Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4670 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

Hi

I hope somebody can advise me.

Yesterday a bailiff called a my business premises and handed me a notice which read 'REMOVAL 24 HOURS.'

This is for upaid business rates of £614 (i have confirmed this figure with local authoritry) for year 2010/2011 I do not dispute this debt but was shocked that the bailliff demanded £932.68!!

His notice states I have ignored all previous correspondence -not true, I have not had any contact with bailiff no visits no cards or letters left at business. He said he will give me until Monday to pay then he will return and close business or take goods from my home. (i am a sole trader)

Can somebody tell me why his fees are so much. He has not levied but is threatening removal?

I have told the local authorit that bailiff has added £318.50 to my debt but there response was take it up with bailiff I asked if they knew what bailiff was allowed to charge and was told they could not comment I had to take this up with bailiff.

I phoned Jacobs who were unhelpful and said I had to ask visiting bailiff, I said surely you know what the fees should be on this debt- apparently they don't it is up to bailiff.

I spoke to bailiff who said it was because of court fees for liability order, I pointed out they were already in £614 debt he said he had a right to charge various fees.

My problem is I cannot pay whole debt at once, bailiff would not make arrangement, council are saying I cannot pay them and must pay bailiff but I know he will take fees first. Any help please I am desperate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The law prescribing bailiffs fees for collecting unpaid business rates is Regulation 3© of the Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provision) Regulations 1993 and The Council Tax and Non-Domestic Rating (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2006

 

1st Visit £24.50

2nd Visit £18.00

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

His notice states I have ignored all previous correspondence -not true, I have not had any contact with bailiff

 

The law says the council must send you a "final notice" or a "reminder" by post to your current address before making an application to a magistrate for a Liability order against you. As there is compelling evidence the council failed to do this, you can ask the council to roll the case back to pre-liability order stage and cease enforcement action immediately.

 

Pay the council direct. DO NOT contact the bailiff.

 

See if the bauiliff is genuine, enter his name here: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/CertificatedBailiffs/

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I have checked out and the bailiff is genuine. I can pay £300 on Friday to the council but I am worried that the bailiff will still call on Monday and do his worse. The council said I cannot pay them but I can do this online. Should I inform Jacobs when I make the payment and is there any way I can stop this bailiff?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to prevent them entering and levying or the £300 fees will apply after he attends to remove.

 

If you can prevent him entering and levying, the maximum fees will those Fork-it has stated.

 

You should contact your council and ask, via a Freedom of Information (FOI) request if necessary, for a copy of their policy on bailiff use.

 

The copy provided by my LO specified (contrary to what the bailiff said) that the bailiff should acquire 50% of the outstanding debt, then the rest over 6 months. Otherwise he is entitled to remove goods.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Well I managed to pay £614 direct to the council. I then e-mailed them to ask about their policy regarding bailiff fees. I e-mailed Jacobs to say their bailiff was charging me £318.68 fees and asked if they would give me a breakdown. I won't get a reply until next week.

The enforcement bailiff called my mobile about 20 minutes ago to see if I had money to pay him tomorrow, I explained that I had paid council direct, He went mad and said if I don't pay fees tomorrow he will remove goods! I asked him how fees amount to £318.68 he said levy fee and van fee. I asked him when had he had levied, he answered the day 'I called.' I asked exactly what he had levied on he answered ' a Bmw and other things' the BMW PARKED OUTSIDE THE SHOP WAS MY DAUGHTERS. He said he is allowed to call with a van on the very first visit because he is an enforcement bailiff. He said cost of van is £200 plus levy fee. When I again pointed out he was charging £318.68 he said he had probably made a mistake and if I phone him tomorrow he will see if he can get fees lowereed!

Can any body advise if he is allowed to call with a van on first visit and what the fees should be on a debt of £614. I now feel he is bullying

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are bailiffs allowed to phone a debtor on a Sunday? I thought it was a day they couldn't work, also i think you need to email followed up by a letter in writing a Formal complaint to council, Others will know more, but I thought he had to leave a list of items seized, also if the car isn't yours and you can prove it, any levy he claims is likely invalid, and all his other fees apart from first and second visit should be void imho

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The BMW is not yours so the levy is not valid so the fee is £0.00.

 

The law provides for a fee of £24.50 to visit you, plus a sliding scale of charges for amounts recovered, but no money was recovered, so fees due under the scale: £0.00.

 

There is no such prescrived fee called a van fee, so that fee is £0.00.

 

Bailiffs cannot sue you for his fees.

 

JBW Enforcement Ltd v City of Westminster [2009] EWHC 2697 (QB), the Judge, Mr Justice Jack said:

 

Thus the bailiff gets paid only through the process of execution: if he becomes entitled to charge fees, but does not continue with the execution process, he will not recover them and he cannot sue the debtor for them.

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2009/2697.html

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me get this clear,

He can't charge levy fee for car

What if he listed other goods ie tables and chairs - can he remove these to cover his fee?

Is he allowed to attend with a van on first visit?

Sorry if I seem dim, I am just scared he will come tomorrow and start removing goods - as threatened - even thogh debt is now paid

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Fork-it has nailed this one, as he included property that is not yours in his levy viz a BMW the whole levy falls, i don't think they can charge a levy AND a van fee together, as they attend to levy goods, and attend to remove at a later date at which point a van fee can then be added.

 

Jacobs are less than scrupulous in their operations imho. I have mentioned in another thread how one of them approached me whilst parked and on the phone, opposite an address they were attending, hoping I was the debtor, and obviously intending to levy my motor

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame, I was going to suggest you have a day off. However if he did not leave a Notice of Seizure on the day he called that's his tough luck. You do need to contact the Council and make sure your Liability to them is discharged. The Regulations allow the Bailiff to have his fees first and any surplus is then taken off your indebtedness to the Council. However a number of Councils do not work in this manner and leave to you to pay Bailiff fees separately. If the Council do confirm you owe zero then the Bailiff cannot use the LO to enforce for his fees alone.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This saga goes on and on.

I contacted bailiffadviceonline who advise me to complain to Chief Executive Officer at the council and copy Jacobs in. She also advise me to pay for bailiffs initial and only visit fee £24.50. pay to cpouncil if Jacobs won't accept this. I did as she said. This morning the bailiff rang to ask exactly what amounts I had paid, I told him full liability £614 plus one visit fee £24.50 he said OK i WILL BE AT THE SHOP WIYHIN 1 HOUR TO REMOVE GOODS THEN SLAMMED THE PHONE DOWN.

i CONTACTED lOCAL aUTHORITY WHO SAID IT WAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM i HAD TO TAKE IT UP WITH BAILIFF. i EXPLAINED THAT BAILIFF would not listen and was told 'well you should have paid your debt on time' I asked LO if they agreed bailiff could charge anything he felt like they more or less said it was not there problem. Phoned Jacobs who will not call off bailiff until LO confirm payment has been made. I had to phone Council back and insist they inform Jacobs they informed me that whoever was telling me they are responsible for the bailiff they hire are giving me incorrect information. I feel really stressed by all this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

your council are talking rubbish they are and always will be fully responsible for all bailiff action

 

I would stop talking to the bailiff on the phone unless you can record the call

has he actually left a notice of seizure of goods and inventory listing the car and other goods without it there is no levy

 

What council is this

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a video camera your phone will do, to film the Jacobs bailiff as and when he turns up, as if you have paid the requisite fees in, they have nowhere to go, the council are clueless, and remain wholly responsible if jacobs act unlawfully to collect their now spurious fees imho.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone thanks for your most helpful replies.

 

hallowitch this is Salford City Council (home of Hazel Blears)

 

Well the bailiff failed to call today so I am hoping that is the end of this sorry tale.

What makes my blood boil is the fact that these bailiffs will do this again and again and unsuspecting people will pay - usually those who can ill afford it.

 

As I said I have sent a formal complaint to Salford Council and sent a copy of this to Jacobs, Is there anybody else I should be complaining to, these people should be stopped?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can make a complaint to the court that issued the bailiffs certificate on the grounds of falsely representing a higher fee than he was lawfully entitled, in the alternative the bailiff claimed unjust enrichment.

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could also copy Hazel Blears in to see if she can earn a bit of the money she gets paid. have a video camera ready incase jacobs are silly enough to call, it is not illegal and you don't need their permission whatever they say when you film them.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good idea. Perhaps you should 'rock her boat' and see how she likes it. dizzy mare.

 

A horse would be more intelligent imho

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The law prescribing bailiffs fees for collecting unpaid business rates is Regulation 3© of the Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provision) Regulations 1993 and The Council Tax and Non-Domestic Rating (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2006

 

1st Visit £24.50

2nd Visit £18.00

 

 

That is not true, as I presume he has gained access into the property - as the impression is this guy has met with the Bailiff.

This means that now he has gained peaceful entry he is able to re-attend at any time advised to this chap, and force entry if demands are not kept to - resulting in high costs and removal of goods.

 

Take it from an ex-bailiff...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...