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

[RaeUK]

[cobblers! I can't edit!] Note: by 'forum' I meant completely different website using the same software...

[Vicki202]

Am i also correct in thinking to that if this had of been my car then they would of had to leave me notice of seizure or/ and copy of the levy made on what they assumed was my car ?

[ploddertom]

Am i also correct in thinking to that if this had of been my car then they would of had to leave me notice of seizure or/ and copy of the levy made on what they assumed was my car ?

 

Wouldn't matter if it was a JCB or a mousetrap if they believe it is yours - even if it isn't - and seize/levy on it they must leave a Notice of Seizure even if it is put through your door if you were absent.

 

PT

[Vicki202]

Ok ty plodd which they didnt do wouldnt even no what one looks like but am sure i would no if id had one all i have is a last letter from them and a one she left on my windscreen the morning she clamped the car which did not say notice of seizure

[marie6666red]

im sorry im VERY confused.....i read this thread, but then read a thread whereby you are aquiring horses....or am i on the wrong thread??????

[Vicki202]

i look after my friends horses and have just taken a mare and foal on that where been ill treated there is no way on earth i would see a animal made to suffer and this thread is not about me saying i dont have the money to pay the debt its about the wrong doings of a bailiff not the money

[Vicki202]

Plod can i request that template letter about the complaint 46 or what ever it was called please i have had a letter back to which im am going to post up and i am far from happy with response

[Vicki202]

Plod can i request that template letter about the complaint 46 or what ever it was called please i have had a letter back to which im am going to post up and i am far from happy with response

[lordcrocket]

if you lived in the midlands my friend i would be round to remove it for you you could just write me a notice and i'd send them one before i did and to the police instructing them of my actions as i did this with bristow and s

 

the police gave me a crime number and everything and got a clamping fim ready to clamp every car and van on it's grounds my debt was £1000

 

i also paid after the chap assulted myself oh and to my mother and clamped he neighbours car

 

so then reported them for theft in the bank got my money back in few days and money off the bailiff company i also have a case with the council for selling it on if i wanted to get third time lucky

 

sounds like the police may have acted unlawfully anyway and yes ipcc the cheif of police also look at thier oath of alligengce if you wanted to go into that side of it and hold them accountable

[Vicki202]

I am going every side i can police did act unlawfully they are been investigated i am now looking at this bailiff for trying to obtain money by deseption as my bill was 303 for council bailiff demanded 672 there and then but on the breakdown its only adds upto 510 or something so why she added extra 160 quid i have it in her writing to that she wanted the 672 yet the company and the council have no idea about it just wondering if there is enough proof with it been in her handwrighting and having the breakdown from council and bailiff adding lower than what she wanted i also am sending the bailiff a camp removal fee for the ilegal clamp she placed on the car that i had to remove

[Vicki202]

i will post the reply letter that i reviced this morning tomorrow its them admiting the waiting fee and how they reduced it n so on and still the buck is been passed

[lordcrocket]

yeah should think there is you always get someone to make a statement for you passing member of public put my name down hell yeah should think you have a case and half do not give up

[dx100uk]

Plod can i request that template letter about the complaint 46 or what ever it was called please i have had a letter back to which im am going to post up and i am far from happy with response

 

 

ding ding:

 

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c...form4_0606.pdf

 

 

dx

[Vicki202]

Morning guys n girls here comes the letter i got. it is a copy of the letter sent back to my MP from the council

 

i also tried the link dx and it took me to a error page or sayin page could of been removed

 

Dear Miss MP

 

Further to your letter on the Th of July I have now had the opportunity to investigate the issues that miss ******** raised.

 

Miss ******** council tax account was passed to Rossendales to collect on our behalf Th January 201. The amount at that time was £331.81. Since that date payments of £131.81 have been paid directly to us in respect of this debt. On each occasion that a payment has been received by by us , we have advised rossendales to reduce the amount been asked to collect on our behalf .

 

I have spoken to Rossendales in respect of the breakdown of the account that miss ******** requested from them. They confirm that a breakdown has been issued and that no fee has been charged for providing this information. They advise that they did not provide this information immediately as some of the information requested would have attracted a subject access request fee of £10.00 there intention was to supply all the information once the fee was received. i have asked them to make sure that similer requests for a breakdown are not held up because they are part of a subject access request. they acknowledge that a tax payer can contact them and request a breakdown of there account at any time ( only took them forever and i am still waiting for the information that the council said they are going to send me which is a subject access request but have agreed not to charge as i have asked for screen shots of my account and so on )

 

The bailiff fees incurred up to date are as follows

* 1St bailiff visit fee £24.50 incurred on the Th of February 2010. A letter was left

* 2Nd visit fee £18.00 on Th February 2010 another letter was left

*van attendance fee £110.00 on Rd march 2010 ( Was not awear a van had attended my property previously )

*levy fee incurred £35.00 on 23Rd march the bailiff levied on a blue ford escort registration edited The walking possession agreement was not signed by anyone but the bailiff did leave a notice of distress detailing the levy and the fees incurred ( i knew nothing of this until the council informed me of this last week plus this is not my car or was there is a wrong digit in the registration which has been repeated on 2 letter now and colour and type is wrong it is a ford escort but something else to and it is not blue )

*payment fees were incurred on each occasion a payment was made using the allpay payment system namely April 19th and April 21st2010 total £1.00

* a waiting fee of £60.00 was incurred on 21st June 2010

 

I am not clear why Miss ******** has stated that the only lawful fe that can be added is £42.50 . She refers to the day that the altercation with the van bailiff happened (21 June 2010 ) and claims fees are not chargeable because of these events please not most of the fees were incurred prior to this date

 

A valid levy does not have to have taken place for a van attendance fee to be charged. The bailiff is only allowed to charge for 2 unsuccessful visits to a property, he can make further visits but can not charge for leaving further letters. However he is allowed to attend a property with the intention of removing goods and charge reasonable fees for doing so. In miss ********* case the bailiff visited the property again on 23rd March 2010 with a vehicle with the intention of removing goods. He did not gain access to the property but did levy on the vehicle detailed above for which a levy fee was charged. A notice of distress was left. ( this one i do not understand as everything i have been reading and told states a valid levy does need to be in place or is this them saying there was no valid levy in place which admiting everything i have been telling them or are they still trying to go round in circles )

 

Rather than enforcing the liability order and removing the vehicle straight away the previous arrangement of £40.00 per month was reset to allow miss ******** a further opportunity to pay by instalments

 

With regard to the waiting fee incurred on 21st June 2010 , they advised that the fee was reasonably incurred prior to police involvement. Rossendales charge £30.00 per half hour or part thereof in respect of waiting time. They advise that the bailiff was at te property in excess of 4 hours due to the bailiff having phoned the police.( robbing ******* again i now belive this is not a lawful charge as nothing states they can charge a waiting fee apart for themselves lol )

 

On 21st June 2010 the bailiff visited the property with the intention of collecting £456.31 on behalf of the council initially waiting fees of were £180.00 were charged to reflect the time that the bailiff was at the property but they where later reduced to £60.00 to charge only for the waiting time prior to the police being called to the property ( if she was there to collect £456.31 why was she demanding £672.31 which i have in her own handwriting i am now going to go to the police and ask them to look into her trying to take money by deception

 

We are prepared to allow miss ******** a final opportunity to pay the debt off at a rate of £40.00 per month. Please contact me by 20th august 2010 if you wish this arrangement to be et up again with the bailiff it will include the fees that have been incurred to date ( how nice of them but i dont think so any money paid will be the outstanding amount direct to the council )

 

i trust that this clarifies matters

 

I am getting better with my letter writing and aim to reply to this asap back to both the MP and the council but views and any advice on what else i can add into my reply letter would be great

 

Thanx[/size]

Edited August 13, 2010 by IdaInFife
removed reg

[Vicki202]

Morning guys this is my reply letter to the one above any suggestions on adding or removing parts

 

Dear miss chi

 

I write in regards to the reply letter that you received from the council and sent a copy to myself there are still a number of points to which I need to raise the first is that the car they have on the letter sent to yourself and a letter I received from the bailiff company is not the car that they had clamped nor did it belong to myself. I do not own or have ever owned a car with the registration number R149HYG it also states a blue car again I do not and have never owned a blue car.

 

Fee’s added to my account as you are aware raised the issues of the fees added onto my account and have done this with yourself and the council still the amounts do not add up to what the bailiff demanded on the day she came to my property. To which I am now looking at taking legal action due to demanding money that was not owed in any way shape or form there is still no explanation as to why this bailiff was demanding money not listed on any breakdown or for what was on the liability order there for this could be a case of fraud/deception I have written evidence of this demand from the bailiff in her own handwriting.

 

I have had some contact with the council myself and they did put my account on hold I feel this may be myself been cheeky but would it be possible to ask the account is held until outcome of all manor of this is cleared up i.e. complaints and so on as I do not feel they are been dealt with seriously enough nor do I feel I am getting anything from this it all. Seems as though it is been passed backwards and forwards and nobody is owning up to the wrong doings of what has happened the out come from the assault is still with the police and I will carry on with this as this bailiff broke the law to which myself and oldest daughter are still suffering from. When trying to ask for help I am been pushed away due to so little been known by people over the laws and bailiffs however the inspector dealing with my complaint against the officers that attended that day has offered thanks for information I have gave to him and admitted that they knew none of this themselves and has now passed on the written information the Northumbria police’s training department. Up to now the only people showing any form of help is you and this officer to which I am grateful for and thank you for.

 

The bailiff company are sticking that there bailiff did not commit an assault and are still claiming all charges are lawful however it states nowhere in any regulations that a waiting fee can be added and also the van fee added this also states that it has to be a reasonable amount to which £110.00 is not as you can hire a van for a lot cheaper than this so that then makes the £110.00 charge a unfair charge Rossendale’s argued this as they said that it was arranged with Newcastle city council and agreed on so that would also mean that Newcastle City Council sanction there Bailiff company charging unfair and high amounts to which I would say is not right In respect to other charges I am not liable for a levy fee as the car stated as levied does not belong to myself and it never has done and unless this levy fee is removed I will request a Regulation 46 Complaint from the magistrates court and will be naming Newcastle City Council as defendants I will be sending the letters to both the

[Zamzara]

Culligan v Simpkin deals with alleged 'attendance to remove charges' before a levy has taken place. It's not binding, but Marstons were given the chance to appeal and declined.

As for a waiting fee, there is quite simply no such thing.

 

DJ Avent, after considering Case Law and Statute, has found that the purpose of putting on a clamp is to "impound" the vehicle and is not part of the costs of removal. This is because:-

 

1. The Bailiff's obligation is to secure the vehicle, and the simplest and easiest way to do this is to "immobilise" it so it cannot be driven away. This is effectively the equal of impounding the goods.

 

2. The Fee Regulations provide for a distinction between the levying of distress and removal of goods. There is a gap between the two stages. The purpose of this "gap" is to allow the debtor to make payment of what is due after the first stage.

 

DJ Avent says at paragraph 50 of his Judgment:-

 

"Accordingly, in my judgment the bailiff should not and, as a matter of law cannot take any steps to remove goods until he has given the debtor a reasonable opportunity to pay what is due at the time of seizure. This being so I cannot see that Form 7 can or should include any costs of removal. Mr. Simkin included on the Form 7 he produced for Mr. Culligan the sum of £100 in respect of the immobilisation device. If, as the Defendants now argue, that was part of the removal expenses, it should never have been included in Form 7".

[Vicki202]

This is becoming interesting i have this morning had everything from the council i asked for on the subject access request they say hey interviewd the bailiff she has told them as she seen my ex's van here that he is living here or she belives he lives here that could cause trouble where do i stand on this ?

[Vicki202]

I have been sifting through the documents i got today from the council after they where nice enough to send me a subject access request without charge and how fortunate for them they have admitted in there internal emails to each other that call recording was down for the day i asked for and can you guys tell me can they charge a levy fee and a van attendance fee for the same day altho i no the levy is not lawful they have said in these mails tat they are backing the bailiff no supprise there but a levy fee and a van attendace fee on same date is this allowed ?

[hallowitch]

try again lost post

 

no the bailiff cant charge a van fee and a levy fee on the same day

 

read C

For one attendance with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods Reasonable costs and fees incurred.

(where, following the levy, goods are not removed):

THE COUNCIL TAX (ADMINISTRATION & ENFORCEMENT) REGULATIONS 1992

AS AMENDED BY THE COUNCIL TAX (ADMINISTRATION & ENFORCEMENT) (AMENDMENT) (NO.2) REGULATIONS 1993,

THE COUNCIL TAX (ADMINISTRATION & ENFORCEMENT) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 1998,

THE COUNCIL TAX (ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT) (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) (ENGLAND) REGULATIONS 2003

AND THE COUNCIL TAX AND NON-DOMESTIC RATING (AMENDMENT) (ENGLAND) REGULATIONS 2006

SCHEDULE 5 CHARGES CONNECTED WITH DISTRESS

1. The sum in respect of charges connected with the distress which may be aggregated under Regulation 45(2)

shall be as set out in the following Table- (1) Matter connected with distress

(2) Charge

 

 

 

A For making a visit to premises with a view to

Levying distress (where no levy is made) -

(i) where the visit is the first or only

such visit): £24.50

(ii) where the visit is the second such

visit: £18.50

B For levying distress: The lesser of -

(i) the amount of the costs and fees

reasonably incurred:

and

(ii) the relevant amount calculated under

paragraph 2(1) with respect to the levy.

C For one attendance with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods Reasonable costs and fees incurred.

(where, following the levy, goods are not removed):

D For the removal and storage of goods for the purpose of sale: Reasonable costs and fees incurred.

E For the possession of goods as described in paragraph 2(2)

(i) for close possession (the man in £15.00 per day.

possession to provide his own board):

(ii) for walking possession: £12.00

F For appraisement of an item distrained at the Reasonable fees and expenses of the broker

request in writing of the debtor appraising.

G For other expenses of, and commission on, a sale by auction-

(i) where the sale is held on the the auctioneer’s commission fee and out-of

auctioneer’s premises: pocket expenses (but not exceeding in

aggregate 15%, of the sum realised), together with reasonable costs and fees

incurred in respect of advertising.

(ii) where the sale is held on the debtor’s premises: The auctioneer’s commission fee (but not

exceeding 7.5% of the sum realised), together with the auctioneer’s out-of-pocket expenses and reasonable costs and fees incurred in respect of advertising.

H Where no sale takes place by reason of payment or tender in the Either:

Circumstances referred to in Regulation 45(4); (i) £24.50, or

(ii) the actual costs incurred, to a maximum of 5% of the amount in respect of which the liability order was made.

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.

(2) An authority takes close or walking possession of goods for the purpose of head E of the Table

in paragraph 1 if it takes such possession in pursuance of an agreement:-

(a) to which the debtor is a signatory;

(b) which is made at the time that the distress is levied; and

© (without prejudice to such other terms as may be agreed) which is expressed to the effect that, in

consideration of the authority not immediately removing the goods distrained upon from the premises occupied by the debtor and

delays its sale of the goods, the authority may remove and sell the goods after a later specified date if the debtor has not by then

paid the amount distrained for (including charges under this Schedule).

and an authority takes close possession of goods on any day for those purposes if during the greater part of the day a person is left on the

premises in physical possession of the goods on behalf of the authority under such an agreement.

2A.-No charge shall be payable under head F of the table to paragraph 1 in respect of the appraisement of an item unless the debtor has

been advised of the charge and the manner of its calculation, before the appraisement is made.

3.- (1) Where the calculation under this Schedule of a percentage of a sum results in an amount containing a

fraction of a pound., that fraction shall be reckoned as a whole pound.

(2) In the case of dispute as to any charge under this Schedule (other than a charge of prescribed amount) the debtor or the authority

may apply to the district judge of the county court for the district in which the distress was or is intended to be levied for the amount of the

charge to be taxed.

(3) On such application, the district judge may give such directions as to the costs of the taxation as he thinks

fit; and any such costs directed to be paid by the debtor to the charging authority shall be added to the sum which may be aggregated under

Regulation 45(2).

(4) References in the Table to paragraph 1 to costs, fees and expenses include references to amounts payable by way of value added tax

with respect to the supply of goods or services to which the costs, fees and expenses relate.

[Vicki202]

Thanx hun think al print that off n put it in me reply do you no where it would say about there been no waiting fee allowable so i can throw that at them to as they are still saying waitin fee acceptable and stands

[letsdothis]

How much do you still actually owe the council?

 

I would if possible borrow the exact amount that you owe under the liability order off family if possible. If say for arguments sake you owe the council £230 and you then pay that off, direct to the council. It doesn't really matter what the bailliff's are charging you. As the liability order would have then been paid off in full, they then have no means of lawfully collecting any monies off you. Obviously you would still owe the £24.50 and the £18.00 though, which would be £42.50 - Which in reality, I feel you should pay, if you have had those 2 visits. But that of course is up to you.

[hallowitch]

there is no waiting fee in the regulations therefore you wont find a reference to it

 

this link apples to all councils in england and wales the fees quoted are the only fees the can charge

 

 

 

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

[Vicki202]

I owe the council 200 pound now and my account is on hold it will be paid in full by then its mainly the principle of it the bailiffs have already had money off me i need to work out just how much but i think its enough to cover the 42,50 so they certainly wont get anything else

[Vicki202]

Ok thanx there is more and more interestings sayins in these internal emails so i dare say im going to have plenty to throw at them when i get this letter done im pretty hacked off regarding them saying she came to observe me the cheek of it she had no right what so ever to sit and watch me find it highly annoying that they also have not answerd as to why she turned up and openly admits to knocking on my door at ^.35 am and then again at 7.05

[letsdothis]

I owe the council 200 pound now and my account is on hold it will be paid in full by then its mainly the principle of it the bailiffs have already had money off me i need to work out just how much but i think its enough to cover the 42,50 so they certainly wont get anything else

 

Pay the council the £200 asap then the baillifs are powerless. The worst they can do is to issue court proceedings for the £42.50 to get any chance of recovering it from you. The cost of doing so would outweigh what you owe so they lose anyway.

 

Then press charges against the bailiff. Don't be worried about upsetting her feelings, she deserved it. Let her lose her bailiff's licence. I would.