Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • (See the link to DVLA’s INF188/6 document I posted above, page 4 as cited) “I have a new medical condition that I have told the DVLA about on my recent application. Can I drive? As soon as the DVLA receives your correct and complete application for a new licence and as long as you meet all the Section 88 criteria, you may drive. It is important that you are satisfied that the medical condition you have declared on your application does not stop you from driving. If you are unsure, check with your doctor or healthcare professional before you make a decision. You can also look up your condition in the ‘Assessing fitness to drive’ guide, which you can find at www.gov.uk/dvla/fitnesstodrive to see whether you meet the medical standards for driving. As this guide is intended for healthcare professionals, it can be complicated. Your doctor or healthcare professional should be able to help you if necessary." It seems that DVLA think that S.88 does apply for applications disclosing a new medical condition after all. Why might this be so, and what of “qualifying application" and "relevant disability"? S. 92(1) imposes on the driver a requirement to disclose a relevant disability. S.92(3) requires the Secretary of State to refuse such an application disclosing a relevant disability ….. EXCEPT S.92(4) requires the Secretary of State to grant such an application if the relevant disability is “adequately controlled”. Hence my belief S.88 can apply for medical conditions (if the driver meets the medical standard of fitness to drive) as the application remains a qualifying application IF the driver meets the medical standard of fitness to drive, until DVLA (on behalf of the Secretary of State) say it doesn’t, provided the driver believes they meet the (medical) standard. Additionally, at (or before) June 2013 (as noted in my previous post) the medical standard for fitness to drive for conditions involving excessive daytime sleepiness was changed from “completely controlled” to "adequately controlled".  
    • Anyway, I've asked my Booking.com flat-rent-out-bloke what needs to be done on the Booking.com portal to cancel a reservation. I got a late message "I'll let you know tomorrow".
    • I see that at the start of your thread you said they hadn't sent a Letter of Claim.  And in fact in all the uploaded material there is no LoC.  This is great news.  Even were you to lose - you won't - the judge would chop off a chunk of the money for their non-respect of PAPLOC. However, I'm a bit confused as you've named the file name as a SAR.  Are you sure about this?  Did you send any other letters apart from the one dx advised which was a CPR request (not a SAR) to DCBL (not Group Nexus).  I'm not being pernickety, this will be important for your Witness Statement further down the line.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5187 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I owe the sum of £650 an outstanding council tax - A liability order was granted in 16/07/09 but made an arrangement of to clear the balance but now have an outstanding of £290 which has now be passed to bailiff. The bailiffs now want an additional £181.50 . My gripe is that this is the first time i have heard from the bailiffs and how can they justify that sum . A letter which included a formal notice and Notice of distress was put through my letter box. I am now in position to pay off the balance but cannot afford to pay 181.50 . I read some where it details the charges a baliffs can charge. Someone please help.

Edited by blackstar500
Link to post
Share on other sites

a total of 42.50 only!

18 & 24.50 visits 1 & 2.

 

if you can pay

then pay the council direct by internet banking and stuff the bailiff fees.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no just wait for the pratt to call and tell him it was already paid direct to the council.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no just wait for the pratt to call and tell him it was already paid direct to the council.

 

dx

 

 

Thanks again - just worried about my car - which always parked on drive - Hope it wont be towed away - Can bailiffs tow one's car - when one is not at home - Any ideas on the rules on that

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi blackstar.

Personally, if you are able, I would pay the full amount owed to the council direct to the council online. I would also pay the additional £42.50 which is the bailiffs legitimate fee. This way he cannot chase you for anything and the matter resolved.

Best wishes

Rae.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to Kelcou

 

I have paid the council tax off - but the only thing i have ever received is a formal notice/ Notice of distress ( which i classify as a first visit) - On the notice Inventory section - My car is listed as goods to seized or to be seized

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to Kelcou

 

I have paid the council tax off - but the only thing i have ever received is a formal notice/ Notice of distress ( which i classify as a first visit) - On the notice Inventory section - My car is listed as goods to seized or to be seized

 

we'll you didn't say that did you..........

 

your car is then at risk.

 

you now need to ask the bailiff co. for a screen shot of his 'charges' as you think they are 'fraud'

 

 

do some reading in a few of the other threads here.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to Kelcou

 

I have paid the council tax off - but the only thing i have ever received is a formal notice/ Notice of distress ( which i classify as a first visit) - On the notice Inventory section - My car is listed as goods to seized or to be seized

 

 

Is the car legally yours. Have they listed it correctly, make & model, reg no etc. Is it on any type of finance particularly HP. Is it a business vehicle? On the Notice of Seizure have they listed any charges or on any other subsequent piece of paper.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ploddertom

 

Yes the car is legally mine - fully paid for - although i use it because i am self employed - The car details are hand written on the notice of distress -

on the notice it says - Council tax owed / 290 - bailiff charges - 181.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ploddertom

 

Yes the car is legally mine - fully paid for - although i use it because i am self employed - The car details are hand written on the notice of distress -

on the notice it says - Council tax owed / 290 - bailiff charges - 181.50

 

Is the vehicle insured for business use and are you the sole user?

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - not insured for business use

 

That may be a shame, however there may be a chance he has overcharged you on the fees, I think hallowitch is the one to work that out - hopefully she shouldn't be too far away.

 

A lot now will depend upon how the Council appropriate the monies you have paid. Some Councils pay the Bailiff first and the balance comes off what you owe. Some will say your account is clear but you must pay the bailiff yourself. If it is the second option then he cannot charge you further fees for collecting his fees he may have to take you to County Court for these if they won't negotiate - that is why if the fees he has charged are wrong then you have a bargaining tool. You can of course tell him to take a walk.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, hadn't realised this has been going on since last year, there are probably other charges from when he first appeared on the scene to take into consideration. Was your car ever there on previous visits?

 

Send the Bailiff the following - adapt to your own needs and send by email & letter:

 

"From:

My Name

My Address

 

To:

Acme Bailiff Co

Bailiff House

 

Ref: Account No: 123456

 

Dear Sir

 

With reference to the above account. Can you please provide me with a Statement of my account including Computer Screenshot. This is not a Subject access requestlink3.giflink3.giflink3.giflink3.gif under the Data Protection Act S7 1998 so does not incur a fee of £10. I also require the name of the attending Bailiff and the name of the Court he was Certificated at. You are obliged to provide this information.

 

I require this information within 14 days.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Ripped off customer"

 

I've put this in here as i belive you need to get an accurate view of what is being charged. You should also ring the Council and ask how much the Liability Order was for and how much is still outstanding.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - plodderton - No visit at all apart from letter from the council that the matter would be passed to the baliff in 14 days that was in December . This is the first i am hearing from the bailliff - i am surprised did not even receive any first letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

The following is taken from another website:

 

Council Tax

The Bailiff visits the premises but does not gain entry:

1st visit - £24.50

2nd visit - £18.00

The Bailiff gains entry, lists and takes 'possession' of the goods (the goods are not necessarily removed).

 

Debt less than £100 - £24.50

Where the debt is over £100 it is calculated thus: 22.5% on the first £100 of the sum due, 4% on the next £400, 2.5% on the next 1,500, 1% on the next £8000 and 0.25% on any additional sum.

The bailiff makes one attendance with a vehicle and intends to remove goods (where the bailiff has previously gained entry, listed, taken 'possession' but not removed the goods): reasonable costs and fees.

The bailiff removes and stores goods reasonable costs and fees.

The bailiff takes walking possession of the goods (the debtor has signed a walking possession agreement) - £12.00.

 

As I say I'm not up to working the percentages out but according to my calculations the levy fee should only be about £30 so where all the extra comes from I don't know. Don't take this as gospel though until someone else has had a look.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is you bailiff charges without a van fee

going by your bailiff charges you have been charged a van fee

as PT says you need the breakdown with dates for each charge

I have never known a bailiff charge less than a £100 for a van fee but there is every possibility you have not been charged the 2nd visit fee

 

1st visit fee £24.50

2nd visit fee £18

walking possession fee £12

levy fee £32.10

total £86.60

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone - sent a subject access letter to the bailffs and My local councillor who has forwarded to the chief execs - Anybody know what impact that will have. In the mean time - I am thinking a setuping a db with baliff to stop the charges increase - i welcome more ideas

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Response from the Council

 

A detiailed review has been undertaken by the bailiff company and I can confirm the following action was taken by them.

They instructed bailiff to call at your premises in order to discuss payment with you and a visit was made on the Thursday 28 January 2010. Acesss was not available and as such baliff placed a notice through your door to state he had called . A charge of 24.50 had been made for this visit. The letter requested you should contact the bailiff immediately to negotiate settlement to avoid further action.

B - No contact was made and therefore a further visist was on Thursday 4th febraury 2010, again no contact was available and correspondence was left advising an additional 18.00 fees had now been incurred and that bailiff intended to return and remove goods if payment or contact was not made

C- No reponse or payment was received so the bailiff was left with no alternative but to return on Saturday 27 feburary. He called with a van with the intention of removing goods if an arrangement or payment was not made as advised in the correspondence that was posted through your door on the 4th of feb.

D-Again access was not available to remove goods from the premises and the bailiff noticed a Mercedes on the drive that had been there on his previous visits to the premises so a levy was made on this vehicle. Appropriate documents confirming his action were posted through your letterbox.

When making visits to levy the bailiff will call with a van to remove goods from the premises if required and will make contact with removal vehicles etc as required.

the cost raised by the bailiff have all been in accordance with the charging structure shown on rear of the notice sent to you on the 29th December

Having reviewed the case I am satisfied the charges have been raised appropriately as three visits had been made to your property and not one as stated in your correspondence.

With regard to the Evans v Ribble case this relates to a situation where a bailiff had attempted to levy on goods and make a charge for this but had not physically entered the property which of course is not appropriate. However a levy can be performed on items outside a property.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reponse from the balififf company

 

You have been charged for our representive attendance with van following a levy being taken against goods. Our representative has attended the address supplied on the 27.10.10 with a van with the intention of removing goods to satisfy the debt. Upon his attendance to the address supplied our rep has neither been able to gain a response from within the property no could they gain peaceful entry. Our rep has noted that a vehicle was parked which was sighted on his previous visit. He has subsequently levied upon the vehicle have reasonable belief that it belonged to the name debtor. Therefore the enforcement fee of 105 and levy fee of£34 has been raised and applied correctly to your file.as we are able to make charge for a bailiff attendance with a vehicle following a levy made upon your property

 

Please be advised that the statement of account and screenshot you have requested are considered to be a subject access request under section 7 of the data protection Act 1998 and you shall need to forward a payment of £10.00 before we are able to act upon your request

 

All our bailiffs are certificated at court and employed to work of newlyn PLC. They work under our instructions and upon work that we give them. We are unwilling to provide the bailiffs name and court details at this time as we believe this request to be vexatious and unnecessary, and his actions are based on instructions given by the office and form part of the our standard. We believe that by taking our bailiffs certificate details you would be looking to issue a form 4 complaint against him as an individual. If you have reason to believe that the bailiffs as an individual has acted incorrectly and not upon our instruction. Please advise

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update

 

1. Requested a subject access

 

2. On the letter from the baliffs the vehicle registration is incorrect

 

3. Never recieved any 1st or 2nd or 3rd Correspondence - only communication was bill of £181

 

Please help - Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

two things from my limited brain.

 

they cannot levy & charge van fees on the same visit. [as all i have read shows they did not issue a levy on the car on visit 2 just 'noticed' it was there]

 

so both the council & the bailiffs dont know what they are talking about.

fees for third visit are illegal as a previous levy was not done.

 

as for needing £10, thats bull too, i have never known the latter from post 16 to get this response. you are intitled to all the info you asked for FOC

 

thats my comments, someone is trying it on here .... nothing unusual.

 

i notice the bailiff ci makes no comment about the first 2 visits either.

 

flippin leechers!!

 

dxd

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...