Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.    Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.   The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved.  Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
    • I was referring to #415 where you wrote "I was forced to try to sell - and couldn't." . And nearer the start in #79 .. "I couldn't sell.  I had an incredibly valuable asset. Huge equity.  But the interest accrued / the property market suffered and I couldn't find a buyer even at a level just to clear the debt." In #194 you said you'd tried to sell for four years.  The reason for these points is that a lot of the claims against for example your surveyor, solicitor, broker, the lender and now the receiver are mainly founded in a belief that they should have been able to do something but did not. Things that might seem self evident to you but not necessarily to others. Pressing these claims may well need a bit more hard evidence, rather than an appeal to common sense. Can you show evidence of similar properties, with similar freehold issues, selling readily? And solid reasons why the lender should have been able to sell when you couldn't.
    • You can use a family's address.   The only caveat is for the final hearing you'd need to be there in person   HOWEVER i'd expect them to pay if its only £200 because costs of attending will be higher than that
  • 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

Bristow & Sutor Statement of Fees and Letters received do not match, whats next?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4448 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 am really grateful for the information on this site, I am tackling Bristow & Sutor currently and have the following info in the hope that someone could advise me of the next steps?

 

My partner has a liability order for Council Tax for £193.90 which is the correct amount and from a previous address.

 

Bristow and Sutor have been calling at our now joint home, I have not let them in at any time and below are the events so far...

 

Letter received in the post dated 16th June 2011 from B&S stating notification prior to sale of goods. It states that "to avoid the bailiffs attendance you must pay £247.40 by 23/06/11. Please note the original liability order was for £193.90.

 

Next, a bailiff turns up at the door, I talked to him through the glass and he told me the whole outstanding amount he wanted to collect was £247.40, told me who the liability order was for - ie.e. my partner, who the order was payable to (are they allowed to discuss this with anyone else except to whom the order was made?). I told him my partner was not in. He posted a Notice of Seizure letter through the door - stating the following charges -

 

£193.90 Council Tax

£24.50 Attendance to Levy Fee

£29.00 Levy Fee

 

This letter is dated 9th July 2011 at 11.45am.

 

Next when I got home there was a letter hand posted "A bailiff removal team visited today to remove your goods for sale by public auction.

 

£120.00 charge for todays visit.

 

This letter is dated 13th July 2011 at 11.06am.

 

It was at this time that I looked on the website for some help. I read and read about their tactics and noted that I could query their fees.

 

On 25th July I emailed Bristow & Sutor with the following letter -

 

Bristow & Sutor

Bartleet Road

Washford

Redditch

Worcestershire

B98 0FL

 

Ref: BOT-T 6841

 

Dear Sir

 

With reference to the above account, Can you please provide me with a breakdown of the charges.

 

This includes:

a - the time & date of any Bailiff action that incurred a Fee.

b - the reason for the fee.

c - the name(s) of the Bailiff(s) that attended on each occasion a Fee was charged.

d - the name(s) of the Court(s) the Bailiff(s) was/were Certificated at.

e - the date of the Certification.

 

This is not a Subject Acces Request under the Data Protection Act S7 1998 so does not incur a fee of £10. You are obliged to provide this information.

 

I require this information within 14 days.

 

Yours faithfully

 

On the 26th July another bailiff turned up in a van, whom I spoke to again through the window. This one was a cocky little s**t who said that they were here to remove goods from the house, to which I informed him that unfortunately for him I knew my rights and I was not giving him access to the property. He shouted out loud, so passing people could hear, that he was here to collect Council Tax for my partner, what the amount was, whom the debt was to and said that he was going to charge me for the van they turned up in. Again I told him that I was sure he couldnt discuss the debt with anyone else other than the debtor, at this point my nosey neighbour was at their door, and the bailiff replied that he could discuss the debt with anyone, including my neighbour. At this point I told him that I knew my rights and I beleived their actions and charges to be unfair and that I had requested a breakdown of their charges, he replied that I would not receive this information back, so I replied ok and shut the window. He then posted a letter through the door - amazingly this one had no charges!!

 

On the 29th July I received the following email back from B&S -

 

Dear Sir,

 

We acknowledge receipt of your email, contents of which have been duly noted.

 

We can confirm that all our bailiffs are certified in the Worcester County Court.

 

Having reviewed your account we can now confirm that a first attendance to your property was made on 25.05.11 at 11.08am which incurred a first visit fee of £24.50, this visit was made by our bailiff A who was certified on 23.11.09.

 

A further attendance was then made to your property on 09.06.11 at 11.52am when the bailiff levied upon goods which incurred a levy fee of 29.00. This visit was made by our bailiff B who was certified on 13.10.10. Following this a van call was made on 13.07.11 at 11.15am which incurred a fee on £120.00, this visit was made by our bailiff C who was certified on 05.03.10.

 

A further van attendance was made to your property on 29.07.11 at 11.00am by our bailiff D who was certified on 29.06.10, this visit did not incur a fee.

 

All fees are charged correctly in accordance with the Council Tax Administration and Enforcement Regulations 1992 (as amended) of which you are full liable for.

 

Please find below a statement of account for your perusal.

 

 

At this point we would request you contact our offices by no later than 05.08.11 to discuss payment of your account.

 

Failure to comply with the above will result in bailiffs being instructed to attend your property for the removal of goods to be sold at public auction, which will incur further fees.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Bristow & Sutor

 

I have since paid £20.00 on-line directly to the Council and will remain to pay £20.00 per month directly to them.

 

Could you please advise me if the charges apply, I don't understand what they have levied upon as they were never granted access to the property, however there was a car on the drive which was registered to my partner, however, the receipt of payment for the car is in his sisters name, as she bought it and my partner is paying her back, so he is not the legal owner, plus the vehicle is crucial for him employment. And, if it was the car that was levied we have never had any paperwork to say so, and if the charge of £120 for a van fee was to collect goods - how can they collect a car in a transit van???

 

Please could you also look at the dates that B&S say they attended versus the dates and charges of the paperwork I received and advise me what to do next? We am not avoiding paying as we have started to do so, however I will not have unlawful actions or charges added to my account.

 

Your help is very much appreciated.

 

Thanks x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously you calendar of events is totally different to theirs. Each time they visit they are supposed to leave you a letter/note confirming they have been and the charges to date. From what you already have it would appear you do have cause for complaint as receiving a letter in the post demanding the debt + fees is a no no as far as CT is concerned.

 

The chances are you are correct in your guess they have levied the car but whata surprise they failed to leave the Notice of Seizure. Yet another cause for complaint. If the vehicle is not legally yours or your OH then it is a simple matter of getting the legal owner to swear a Statutory declaration as to ownership. B&S will no doubt argue the toss but so what.

 

If you keep paying as you do then that is OK although you may have to budget for some Bailiff fees. Providing you deny them access or otherwise prevent them gaining a levy on anything outside then the most you can be charged is £24-50 1st Visit Fee & £18-00 2nd Visit Fee - total £42-50.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

first of all well done in the actions you have taken. they cant levy unless they have been in and you signed so that fee and any fees after are null & void. a trick I've noticed them do is they assume you have a TV,DVD player, stereo, portable tv, microwave so stick that down and shove levy through letterbox and B&S have done this several times to people I know. keep paying the council until debt is finished then let B&S try and get their fees off you. someone will advise about this

I know my rights Mr DCA I'm with the CAG......hello hello where you gone Mr DCA8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

:-)As your OH'S sister in actually the owner of the car you will of course ensure you have the simple "I xxxxxagree to finance you to the amount of £ xxx to purchase a vehicle of your choosing. you XXXXX agree to repay the monies at the rate of £xxxx per month and on a final repayment of £xxxx the vehicle will become yours to own outright."agreement ready to hand to them won't you.:roll:

 

WD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Thanks for the replies....really appreciate how quick you guys are!

 

How do I complain about the fees to get them rectified and who do I complain to?

 

Also, if they have levied the car, and I have the reciept for the purchase in the OH's name and the agreement to pay back OH sister (thanks wonky donkey), am I supposed to keep the car away from the house until this is resolved? How can I resolve it?

 

Cheers guys x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Thanks for the replies....really appreciate how quick you guys are!

 

How do I complain about the fees to get them rectified and who do I complain to? Unfortunately you have to give the Muppets the chance to put things right.

 

Also, if they have levied the car, and I have the reciept for the purchase in the OH's name and the agreement to pay back OH sister (thanks wonky donkey), am I supposed to keep the car away from the house until this is resolved? How can I resolve it? In theory the car now belongs to the Bailiff until such time as he agrees his levy is invalid, at the same time the legal owner of the vehicle can kick up a fuss about the Bailiff levying goods that belong to a 3rd party. As said in my first post the owner need to do a Stat Dec - can be done at any Solicitor/Commissioner for Oaths - cost £5/£10.

 

 

 

Cheers guys x

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that PT, do I just put together a complaint letter stating what I have above about the fees and send a copy to both the council and B&S, I will arrange a Stat Dec in the morning - and send this with my complaints letter? Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine the only arguing point is that your dates are different to theirs, the outcome unfortunately will still be the same regardless. You could put a Formal Complaint to the Council using the fact the dates are all different, they charged you for writing a letter, the argument you had in the street. The chances are the Council will believe the Bailiff and come down on their side.

 

The fact the goods belong to someone else is your arguing point. Wait till you have the Stat Dec, write to them pointing out their error as confirmed by the Stat Dec and ask them to remove the Levy Fee and all other associated costs. Point out to them that if they are unwilling to do this you will have no option but to start an action in the Magistrates Court for a Regulation 46 Complaint where you will name the Council as Defendant as you would at that stage be aggrieved by the levy they have made - you send a copy of this letter to the Council asking them to

a - note the contents

b - put it on your file

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

By the way - the bailiffs sent the car registration to Bolton Council, which was a vehicle we didnt even own. Excellent! Bolton Council wrote to us confirming that all charges relating to the bailffs had been cancelled. We now pay £20.00 per month back to clear the debt. Result. Thank you CAG!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way - the bailiffs sent the car registration to Bolton Council, which was a vehicle we didnt even own. Excellent! Bolton Council wrote to us confirming that all charges relating to the bailffs had been cancelled. We now pay £20.00 per month back to clear the debt. Result. Thank you CAG!!

 

well done :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...