Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
    • Massive issues from Scottish Power I wonder if someone could advise next steps. Tennant moved out I changed the electric into my name I was out the country at the time so I hadn't been to the flat. During sign up process they tried to hijack my gas supply as well which I made it clear I didn't want duel fuel from them but they still went ahead with it. Phoned them up again. a few days later telling them to make sure they stopped it but they said too late ? had to get my current supplier to cancel it. Paid £50 online to ensure there was money covering standing charges etc eventually got to the flat no power. Phoned Scottish Power 40 minutes to get through they state I have a pay as you go meter and that they had set me up on a credit account so they need to send an engineer out which they will pass my details onto. Phone called from engineer asking questions , found out the float is vacant so not an emergency so I have to speak to Scottish Power again. Spoke with the original person from Scottish Power who admitted a mistake (I had told her it was vacant) and now states that it will take 4 weeks to get an appointment but if I want to raise a complaint they will contact me in 48 hours and it will be looked at quicker. Raised a complaint , complaints emailed me within 24 hours to say it will take 7 days till he speaks with me. All I want is power in the property would I be better switching over to EON who supply the gas surely they could sort it out quicker? One thing is for sure I will never bother with Scottish Power ever again.    
  • 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

Police let bailiff into my property ***WON - bailiffs certificate removed ***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4691 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 691
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't think they realize it but the council have really have dropped the police in it namely "He denies being unpleasant but does state that he did advise that you must deal with the bailiff". Even if offered it with the best of intentions he has absolutley no authority to give such advice nor was he wise to do so as by doing it he has involved himself directly in the collection of a debt.

 

In addition such language clearly implies that he DID aid the bailiff in entering your home

 

I do hope you are going to complain to the police

 

 

I'd agree with that - if the council have told you that in writing, it's as good as a written confession - that of complicity in an offence.

 

And that's just as guilty as the one who commits the offence, and ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it.

 

I hope you really come down heavy on them for this, as this is an arrestable offence. If the bailiff is arrested, then so should the policeman involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would subject access request the council our council don't charge a fee for this

 

personally i think the revenues department (the bloke you spoke on the phone) should have taken this debt back as soon as you told him about the alleged assault this being done to protect you the bailiff and the council the seriousness of the situation should have been paramount you should not have been told to deal with the bailiff

 

This being the same bailiff that allegedly assaulted you as your account was sill being held by her

 

 

I use the word alleged because at the time of the phone call its just an allegation

However a serious allegation should be immediately looked into and the debtor should not be put back in the lions den

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would subject access request the council our council don't charge a fee for this

 

personally i think the revenues department (the bloke you spoke on the phone) should have taken this debt back as soon as you told him about the alleged assault this being done to protect you the bailiff and the council the seriousness of the situation should have been paramount you should not have been told to deal with the bailiff

 

This being the same bailiff that allegedly assaulted you as your account was sill being held by her

 

 

I use the word alleged because at the time of the phone call its just an allegation

However a serious allegation should be immediately looked into and the debtor should not be put back in the lions den

 

 

Agree with this also. Now that the whole affair is under police investigation, the council should be placing this on hold until the investigation is complete. Clearly, this has gone beyond civil matter, and is now a criminal matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The police are already massivley involved as 10 officers are under investigation for assisting the bailiff while she was here

 

 

10:shock: & they can't find the time to attend a mugging or a burglary often even when the burglar is still on the premises but they can send 10:evil: to help in enforcing a debt

 

You may not want it but it would be great to get the press involved they'd love such a story

 

"You were unpleasant" what did he expect a welcoming committee of course you were unpleasant so would most people be in that situation clearly that one's not the sharpest tool in the box

Link to post
Share on other sites

the police where called by her at first because her keys where removed from her van after her assaulting me as i didnt no who she was and to make sure she didnt get away without it been reported the other police where called when i tried to stop her entering my property while dealing with the police

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which police force was it & no matter who ask them if they have guidelines like the following & if not why not

 

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

11/06/08 1 Force Publication Scheme

DEVON & CORNWALL C O N S T A B U L A R Y

Force Policy & Procedure Guideline Attending Premises with Bailiffs

Reference Number D222

Policy Version Date 11 June 2008

Review Date 01 June 2009

Policy Ownership: Criminal Justice Department

Portfolio Holder: Assistant Chief Constable (JPS)

Links or overlaps with other policies:

DEVON AND CORNWALL POLICE AND PROCEDURE GUIDELINE D222

ATTENDING PREMISES WITH BAILIFFS

Version dated: 11 June 2008

1. POLICY AND AUDIT IDENTIFICATION

1.1 This policy has been drafted and audited in accordance with the principles of

Human Rights legislation and the Race Relations (amendmentclip_image001.gif) Act 2000. Under

the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the document is classified as OPEN.

2. POLICY STATEMENTS/INTENTIONS

2.1 This document is designed as a reference point for officers when dealing with bailiffs and other officers of the court legally authorised to collect a debt on behalf of a creditor.

2.2 The policy gives officers guidance on their role when attending premises with bailiffs, and for their information also provides summaries of the rules bailiffs should follow when lawfully conducting their business.

2.3 Policy Contents:

3. Introduction

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

11/06/08 2 Force Publication Scheme

4. Procedures

5. Determining Criminal Liability

6. Review

7. Appendix A – Range of Bailiffs and Enforcement Officers

8. Appendix B – Bailiff Rules: Gaining Entry to Premises

9. Appendix C – Bailiff Rules: Inside Premises

3. INTRODUCTION

3.1 The law relating to bailiffs and their powers is extremely wide. Using legal authorisation, they may collect debts for any number of creditors. This can sometimes be a difficult experience for both debtor and bailiff, which is why officers may be called to attend.

3.2 The usual authority of a bailiff is a warrant issued by a county courtclip_image001.gif to recover goods or monies owed, or goods to the value of monies owed, from a debtor. The alternative authority officers will likely experience is a distressclip_image001.gif warrant or liability order issued by a Magistrates’ Court.

3.3 The Constabulary's involvement with regard to the policing of bailiffs – as with any other civil dispute - is to prevent a breach of the peace from occurring, or to attend an incident when a specific criminal offence has occurred or is likely to occur.

3.4 These instances will largely be confined to: disputes by debtors over a bailiff’s entry to their premises when executing a warrant or liability order; the lawful conduct of the bailiff when entering and inside the premises; and any criminal/illegal activity committed by either a bailiff or debtor.

3.5 Further Guidance on Bailiffs is available in the Appendices, and: The National Standards for Enforcement Agents, which are advisory and not mandatory minimum standards for bailiffs. Available at:

Department for Constitutional Affairs - Enforcement - National Standards for Enforcement Agents

The Association of Civil Enforcement Agencies’ Guide to Bailiffs & Bailiff Law for Police Officers. Available at:\\hqdc2\hqdc2dfs\Criminal Justice

Department\HQ\Operations\ Guidance and Legislation\Attending Premises with Bailiffs\ACEA Police Guide to Bailiffs & Bailiff Law v1.1.pdf

4. PROCEDURES

4.1 When first called to a scene, or if attending a scene with a bailiff by prior arrangement, a constable should be satisfied of:

a. The bailiff's identity and status,

b. The authority on which the bailiff has or seeks to enter the premises; including any relevant documentation which gives the bailiff the power to enter the premises,

The fact that the bailiff has located the correct premises or correct debtor.

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

11/06/08 3 Force Publication Scheme

4.2 Advice for bailiffs is that they should always, upon request, produce relevant identification, such as a badge or ID card, together with a written authorisation to act on behalf of the creditor.

4.3 If a bailiff or court officer is unable to provide evidence of identity, status, authority or power, and is causing a breach of the peace or committing an offence, the police constable should prevent the bailiff from entering the premises, or if already on the premises, should remove the bailiff/court officer at once.

4.4 If the documentation is in order, the constable should remind the bailiff that entry

must be obtained without force, except in the circumstances highlighted in

Appendix B. N.B. Bailiffs can take goods from outside the premises such as a

debtors car on a driveway (if they have a clamping order), or garden equipment.

4.5 Constables should be aware of their duty to keep the peace. If there is a sufficiently real and imminent threat of a breach of the peace, the constable should be very careful when determining who is acting unlawfully, then act accordingly by arresting the prime culprit of the potential breach, or using his/her discretion to diffuse the situation. It is vital to remain impartial to determine whose conduct is unlawful.

4.6 However, it is not the responsibility of the Officer to act as an arbitrator between the bailiff and the debtor, nor to determine the rights and wrongs of the issue, and in no way should the officer assist in the seizure of any goods.

5.0 DETERMINING CRIMINAL LIABILITY

5.1 When determining that there is a sufficiently real and imminent threat of a breach of the peace, which justifies an arrest, the officer must decide whose conduct is causing that breach.

5.2 If the bailiff were hindered in any way whilst acting lawfully and reasonably in the course of their duties, then that would constitute a breach of the peace by those causing the obstruction.

5.3 If a debtor is present when a bailiff is entering and levying distress, he/she could face arrest and criminal liability if:

a. They forcibly exclude the bailiff from his/her premises should they have

gained peaceful entry. N.B. This could result in subsequent forced re-entry by the bailiff, as outlined in Appendix B.

b. They conceal or remove goods that have been allocated as the subject of

distress during an earlier visit (this is known as ‘Walking Possession’).

N.B. in other cases a debtor is well within his/her rights to conceal or remove

goods in order to avoid distress.

5.4 However, should the bailiff be acting unreasonably or unlawfully whilst gaining entry, whilst inside the premises, or so to provoke the debtor, then that will be considered unlawful on their part.

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

11/06/08 4 Force Publication Scheme

5.5 Police constables should also be aware that in very rare cases a bailiff's persistent and frequent actions or demands for payment may constitute harassment under

Sec. 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

5.6 If other elements exist, such as a bailiff threatening or using violence to gain entry, or assault or criminal damage by either party, then other powers of arrest should be used.

6.0 REVIEW

6.1 The contents of this guideline will be reviewed annually by the Commander, Criminal Justice Department.

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

11/06/08 5 Force Publication Scheme

7.0 APPENDIX A – RANGE OF BAILIFFS AND ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS

7.1 county courtclip_image001.gif Bailiffs:

Enforce money owed under county courtclip_image001.gif Judgement debt.

• Power: can Seize and sell goods, effect and supervise the possession of property and the return of goods under hire purchase, and serve court documents.

7.2 High Court Enforcement Officers:

Enforce money owed under high court judgement, or judgement transferred from county courtclip_image001.gif.

• Power: Can seize and sell goods, & enforce and supervise the possession of property and the return of goods.

7.3 Civilian Enforcement Officers (CEO’s are employed by HMCS): Enforce Magistrates’ Court Orders, fines and community penalty notices.

• Power: can Seize and sell goods to recover amount of money owed under a fine and community penalty notice. Under certain statutes, have the power of

ARREST, committal, detention and distress.

7.4 Certificated Bailiffs:

Enforce debts on behalf of a variety of organisations, including magistrates’ courts and local authorities.

• Power: They can seize and sell goods to cover the amount of debt. They hold a certificate, which enables them (only) to levy distress for rent, road traffic debts, council tax, non-domestic rates, and debts of Child Support Agency, Inland Revenue, Customs & Excise (VAT), and Magistrates Court Fines. They cannot enforce monies owed under High/county courtclip_image001.gif Orders.

7.5 Non-Certificated Bailiffs:

Enforce debts owed to a variety of organisations.

• Power: are only entitled to seize the goods that are subject of the to the particular debt being pursued, e.g. a car bought on credit when the payments have not been made.

7.6 The above list is not substantive, and there are a few other people/organisations that have similar powers to bailiffs. These include Landlords enforcing rent and Collectors of Taxes who enforce unpaid Income Tax and National Insurance.

7.7 In Devon & Cornwall, HMCS contracts the civil enforcement agency 'Drakes' (a certificated bailiff) that works on its behalf with regard to executing warrants of distress in respect of non-payment of fines. They are not contracted to execute warrants of arrest, this is undertaken by CEOs and Devon & Cornwall

Constabulary.

8.0 APPENDIX B – BAILIFF RULES: GAINING ENTRY TO PREMISES

8.1 The actions of a bailiff lawfully entering a premises and seizing and selling goods to cover monies owed by the debtor, including the bailiff’s fees, is called ‘levying distress’. The term ‘distress’ used on its own generally means the procedure for bailiffs just to ‘seize’ goods; this may not necessarily involve removing and selling the goods.

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

11/06/08 6 Force Publication Scheme

8.2 The basic rule for Bailiffs is that entry should be without force, thus they have the right to peaceful entry only. There is no legal requirement by a debtor to let a bailiff into their home.

8.3 To gain peaceful entry, the bailiff can walk through an open door, open an unlocked door, climb through an open window, and even climb over a wall or fence, provided no damage is caused in so doing.

8.4 The bailiff cannot, however, break open a closed but unfastened window or door, open a closed latched window, or use a locksmith to open a door. Use of a landlord's key is also illegal. They cannot force their way past someone at a door, or wedge their foot in a doorway to prevent the door being closed. The protection against forced entry extends to all buildings physically attached to the living premises.

8.5 Reasonable Force may be used to gain entry in these circumstances only:

a. A bailiff is executing a magistrates distress warrant for non-payment of fines.

b. A bailiff has once previously entered a debtor’s home peacefully, or was forcibly ejected by the occupier after gaining lawful entry, and is returning to levy the goods.

c. The officer is a High Court enforcement officerclip_image001.gif and the premises to be entered with force are separate non-domestic premises, which are not connected to the living accommodation, e.g. a workshop or barn. Or, the

premises are a third party's house where goods have been taken to avoid seizure by a bailiff. A demand for entry should always be made first.

d. More rarely, a Landlord has a county courtclip_image001.gif Possession order to evict a tenant, or requires entry to a stranger's premises and has an oath sworn by the Magistrates to the effect that there are grounds for believing goods have been fraudulently removed to those premises.

E Or, an Inland Revenue Collector enforcing income tax for HMRC has a warrant to force entry.

N.B. A county courtclip_image001.gif Bailiff must always obtain the permission of a District Judge before a forced entry to separate non-domestic premises, stranger’s premises, or when returning for a second time to remove a debtors goods.

8.6 With regard to time of calling, only bailiffs collecting rent are obliged to call after sunrise and before sunset. There are no restrictions for when a levy of distress shall commence in respect of unpaid fines, costs and compensation. N.B. The

National Standards for Enforcement Agents, which are advisory and not mandatory, highlight that enforcement should only commence at a reasonable time between 6am and 9pm, or during trading hours, excluding Sundays and Public

Bank holidaysclip_image001.gif, unless the court specifically orders otherwise or legislation permits it.

9.0 APPENDIX C – BAILIFF RULES: INSIDE PREMISES

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

11/06/08 7 Force Publication Scheme

Edited by JonCris
Link to post
Share on other sites

that could turn out interesting i do not no what was said the Sargent that brought her into my house the second time but the sargent made out she had a warrant to witch i now no she didnt it was a liability order

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been in touch with tyne tee's tonight and they would like me to email them a brief summery of whats gone on and i dont have a clue where to start pmsl

At the the beginning .. ;) try from the time she first got there at 6.30am.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yea lol shes admited knocking at 6.30 am to now why do that if newcastle city council state they cant collect on council tax before 8am

 

 

i would print out a screen shot of that just in case it mysteriously disappears from there website

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also this from the Council website:

 

Council Tax

 

in particular:

 

Distraint

 

The council can ask bailiffs to visit your home and take goods which may be sold to pay off your debt. They must send a letter, giving two weeks notice, telling you that bailiffs will call and how much you still owe under the liability order.

Contact the council and the bailiffs and try to make an arrangement to pay. If the bailiffs will not accept your offer of payment then ask the council to take the account back from bailiffs to let you pay the Council Tax directly. You should do this as soon as possible because you may be charged costs for each time the bailiffs visit your home. Use your personal budget to support your offer and start paying immediately.

 

 

 

Seems as if they are contradicting themselves!!

 

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning all ive recived an email this morning from my local mp it only states they will contact the council and the police regarding the matter should i reply to them and attach coppies of the replys ive had and state how unsatisfactory they are or wait and ee if he manages anything

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys keep going thro my reply letters from the formal complaints the more i read the one from the council the more it feels like they are deff gonna support the bailiff over this also not sure wether i should be replying to it saying its not good enough and the fact that it state on the website that if the bailiff company wont accept my offer then ask them to take it bk should i make a offer to the bailiff company via recorded delivery or make it to the vcouncil and point out about the taking it back from bailiff

Link to post
Share on other sites

you should reply to the councils letter

 

Your complaint received on 23 June 2010 has been referred to Rossendales to investigate the allegations that you have made in respect of *** ****** actions. I have received their reply with regard to this aspect of your complaint and will refer to this later in my letter.

 

Your Council Tax account was passed to Rossendales to collect on our behalf as the outstanding balance had not been paid and it was necessary to obtain a liability order on 22 October 2009. A letter was issued on 23 October 2009 requesting that the outstanding balance, £ 331.81 at that time, was paid within 14 days. The letter warned that if this amount was not paid as requested then the account would be passed to a firm of bailiffs to collect on our behalf. As no payments were received in respect of this debt, the account was passed to Rossendales on 28 January 2010.

 

I have received a report from Rossendales in respect of the actions that they have taken; I will list them in chronological order:

 

A bailifflink3.gif first visited your property on 17 February 2010; you advised that you were in dispute about the outstanding balance and that you would contact the Council direct with regard to this matter.

If you did not speak to her reply

AT no time on the 17th did i have a conversation with miss xxxx (if she left a letter say a letter was left)

The bailiff re attended the property on 19 February 2010 and you advised that you had not contacted the Council yet.

as above

 

On 25 February 2010, Rossendales agreed to allow you to pay the debt at a rate of £ 40.00 per month as you were in receipt of Income Support, payments to commence on 1 March 2010. This arrangement was set up as a result of your telephone calllink3.gif to the Council on 25 February 2010.

I did not make a telephone call to the council i went to council office's

As no payments were received by the bailiff (£ 10.00 was received by the Council), a broken arrangement letter was issued by Rossendales on 8 March 2010.

 

Payment was made to the council direct as I have no method of payment to pay rossendaless neither the council or rossendales have provided me with with a method of payment to pay rossendales direct

A further letter was then issued by Rossendales warning that the case would be passed to an enforcement bailiff. On 23 March 2010 a bailiff attended the property and a levy on a vehicle was completed. A copy of the Notice of distresslink3.gif was given to you at that time.

A notice of seizure of goods and inventory was not left or handed to me on this or any other date

Rather than enforce the liability order straight away, the arrangement of £ 40.00 was reset to commence from 17 April 2010. As no payments were received by the bailiff (a further £ 20.00 had been received by the Council), another broken arrangement letter was issued.

 

As no response was received in respect of this, *** ****** visited the property on 10 June 2010 but was unable to meet anyone so a letter was left with her contact details. She noted that there was a white transit van at the property in addition to the vehicle that had already been levied on. She states that a second visit was made to try to confirm ownership of the vehicles; she noted that you drove off in the levied vehicle after putting a bridle and saddle into the vehicle. From this information, she made the assumption that you owned a horse. However she did not see a horse and did not make reference to ‘moving it from field to field’.

Had miss xxxx approached me i would have informed her i did not own a horse

I fail to understand why a bailiff would sit outside my property and not approach me

She re attended the property on 21 June 2010 at approximately 6.30 am.

*** ****** confirms she knocked on the door but received no response.

If miss xxxx did knock my door at 6.30 am i did not here the knock

however i mush question why she was there at this time in the morning as according to guidelines published on your website bailiff should not collect council tax till after 8am

 

She clamped the vehicle that she had previously seen you driving and left a notice under the windscreen wiper, she then withdrew from the property.

this notice was not in an envelope therefore anyone passing my car could read it

The national standards for enforcement agents clearly state

They must maintain strict client confidentiality and comply with Data Protection legislation and, where appropriate

 

She returned to the property 30 minutes later to find the clamp and the wheel had been removed. She attempted to put another clamp onto the vehicle, at which point both you and Mr *********** came out of the property. *** ****** states that Mr ********** removed the keys from her vehicle. She states that she tried to stop Mr ********* from doing so but was physically unable to do so and therefore rang the police. She confirms that there would have been some physical contact during this incident but she denies any allegation of assault.

 

She confirms two police officers attended the incident and that she subsequently entered the property through an open door. She then returned to her vehicle and contacted the Council where she was given permission to uplift goods. The police then requested that the Council telephone Miss******** which we duly did. She then re entered the property and proposed she would accept half the balance then and the remainder was to be paid the following week. Subsequently Mr ********** advised *** ****** that the payment could not be made until 23 June 2010. She agreed to this but left the clamp on the vehicle.

 

Subsequently a police officer rang *** ******* and confirmed that you would not press charges against her if she collected the money that day, the officer advised her not to attend alone. She then rang to arrange this but Mr ********* disputed the outstanding balance and refused to make payment as he stated that you were to press charges against *** ******

 

She only returned to the property to retrieve her wheel clamp. The account was then put on hold.

 

I note that you have pointed out that Mr ********** vehicle is not subject to a Walking Possession Agreement. If the bailiff had proposed to clamp it, she would simply have had to levy on it prior to doing so. The fact Mr *********** is a market trader does not necessarily mean that this vehicle is a ‘tool of the trade’.

I have spoken to the officer that rang you as a result of the request from the police. He confirms that no agreement was made for you to pay £ 100.00 per week. He denies being unpleasant but does state that he did advise that you must deal with the bailiff. As I understand the situation the clamp has been removed from your vehicle. However Council Tax does remain due and must be paid to Rossendales. I have advised them to allow you until the end of July to do so. If it has not been paid in full by then, the bailiff will take further action to recover the outstanding debt. I have however requested that *** ****** takes no further action in respect of recovering this debt.

If you wish to take action in respect of the alleged assault, this is a matter that you must pursue with the police.If you are not happy with the result of my investigation, you can ask our Corporate Complaints Officer to review your complaint. If you wish to do so, please telephone #

 

 

go through it like i have and bullet point things then post up your reply to

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...