Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Shein has been linked to unethical business practices, including forced labour allegations.View the full article
    • Hi I have to agree with @unclebulgaria67 post#3 For the funding side of moving to a new area and it being private supported accommodation I would also suggest speaking to private supported accommodation provider about funding but also contact the Local Council for that area and have a chat with them about funding because if you are in receipt of Housing Benefit certain Supported Accommodation that meets a certain criteria is treated as ‘exempt accommodation’ for Housing Benefit purposes but you need to confirm this with that relevant Council in your new area especially since it is Private Supported Accommodation as each Council can have slightly different rules on this. If you have a certain medical condition look up the charities and also have a wee chat with them as they may be able to point you to different Grants to assist with moving costs and your question about funding for private supported accommodation as well.
    • Hi Just to be clear a Notice to Quit is only the very start of the Housing Association going down the Eviction route there is a long process to go. Also to be clear if you leave at the Notice to Quit date only and go to the Council claiming you are Homeless they will more than likely class you as Intentionally Homeless therefore you have no right to be given temporary housing by the Council. The only way that works is when the Court has Granted a Possession Order then you can approach the Council as Homeless with the Court Order. As for the Housing Association issuing the Notice to Quit because there investigation has proved it's not your main residence but you have witness statement to prove otherwise. From now on with the Housing Association you need to keep a very good paper trail and ensure to get free proof of posting from the post office with anything you send to them. You now need to make a Formal Complaint to the Housing Association and please amend the following to suit your needs:   Dear Sir/Madam FORMAL COMPLAINT Reference: Notice to Quit Letter Dated XX/XX/2024, Hand Delivered on XX/XX/2024 I note in your letter that you stated that the Housing Association has carried out an investigation into myself and came to the conclusion that I am not using this property as my main residence and have evidence of this and have therefore issued a 'Notice to Quit' by XX/XX/2024. I find the above actions absolutely disgraceful action by the Housing Association. 1. Why have I never been informed nor asked about this matter by my Housing Officer. 2. Why have I never been given the opportunity to defend myself before the Housing Association out of the blue Hand Delivered a Notice to Quit Letter. 3. I have evidence and witnesses/statements that prove this is my Main Residence and more than willing provide this to both the Housing Association and the Court. I now require the following: 1. Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Copy of your Customer Care Charter (not the leaflet) 3. Copies of your Investigation into this not being my main residence.    As well as the above you need to send the Housing Association urgently a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that in whether it be letters, email, recorded calls etc. The Housing Association then has 30 calendar days to respond but that time limit only starts once they acknowledge your SAR Request. If they fail to respond within that time limit its then off with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).     
    • Hi Sorry for the delay in getting back to you The email excuse and I do say excuse to add to your account and if court decide LL can't recoup costs will be removed is a joke. So I would Ask them: Ask them to provide you with the exact terms within your Tenancy Agreement that allows them to add these Court Fees to your Account before it has been decided in Court by a Judge. Until the above is answered you require these Court Fees to be removed from your Account (Note: I will all be down to your Tenancy Agreement so have a good look through it to see what if any fees they can add to your account in these circumstances)
    • Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Collect Services Bailiffs two PCN's issued by Hillingdon Council...paid £720. No breakdown ***WON***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4836 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

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have looked at Culligan v Simpkin and Marstons and am massively confused, mainly because it appears to be about clamping.

 

Looking at the Charges, shouldn't the Levy Fees and Attendance to remove fees be the same on each invoice?

 

When I fill out the money claim is it :

 

My Wife v bailiff 1, bailiff 2 and Collect Services?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of Culligan is that there are two stages to levying distress.

 

The first is the levy (seizure), for which set charges are laid down.

 

There is then an opportunity for the debtor to pay.

 

The second stage is then removal of the debtor's goods if he does not pay. For this, further reasonable costs may be added.

 

Marstons were trying to charge £100 for clamping on the grounds it was a reasonable charge. The judge held they could not, as at the levy stage no charges can be added beyond the fixed % fees prescribed in regulations, even if the bailiff incurrs additional reasonable costs.

 

Only when removing or attending to remove goods which have already been levied, after the debtor has had a further opportunity to pay, can they add reasonable costs for doing so.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have written the following to Credit Services on 17th August:

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

CASE NUMBERS ******/********

 

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Thank you for providing the statements and screen shots of account dated 21 June 2010, relating to two unpaid Penalty Charge Notices.

Upon examination of your charges, it is clear that you have charged fees twice on each single visit . This not allowed. These second fees are not an “actual and necessary cost” (Throssell v Leeds City Council (1993).

You have also charged “attendance to remove” before you have levied . This is also wrong , confirmed by the recent ruling in Culligan v Simkin & Marstons Group (2008) at paragraphs 49 and 50.

No form 9 was served at the address.

I am fully conversant with the fees prescribed in The Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts Order 1993.

 

I therefore calculate that you have wrongly charged me:

Visit/Levy Fee 1 £55.23 on 07.04.2010

Attendance to remove £104.50p on 07.04.2010

Visit/Levy fee 2 £68.15 on 22.04.2010

Attendance to remove £124.75 on 22.04.2010

 

Total £352.63p

 

I request that these unlawfully applied fees are refunded forthwith.

 

If you have not responded within fourteen days of this request , I will proceed by way of Court.

 

Besides requesting a refund of unlawful charges, and reasonable costs incurred in dealing with this matter I will request that you give proper evidence that these two visits have taken place. I will also ask you to explain how what you have charged for these two alleged visits represents “actual and necessary costs”

 

 

They have failed to respond and I am now in the process of compiling the Money Claim Online.

 

Must it all be done in my wife's name or can I act as her agent?

 

Who do I claim against, the company, the named bailiffs or both ?

 

Any help much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Ok.

 

My wife has now claimed against these people for the previously mentioned sum.

They have come back with following defence:

 

We have enforced two warrants issued by Hillingdon Borough Council against Ms **** **** (my daughter) in accordance with Enforcement of Road Traffic Debt (Certified Bailliffs 1993 amended 2003).

Further details of particulars have not been provided by Claimant ( even though we have copies of the previous letters sent signed for on delivery, so they know full well what the amount claimed is and why).

 

Collect Services have not carried out any enforcement action against the Claimant (i.e my wife, who paid the inflated invoice)

 

My wife is now panicking because we may have cocked up the process.

 

Thoughts please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. My wife is quite nervous about this. She thinks that it may affect her credit rating if she loses at Court.

If it turns out that my daughter should have claimed (even though my wife paid the bill),can we claim again in her name?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever is due the refund makes the claim. Its best to claim from the council and as an option, name the bailiff company as a 2nd defendant.

 

Reclaim everything, and let the bailiffs and council counter-argue what fees they want to keep. I think its £24.50 but you can ask for what is called "discovery of information" plus the statutory 8% interest, so you should make something out of that.

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we go down this path, do we have to contact the Court and resubmit the claim as above? i.e the whole amount from council and bailliffs. Sorry if it seems I'm a bit dim but my wife and I live a long way apart anf I havent physically seen the defence documents yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Right, it's taken a while but my wife has now been given a date to attend at Court. She is now panicking that if she loses her claim A)She will be liable for the bailliffs court costs , and B) Have a CCJ AGAINST her because she has lost.

 

Anyone advise us please?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you possibly lose, you need to have your facts right about their excessive fees.

 

As stated they cant levy for 2 tickets at the same time. Quote precidents. FACT thats WON.

As long as you go to court with all the relevant details then you dont have a worry. Go ill prepared then you will.

 

They dont have a leg to stand and might contact you before court date to settle.

My respect to people who post regularly and help people out on here. Without your help alot of wrongs would have been committed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they will settle before court.

 

and why would she get a CCJ even if she looses???

 

strange logic 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

You are the aggrieved party and not the defendant, there is no risk your wife will get a ccj. You have had money taken from you under false pretences..they cannot charge two fees for one visit.

Just make sure you have everything with you, filed in the order the events occured and be armed with facts, figures and precedents so you are not stumbling to find them in Court. You have nothing to worry about the DJ will help guide you through the procedures.

 

WD

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Sorry I probably didn't make that clear.

Her thoughts are if the Judge were to find for the bailiffs, would it count as a County Court Judgement against her because she lost the claim - definitely not? I am confident but she has no experience of Court, Judges etc.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

She won't get a CCJ if she loses.

 

No as per ploddertom's post she won't get a CCJ if she loses. If that was the case, debt collection agencies and bailiffs would lose their licences, and they would be out of business and not pursuing debtors if they got a CCJJ every time they lose a case in the County Court.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to rephrase the above as it does not make sense in reference to the OP. This is not a debt related issue anyway.

Even if it was a debt related issue, you still don't get issued with a CCJ if you pay up within 28 days of losing a debt related case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No OP's wife thought losing a case they have brought with the bailiff as defendant would give her a CCJ which it won't. I am aware that a CCJ won't be registered if the amount of judgment is paid within 28 days.

 

The point is we are reassuring OP that a CCJ would not result for a judge finding against them.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Court date on 30 th March.We are about to submit all copies of paperwork on which we are relying, to Collect Services and the Court, and pay the £50 fee.

Where can I find a printable version of THROSSELL V LEEDS CITY COUNCIL ?. I can't seem to find one anywhere.

Thanks

Glennyboy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...