Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
    • The airline said it was offering to pay $10,000 to those who sustained minor injuries.View the full article
    • The Senate Finance Committee wants answers from BMW over its use of banned Chinese components by 21 June.View the full article
    • Brussels is widely expected to introduce tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles coming to Europe.View the full article
  • 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

Rossendales Uncertificated Receptionist


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5022 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

Rossendales did not send a bailiff to my house but sent a receptionist instead to claim 1st + 2nd visit fees for council tax arrears. Therefore I believe that these fees (and maybe the visits) are invalid.

Rossendales referred to this receptionist by name several times in written correspondence as their "first call bailiff" and paperwork that she posted had her signature next to 'Bailiff of Rossendales Ltd'.

 

Forget about the fees for a minute.

 

Can the 1st and 2nd visits 'with a view to seizing goods' be made by a person that does not hold a valid bailiff certificate? I think not.

 

The first visit I received from a certificated bailiff is the visit that incurred fees of £201.00.

 

Can certificated bailiffs charge van fee, waiting fee(lol), and levy fees(lol) worth £201.00 on their very first visit, or would that be bad sport?

Edited by Dhimmiwit
more sp's
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the 1st and 2nd visits 'with a view to seizing goods'

 

For making a visit to premises with a view to levying distress (whether the levy is made or not):

 

 

Mmmmmm, the uncertificated receptionist's paperwork that she posted states "by virtue of an authority given to me by Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale Mags in a liability Order dated Jan 28,2010 I have this day re-attended with a view to seizing goods for the debt and costs owing to Pendle Borough Council as stated in the said liability order"

 

She had authority?

Edited by Dhimmiwit
Link to post
Share on other sites

If she is not certified then i would imagine she could not impose these threats.. Check the name on the data base here

 

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/CertificatedBailiffs/

 

Oh she was never ever certificated eggy, I know that for a 100% fact. I just need to know if an uncertificated person can act on behalf of a bailiff firm "with a view to seizing goods" (as she stated) and if these visits can be treated as the 1st and 2nd visits (not necessarily incurring a fee) which would lead to my next query-

 

The questions in the opening post are the ones that I would love some help with ie-

 

Can certificated bailiffs charge van fee, waiting fee(lol), and levy fees(lol) worth £201.00 on their very first visit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

She had authority?

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldhansrd/text/70420w0001.htm

 

Lord Lucas asked Her Majesty’s Government:

    Whether a person who represents himself to be a certificated bailiff, but is not, and by doing so obtains a payment or goods from a debtor, commits a fraud within the meaning of Sections 1 to 5 of the Fraud Act 2006; and, if so, which sections of the Act apply; and whether it would be right for the police to claim that such an action is a civil and not a criminal matter. [HL2744]

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Fraud Act 2006 created a new general offence of fraud. This can be committed by three means, one of which is by false representation. Fraud by false representation is set out in Section 2 of the Act. Where a person dishonestly makes a false representation and intends, by making the representation, to make a gain for himself or another, or cause a loss to another, or expose another to a risk of loss, that person will be committing an offence. A person who dishonestly represents to be a certificated bailiff, but is not, is likely to be committing an offence under this section. It will be necessary to show that the person was acting dishonestly in making the false representation, as well as that they intended to make a gain or cause a loss. It is immaterial whether they actually obtained a payment or goods from a debtor.

The decision on whether to investigate a crime rests solely with the police, who will take into account available resources, national and local policing priorities, the likely eventual outcome and the competing priorities of fraud and other criminal cases already under investigation. Such operational issues are a matter for the chief officer of the force concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can certificated bailiffs charge van fee, waiting fee(lol), and levy fees(lol) worth £201.00 on their very first visit?

 

no the only fee they can charge is the levy fee

 

Oh she was never ever certificated eggy, I know that for a 100% fact. I just need to know if an uncertificated person can act on behalf of a bailiff firm "with a view to seizing goods" (as she stated) and if these visits can be treated as the 1st and 2nd visits (not necessarily incurring a fee) which would lead to my next query

 

no the visits cant be treated as anything as she should not have been there in the first place with or without fees

 

which would lead to the 3 visit by the certificated bailiff being classed as the first visit for the purpose of fees as this new 1st visit incurred a levy fee the bailiff company have lost all rights to collect any further visit fees

 

hope you understand that not quite sure i understand it myself

I think its one of my if i was talking you would understand it

Link to post
Share on other sites

With council tax enforcement ONLY a certificated bailiff can levy upon goods.

 

The purpose of the visit is to "levy upon goods" and is therefore NOT to remove the goods. For this reason, the bailiff should NOT be applying a removal fee at the SAME time as a levy fee.

 

Did the bailiff "levy" upon goods and if so, what did he levy upon?

Link to post
Share on other sites

With council tax enforcement ONLY a certificated bailiff can levy upon goods.

 

The purpose of the visit is to "levy upon goods" and is therefore NOT to remove the goods. For this reason, the bailiff should NOT be applying a removal fee at the SAME time as a levy fee.

 

Did the bailiff "levy" upon goods and if so, what did he levy upon?

 

Where do I start Tomtubby?

 

Firstly, goods were never levied upon.

 

I began asking questions about the fees charged, and eventually a fabricated list of levied goods (I may have to collate and pm the whole saga to you) were sent to me consisting of items that I do not and never have possessed.

The goods "levied upon" were -

1) Unmarked White Microwave.

2) Unmarked Computer System

3) Coffee table

4) Colour TV and remote

5) Wooden framed mirror

 

My naivety (I had not at this point discovered this forum) led me to allow the certificated bailiff into my house, but only after she had handed to me a document with charges on that reflected fees such as 'levy fee' 'van fee' and 'waiting fee'.

 

An independent witness was there for the whole12 minutes (for which she had charged an hours waiting time 'applicable after the first hour' before she had even set foot in the house). Here is his statement-

 

Dear Pendle Council/Rossendales,

 

 

On the 11th of April 2010 I was asked to go to ** ******* ****** to show Mr ********a small ********* job that needed doing the following day.

On the Morning of the 12th April I set off to Mr ********'s house.

I arrived at Mr *********'s house at approximately 09:30. Mr*********had made himself a cup of tea and made one for me.

After we had finished our drinks, Mr *********looked at the time and said "it's Quarter to ten, better make a start" to which I agreed, but as I had been informed that the client had young children in the house that needed dressing and feeding there was no great hurry.

He picked his***** ****** up and I offered to carry some of his tools that were in a bucket, which I did.

Mr********* shouted goodbye to his son who was in the front room with his friend.

We left the house and Mr ********* locked the back door behind him.

As we were leaving the back yard a lady pulled up in a small white van, wound her window down and said "Mr ********?" to which Mr ********replied "Hello, yeah, that's me" The lady then introduced herself as a bailiff and said "can I have a word with you, this will only take a minute" Mr ********* said "Sure but it'll have to be quick" and the bailiff parked her van around the front.

While the bailiff was parking her van Mr********* explained to me that he owed just over £200 in Council Tax that he hadn't gotten round to paying.

As the bailiff came around the corner I joked to her that Mr ********* had 'Run off' which, after a moment of hesitation and seeing Mr******** she seemed to find mildly amusing.

The bailiff met Mr ********* at the yard entrance and she asked if he knew what 'this is about'. He replied that he owed about £200 in Council tax and that he was trying to find enough work to pay it. The Bailiff said that he had had plenty of time to come to an arrangement to pay it and said that the amount was now £441 with fees as she handed Mr ********* a document with the amount £441.42 written on it.

Mr ********* looked at it, showed me, and said "that's just set me back weeks" and said to her " you'd better come in so that we can sort this out"

Mr********then unlocked the door and we all entered. The bailiff stood at the door to the kitchen and I stood beside her.

Mr******** explained that he didn't understand how the amount he owed had nearly doubled.

The bailiff then told him that the amount would keep rising unless he paid the full amount in cash.

She told him that he had to pay the full amount in cash by Friday that week and that he must ring her to arrange to meet her with the cash by 5pm Friday. The bailiff informed Mr ******** that if she wanted to she could take his possessions, but she said that there really wasn't any point in this as "that old television and computer aren't worth anything"

She kept asking "when are you going to ring me" and he said " I'll ring you Friday, I'll have to see if I can borrow enough money by then"

The bailiff's demands became more aggressive as she demanded that she MUST have the cash by Friday or the fees would continue to mount up with every visit, she asserted that more fees would be added on if he did not get in touch with her and pay her the cash by 5pm Friday of that week.

Mr ******** continued to assure her that he would have her cash by Friday and that he would ring her on the Friday to arrange meeting her.

The bailiff eventually seemed to accept this and left the house.

In the short time that the bailiff was there, she did not make any written notes whatsoever.

I recall Mr ******** remarking "it's nearly 10 now" as we left, I looked at my mobile phone and concurred.

The meeting could not have spanned more than 15 minutes.

 

Yours sincerely

 

**********

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oldstyle TV's are being rejected by auction house. A microwave can be picked up in Argos for £20 so again this is a uslesss item on which to levy and would again be rejected by the auctioneers. That leaves a mirror and an unmarked computer. As the bailiff has not identified the computer it can be any worthless old computer. Frankly, I would consider this levy to not even be worth the paper on which it is written.

It addition it is unsigned. It would NOT cover the debt and bailiff fees and frankly, unless Rossendales are willing to remove the fees I would suggest that you make a FORMAL COMPLAINT to the council.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do make a complaint, especially as I have just sent one throught to Pendle Council.

 

Pendle may well currently be defending their use of Rossendales, but unless people like us make them aware of any underhand tactics then they will indeed think everything is rosy...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do make a complaint, especially as I have just sent one throught to Pendle Council.

 

Pendle may well currently be defending their use of Rossendales, but unless people like us make them aware of any underhand tactics then they will indeed think everything is rosy...

 

 

 

 

I'm in the middle of compiling a letter to Pendle Borough Council right now Pendledad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

eggy - is that a fact ? can you show me the link please ?

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?275666-what-do-you-think-of-this

 

this was posted by tomtubby in the tread i have linked to this post

I have made many Freedom of Information requests to local authorities for copies of Contracts with bailiffslink3.gif and it is astonishing to see how many councils are demanding a "kick back" from the bailifflink3.gif companies of a percentage of bailiff fees.

 

In effect this means that councils are making a PROFIT from enforcement. It is WRONG but with bailiff companies desperate for Contracts they will agree to anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...