

- hire car not yours - so its not a valid levy.

 

Nothing other than the car was levied. I have made a complaint to the council as the bailiff has been threatening to come and force entry using a locksmith.

 

- levy is invalid on 2 counts - he cant do that.

 

The head of revenues/collections at the council spoke to me and said the fact that a hired car was levied is "irrelevant" and that the WPA is valid because my OH signed it! Hallowitch has helped me a lot and I thought I knew my rights after all the reading I've done on this site and the help the caggers have given me. However, I was totally bamboozled by the Head of Revenue's statement that it was irrelevant what was levied as the debtor's signature is all that is needed for the WPA to be valid!! Is it just me or is that a load of b*****ks! I feel I'm going around in circles here.

 

Oh and another thing...I read somewhere (but can't remember where..or even if I flippin dreamt it) that a WPA is only valid for 6 months. Does anyone know if this is the case?

 

Also, the bailiff levied on a brand new car (hired) worth approx £13k for a debt of £400!! Surely it's illegal for a bailiff to levy upon goods which are obviously valued at an amount far in excess of the debt?

Thanks in advance for any replies

x

 

dx

[dx100uk]

I should also point out that this same person accepted an offer of payment to be made weekly direct to the council using online banking and yet I STILL received the bailiffs letter threatening to remove goods tomorrow!

 

- cause the bailiff wants his fees,

 

tough!!!

 

dx

[hallowitch]

did The head of revenues/collections say anything about the 2nd levy for the same debt

[eliza2705]

did The head of revenues/collections say anything about the 2nd levy for the same debt

 

 

Hey Hallowitch, No the Head of Revenues skirted that issue...kept changing the subject when I brought it up.

[dx100uk]

time for a screen shot from the bailiff then!

 

dx

[eliza2705]

dx

 

Hi dx, are you absolutely certain the levy/WPA is invalid at the new address?? I questioned this with the Head of Revenues & Collection at council and he said the address is "irrelevant" (really seems to like that word!) as my hubby signed the WPA it's "valid at any address where we reside"..now this sounds like another load of old you-know-what to me. Not only do the bailiffs misrepresent their powers but the council are at it as well/

[hallowitch]

have you had a reply to your complaint in writing

 

The main point is (regardless of the address on the WPO ) the bailiff has never been in your house both Levy's were done on goods outside your house he has no legal right to enter your property with or without a locksmith

[wonkeydonkey]

Hi dx, are you absolutely certain the levy/WPA is invalid at the new address?? I questioned this with the Head of Revenues & Collection at council and he said the address is "irrelevant" (really seems to like that word!) as my hubby signed the WPA it's "valid at any address where we reside"..now this sounds like another load of old you-know-what to me. Not only do the bailiffs misrepresent their powers but the council are at it as well/

 

This must be Enid Blytons Grandson then? he's certainly a chip of the old block,, he tells as good a fairy story as his grandma.

 

Head of Revenues & Collection well he should know what he is talking about but clearly doesn't. I would suggest you write to him and tell him his comments are b... s... and therefore "irrelevent"

 

WD

 

WD

[eliza2705]

have you had a reply to your complaint in writing

 

The main point is (regardless of the address on the WPO ) the bailiff has never been in your house both Levy's were done on goods outside your house he has no legal right to enter your property with or without a locksmith

 

Hi Hallowitch

I've had a response to my complaint but not to the letter you helped me with. THe Head of Revenues from the council rang me at home and asked "couldn't we sort this out on the phone instead of writing back and fore?"..I responded that although I was happy to talk I still require a WRITTEN response.

[hallowitch]

Hi Hallowitch

I've had a response to my complaint but not to the letter you helped me with. The Head of Revenues from the council rang me at home and asked "couldn't we sort this out on the phone instead of writing back and fore?"..I responded that although I was happy to talk I still require a WRITTEN response.

 

 

good for you it will be a very interesting letter

did he say when you would receive it

 

[eliza2705]

Hi Hallowitch

I've had a response to my complaint but not to the letter you helped me with. The Head of Revenues from the council rang me at home and asked "couldn't we sort this out on the phone instead of writing back and fore?"..I responded that although I was happy to talk I still require a WRITTEN response.

 

 

good for you it will be a very interesting letter

did he say when you would receive it

 

 

 

 

No, he didn't. But I shall give him seven days and then write to CEO again.

[RaeUK]

Hi eliza2705, of course the Head of Revenues would like to sort this out on the phone. No nasty written record of his/her incredible incompetence!

Did I see Hallowitch mention your OH's written English is poor? [From another thread I guess], then I suggest that the all knowledgeable one at the council will be familiar with and working to the National Standards of Enforcement Agents which clearly advises that a person might be deemed vulnerable where they have obvious difficulty in understanding, speaking or reading English.

I'd suggest hitting them with that as well, if not already done so...

Best wishes.

Rae.

[seanamarts]

If you get no joy from this numpty on the phone just tell him that you are escalating your complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman to investigate this matter.

[ploddertom]

When the guy from the Council reiterates his mumblings ask him what case law he depending on for his comments and what part of any Statute says this. The chances are he is learning the Laws of Bailiffs from the Bailiff and we all know how straight in bed they lie.

 

PT

[RaeUK]

... The chances are he is learning the Laws of Bailiffs from the Bailiff and we all know how straight in bed they lie...

 

I've never been in bed with a bailiff!

 

Rae.

[Hentooth]

Hello All

My OH signed a WPA in August 2008 at our previous address. The bailiff didn't gain entry and levied on a hired car in the driveway. Nothing other than the car was levied. I have made a complaint to the council as the bailiff has been threatening to come and force entry using a locksmith. The head of revenues/collections at the council spoke to me and said the fact that a hired car was levied is "irrelevant" and that the WPA is valid because my OH signed it! Hallowitch has helped me a lot and I thought I knew my rights after all the reading I've done on this site and the help the caggers have given me. However, I was totally bamboozled by the Head of Revenue's statement that it was irrelevant what was levied as the debtor's signature is all that is needed for the WPA to be valid!! Is it just me or is that a load of b*****ks! I feel I'm going around in circles here.

 

Oh and another thing...I read somewhere (but can't remember where..or even if I flippin dreamt it) that a WPA is only valid for 6 months. Does anyone know if this is the case?

 

Also, the bailiff levied on a brand new car (hired) worth approx £13k for a debt of £400!! Surely it's illegal for a bailiff to levy upon goods which are obviously valued at an amount far in excess of the debt?

Thanks in advance for any replies

x

 

Having just been thru all this, and ended up making myself insolvent, I have a few gems from the Insolvency services website for you.

 

1) Only property BELONGING to the debtor can be removed by a Bailiff, in the event that it is under a Hire Purchase agreement, ownership has to be established afterwards by the HP company.

 

Which does NOT apply in this case, it is a HIRED car, borrowed for "the day", so it is the same as them taking next doors car because they couldn't find your car.

 

As for £400 VS £13k , no they are allowed to levy up to 10 times the value of the court order to allow for auction sale values, which would be £4k and a MUCH older car.

 

2B honest, I'd let them take the hire car and tell the hire company, while laughing as the Bailiffs get bogged down in court actions.

 

But Bailiffs will tell you anything to get what they want, they assume we are all idiots and think they can run off with our possessions, but after talking to a Court officer they have VERY, VERY limited powers indeed... But they will say anything they can to convince you otherwise

[seanamarts]

As for £400 VS £13k , no they are allowed to levy up to 10 times the value of the court order to allow for auction sale values, which would be £4k and a MUCH older car.

very interestring you wouldnt happen to know where this is written, as im sure it would be useful for future reference:)

[Hentooth]

Have a read at the site below then, some interesting little facts from the insolvency service

 

Debt Basics - Bailiff Guide - know your rights

[eliza2705]

Thank you all for your support and advice. I'll keep you updated as to what happens next. No bailiffs have shown up so far, despite their threat to come with a van in 24 hours. Can't help thinking that this is all so unnecessary...terrorising people for a few quid.

[ploddertom]

 

As for £400 VS £13k , no they are allowed to levy up to 10 times the value of the court order to allow for auction sale values, which would be £4k and a MUCH older car.

 

 

 

very interestring you wouldnt happen to know where this is written, as im sure it would be useful for future reference:)

 

Sorry have to disagree on this see below:

the bailiff has levied excessively.

This means that the value of the goods seized from you is more than the amount of the debt, or that you have paid an excessive amount to the bailiff. If more money is raised at auction than the debt, (this includes the fees, the cost or removing your goods and the cost of selling them), the balance should be returned to you. A levy is not excessive if there are no other goods that can be seized.

Taken from a list of Complaints that may be filed for a Form 4 under Grounds for Complaint

 

Bailiffs: Complaint about Certified Bailiff - Consumer Wiki

 

PT