rossendales/Council tax pain in the rear ***WON***

[eggy12]

Ok I see what your saying HW thanks..

 

Oct 20 Visit 1 charged 24.50

Oct 23 Paid liability order in full so no liability order now exists

Oct 26 Visit 2 chaged £18.00 I CAN CLAIM BACK

Feb 17th Attendance fee/Van £110 CANNOT CHARGE

Feb 17th Levy Fee £24.50 CANNOT CHARGE as not allowed to levy for own fees

[hallowitch]

OK I see what your saying HW thanks..

 

Oct 20 Visit 1 charged 24.50

Oct 23 Paid liability order in full so no liability order now exists

Oct 26 Visit 2 chaged £18.00 I CAN CLAIM BACK

Feb 17th Attendance fee/Van £110 CANNOT CHARGE

Feb 17th Levy Fee £24.50 CANNOT CHARGE as not allowed to levy for own fees

 

yes you got it

 

 

do you still have a copy of the notice of seizure

 

you know if you pay something and receive a hand written receipt there a number on it e g 1 through to 100 so that each receipt runs concurrent does your notice of seizure have a number like this (I'm having a thought here )

[eggy12]

Ive never had a notice of seizure only the notice of distress

 

POST 59

 

Envolope

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/h...e/scan0001.jpg

 

Walking order 1st side

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/h...e/scan0002.jpg

 

Walking order 2nd side

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/h...e/scan0003.jpg

[hallowitch]

Ive never had a notice of seizure only the notice of distress

 

POST 59

 

 

Envolope

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/h...e/scan0001.jpg

 

Walking order 1st side

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/h...e/scan0002.jpg

 

Walking order 2nd side

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/h...e/scan0003.jpg

 

 

sorry for confusing you notice of seizure same thing as a notice os distress

[eggy12]

For some strange reason i cannot access the notice of distress from my last post but CAN when i go back to post 59.. Do these links above work for you HW .. The only thing ive paid is the 1st and second visit fee and done that via Ross web site

[hallowitch]

not from here i cant but i can from post 59

 

do you see at the bottom of the page NOD 2/07 it may be possible to use this to your advantage

 

i would imagine the notice of distress that the bailiff wrote previous to yours will have Nod 2/06 the date of this notice will be march yours was delivered 10 march with Feb date

 

I would be threatening to ask for disclosure of the date of the previous notice of seizure though a form 4 complaint if necessary

[eggy12]

The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992

Distress

 

45 section 3

If, before any goods are seized, the appropriate amount (including charges arising up to the time of the payment or tender) is paid or tendered to the authority, the authority shall accept the amount and the levy shall not be proceeded with.

 

SO I paid and eat **** Rossandales

 

OK here is something else im looking at

 

The levy fee is 24.50.. If they have levied for just there costs that are £42.50 then according to SCHEDULE 5

CHARGES CONNECTED WITH DISTRESS

B. For levying distress:

 

An amount (if any) which, when aggregated with charges under head A for any visits made with a view to levying distress in relation to an amount in respect of which the liability order concerned was made, is equal to the relevant amount calculated under paragraph 2(1) with respect to the levy.

 

2.—(1) In heads A and B of the Table to paragraph 1, “the relevant amount” with respect to a visit or a levy means—

 

(a)where the sum due at the time of the visit or of the levy (as the case may be) does not exceed £100, £12.50,

 

(b)where the sum due at the time of the visit or of the levy (as the case may be) exceeds that amount, 12½ per cent. on the first £100 of the sum due, 4 per cent. on the next £400, 2½ per cent. on the next £1,500, 1 per cent. on the next £8,000 and ¼ per cent. on any additional

 

So i should have been charged £12.50 only !

If for the £134 they are claiming it should be £5.36

If for the £870.71 council Tax it should be £21.77

If for the £134 so called outstanding plus the £42.50 ive paid that is £7.06

 

So where did they get the levy fee off £24.50 from ?

[eggy12]

not from here i cant but i can from post 59

 

do you see at the bottom of the page NOD 2/07 it may be possible to use this to your advantage

 

i would imagine the notice of distress that the bailiff wrote previous to yours will have Nod 2/06 the date of this notice will be march yours was delivered 10 march with Feb date

 

I would be threatening to ask for disclosure of the date of the previous notice of seizure though a form 4 complaint if necessary

 

Sorry HW ive lost you on that comment..Maybe Its me, I had Bailiff removal letter on 17/02 popped in letter box then Final Notice on 26/02.. Had phone convo with Bailiff some time later then back dated NOD popped through letterbox on 10/03

[hallowitch]

Sorry HW Ive lost you on that comment..Maybe Its me, I had Bailiff removal letter on 17/02 popped in letter box then Final Notice on 26/02.. Had phone convo with Bailiff some time later then back dated NOD popped through letterbox on 10/03

 

 

no its me

 

your bailiff put a notice of distress through you door on 10th /03 dated 17/02

your NOD has a sequence number on it (bottom left of notice of distress)

so the NOD that was written out before yours will have a sequence number on it and will be filled in with a march date thus proving the bailiff backdated the NOD

 

 

jo bloges notice of distress dated 9 march sequence number NOD2/06

eggy 12 notice of distress dated 17 February sequence number NOD 2/07

jenny blogs notice of distress dated 11 march sequence number NOD 208

[eggy12]

yes i see what your saying now HW.. As it shows Feb date maybe he pre filled it out to be on sfe side.. Will bear that in mind all the same.

 

What i was trying to find last night before i fell asleep was where does it state that a bailiff cannot levy for there own charges ? If i can get this info then everything is covered

 

Thanks

 

Eggy12

[hallowitch]

http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/docs/Enforcement_Agent_Charges.pdf

 

 

 

2.- (1) In head B of the Table to paragraph 1, "the relevant amount" with respect to a levy means;-

(a) where the sum due at the time of the levy does not exceed £100, £24.50;

(b) where the sum due at the time of the levy exceeds £100, 24.5% on the first £100 of the sum due,

4% on the next £400, 2.5% on the next £1,500, 1% on the next £8,000 and 0.25% on any additional sum;

 

 

and the sum due at any time for these purposes means so much of the amount in respect of which the

liability order concerned was made as is outstanding at the time

[eggy12]

Email sent

 

Your ref....XXXXXXX

My Ref.... GO>J.U.M.P/A.S.A.P 09/10

 

With regard your latest letter dated xxx September 2010.

I am still awaiting my refund of £18 that was paid under stress to you company.

I have also asked for screen shots of alleged visits that you are not willing to send.

Until I am able to see this alleged information I am unable to make a decision on what coarse of action to take.

 

For your information I have added some relevant information from the The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992.

 

2.- (1) In head B of the Table to paragraph 1, "the relevant amount" with respect to a levy means;-

(a) where the sum due at the time of the levy does not exceed £100, £24.50;

(b) where the sum due at the time of the levy exceeds £100, 24.5% on the first £100 of the sum due,

4% on the next £400, 2.5% on the next £1,500, 1% on the next £8,000 and 0.25% on any additional sum;

 

Take note the following:

and the sum due at any time for these purposes means so much of the amount in respect of which the

liability order concerned was made as is outstanding at the time.

 

Your Company visited my home according to the breakdown of charges you kindly sent me on Oct 20th

and charged me a Visit 1 fee £24.50, Oct 23rd the liability was paid in FULL. THAT is all you are entitled to.

Anything after that is null and void with regard your recovery.

 

I paid an extra £18 PLUS a card charge of 80p, I require this money refunded to me within 7 days

with an apology for direct harassment that you have unlawfully caused myself, with an offer

of compensation for excessive hours spent researching my rights along with all due stress you have caused me having to take over 6 days off work.

I also ask for BOTH bailiff name's and what courts they were certified at along with

a copy of the National Standards for Enforcement Agents that you should have and be aware of.

 

If this is not resolved to my satisfaction I will issue a claim in the County Court for return of the £18

you owe me plus costs and will name XXXXX Borough Council as Co-defendants.

 

Regards

Eggy12

[hallowitch]

nice letter good luck

[eggy12]

XXX Borough Council

 

 

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account No: XXXXXXXXX

Subject Access Request - S.7 Data Protection Act 1998

 

Please supply me with a copy of all information your company hold on me including a list of accounts details of payments along with copies of statements and any phone conversations held between myself and XXX Borough Council regarding my account with the main focus being communications with Rossendales Ltd a bailiff company under your instruction regarding recovery action for unpaid Council Tax/bailiff fees/Liability Orders. I require this in script AND voice recorded copy in what ever .file you use to record messages. This (link to download recorded messages) can be sent to me via my email address supplied below or sent to myself on disc at the above address.

 

 

Under the Data Protection Act 1984 and 1998, and including the right of subject access under these acts, I hereby request that you supply me with any and all historical data in your possession which relates to me and am entitled to under section 7(1) of the Act. If you store any of the older records on microfiche, please be aware that the Information Commissioner deems this to be a relevant filing system under the Act. As such, any microfiche data must be sent to me in fully legible and comprehensible form.

 

Additionally, where there has been any event in my account history over this period which has required manual intervention by any member of your staff, or any other person, I require disclosure of any indication or notes which have either caused or resulted in that manual intervention, or other evidence of that manual intervention in relation to my business with you.

 

If you are unable to supply this data because there has been no such manual intervention, then please be so kind as to confirm this in your response. I enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. You have 40 days in which to comply. Furthermore, if I discover that you have levied disproportionate penalties against me or collected monies to which you were not entitled, then I shall be reclaiming them and also the enclosed £10 Data Protection Act subject access request fee.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Eggy12

 

For correspondence via email, replies to this request should be sent to Eggy12@Caggers are on to you.com

 

Also asking for FOI on the subject of councils getting a percentage of money earned from bailiff's fee's but thats a different matter

 

Eggy12

[eggy12]

I need this info from when I rang council and they told me it was ok for rossendales to issue van visit fee and levy on the same day !

[eggy12]

Cannot believe I forgot to date it....

 

Redone

 

 

XXX BOROUGH COUNCIL

 

DATED THIS DAY 12th September 2010

 

 

 

Address

 

Account No: xxxxxxxx

Subject Access Request - S.7 Data Protection Act 1998

 

Please supply me with a copy of all information your company hold on me including a list of accounts details of payments along with copies of statements and any phone conversations held between myself and xxxxx Borough Council regarding my account with the main focus being communications with Rossendales Ltd a bailiff company under your instruction regarding recovery action for unpaid Council Tax/bailiff fees/Liability Orders. I require this in script AND voice recorded copy in what ever .file you use to record messages. This (link to download recorded messages) can be sent to me via my email address supplied below or sent to myself on disc at the above address.

 

Under the Data Protection Act 1984 and 1998, and including the right of subject access under these acts, I hereby request that you supply me with any and all historical data in your possession which relates to me and am entitled to under section 7(1) of the Act. If you store any of the older records on microfiche, please be aware that the Information Commissioner deems this to be a relevant filing system under the Act. As such, any microfiche data must be sent to me in fully legible and comprehensible form.

 

Additionally, where there has been any event in my account history over this period which has required manual intervention by any member of your staff, or any other person, I require disclosure of any indication or notes which have either caused or resulted in that manual intervention, or other evidence of that manual intervention in relation to my business with you.

 

If you are unable to supply this data because there has been no such manual intervention, then please be so kind as to confirm this in your response. I enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. You have 40 days in which to comply. Furthermore, if I discover that you have levied disproportionate penalties against me or collected monies to which you were not entitled, then I shall be reclaiming them and also the enclosed £10 Data Protection Act subject access request fee.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Eggy12

 

For correspondence via email, replies to this request should be sent to Eggy12@Caggers are on to you.com

[tomtubby]

[EDIT]. this charging of an "attending to remove" fee at the same time as a levy is something that is causing a lot of concern and I am aware that many such complaints have been made to the relevant council as they are wholly responsible for the fees charged by their agents.

 

The regulations provide that with council tax recovery, a bailiff can charge up to two van attendances but with the 2nd once, good must actually be removed.

 

The regulations are clear in that the purpose of the first visit is to "levy upon goods". Therefore I am at a loss to understand how it is possible that the bailiff can charge a "removal fee" AT THE SAME VISIT. That was NOT the purpose of the visit.

 

In addition, how can it be possible to charge an "attending to remove" fee UNLESS the bailiff knows that there is something to REMOVE !!

 

It is MY VIEW (supported by many) that an "attending to remove" fee can only be applied FOLLOWING a successful levy and where the debtor has then DEFAULTED on any payment arrangement made.

 

PS: What you need to be requesting is a copy of the SCREEN SHOT of your account.

[outlawla]

Also asking for FOI on the subject of councils getting a percentage of money earned from bailiff's fee's but thats a different matter

 

Eggy12

 

Re: what do you think of this

I have made many Freedom of Information requests to local authorities for copies of Contracts with bailiffs and it is astonishing to see how many councils are demanding a "kick back" from the bailiff companies of a percentage of bailiff fees.

 

In effect this means that councils are making a PROFIT from enforcement. It is WRONG but with bailiff companies desperate for Contracts they will agree to anything.

 

I'm interested to know if responses to these Freedom of Information requests have to be made available to the public, and would especially like to know if North East Lincolnshire Council take a cut out of bailiff's fee's?

 

Anyone know?

[Dhimmiwit]

As many people on here know, I have a commercial business providing bailiff advice to the public and this charging of an "attending to remove" fee at the same time as a levy is something that is causing a lot of concern and I am aware that many such complaints have been made to the relevant council as they are wholly responsible for the fees charged by their agents.

 

The regulations provide that with council tax recovery, a bailiff can charge up to two van attendances but with the 2nd once, good must actually be removed.

 

The regulations are clear in that the purpose of the first visit is to "levy upon goods". Therefore I am at a loss to understand how it is possible that the bailiff can charge a "removal fee" AT THE SAME VISIT. That was NOT the purpose of the visit.

 

In addition, how can it be possible to charge an "attending to remove" fee UNLESS the bailiff knows that there is something to REMOVE !!

 

It is MY VIEW (supported by many) that an "attending to remove" fee can only be applied FOLLOWING a successful levy and where the debtor has then DEFAULTED on any payment arrangement made.

 

PS: What you need to be requesting is a copy of the SCREEN SHOT of your account.

 

Yes Tomtubby, clarification is needed with rergards to this. Rossendales believe that they are acting within the rules accordin to this part of a communication with myself.

 

"It was not necessary that you signed either the inventory or the Walking possession Agreement, and consequently you did not do so.

 

This levy incurred a fee of £31.00 calculated in accordance with Schedule 5 of the Council Tax Administration and Enforcement Regulations 1992 which we enclose.

 

Only once a levy has been completed, can a van attendance fee be applied and this is also in accordance with the above regulations. Again it is not necessary for the Walking possession Agreement to be signed to incur this fee.

 

Whether goods are removed after completion of a levy is then at the discretion of the bailiff."

 

 

My particular case has become more shall we say...interesting after I took it on myself to discover that the first two visits were conducted by a receptionist with the intent of extorting monies from myself in the form of visit fees.This made my very first visit from a certificated bailiff one that incurred levy fee of £31.00, van attendance fee of £120.00, and waiting fee of £60.00.

 

Not bad for a first visit that lasted 12 minutes and no levy was made, eh?

[eggy12]

Thanks for replying..

 

In my case they turned up and charged me 1 visit fee.. Fair cop, I then paid the liability in full. they came a second time and third blah blah blah.

 

i rang council to complain and was told they are allowed to charge me what they did £177 altogether ! I was also told the levy was lawful even though the liability had been paid and they can charge van fee and levy on same day !!!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?247917

 

Eggy12

[eggy12]

I can add in the SAR that information they hold and anyone concerned with my account that should cover Rossendales and Council.. Two birds with one stone if you like

[jimbo45]

Here again it shows the ABSOLUTE REQUIREMENT OF NEVER TO LET THESE PEOPLE IN

You DO NOT HAVE TO.

 

No Levy, No Van fees etc etc etc. End of story.

 

You WILL have to make arrangement to pay the tax owed one way or another but you DO NOT HAVE TO PAY OR DEAL IN ANYWAY WITH THE BAILIFF's.

 

Even if the council refuse --just sit tight --if they are imbecelic enough to go to court again you WILL WIN a better deal especially if you say you HAVE attempted to pay and you are not forced to deal with people intimidating you and attempting to apply UNLAWFUL charges.

 

I'm not sure that requesting a SAR in this case will do you any good. YOU CAN demand to see a copy of the liability order - this will state the amount that the Council are demanding together with any court fees.

 

You KNOW you have to pay the tax sooner or later even if only at 5 GBP a month so a SAR IMO here doesn't actually buy you anything.

 

Cheers

jimbo

[eggy12]

Thanks Jimbo..

The frustrating thing is i paid the liability order after 1st visit, i owed them £24.50 only end of story.. What im planning is to take Ross to small claims court where all this can be sorted and brought to light once and for all, the reason im after phone recordings from council is because there backing the parasites from Ross saying there right in the charges they have added. Not once did i let them into my home, they levied on my broken down car that was in the drive 5 months after i paid liability order in full !

 

Love your rants lol

 

Eggy12

[jimbo45]

Hi there

If they "immobilised" your car AFTER you had paid everything then they are also possibly committing the following CRIMINAL acts as well as any claims you bring against them in Civil Court.

 

1) Aggrevated trespass -- they HAVE NO RIGHT TO ENTER ANY PART OF YOUR PROPERTY IF THE ORDERS HAVE BEEN PAID. If the liability order has been satisfied then any other charges are a normal "CIVIL DISPUTE" between you and either Rossendales or the Council or both.

 

 

2) EXtortion - attempting to extract money from you with no authority to do so.

 

3) Possible "Vehicle Theft".

 

What I would tend to do here is just make a FORMAL COMPLAINT TO LOCAL GOVT OMBUDSMAN about your council and the behaviour of ITS AGENTS (Rossendales) - this will actually HURT them since they have to give a written explanation of what went wrong and how it is to be avoided again and possibly use an angle grinder to "de-immobilise" the vehicle and remove it somewhere safe.

 

The BAILIFF may NOT enter your property again anyway since you HAVE PAID THE LIABILITY ORDER IN FULL so he's one Car clamp lighter now. Even if he enquires through the letterbox -- where's the Car - if you want to reply just say I suppose someone's stolen it for spare parts -- doesn't bother me as its not my problem. That should make him really mad. Good as I HATE THESE THUGGY BARSTEWARDS and give them a taste of their own medecine back.

 

If he attempts to enter have him removed by Police as a trespasser. He certainly won't be carrying any Court authorisation to enter.

 

He'll probably give you all sorts of B/S about the right of entry etc -- just tell him to Foxtrot Oscar and take you to court if he can as HE will be paying.

 

Believe me these people have even LESS rights than School Ground Playground Bullies since any violence or intimidation on their part can be rewarded VERY QUICKLY in LAW with all sorts of sanctions including SERIOUS JAIL TIME --but you MUST STAND UP TO THEIR LIES.

 

Ensure also that you do have a VALIDATED receipt for the amount paid to the Council.

 

BTW if you don't want to use an anglegrinder the Bailiff in any case in this situation has NO LEGAL RIGHT in any case to re-claim his "clamp".

 

It's the same as if a Football is kicked into your garden. The owners must ask your permission which you can give or deny.

 

With the Bailiff I'd DENY the permission -- if you have to speak to him you could say this is now evidence in a pending court case so it must not be touched.

 

As I said above you do NOT have to let this Bailiff on to your property again.

 

Another way to sting them is to request to Rossendales that as your car has been ILLEGALLY clamped could they please send round a PROFESSIONAL Car clamping removal van to remove the clamps as you will NOT be letting any of the Bailiff's on to your property due to their illegal and unjustifianle behaviour --they HAVE to pay the bill too.

 

Also charge them say 3 GBP a day compensation as to loss of use of a vehicle illegally imobilised -- and if they don't pay up use the NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT against them --great to see Rossendales stuck with a CCJ --should hamper them a bit next time council contracts are up for grabs.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Edited September 12, 2010 by jimbo45

[Pendle_dad]

 

The regulations are clear in that the purpose of the first visit is to "levy upon goods". Therefore I am at a loss to understand how it is possible that the bailiff can charge a "removal fee" AT THE SAME VISIT. That was NOT the purpose of the visit.

 

In addition, how can it be possible to charge an "attending to remove" fee UNLESS the bailiff knows that there is something to REMOVE !!

 

It is MY VIEW (supported by many) that an "attending to remove" fee can only be applied FOLLOWING a successful levy and where the debtor has then DEFAULTED on any payment arrangement made.

 

Tom, do we have any case history where this has been overturned in court or on appeal to the council ?

 

It seems that this is a case of us and them interpreting the wording of the regulation in different ways and them always coming out on top.

 

It is MY VIEW (supported by many)....

 

I concur from reading the regulation (several hundred times this week !) - but views / opinions / thoughts and wishes don't hold much stead in a court...