Jump to content


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3419 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

I'm thinking about replying with a copy of the ombudsmans report regarding these levies. Along with the above reminders.

 

Seems like this is a big problem with Rossendales as they now have their own section.

 

Im prepared to take them to court over this, of it comes to this.

 

I guess Rossendales are going to now do a dvla check.

I'll give them 7 days and that's it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 5 weeks later...

New reply today. Having chased up last week and person from council was on leave.

I'm going to allow the 2 extra days. Then that is it.

 

 

*

I am sorry for the delay in dealing with this matter for you but as you are aware I have been away from the office and I am reliant on information being obtained from the DVLA.* I had previously been in contact with Rossendales*on 14 October prior to my absence*to see if they had heard from the DVLA but unfortunately there had been no response at that time.** I have again today been in contact with Rossendales as the matter remains unresolved and I am conscious that you have waited longer than first indicated.

*

Rossendales have been pressing the DVLA for a response and I am advised that this should be available on Thursday.* I will again contact Rossendales on Thursday.* Please accept my apologies for the delay in resolving this matter and thank you for your continued patience.

*

Link to post
Share on other sites

A registered keeper is not necessarily the owner, so DVLA will be of no help where a Hire Purchase agreement is in force, or a Motability lease, so DVLA is not prima facie absolute proof to ownership, but they conveniently forget this when it suits.

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

Ah this is a very good point. Although the debt and car are not for the same person.

 

Also, it doesn't provide an answer for levy and van on the same day, and also the waiting fees.

 

I think I might put together a reply to send over in the morning. This has been 4 weeks now... Plenty of time to get the information and report.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok here's some good news people.

 

Have finally received a reply this morning. :) I am in a very good mood. :)

 

Further to my email last week I have again been in contact with Rossendales regarding this matter.* They have advised me that they have still not been able to obtain confirmation from the DVLA.* I am very disappointed that the matter has still not been resolved and in view of the*extended period off time you have been waiting they have agreed in this instance to refund the fees incurred by you on 2 June 2011.* A refund of £213.00 will be made to you shortly.

*

I trust this brings the matter to a satisfactory conclusion and again apologise for the delay in dealing with this matter for you.

*

Regards

Jx Axxxxxx

Revenues*Manager

Link to post
Share on other sites

So pleased.

 

Thank you everyone so much for your help. Wouldn't have gotten anywhere with this otherwise.

 

:) :)

 

Well done,

 

Possibly scared of the program on tonight!! I bet Rossendales Trading Standards will be inundated tomorrow!!

 

LL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great result, for you GetOffMyCase, but that programme only served to consolidate the consensus that bailiffs are unregulated bullies liars and cheats, Mr Boast deserves to go to jail, along with his CEO

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

I agree he really does!!

I think it's disgusting what he's done, and they way he treats people.

He's not the only one either. The ones that clamped the car were no better. Threatening me and my grandad. My grandad is 75 years old! My grandad was even threatened with the bill increasing cause he was asking questions about it. :/

There's some justice in me getting a refund. But it doesnt make up for what they've done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree he really does!!

I think it's disgusting what he's done, and they way he treats people.

He's not the only one either. The ones that clamped the car were no better. Threatening me and my grandad. My grandad is 75 years old! My grandad was even threatened with the bill increasing cause he was asking questions about it. :/

There's some justice in me getting a refund. But it doesnt make up for what they've done.

 

If another unfortunate person either debtor or innocent third party, whose motor the bailiff had wrongly clamped and levied on was to die whilst arguing with the bailiff would the police treat it as manslaughter, as they should, or would they side with the bailiff and cover it up? Answers on a postcard to the MOJ....:x

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

  • 3 years later...

I called my council early last week,

as someone suggested they may take a attachment of earnings for my CT debt.

 

 

i spoke to someone on the phone who said...

. yes tha'ts fine, took all my work details etc etc. to do that... happy days. all sorted.

 

 

Only for a couple of days later to get a letter from Rossendales on the 31st (letter dated 27th).

Notice of Enforcement Agent Visit - Final Opportunity.

debt = £681.81

Enforcement costs incurred: 75

total = 756.81

 

I was confused about it, so I rang S.c.D.C.

who said that the attachment of earnings was added for this years debt, but not the previous years.

 

 

I told the lady that the man said all my debt was sorted,

she just shrugged off everything i said with you need to talk to the enforcement agent,

I said to her I wasnt willing to do that, as i have had problems with them before acting inappropriately.

And asked that she call the debt back to add it on to the AOE, but she just flat out declined anything.

 

I tried to ring Rossendales but my mobile wouldnt allow me to call them on their number,

so in the end i emailed, which means its all recorded.

 

 

i sent the following email....

 

I have received a letter this morning regarding an outstanding council tax debt. There seems to be some confusion.

 

I had set up an attachment of earnings with Suffolk Coastal District Council, for the debt, but it seems this has now gone to yourselves so this is not infact possible.

 

I have tried to call, but my phone will not allow me to call the premium number that is listed on your letters, i would prefer to keep contact as written any how.

 

I would also like to make an offer to pay this debt of £25 a week.

i live on my own, have 2 small children, and work on a low income.

This is the absolute maximum i can afford, after bills and other debts etc.

 

Please can you advise the best method I can pay this in installments, without calling, as it wont let me.

 

 

I didnt get a reply straight away. i assumed they were busy.

 

 

Roll on 2 days to saturday i am out but someone else is at home a bailiff turns up.

He gets explained to him i made an offer before the visit by email of £25 a week,

he said that is a decent amount but now the debt is £900 and something pounds.

But he would check in the office to find the email.

 

I have re-emailed them this morning to get a reply.

 

I am still waiting on a response to the email below.

 

please can you confirm receipt so I can send the 1st payment to start paying the current balance of £756.81.

 

The email below was sent on the 31st October 2014.

 

To get finally get a reply today of:

 

Thank you for your email.

 

Your offer of repayment is not acceptable as your case has been issued to an Enforcement Agent, Mr. Brame, whom you should contact on

Dont know what to do now to be honest. I have twice tried to make offers to pay this now and been turned down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will Rossendales never learn? Under the new Law [Control of Goods Act] when a Letter of Enforcement is sent the recipient has 7 days to contact the bailiff company

from the date the letter is received [and the 7 days should not include Sundays or Bank holidays]. failure to contact them within that time frame means that they can

then pay a visit that incurs an extra charge of £235!

In your case, even if the letter had arrived on the 27th October they would still be breaching the Act by calling round on the Saturday.

Therefore write to the CEO of the Council informing him that this is a stage one complaint. First about the bailiff arriving on the Saturday 1st November, just two days after receiving the Letter of Enforcement and thereby incurring an extra charge of £235 in total breach of the Control of Goods Act. Secondly, your phone

does not allow you to make calls to premium numbers [and bailiffs are not supposed to use premium lines according to OFT guide lines] so you had already

emailed the bailiff offering £25 per week to pay off the outstanding amount which he received prior to his visit.

In addition you are annoyed that the bailiffs were involved at all as you had already made arrangements with the Council to repay your Councl Tax by an attachment of earnings.

 

You therefore would like the CEO to look into your complaint and suggest a remedy as the more the bailiffs add to your bill, the longer it will take to pay off the Council Tax and you obviously do want to pay since it was you who agreed to the attachment of earnings. Add that you have no faith in Rossendales as they

cannot even comply with the Law and would welcome his comments on that.

 

By the way there is a small discrepancy with your dates stated. You said the letter arrived on the 31st October [Friday] and then you said the bailiff arrived two days later on the Saturday. It would be helpful if you could clarify that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was confused about it, so I rang S.c.D.C.

who said that the attachment of earnings was added for this years debt, but not the previous years.

 

 

I told the lady that the man said all my debt was sorted,

she just shrugged off everything i said with you need to talk to the enforcement agent,

I said to her I wasnt willing to do that, as i have had problems with them before acting inappropriately.

And asked that she call the debt back to add it on to the AOE, but she just flat out declined anything.

 

 

Sulffolk District Council is one of the seven Anglia councils planning to launch a revenues enforcement service, allowing them to bypass commercial bailiff firms.

 

The Cabinet report entitled "Anglia Revenues Partnership (ARP) - Internal Enforcement Agency Proposals" sent to Fenland (A similar report will have been sent to Suffolk Coastal) at the last paragraph of the "Summary" where it refers to making sure that residents are treated fairly and keeping fees as low as possible, should be quoted to them as a reminder.

 

  • It has been agreed in principle that the seven partners would like to create an enforcement Agency with the potential to make sure that residents are treated fairly where enforcement is necessary, keeping fees as low as possible, whilst retaining the income generated by Enforcement actions for the Council tax payers of the partner authorities.

 

My guess though is their principle interest lies in "retaining the income generated by Enforcement actions for the Council tax payers of the partner authorities."

Link to post
Share on other sites

offering £25 per week

 

 

There is your error, the word 'offering'. You don't offer as in 'please mr nice man', you tell them that is all you can afford and start making the payments now, don't wait for them to agree. If they can make more money from you by pretending they never received your email or by delaying some other way, they will.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...