Jump to content


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3332 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Ok guys, here goes for a candidate for the most complicated thread going.

 

Heres a few facts. (Jump to the end if you don't want to know the specifics.)

 

I was unemployed from Oct 2010 till June 2011.

Started working again in late June, but on about a 1/3 of what I used to have coming in, so I'm considering going down the IVA route.

I fell behind with my council tax, and wrote to the council, but got no reply.

I also wrote to them, explaining my wife had moved in with me, and that they needed to take off the single person discount. Again, no reply.

I then got taken to court. Now, at the same time, my wife took seriously ill, and at one point the doctors seriously thought she was going to die. She was in hospital for three weeks around the time all this was going on, and to be honest, my priorities were not on the council tax. She is still off sick as I write this.

 

The next thing, I got a reminder / demand from the council for £369 (approx) It said I had to pay £37.99 immediately, and the remainder in 28 days. I paid the £37.99 immediately.

 

Literally, the next day, two bailiffs from Rossendales arrived at my door. They demanded money, and said I owed over £1000. I showed them the documentation I'd had from the Council, and confirmed it was for the same account. We were both confused, but that didn't stop them demanding money (Although, to be fair, they were polite and professional.) I emptied my wallet, and paid off £100. They suggested I talk to the council and Rossendales over the matter.

 

I then wrote to Rossendales, asking about the account, and asking time to pay at £100 per month. (This was late August, btw.)

I also wrote to the Council, complaining about all this. Someone from Liberata (Their agents) called me back, but as I was driving at the time, I asked them to call back. They didn't.

 

I repeated my letter to the Council on or around the 10th of October. As I had not heard anything from either Rossendales or the council, I paid £159 to the council on the 11th online, and have the receipt for that.

 

On the night of the 12th, I was upstairs working, when my doorbell rang repeatedly (30-40 times)

When I opened the door, the guy said he was here for my stuff and was quite intimidating and (IMO) threatening. He offered no identifiaction, and literally threw a bit of paper that said that I had 24 hours to pay the full amount. No if's, no buts. PAY IT ALL NOW. Now, as I've had some experience with bailiffs and bullying before, I explained to him that if he didn't desist, I would call the police and have him arrested under section 40 of the administration of Justice Act 1970. This seemed to deter him, and he drove off, promising he would be back.

I called the police, and they said that if he returned, I was to call them.

 

Next morning, I got the same tactic. Constant ringing of the doorbell. I called the police before opening the door. I did not allow him in. He then said that he was taking the car. Now, I use / need the car for my work (both jobs), and told him that. He said he didn't care because it wasn't signwritten.

 

The police arrived, and I expressely stated to the officer that I did was not allowing the bailiff in. He recorded that in his notebook. The police officer then asked me to retrieve a document for him, and I repeated that the bailiff was not allowed to enter the house. The officer agreed. When I turned round, the bailiff walked past the officer and claimed he had the right. The officer did nothing.

I then asked the bailiff to leave, which he repeatedly refused to do.

 

He then went about my house "levying stuff." He clearly (and in front of the police officer) stated that he was going to take EVERYTHING I had. I asked the officer to note this down in his book, which he did.

 

I explained to both the bailiff and the police that I had two jobs. One, as a computer engineer, and one as a photographer, and that items linked to those were part of my livelyhood, and were classed as tools of the trade. The bailiff repeated that he didn't care, and was taking everything.

 

Now, while he did not actually seized "everything" he seized ONLY items relevant to my work. He took my camera, my lighting, my tripods, etc. Even my wife's camera (Which she has a receipt for.) He also seized the car. The whole worth of the items taken is around £14000.

 

Right. Sorry for taking so long. I've now done some research, and spoken with solicitors, etc. but to be honest, if I had enough money to pay the solicitors, I'd pay the bastards their money!

 

My points, bearing in mind this is for council tax, so bailiffs have diferent rights, etc.:

 

1. Was his entry legal? My solicitor (On the free consultation I had with him) says no. He says it was classified as forced entry because I'd told him, and that I had repeated my instruction to a police officer, who then had the responsibility to prevent him entering.

 

2. Was the seizure ONLY of goods relating to my employment legal and fair? He claims that he has the right to take anything he wants (And told the police he intended to take everything.)

 

3. Was he right in taking my wife's property? She offered him receipts, but he refused to accept them.

 

4. The warrant itself. My understanding is that because there was a complaint / dispute over the bill, the warrant should have been suspended until the official outcome.

 

4. The car....... Complicated time again. I initially claimed it was tools of the trade, but then the police said it wasn't even registered to me anyway.

 

It turns out that (By coincidence) the DVLA lost the forms I sent in (Or they were lost in the post, etc.) This was about a year ago, and really doesn't have anything to do with this case OTHER than show I didn't own the car. The only thing connecting me to the car is the insurance I have on it.

 

So, I am now claiming that it was not my property, but my wife's (We have the Credit card receipt in her name for it, and she has now taken steps to have it registered in her name.)

 

5. Now, an even more complicated situation over the camera......

 

When researching complaints against, I came across a couple of points.

 

A reason for having his license revoked is if the bailiff:

 

Removes intellectual property or item covered under the copyright, designs and patents act 1988 or a computer containing the aforementioned

 

Now, my camera had 600 plus images - of clearly verifiable commercial value - on it when seized, and my wife has 200+ images of shots of her friends and family.

We both asked the bailiff if we could remove the cards, and he refused. Now, I'm quite conversaant with copyright law (Having taken courses etc on it) and each and every one of the images are classed as intellectual property and covered by the copyright act 1988.

 

The second part, goes back to tools of the trade. From my research, the most common grounds for denying items as tools of the trade, is that they may be used by other people, or in non business related environment. The camera and lighting seized are absolutely NEVER used for anything but commercial or educational use (I am a registered student, doing a degree course in Photography) It is a highly complex camera, and classed as "Professional" in all advertising I've ever seen for it. The lighting is not simple flashguns, but professional quality studio lighting which has only ever been used in a professional context. I clearly and categorically need them ONLY for my work and studies. Nothing else.

 

So, that's my position. Unable to work. Unable to pay the full debt, but able to pay the instalments offered. I feel the bailiff has breached / broken the law in the ways mentioned.

 

What I need to know is: How to get redress and / or how to get my stuff back fortwith.

 

Thanks for your patience in reading all this.

 

D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the face of it, but others would know more, as the camera and images are for use as a registered student on a bona-fide course, it is exempt from seizure, the same would apply to a Uni student's laptop containing their disseration 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

 

1. Was his entry legal? - Yes, you should have closed and locked the door - My solicitor (On the free consultation I had with him) says no. He says it was classified as forced entry because I'd told him, and that I had repeated my instruction to a police officer, who then had the responsibility to prevent him entering. Police Officer is only there to prevent a Breach of the Peace.

2. Was the seizure ONLY of goods relating to my employment legal and fair? - Yes, until such time as paperwork was provided He claims that he has the right to take anything he wants (And told the police he intended to take everything.)

 

3. Was he right in taking my wife's property? She offered him receipts, but he refused to accept them. No, he should have accepted proof

 

4. The warrant itself. My understanding is that because there was a complaint / dispute over the bill, the warrant should have been suspended until the official outcome. No

 

4. The car....... Complicated time again. I initially claimed it was tools of the trade, but then the police said it wasn't even registered to me anyway. Reading below I see what you mean, if OH paid for it then if the debt owing was for a period of time when you were both liable he can seize it.

 

It turns out that (By coincidence) the DVLA lost the forms I sent in (Or they were lost in the post, etc.) This was about a year ago, and really doesn't have anything to do with this case OTHER than show I didn't own the car. The only thing connecting me to the car is the insurance I have on it.

 

So, I am now claiming that it was not my property, but my wife's (We have the Credit card receipt in her name for it, and she has now taken steps to have it registered in her name.)

 

5. Now, an even more complicated situation over the camera......

 

When researching complaints against, I came across a couple of points.

 

A reason for having his license revoked is if the bailiff:

 

Removes intellectual property or item covered under the copyright, designs and patents act 1988 or a computer containing the aforementioned

 

Now, my camera had 600 plus images - of clearly verifiable commercial value - on it when seized, and my wife has 200+ images of shots of her friends and family.

We both asked the bailiff if we could remove the cards, and he refused. Now, I'm quite conversaant with copyright law (Having taken courses etc on it) and each and every one of the images are classed as intellectual property and covered by the copyright act 1988.

 

The second part, goes back to tools of the trade. From my research, the most common grounds for denying items as tools of the trade, is that they may be used by other people, or in non business related environment. The camera and lighting seized are absolutely NEVER used for anything but commercial or educational use (I am a registered student, doing a degree course in Photography) It is a highly complex camera, and classed as "Professional" in all advertising I've ever seen for it. The lighting is not simple flashguns, but professional quality studio lighting which has only ever been used in a professional context. I clearly and categorically need them ONLY for my work and studies. Nothing else.

 

So, that's my position. Unable to work. Unable to pay the full debt, but able to pay the instalments offered. I feel the bailiff has breached / broken the law in the ways mentioned.

 

What I need to know is: How to get redress and / or how to get my stuff back fortwith.

 

Thanks for your patience in reading all this.

 

D.

 

I'll look in later this afternoon.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4. The car....... Complicated time again. I initially claimed it was tools of the trade, but then the police said it wasn't even registered to me anyway. Reading below I see what you mean, if OH paid for it then if the debt owing was for a period of time when you were both liable he can seize it.

The thing with the car is that the documents we sent off to the DVLA Last year) appear to have gone missing. The vehicle is still technically registered as being with the previous owner. The only thing that connects me with the vehicle is the insurance certificate. As to the OH paying, the council and Rossendales say the receipts supplied aren't relevant. They say it just shows she paid £4500 by credit card to the company we bought it from.

 

So, I suppose the question is. If they're saying it's not registered to me, and they deny the credit card statement showing that my wife bought it, how are they saying I own it? I know the "keeper is not necessarily the owner" is a bit of a minefield, but I just don't understand it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading from what you said there are 2 scenarios and I am not quite sure which one applies.

 

1 - The debt arose solely because you did not pay your CT before your OH came back. If this is the case then they may only seize goods that belong solely to yourself. They can argue all they like about the car but if your OH bought it then it is legally hers - you just have the use of it. Of course if she were to swear a Statutory Declaration to the effect the car is her property then that will stop the arguments - although they will still try to denounce it.

 

2 - If the debt arose from after your OH moved back in then you are both jointly & severally liable for the debt and therefore in this case the vehicle could be seized.

 

Moving on to your camera equipment - the way it comes across to me is that the Bailiff has actually removed this - is this correct?

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, he has removed my camera, my lighting, my tripods, stands and memory cards. This has stopped me making any money from my photography at all, and has stopped me being able to study the subject - I'm a registered student on a B.A. (Hons) degree in creative photography.

 

Now, I've been researching, and I've found two things. Maybe you guys can say if they're worth the time.

 

The definition ofprotected goods (i.e. goods which cannot be seized by the bailiffs) for unpaidcouncil tax is: -

‘such tools, books, vehicles and other items of equipment as arenecessary to the debtor for use personally in his employment, business orvocation’ and ‘such clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipmentand provisions as are necessary for satisfying the basic domestic needs of thedebtor and his family’

Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992, Reg45(1A)

Well, I need both the car for my day job (Employment) and the cameras and stuff for business and vocation (If you call studying for a degree vocational.)

 

Finally, I found the thing about copyrighted material, which says he cannot remove:

 

Intellectual property or item covered under copyright, designs and patents act 1988 or a computer containing the aforementioned.

The cameras contain images on their memory cards, which are all copyrighted. There are about 600 on mine, and 200 on the wife's. There is quite a substantial price attached to those images from my camera, as they can both be considered business and student related.

Now, if the bailiff isn't allowed to take those items (And both my wife and I asked to get the cards back, and were refused.) Surely he has breached his powers? And also, by levying items of such substantial amount, is he not guilty of over levying? (If that is the term?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have been left at least 1 Form possibly 2, can you tell me what paperwork he has left and in particular the goods listed upon them.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He left a "notice of distress" which charged £415.00 for Walking possession.

 

The list on the other form is:

1x Giotto MTL Camera Tripod

1x Manfrotto 190 Camera Tripod

3x Portaflash camera tripods

2x LS Camera tripods

1x LS1 Camera tripod

1x Atlantic camera tripod

1x Interfit light stand

1x Sigma Flash unit plus case

2x Portaflash 55 with cable

1x Canon EOS 5D Camera and sigma lens

1x Fuji S1900 camera

1x Sony handycam

1x JVC camcorder

1x targus camera bag

1 x citreon Xsara

 

He has signed both documents, but I didn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on all this from what you have said

You appear to have been left a Notice of Seizure - Form 7 for goods upon which he has levied upon. Has he also left a Form 9 - Removal Notice which should also list the goods removed. Looking at what he has seized it does indeed appear to be an excessive levy, you say initially you thought the sum owing was £369 so to give the benefit of doubt he would needed to have seized items worth c.£3.5k/£4k in total.

 

Turning to all the photo equipment which you say is needed for business/education. Apart from the fact the equipment is not the common or garden type used by most folks going on holiday do you have anything which suggests the equipment is for the use you describe? In other words can you prove the equipment is for business/educational use - do you have a portfolio of work/contracts, do you have a current letter etc from the Educational Establishment that shows you as a current Student etc.

 

I would concentrate on putting this together & sending them the proof by email tomorrow so it is on their desk first thing Monday. I would also contact some local Councillor(s) tomorrow and advise them of what has happened and enlist their help - any refusal or reluctance and go over their heads to the Leader of the Council and his opposite number - these people have access to those at the Council who can have this reversed on Monday morning particularly if there is a chance they could be hit in the pocket for your loss of trade/continued education.

 

Providing the debt arose before your OH moved back in she should prepare a Statutory Declaration ready to be notarised on Monday morning at any Solicitor laying claim to her own goods which have been seized.

 

The letter below should also be sent to the Bailiffs asking for a Breakdown of the charges so far applied, use & adapt as you require and send initially by email backed up by a copy in the post:

 

"From:

My Name

My Address

 

To:

Acme Bailiff Co

Bailiff House

 

Ref: Account No: 123456

 

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 Access 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

 

Ripped off customer"

 

Come back and let us know how you progress with things tomorrow as there is still 1 more thing that can be done if approaches to the Councillors fail.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Turning to all the photo equipment which you say is needed for business/education. Apart from the fact the equipment is not the common or garden type used by most folks going on holiday do you have anything which suggests the equipment is for the use you describe? In other words can you prove the equipment is for business/educational use - do you have a portfolio of work/contracts, do you have a current letter etc from the Educational Establishment that shows you as a current Student etc."

 

I have two websites, which are business orientated - i.e., I use them to sell images on.

I also have contracts with 9 agencies worldwide that represent me.

I have 7 websites of my work directly related to my degree work, one for each individual section studied.

I have my up to date student identity card, which identifies the course (BA (hons) Undergraduate in Creative arts)

 

I have already sent them the detals of the sites, a jpeg of my identity card, and links to images that are on the various agencies so they can verify them.

 

D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Others will know more but, it does look excessive, and I would be compiling a letter of Formal complaint to the CEO, I would on Monday ask the revenues department how they will expect future payments, as you are requesting a claim form for Council tax benefit due to your now unemployed status, their agent the bailiff having removed your livelihood, with an excessive levy.

 

You should also do as ploddertom suggests pdq, and if they ignore the proof of your professional status, proceed to the Formal complaint copied to CEO, council leader and MP

The primary aim must be to reclaim your equipment and arrange a sensible affordable payment arrangement,

 

I wonder PT, if Op could mention on Monday to the council he was issuing e a Regulation 46 complaint with the council named as defendant in the magistrates court due to the excessive nature of the levy, the council being wholly liable and responsible for their agent Rossendales actions, and it's obvious focus on removing ALL the tools of his trade whilst ignoring the other usual household items subject to levy?

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
If my calculations are correct your debt (excluding any bailiff fees) before the goods were removed was standing at a balance of approx £75, can you comfirm this please?

 

WD

 

If this is indeed the case there is prima-facie evidence that the levy and removal was solely to garner fees for Rossendales which is a no no as it is far in excess of what is reasonable.

 

Just needs tomtubby to look in now, and it may be looking a little grim for Rossers again.

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

"If my calculations are correct your debt (excluding any bailiff fees)
before
the goods were removed was standing at a balance of approx £75, can you comfirm this please?

 

WD"

 

No. I think it was around the £1000 mark.

 

I got the summons from the council in June. I then heard nothing (Or to be honest, possibly missed some stuff, as my wife was in intensive care - although I've gone through every bit of post and can't find a thing.), but got a "reminder" in August for £369.99, saying I had to pay £37.99 immediately, which I did. Then bailiffs arrived, claiming £1000 and I paid £100 to them. I then wrote to the council, both complaining and asking for a detailed amount of what I owed and why. I also sent the same stuff to Rossendales, and asked for time to pay. I had the one phone call from the council, but as I was driving, I asked them to call back, which they didn't. As I didn't hear back from them, I paid the remainder (£159.99 or something) directly to the council. At that time, I thought I was "up to date," as it were, because while I obviously knew I still had to pay my council tax, This was by now September, so assumed I still had til the end of the period to pay the remainder.

 

Then all this kicked off.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right........... Important point that I think may have arisen.

 

What is the definition of "wife" here? I certainly call her my "wife" but we have not actually been married in church, registrars office, etc. in the UK, and certainly have no marriage certificate in the UK. We went through a ceremony in the U.S., but not here. When we did so, we were told that it actually holds no legal significance in the UK, and that we should go through a civil ceremony back in the UK.

 

I know this sounds so pedantic, but as the council and bailiffs seem to use those sort of tactics, then why can't I?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Right........... Important point that I think may have arisen.

 

What is the definition of "wife" here? I certainly call her my "wife" but we have not actually been married in church, registrars office, etc. in the UK, and certainly have no marriage certificate in the UK. We went through a ceremony in the U.S., but not here. When we did so, we were told that it actually holds no legal significance in the UK, and that we should go through a civil ceremony back in the UK.

 

I know this sounds so pedantic, but as the council and bailiffs seem to use those sort of tactics, then why can't I?

 

They will take it to mean your partner, and as you live together, will rely on the DWP definition of co-habitation, as that of someone living with you AS IF YOU ARE MARRIED, so as you are in a relationship AND live together, the council and bailiffs will regard her property as yours and yours as hers as in partners in a relationship share costs; so will argue they can snatch whatever they want.

 

I'm sure others will know more and how to deal with this aspect better than I.

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

Sorry to be pedantic but I am trying to geta bigger picture, that way we can sort out fact from bailiff fiction when it comes to the fees you have been charged.

 

I can see we have 2 years CT 2010/11 2011/12 is the £369.99 you make reference to the balance owed for 2010/11?

 

You are going to have to ring the Coucil tomorrow and ask:

 

 

How many liability orders they have against you?

What period each one covers?

How much each was for at the time of applying for the LO?

How much is outstanding on each?

When were the orders passed to the Bailff?

 

You know you have paid £159.99 £100 £37.99 what you need to find out is how much of the balance across all the liability orders are being claimed by the bailiff for his "fees". I suspect you do not owe nearly as much as the bailiffs abacus supposedly tells and as BN has already said it could indeed the be case there is prima-facie evidence that the levylink3.gif and removal was solely to garner fees for rossendales, you have obviously taken steps to make arrangements with the Council to pay and they have ignored those requests unreasonably by not replying to them and, on the face of it prefer to line the pockets of Rossendales without little consideration.

 

WD

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Sorry to be pedantic but I am trying to geta bigger picture, that way we can sort out fact from bailiff fiction when it comes to the fees you have been charged.

 

I can see we have 2 years CT 2010/11 2011/12 is the £369.99 you make reference to the balance owed for 2010/11?

 

You are going to have to ring the Coucil tomorrow and ask:

 

 

How many liability orders they have against you?

What period each one covers?

How much each was for at the time of applying for the LO?

How much is outstanding on each?

When were the orders passed to the Bailff?

 

You know you have paid £159.99 £100 £37.99 what you need to find out is how much of the balance across all the liability orders are being claimed by the bailiff for his "fees". I suspect you do not owe nearly as much as the bailiffs abacus supposedly tells and as BN has already said it could indeed the be case there is prima-facie evidence that the levy and removal was solely to garner fees for rossendales, you have obviously taken steps to make arrangements with the Council to pay and they have ignored those requests unreasonably by not replying to them and, on the face of it prefer to line the pockets of Rossendales without little consideration."

 

Right, here goes an answer to this:

 

How many liability orders they have against you? Only 1. dated 7th July 2011.

What period each one covers? This current year (2011-2012?)

How much each was for at the time of applying for the LO? (I don't know exactly, but it was £1154.17 on the first paperwork I received from the bailiffs.)

How much is outstanding on each? Having paid around £369, I'd say it should be about £775?)

When were the orders passed to the Bailff? Not a clue, but they first visited on 2nd September.

Which brings me to fees they've charged:

 

On the first paperwork I received, I was charged £24.50 for a first visit, £18.00 for a second visit (They only turned up once.) and £59 for a levy fee: total £101.50. I paid them £100 cash on that day.

 

On the "real" second visit, (the one where goods were seized,) the debt had increased to £1184.67. I was then charged £415 for "other" fees, leaving the outstanding amount at £1599.67

Link to post
Share on other sites
"Sorry to be pedantic but I am trying to geta bigger picture, that way we can sort out fact from bailiff fiction when it comes to the fees you have been charged.

 

I can see we have 2 years CT 2010/11 2011/12 is the £369.99 you make reference to the balance owed for 2010/11?

 

You are going to have to ring the Coucil tomorrow and ask:

 

 

How many liability orders they have against you?

What period each one covers?

How much each was for at the time of applying for the LO?

How much is outstanding on each?

When were the orders passed to the Bailff?

 

You know you have paid £159.99 £100 £37.99 what you need to find out is how much of the balance across all the liability orders are being claimed by the bailiff for his "fees". I suspect you do not owe nearly as much as the bailiffs abacus supposedly tells and as BN has already said it could indeed the be case there is prima-facie evidence that the levy and removal was solely to garner fees for rossendales, you have obviously taken steps to make arrangements with the Council to pay and they have ignored those requests unreasonably by not replying to them and, on the face of it prefer to line the pockets of Rossendales without little consideration."

 

Right, here goes an answer to this:

 

How many liability orders they have against you? Only 1. dated 7th July 2011.

What period each one covers? This current year (2011-2012?)

How much each was for at the time of applying for the LO? (I don't know exactly, but it was £1154.17 on the first paperwork I received from the bailiffs.)

How much is outstanding on each? Having paid around £369, I'd say it should be about £775?)

When were the orders passed to the Bailff? Not a clue, but they first visited on 2nd September.

Which brings me to fees they've charged:

 

On the first paperwork I received, I was charged £24.50 for a first visit, £18.00 for a second visit (They only turned up once.) and £59 for a levy fee: total £101.50. I paid them £100 cash on that day.

 

On the "real" second visit, (the one where goods were seized,) the debt had increased to £1184.67. I was then charged £415 for "other" fees, leaving the outstanding amount at £1599.67

 

This looks like gross overcharging to me, have you had a detailed breakdown of the fees they have applied as something seems wrong here, especially the "OTHER FEES"

 

You need a breakdown as per the letter in ploddertoms post # 10, as they will fudge and add spurious amounts if they think you don't know what they are legally allowed to charge

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

In that case going of the original Liability Order the levy is NOT excessive. Reasons being is that items removed for sale only realise approx 10% of their worth - mainly because the Auctioneer will tell his saleroom that the associated lots are subject to a Bailiff seizure/removal. Therefore goods with a value of £14k will not be seen as being excessive.

 

However that does not mean to say that what happened is correct especially as you have provided the proof that the majority of the items should be classed as exempt. I say majority as they may argue that you would only need 1 tripod, 1 camera, 1 flash etc and they can therefore have the rest. I appreciate it would be impossible to operate like this but you may need to find the arguments as to why you need so much.

 

When the goods were removed were you given a Form 9? At the time of seizure but before removal were you given an opportunity to pay either in full or by instalments?

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Re: Council tax and Rossendales.

In that case going of the original Liability Order the levy is NOT excessive. Reasons being is that items removed for sale only realise approx 10% of their worth - mainly because the Auctioneer will tell his saleroom that the associated lots are subject to a Bailiff seizure/removal. Therefore goods with a value of £14k will not be seen as being excessive.

 

However that does not mean to say that what happened is correct especially as you have provided the proof that the majority of the items should be classed as exempt. I say majority as they may argue that you would only need 1 tripod, 1 camera, 1 flash etc and they can therefore have the rest. I appreciate it would be impossible to operate like this but you may need to find the arguments as to why you need so much.

 

When the goods were removed were you given a Form 9? At the time of seizure but before removal were you given an opportunity to pay either in full or by instalments?"

Hi.

The "tripods" mentioned in the list, are mainly not really tripods, but stands for the lighting and studio equipment. I know it gets a bit technical, but they are needed. Same with the "flash" units. They're not like the flashguns you stick on top of the average camera. They are dedicated studio flashes that sync by radio controller to the camera, and fit onto some of the "tripods" mentioned in the list. I don't want to get too technical, but you need numerous units to create a professional image. I could probably write a thesis on photographic lighting, as it is an integral part of both my work and my degree. Think of the difference between a family snap and what you see in Vogue.

 

Same can be said about the camera.

 

I was not given a chance to pay by instalments (I had already written to both the council and Rossendales, asking for an instalment scheme but had been ignored.)

I was told to pay - in full, immediately. No choice. It is even on the paperwork they left.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For clarity as one with some experience in videography, sound support and lighting, all of the equipment listed would be required to fulfill a professional assignment, so basically seizing any of it puts Op out of work 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

I've written to the 5 person team of the executive team in charge of the council, and the head of the council, outlining my concerns.

I've also written to Rossendales, asking for a complete breakdon of info, as ploddertom suggested. My wife has requested he personal property back (I know that's probably not going to work, but it's worth a shot.)

I've also written a draft for a Regulation 46 appeal, does anyone think that's a worthwhile shot?

 

anything else anyone can think of?

 

Ta.

D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also written a draft for a Regulation 46 appeal, does anyone think that's a worthwhile shot?

 

 

Hold off on that for now. You have to be seen to give them the chance to sort this. However in my view if the reply you get from the Council in the morning is tough then that may throw a different light on it.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...