bailiff levy on someone elses vehicle!

[andy262000]

A friend of mine was telling me how a bailiff had levied on a vehicle which did not belong to him, I had been reading on here about how frequently this occurs.

 

He was behind on council tax and discovered he would be eligible for small business rates relief, inbetween sorting this out and paying the balance rossendales visited 24.50 first visit, second visit levy on a vehicle presumed to belong him described as van fees and levy an extra £230, then a visit when he was actually there to take the payment under duress paid the full amount after a period of arguing he was threatened with police, £50/hr costs and he would sit there until he got his money.

 

I read some good advice on here and told him to write to the council and rossendales asking them to prove via DVLA check it was his vehicle and refund the money although accept the first visit £24.50.

 

Rossendales have wrote back asking him to prove it's not his vehicle by way of sending copies of logbook and insurance? how can he do that if the vehicle does not belong to him..

 

Thanks in advance

[seanamarts]

Do you know the person that of the vehicle, if so then you can ask them to do a statutory declaration which can be sworn at a solicitors or a local county court. He can then send that to the bailiff company.

If he does not know the owner, then he must write back and tell them to do a search.

[hallowitch]

Send council and rossendales a copy of this ask rossendales to refund levy fee walking possession fee (if charged)and van fee within 14 days of your recorded delivery letter

informing them both if fees are not returned your next move is a form 4 against the bailiff and small claims court action against rossendales and the council as co defendant for the return of unlawful fees

 

rossendales can and should have done a Dela check against the van before the fees were charged

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/262730-has-bailiff-levied-upon.html

 

April 2010 Insight – Local Government Ombudsman

 

 

As it has become increasingly difficult for bailiffs to gain access to debtors’ homes for the purpose of taking goods for council tax, the practise of levying on vehicles in the absence of the debtor has grown. These vehicles may be parked on the debtor’s property or in the road outside. This practise, if abused, can lead to the Local Government Ombudsman finding fault with the bailiffs and the council employing them.

 

The Ombudsman has dealt with at least four unreported complaints when cars parked in the road were levied on, but did not belong to the debtor. In each case the bailiffs assumed that the vehicle belonged to the debtor, but did not check ownership before making the levy. In one case, having levied on the car, a notice was put through the debtor’s letterbox including the fees. As the debtor did not respond, the bailiffs returned to remove the car, but found it was no longer there. Despite not being able to levy on the goods the bailiffs charged a “van fee” (under head C of Schedule 5 of the 1992 Administration and Enforcement Regulations, as amended) of £105, and posted a further notice through the letterbox to advise the debtor of the new, higher debt.

 

In three other complaints, involving a different authority, the same thing happened – with levy and van fees being charged for cars not owned by the debtors. In those cases the debtors contacted the bailiffs to say that they did not own the cars. The bailiffs acknowledged this, but still insisted that the levy and van fees were payable. When our investigator queried this with the council, they were told that the bailiffs would have checked with the DVLA before moving the car, but even if the debtor did not own the car the levy fees would not have been removed.

 

These practices are likely to result in a finding of administrative fault by the Ombudsman. There is no question that when bailiffs have carried out a relevant action, they are entitled to the fees the law allows them to charge. However in these cases the levy and van fees were being charged for goods that the bailiff would not have removed - had the car been found and the bailiffs checked before removal, it would have been found they belonged to a third party.

 

A council may say that a check would be made before any removal, but this does not prevent possible fault. Some debtors will pay when they receive the levy or other notices, and will pay fees that should not have been charged to them. Levying on a car parked on someone’s drive may appear less problematic as it is more likely to belong to the debtor. But if it does not, and levy and van fees are charged and paid, then the debtor has suffered the injustice of paying fees that were not due.

 

In all four cases the Ombudsman recommended the same remedy. The levy and van fees should be refunded and the council should ensure their bailiffs check ownership of vehicles with the DVLA before levying on them. Debtors should pay what they owe, and if a vehicle belongs to the debtor (and any levy would not be excessive) then levying and charging reasonable fees would not be questioned by the Ombudsman.

 

All councils are encouraged to ensure their written policies say that bailiffs, whether internal or external, do not levy on vehicles without first checking ownership. Failure to do so could mean that any future complaints to the Ombudsman may be the subject of a public report against the authority.

 

 

Andrew Hobley is Senior Investigator with the Local Government Ombudsman.

[andy262000]

Thanks for the rapid advice Seanamarts and Hallowitch, just printed this for him going to take it round to him. The vehicle belongs to a neighbour who knows nothing of the levy, seems ludicrous that they can choose to levy on anything then you have to prove otherwise, it could not be possible to do so in some cases.

[seanamarts]

Thanks for the rapid advice Seanamarts and Hallowitch, just printed this for him going to take it round to him. The vehicle belongs to a neighbour who knows nothing of the levy, seems ludicrous that they can choose to levy on anything then you have to prove otherwise, it could not be possible to do so in some cases.

Bailiffs are a law unto their own, they just make it up as they go along

[ploddertom]

Following on from above have you had a breakdown of what they have charged you so far? I would also get on the Council and ask how the original Liability Order was for so you can start to cover all bases when it comes to trying to get your money back.

 

PT

[tomtubby]

Thanks for the rapid advice Seanamarts and Hallowitch, just printed this for him going to take it round to him. The vehicle belongs to a neighbour who knows nothing of the levy, seems ludicrous that they can choose to levy on anything then you have to prove otherwise, it could not be possible to do so in some cases.

 

I posted the original link to the above letter from the Local Government Ombudsman and I would also advised anyone who has received such a levy to make a formal complaint to the relevant council as it is the COUNCIL who are wholly responsible for any levy (or charges) made by their agents.

 

Insist that ALL charges associated with this so called levy are immediately removed.

 

PS: Which bailiff company was this ?

[andy262000]

Thanks for the replies, the original order had been paid plus £100 court costs, the bailiff just came to collect his costs as he put it, first visit, levy and van fees.

 

I spoke to my friend and showed him this post, he was very surprised there was such useful responses.

 

He received another letter from rossendales, basically acknowledging the complaint he made then the next paragraph said 'If it is found you have made a vexatious complaint against our company you will be prosecuted and through a court ordered to pay substantial costs'

 

He sort of laughed and went a bit serious saying can they do that?? I said you just want your money back, it's not your vehicle the levy was on so it's incorrect!

 

He's upset because as soon as his revised bill came it was paid although by cheque his account was cleared in a week plus the £100 court costs.

 

The bailiff was working on the previous figure before the rates relief was applied and acted in between the council providing the revised bill. In short the bailiff was chasing for the full amount roughly £1000 plus whatever he added when in fact the bill was £500 after the rate relief.

 

Thanks for the help

[seanamarts]

Van fee? Levy fee ? The bailiff levied the wrong car there should not be a levy fee, also a van fee, no valid levy so no van fee.

[hallowitch]

Seanamarts it correct no levy /van fee the only bailiff fees you should have paid is £42.50

the rest should be returned

 

send them this

 

 

"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 Breakdown of the charges including Computer Screenshot.

 

This includes:

a - the time & date of any Bailiff action that incurred a Fee.

b - the reason for the fee.

c - the name(s) of the Bailiff(s) that attended on each occasion a Fee was charged.

d - the name(s) of the Court(s) the Bailiff(s) was/were Certificated at.

e - the date of the Certification.

 

This is not a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act S7 1998 so does not incur a fee of £10. You are obliged to provide this information.

 

I require this information within 14 days.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Ripped off customer"

 

 

send by e-mail & recorded delivery letter

 

Has he been in touch with the council about this

 

 

[andy262000]

Thanks for the replies!

 

I gave him some information I found here to produce a letter requesting a refund of charges and asking them to provide evidence via DVLA check to prove it is an incorrect levy and to notify him when this has been done and the refund is on it's way.

 

The letter went recorded delivery to council and rossendales, the council have backheeled it to rossendales saying it's up to them to sort out.

 

He rang me before to say there is another letter today from rossendales saying they are investigating the complaint and the bailiff has evidence the vehicle belongs to him? He must forward copies of V5 and insurance to prove otherwise. That's three letters in three days from them.

[seanamarts]

i would like to see what evidence they have to suggest the car is his,

[ploddertom]

The Council are passing the buck - they are responsible for the Bailiffs actions. Write a letter to both Council & Bailiff telling them you want the fees refunded or you will submit an N1 in the County Court naming both Council & Bailiffs as Co-Defendants - give them 7 days.

 

PT

[andy262000]

Thanks for the replies, I said I'd do a letter for him, on another note he got a letter from council saying the government are giving small businesses which have 50% rate relief 100% from october 2010 to sept 2011, I think there will be a few upset bailiff's lol!!