Beat The Bailiff On TV

[impecunious]

HCE's comments are always good for a laugh

 

Fridges, washing machines, kettles, most basic furniture - can't be taken hostage anyway ........... we're not living in Somalia!

 

 

Impecunious!!

[little_evo]

I would imagine that a fridge is essential, as is a kettle and basic furniture surely, possibly washing machine also?

 

How could a family keep food fresh with no fridge/freezer, boil water without the use of a kettle, sit or accomodate a family and wash clothes without a washing machine?

[hallowitch]

I would imagine that a fridge is essential, as is a kettle and basic furniture surely, possibly washing machine also?

 

How could a family keep food fresh with no fridge/freezer, boil water without the use of a kettle, sit or accomodate a family and wash clothes without a washing machine?

 

 

List A

 

1) The following articles belonging to a debtor shall be exempt from distress at the instance of a creditor in respect of a debt due to him by the debtor-

a) clothing reasonably required for the use of the debtor or any member of the debtor's household;

b) implements, tools of trade, books or other equipment including a car or van reasonably required for the use of the debtor or any member of the debtor's household in the practice of the debtor's or such member's profession, trade or business, not exceeding in aggregate value £1,000 or such amount as may be prescribed in regulations made by the Lord Chancellor;

c) medical aids or medical equipment reasonably required for the use of the debtor or any member of his household;

d) books or other articles including a computer reasonably required for the education or training of the debtor or any member of the debtor's household not exceeding in aggregate value £1,000 or such amount as may be prescribed in regulations made by the Lord Chancellor;

e) toys for the use of any child who is a member of the debtor's household;

f) articles reasonably required for the care or upbringing of a child who is a member of the debtor's household.

 

2) The following articles belonging to a debtor shall be exempt from distress if they are at the time of the distress in a dwellinghouse and are reasonably required for the use in the dwellinghouse of the person residing there or a member of the household-

a) beds or bedding;

b) household linen;

c) chairs or settees;

d) tables;

e) food;

f) lights or light fittings;

g) heating appliances;

h) curtains;

i) floor coverings;

j) furniture, equipment or utensils used for cooking storing or eating food;

k) refrigerators;

l) articles used for cleaning, mending, or pressing clothes;

m) articles used for cleaning the dwellinghouse;

n) furniture used for storing-

(i) clothing, bedding or household linen;

(ii) articles used for cleaning the dwellinghouse; or

(iii) utensils used for cooking or eating food;

 

o) articles used for safety in the dwellinghouse or of household articles

3) The Lord Chancellor may by regulations add to the list set out in subsection (2) above, or delete or vary any of the items contained in that list.

We consider that under 1(b) and 1(d) the preferable aggregate value might be £1500.

 

List B

 

Such tools, books, vehicles and other items of equipment as are necessary for use personally by the tenant in their employment, business or vocation and such clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment and provisions are as necessary for satisfying the basic domestic needs of the debtor and his family.

[hazza]

Yes they should if you dont pay your debts.

 

and so says a powerless third party ! you're only saying that because of your sole motive in all of this... money - someone elses at that.... it's not your money, it's not your property

hmmmm. but do you still agree to take all that stuff for an unpaid parking ticket - and climb thru windows if need be?

 

btw: your opinion is wholly irrelevant to my comment as you really have no say on the matter

 

no wonder no one likes you guys and the reason why this site rocks

 

an unnecessary profession for today and tomorrows world

 

see: Medieval Occupations

 

In the future... history lessons may say... a long long time ago....

 

the court jester made people laugh

the court bailiff made people cry

 

but society realised these were medievel and evil evil and in 2010 the [X] party won the general election and abolished these cry makers - into history

 

i think baliff's have it easy...

especially if legislation is changed and the gov get's 21C decent

bailiff's will lose their jobs

they may lose their homes

luckily for them there won't be anyone to harass in their homes them like bailiffs do to us today... lucky for them, but a small price to pay

 

i think the best carrot and stick - and perhaps most moral to get 'paid' in 21C is to [deleted]

[YANO BEMUSE]

I bet. Did you see the stupid badge the bailiff flashed on yesterday’s programme? It had a shield and sword and a motto or something at the bottom like he was the Man from UNCLE./quote]

 

 

It reminded me more of the symbols that hung on the walls at the headquarters of the organisations where evil geniuses plotted to take over the world.

 

But seriously... This thread has got me hooked on the programme and I think it's brilliant. But it is tv and has as much in common with real life as Holby City and the Bill.

 

Beat the Bailiff is fiction. For example, it's not practical to expect the contents of any house to clear all the debts owed by the people there. Bailiffs usually call for only one big debt or a few small ones, like PCNs, and don't expect to raise enough to pay everything. I can see a lot wrong with what the bailiffs do on the programme and I expect professional debt advisers cringe at the ease with which the people hope to sort out their problems.

 

In real life, bailiffs don't really expect to get many debts paid by selling debtor's goods. What they really want is to motivate debtors into paying.

 

I think we're the only in country in Europe to still use bailiffs like that. Everywhere else, enforcement alternatives like attachment of earnings and third party debt orders are used much more equitably. When Scotland went that way a few years ago, so that taking goods from homes has ceased almost entirely, I think overall enforcement rates actually went up, at least until the recession.

 

The trouble here (that is, in England & Wales) is that the powers of our bailiffs have never been expanded so they can use other enforcement methods. In Scotland, they have always been able to use them and so when the law changed they just had to change the way they enforced. The Government has repeatedly resisted a similar change here because it's too late to give the extra powers to bailiffs and creditors (mostly central and local government departments) don't want to have to do more enforcement than they have to now under our archaic system.

 

I guess we'll see the Government insisting that we continue with the indiscriminate use of bailiffs here until the system finally breaks down entirely.

[Barbarawoo]

Can anyone point me to the Whistleblower program video about bailiffs while a reporter was under cover plz, I was in hospital at the time and so missed it but keep hearing people talk about it..searched and searched but cant seem to find the tape/video of it .....thanks

[tomtubby]

I bet. Did you see the stupid badge the bailiff flashed on yesterday’s programme? It had a shield and sword and a motto or something at the bottom like he was the Man from UNCLE./quote]

 

 

It reminded me more of the symbols that hung on the walls at the headquarters of the organisations where evil geniuses plotted to take over the world.

 

But seriously... This thread has got me hooked on the programme and I think it's brilliant. But it is tv and has as much in common with real life as Holby City and the Bill.

 

Beat the Bailiff is fiction. For example, it's not practical to expect the contents of any house to clear all the debts owed by the people there. Bailiffs usually call for only one big debt or a few small ones, like PCNs, and don't expect to raise enough to pay everything. I can see a lot wrong with what the bailiffs do on the programme and I expect professional debt advisers cringe at the ease with which the people hope to sort out their problems.

 

In real life, bailiffs don't really expect to get many debts paid by selling debtor's goods. What they really want is to motivate debtors into paying.

 

I think we're the only in country in Europe to still use bailiffs like that. Everywhere else, enforcement alternatives like attachment of earnings and third party debt orders are used much more equitably. When Scotland went that way a few years ago, so that taking goods from homes has ceased almost entirely, I think overall enforcement rates actually went up, at least until the recession.

 

The trouble here (that is, in England & Wales) is that the powers of our bailiffs have never been expanded so they can use other enforcement methods. In Scotland, they have always been able to use them and so when the law changed they just had to change the way they enforced. The Government has repeatedly resisted a similar change here because it's too late to give the extra powers to bailiffs and creditors (mostly central and local government departments) don't want to have to do more enforcement than they have to now under our archaic system.

 

I guess we'll see the Government insisting that we continue with the indiscriminate use of bailiffs here until the system finally breaks down entirely.

 

YB

 

Excellent post and most informative !!

 

The TV programme is hopelessly inaccurate at the best of times but it is the impact of the programme that is what the Producers will be looking at and for the series to keep being repeated must say something for it's viewing numbers.

 

In the early days I remember writing to the Producers to complain that one of the bailiffs on the show was NOT certificated ( I was correct !!) but they choice to ignore this !!

 

The Government have had many years to get the bailiff industry regulated and have completely failed to do so. Clearly, they would not want to make it TOO difficult for bailiffs to collect money from debtors because after all.....bailiff's are collectors of GOVERNMENT DEBTS!!!

 

 

 

PS: What do you mean Holby City is NOT REAL....are you saying that Charlie didn't really have a heart attack !!! Shame on you......

[Getinthebackofthevan]

I love Beat the Bailiff! I think that Jamie Wally whatshisface (he looks about 12) is hilarious in his cheesy, black Oswald Moseley outfit (oooooh, suits YOU sir!) What a complete prat! And that ridiculous line-up at the end with all the bully-boys, sorry, bailiffs all looking 'well 'ard', scowling down into the camera! I laughed that much I spilt my VAT! And.... didn't I read somewhere that the annoying, regulation, scrawny-arsed blonde presenter is a bankrupt? As the late, great Sid James would have said, "Dear oh dear oh dear!"

[YANO BEMUSE]

 

In the early days I remember writing to the Producers to complain that one of the bailiffs on the show was NOT certificated ( I was correct !!) but they choice to ignore this !!

 

PS: What do you mean Holby City is NOT REAL....are you saying that Charlie didn't really have a heart attack !!! Shame on you......

 

 

I don't see why the bailiffs on the show need to be certificated because they're not doing the sort of enforcement that certificated bailiffs do. Isn't it like criticising 'Charlie' for not having a heart attack for real?

[YANO BEMUSE]

And.... didn't I read somewhere that the annoying, regulation, scrawny-arsed blonde presenter is a bankrupt? As the late, great Sid James would have said, "Dear oh dear oh dear!"

 

Why did she go bankrupt? Was she as reckless as some of the people on the programme? (Physician, heal thyself.) Or was she unlucky?

 

Some people go bankrupt because of the sorts of errors of judgment we can all make from time to time and some are the victims of circumstances beyond their control. I think the programme, with its faults, does everyone a great service and it's a tragedy if the presenter is having difficulties of her own.

 

After all, we don't laugh about people who die of lung cancer, even if they had a fifty-a-day habit for life!

[High Court Enforcer]

The laws surroundy the insolvency of individuals and businesses needs more of a shake up than the bailiff industry IMO.

 

I just cant understand how somebody can run up hundreds of thousands of £ debt in ABC Ltd, liquidate it, start ABC (UK) Ltd before it's dissolved and be scott free. I see this all the time! They have the same Directors, staff and often run from the same offices. It stinks.

 

Individuals are starting to do the same but not to the same extent. You'd be amazed how many huge houses I've visited where the husband registers everything in his wifes name and still drives round like lord of the manor....

 

It's Insolvency Practitoners that are making the serious money in times fo hardship I can assure you.

[ploddertom]

The laws surroundy the insolvency of individuals and businesses needs more of a shake up than the bailiff industry IMO.

 

I just cant understand how somebody can run up hundreds of thousands of £ debt in ABC Ltd, liquidate it, start ABC (UK) Ltd before it's dissolved and be scott free. I see this all the time! They have the same Directors, staff and often run from the same offices. It stinks.

 

Individuals are starting to do the same but not to the same extent. You'd be amazed how many huge houses I've visited where the husband registers everything in his wifes name and still drives round like lord of the manor....

 

It's Insolvency Practitoners that are making the serious money in times fo hardship I can assure you.

 

Apart from a slight difference of opinion over the first line I have to agree with what you say, 9 times out of 10 it is the same people doing this time and time again.

 

PT

[tomtubby]

Why did she go bankrupt? Was she as reckless as some of the people on the programme? (Physician, heal thyself.) Or was she unlucky?

 

Some people go bankrupt because of the sorts of errors of judgment we can all make from time to time and some are the victims of circumstances beyond their control. I think the programme, with its faults, does everyone a great service and it's a tragedy if the presenter is having difficulties of her own.

 

After all, we don't laugh about people who die of lung cancer, even if they had a fifty-a-day habit for life!

 

I think that with Lorne Spicer ( or Donovan as she was when she presented her petition) it is more to do with the fact that not only was she presenting a less than popular programme such as Beat the Bailiff but she also presented a Money Management Programme as well !!!

 

We not forget of course Crxxp in the Attic !! ( Not my words...but from internet boards ).

[Another Jack]

I just cant understand how somebody can run up hundreds of thousands of £ debt in ABC Ltd, liquidate it, start ABC (UK) Ltd before it's dissolved and be scott free. I see this all the time! They have the same Directors, staff and often run from the same offices. It stinks.

 

Is that why she stopped making Beat the Bailiff? Did the tevelision company object to what she was doing?

[hazza]

Yes they should if you dont pay your debts.

 

Hey HCE, have you seen this: BBC News - Internet access is 'a fundamental right'

 

Especially as it should be a fundamental right to access cag 24/7

[hallowitch]

Especially as it should be a fundamental right to access cag 24/7:D

[High Court Enforcer]

Hey HCE, have you seen this: BBC News - Internet access is 'a fundamental right'

 

Especially as it should be a fundamental right to access cag 24/7

 

But it's not law unfortunately so your laptop/PC is still available for seizure.

 

Maybe this will change in 2012 but then hopefully so will the right to force entry.

[2ltr16valve]

But it's not law unfortunately so your laptop/PC is still available for seizure.

 

Maybe this will change in 2012 but then hopefully so will the right to force entry.

 

 

along with the right to protect your home and property with force using any means !

[loopinlouie]

But it's not law unfortunately so your laptop/PC is still available for seizure.

 

Maybe this will change in 2012 but then hopefully so will the right to force entry.

 

You can come round my house anytime 'hce', skips cost too much:lol:

 

You think if I ask them nicely, they will take a fridge freezer and oven (dont worry i will use the microwave as I wouldnt turn it on if you know what I mean, boom ) and then theres the telly, one of the oldest 32'' going when they first came out, looks like an armoured tank,. None work, but I wont tell the bailliff:lol:

 

Was going to throw them all out but will pretend to be distraught when they all go:lol:

 

Beat the bailliff could come back under a new light, a group of genuine just on hard times people fighting back. Invite the bailliff in and dont tell them a group of neighbours rallied around to the recycling tip and got a load of crap goods and put them in the house.

 

Id do that after all, wouldnt want to feel ashamed when they find bugger all in the house. Theyd end up having to pay to recycle them being a company. We can dream, thats a show I would watch xx

 

Id do that.

[seanamarts]

But it's not law unfortunately so your laptop/PC is still available for seizure.

 

How would that work if the laptop/PC is used for working purposes, and what would happen to the personal data on the hard drive

 

Maybe this will change in 2012 but then hopefully so will the right to force entry.

In what way do you mean, it wouldn't be so that more bailiffs can force their way in and attack defenseless old people trying to protect their life savings would it ?

 

If the law allows for force to be made to gain entry to a home I hope the government will provide the bailiff with sufficient body armour.

[Skankedbythebank]

HCE

 

Hello,

 

If someone runs a business from that computer i.e maintaining a website, receiving orders / issuing quotes via e-mail it would be protected as a tool of the trade?

Edited March 11, 2010 by Skankedbythebank

[Skankedbythebank]

Before goods are seized / levied on

 

Surely a person can sell their goods e.g. vital computer, to a third party (friend, family ...), create date & sign the invoices and agreement.

 

Get paid a nominal price (actually get paid by cheque of bank transfer) then hire the computer back for a nominal fee.

 

Put a sticker on it saying "Do not remove. On Hire. Property of XXXXXXX. Item No XXXXXX. Tel 1010XXXXXX"

 

Sorted!

 

I know this works for Ltd Companies, there are (or at least were) companies that did this as a service (equipment purchase and lease back).

 

I know it doesn't work for bankruptcy (voidable transaction and all that...)

 

Would it work for an individual against ccj or Liability Order?

Edited March 11, 2010 by Skankedbythebank

[Skankedbythebank]

Forgot to ask,

 

HCE

 

Why does the industry believe forced entry is on the cards?

Edited March 11, 2010 by Skankedbythebank

[High Court Enforcer]

If the law allows for force to be made to gain entry to a home I hope the government will provide the bailiff with sufficient body armour.

 

First to your other points:

 

Laptops/PC are sold at auction without being checked. It would be for you to remove any personal information before the item is removed and sold.

 

Yes, bailiffs only target defenseless old people protecting their life savings... yawn...

 

Now to your quote above, based on targeting these frail old pensioners and thier feeble defenses, bailiffs wouldnt need body armour.... .....unless it was 2ltr16valve cos he's big and scary, but there wouldnt be anything removing from his house....

[RaeUK]

Yes, bailiffs only target defenseless old people protecting their life savings.

 

Just knew you'd confess eventually!

 

Rae.