BBC Whistleblower exposes criminal world of bailiffs BBC1 26th September 9PM

[Wolfy]

OK so the big question burning in my mind is wether the police will be taking any action against those scumbags shown on camera defrauding people, obtaining money by deception and breaking and entering? Answer of course not.

[chiefengineer]

Just switched the TV off! I knew some baliffs were underhand, but my jaw is still on the floor!

 

The bosses need to be liable for their staff actions, and the entire industry needs to be regulated, by a regulator with some teeth!

[bp]

I have just watched the programme and like the many of you, I am LIVID!!!

 

How could this be allowed to happen?

 

Letter is going out to my MP in the next few days. Lets get the B***ers!

 

Sorry if this offends anyone but I'm so angry. And it seems no one can stop them.

[blacksheep1979]

Anyone see this about baliffs just now on bbc1? Anyone actually on the prog

[nathal]

scandalous behaviour

[maybelline]

my heart went out to those little kids that thug was threatening with imprisonment, surely the police should arrest him for that alone!

 

we had similar threats. I was just looking at the printout the bailiff sent to me which shows charges for visits they did not make, I will be contacting my council to check that they are not now collecting this for the bailiff on top of my council tax since they were 'persuaded' to take the debt back after I complained to the Local Govt Ombudsman, despite this the counci, amazingly, still stand by the bailiff???

 

shame shame shame on them

[veryannoyed]

I expect everyone at the OFT were, er, not at home and accidentally "forgot" to set their video recorders...

[Thailand]

Stick a cattle prod thru your letter box, install a camera, lock your windows and doors. The system I don't see changing of the back of that programme, cest la vie. Fight back and don't give them an inch. Livid isn't in it:-x

[Boobaby]

Hopefully enough people saw the program to make a small difference anyway, especially where they were harrassing families of debtors etc.. I am sure there are a lot of people on this site that have had some sort of Court debt enforcement officer (or not) harrass them! It is a very frightening experience and one I know I would never want repeated. I now realise that the guy who did this to me was in fact not a certificated bailiff (no paperwork and ordinary receipt left which I still have). He also added on a phenomenal amount in charges for extra visits etc.. but to be honest at the time I would have sold my granny to have them not harrass me or my family. My daughter paid it and I had to sell my car to pay her back, so perhaps not a good idea to watch it tonight!! I told myself at the time that that would never happen to me again and thank God it hasn't, but it happens all the time, to other people. Let's hope the program will enable the laws to be tightened up but I doubt it!!

[Number6]

Letter to MP definitely. If enough people write to therir MP and make life uncomfortable for them they'll have to raise the matter with the Home Office.

 

Contact your MP HERE

 

As many of us as possible please.

 

Pete

[chiefengineer]

It will go on and on, until the entire industry (debt collectors, baliffs, etc) is regulated by a regulator with some teeth!

[Number6]

The bailiff system as a whole, even if operated by scrupulously honest bailiffs is archaic and grossly unfair.

 

The whole system is based on a time when goods were a fair medium of exchange, i.e. goods = cash. If you didn't pay your dues then the bailiff or sheffif would sieze goods = in value to your debt. This was fine in medieval times but is no longer the case and hasn't been, certainly since the latter half of the last century.

 

Now goods are worthless as a medium of exchange as we all know, you can buy a £1000 PC today and it's worth maybe £300 tomorrow, maybe only £50 at auction!

 

The system of siezing goods in exchange for a cash debt HAS to change - how is it morally defensible to strip a whole household of everything, stuff that cost £,000's to buy to pay a £500 debt??? It's morally bankrupt and totally reprehensible!!

 

Pete

[elsinore]

Letter to MP definitely. If enough people write to therir MP and make life uncomfortable for them they'll have to raise the matter with the Home Office.

 

Already done it.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/30373-my-mp-bailiffs.html

 

Elsinore

[Thailand]

Calming down now, good link Pete. Any suggestions on

anything else we can do to help each other? hints and tips etc?

[bp]

Thanks for the link. just done it!

[martinpar]

Not directly related to tonight's programme but perhaps indicative of why no government action will happen is this item from the current Private Eye:

 

Back in 1996 (Eye 895) questions were asked about Christopher Tye, head of the business branch of the then Lord Chancellor's Department, who went off to work for bailiffs Drakes.

Former Labour MP Martin Redmond took those questions to the minister responsible and was told there was no conflict of interest as Mr Tye had had "no dealings" with Drakes Group, but it was later revealed that he had indeed attended a meeting involving the firm.

Fast forward to this April, when Drakes Group won the contracts to be the sole fines enforcement agency for magistrates courts in the London, south-east, south-west and north-west regions - four of the seven regional contracts.

We know which officials from what's now the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) were involved in the tendering process, because an application was made for a judicial review of the awarding of one of the contracts. The judgement for that case reads: "The tenders for this Region's contract were marked seperately by Mr Harding... and by two national officials on the panel, Mr Ian Wallace and Mrs Lesley Pyne."

Ian Wallace, who was an official at DCA, now works at Drakes. The DCA told the Eye that: "Appropriate measures were put in place to ensure there were no issues of concern when Mr Wallace joined Drakes some months after the contract was awarded." Plus ca change...

[Guest Zooman]

The situation is deteriorating, because there is increasing pressure on the bailiff companies. In recent years, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has been increasing the pressure on local authorities to improve their enforcement rates. At the same time the Department for Constitutional Affairs has been increasing the pressure on the magistrates court to increase their enforcement rates. Now, knowing that bailiffs don’t knowingly walk away from payment, that means they’ve got to try harder with those people who are further down the economic scale. So what might sound like a good law and order soundbite for a government minister is having a disproportionately harsh effect on those people who are the poorest and most vulnerable.

 

The government expects a free enforcement service for public bodies and if the government or the public body as creditor won’t pay, then the people in debt have to pay. The burden will be pushed down to them. Now successful enforcement varies, but by and large, most bailiffs will be successful in a third or less of cases. And those third of people in debt who pay up therefore have to fund all the bailiff action that takes place against the people who don’t eventually pay up. So you’re seeing that a third or less are paying for two-thirds or more, and therefore the fees will reflect that.

 

Where some of the fees are fixed, some are not. The early stages of the bailiff procedures, the fees are generally fixed. But when it comes to the point of removing goods, then it’s the reasonable costs and expenses which have been incurred by the bailiff. What’s reasonable in any one situation is very difficult to assess. There’s no absolute cap. Bailiff fees for small debts like parking penalties will seem disproportionately high - £200, £250.

[elsinore]

That’s a very cogent and concise summary of the situation, Ashley, and I’m sure that you're right.

 

But it also makes depressing reading (although I don't suppose you meant it to), for it implies that we’re stuck with the status quo.

 

There will be those, watching tonight’s programme, who will believe that Jim Wheble happened upon the only two dodgy bailiff companies in the whole of the U.K. We know differently. The evidence in these forums must be made available to those who can effect change.

 

As Number6 exhorts us, write to your MP, complain, campaign, needle, goad and, most of all, sue the arses off the bailiff companies, if you are unfortunate (fortunate!) enough to be given the opportunity.

 

Elsinore

[Number6]

There's what, 70,000 people on here? I'm sure we can get a fair few letters written to MP's.

 

If a few MP's were to receive several hundred letters of complaint about this subject, especially from people that are directly or indirectly affected by these **** they would be forced to raise the subject "robustly" with the appropriate minister.

 

Also how about getting a petition to the Home Secretary together?

 

Pete

[meagain]

I find the best way to deal with bailiffs is a stable door. They come knocking, and prepare to get their foot in the door to ensure their right to force entry - only they can't, because you've only opened the top half of the door

 

Won't stop the unscrupulous types from trying things like trying to force their way over the door to open the bottom half, but it's a start.

[darling]

I watched the programme as well, am I right the guy did say that their charges are unlawful. Does this now mean that we can claim back the charges from them as well? If so yipee yet another one on my list of 'victims'.

[Number6]

I find the best way to deal with bailiffs is a stable door. They come knocking, and prepare to get their foot in the door to ensure their right to force entry - only they can't, because you've only opened the top half of the door

 

Won't stop the unscrupulous types from trying things like trying to force their way over the door to open the bottom half, but it's a start.

 

How about a "Monty Python & the Holy Grail" style door - you know, solid door with a 8" square hatch that you open to see who's there?

 

Pete

[Guest Zooman]

the easiest way and what we should all be doing in this day and age is having a chain on the door this way for them to get in they have to bust the lock. I have a chain on my front door and I always chain it when I do not know who is at the door (not because of Bailiffs but that you never know who is on the other side and it may be a mad axes man).

[Peterbard]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/members/peterbard.html

[EquitaVictimBirmingham]

Would anyone be interested in getting together with like minded people and using the courts to issue proceedings against these thugs - and when i say thugs i mean not just the baliffs but gangs like equita!

 

equita has done a dirty on me - i agreed to pay them 171.00 for a congestion charge that i disputed - they sent the baliff around anyway and i ended up paying nearly 500.00!

 

if enough of us get together then we can 'sue' them and demonstrate against these b******s we need to kick up such a fuss that these people along with the Mayor of London who i beleive does not really know the misery that his thugs are putting the people of the UK in know that we will fight back - with the MPs and the Media on our side.

 

Its time to fight back! We would like to see Baliffs visit the Mayor of Londons Office and Equita/Capita and take their goods away.

 

Lets fight back!