Rossendales- Bailiff letters and it's not my debt!

[brassnecked]

If this has been going on since 2008 and you have the evidence, you could try the police, and at least send the Council CEO and, Rottendales a letter before action, copied to the Council leader, local councillor, and MP citing the unreasonable behaviour.

You are at stalemate as they do not accept that there is a case of mistaken identity, so the letter should state that you have tried without success to sort this out, and you will be taking advice asto how to ground an action against the council, and their agents the bailiffs as jointly and severally liable for the criminal harrassment.

 

Others may be able to advise further, but as this problem is 3 years old and ongoing there needs to be some sort of wake up call for their woeful system

[brassnecked]

Time to revisit these people with another letter. It is best to post up a draft so that Caggers can help fine tune it. Looking at the reply from rossendales, did you use the Freeman Common Law trumps Statute argument?.

 

I would email followed by hard copy, to the CEO and all the others including MP a letter marked FORMAL COMPLAINT, noting that you will progress this to the local Government Ombudsman. ., along the lines of

 

"Despite our previous correspondence your agents, Rossendales, with whom you are vicariously liable both jointly and severally for their actions, have continued to press xxxx for payment of a debt on property address in which he has never had any interest by lease rental, or any other means. This continued pursuit may well amount to Criminal Harassment contrary to Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act which:

 

"makes it a Criminal offence for debt collectors to make demands for debt payment frequently or “subject him or members of his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation"

 

This test is satisfied by virtue of the continued pressure to pay for a debt he doesn't own causing undue distress as they have ignored all evidence to the contrary and continued their now vexatious action.

 

Their actions may also fall foul of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997, under which It is an offence to “Cause harassment, alarm or distress” which must happen on at least two occasions and can be verbal or written.

 

We consider that the actions of your agents Rossendales who continue pursuit in the face of evidence to the contrary does in fact amount to harassment contrary to the law, so will be seeking redress by initiating a complaint with the police, and as Rossendales hold a Consumer credit Licence, Trading Standards

I had hoped to sort this matter out in an amicable and timely manner, but your agents continued action now means I must progress this complaint to a higher authority.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Aggrieved wrongfully chased person

 

Other Caggers can add to and dissect this skeleton for better impact also, or completely change it for something better, but it is a start for your consideration to sort this situation out.

 

This one may well need advice from tomtubby, ploddertom, hallow and the others. Tingy and Fork-it, and Greenpimpernel may also have something useful to add imho

[brassnecked]

Hi brassnecked,

 

thank you so much for your reply, they sent with this letter three more, in the same envelope, advising that the account is with the van baliff who will be attending his dads property with a view to collecting payment in full. Two had same ref. number the third was different ref. number,

 

Will be using this letter if anyone else has any input please feel free. Thank you once again brassnecked

 

Nick

 

I think in light of the bailiff with a van possibly attending to levy on your parents address they need to swear a Statutory Declaration, as to the ownership of "goods and chattels" in and around the premises, to render any attempted levy unlawful. I think this can be done by Notary or at the magistrates court and costs around £10.

 

It is better to be safe as obviously tossendales are as driven in their desire to blindly collect even off the wrong person, as a pit bull is to hang on to that bone. Other Caggers will be more knowledgeable.

[brassnecked]

Your father swears in front of a solicitor or magistrate that all property in the house is belong to him/your mother, there is nothing of yours there, if the bailiff turns up they give him a copy of the stat dec, and any levy for the debt is unenforceable. this will prevent an illegal levy and the bother of reclaiming the unlawful fees. I found this template courtesy of a post by wonkydonky, that gives the general idea.

 

STATUTORY DECLARATION

I,_______________________ _____ ______________

address__________________ _________________________ ______

_________________________ _________________________ _____

make the following declaration under the Statutory Declarations Act 1959:

 

All items contained within the property at the above address and within it's boundaries, are owned by Mr XXX XXXX . There are no items within the property or it's boundaries belonging to any other person.

 

I understand that a person who intentionally makes a false statement in a statutory declaration is guilty of an offence under section 11 of the Statutory Declarations Act 1959, and I believe that the statements in this declaration are true in every particular.

 

Signed:

 

Declared at___________________on__ ________________of 20___

Before me,

 

A SAR request to the council as suggested by Hallow, is well worth the £10 to identify exactly what data they are reliant on to keep chasing you.

 

I'm sure others will be along with further advice.

 

[brassnecked]

+ how much they will pay for all the hassle etc!!

 

PT

 

They shoul offer a payment for the time and trouble taken to challenge their wrongful actions imho

 

A plan would be to involve the press possibly. The police also need to be shamed into investigating the council and the bailiffs on a charge of Criminal Harassment, not that they will as if the bailiffs call and the police are called by the bailiff, going on past cases, they will insist on the wrongful levy going ahead and force Op to allow the bailiffs in.

[brassnecked]

Thank you hallowitch for that information, will inform his dad, I think they will wait a couple of days and see what transpires, because our MP has asked for Rossendales address too, so she can contact them personally.

 

Thank you once again,

 

Nick

 

Hopefully tossendales will wake up and smell the coffee when the MP contacts them, I would still be wary and a bailiff still could turn up in the meantime

[brassnecked]

Just a thought, has anyone in the council, who has admitted it was a mistake actually called rossendales and told them to cease and desist, as they have chased an innocent party? Possibly in all the excitement they haven't so rossendales in the absence of anything from the council have gone merrily on their way harassing wrong person and adding their fees willy nilly. Of course the council may have told them, but rossendales would then lose out on fees so continued anyway. The SAR may well be a good move as the content could well ground a claim for compensation for the harassment, or a complaint to the Ombudsman for maladministration. Hopefully both.

Edited March 31, 2011 by brassnecked

[brassnecked]

In the same mode why if this has being going on for so long and to date no money has changed hands have:

a - the Bailiffs not returned it Nulla Bono

b - the Council not started committal proceedings

 

PT

 

Exactly PT, you would have thought they would have started committal proceedings by now at which the mistake may well have become apparent, with the resultant negative publicity when the press got hold of it making the council and rossendales out to be a bunch of moronic poltroons.

[brassnecked]

I'll SAR them tomorrow and see what comes from it and keep you all informed.

 

Do you know what I honestly believe to be the case, I think Rossendales have been told by the Council in 08 to cease collection, but because they had already spent time and money they've left it until now to start harrassing to see what they can get.

 

I maybe wrong but it just feels odd, His father phoned them this week to ask them which court it had gone to and they didn't reply.

 

Thank you once again brassnecked, ploddertom and hallowitch for your advise

 

Nick

 

If the SAR shows that rossendales have been a loose cannon, by hoping to salvage some fees after being called off, the council are not in the clear either as they are vicariously liable both jointly and severally with their appointed agents rossendales, so any action both criminal for harassment, and civil for damages, would be against both. The council would be culpable as they have failed to ensure that rossendales have ceased action against the innocent party. It will be interesting what the MP makes of this, as it could be extremely woeful for the council and their not so tame bailiff. This one would definitely be worth referral to the Ombudsman imho