Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 162 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4626 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 All

 

A while ago i signed a walking possession agreement and entered into a payment plan with a bailiff firm after having the bailiff turn up on my door. If i had known then a lot of what i have read since I would never have entered this, but never mind.

 

I have read about charges that they can add etc but am still not clear on this, i got a statement of the account from them and this is what the debt and charges were for:-

 

Initial unpaid council tax debt £499.28 09/12/2010

Levy Fee £41.00 04/03/2011

1st Visit £24.50 06/01/2011

2nd Visit £18.00 18/01/2011

Walking Possession £12.00 04/03/2011

Head of schedule 5 £24.50 04/03/2011

1st Van Call £135.00 04/03/2011

Debit Card Surcharge £1.50 x 3

2nd Van Call £180.00 23/06/2011

Credit Card Charge £15.37

 

Now as i said i have read about what they can and cannot charge for but i might have got the information wrong. The first van charge was on the same day as signing the walking possession and making a levy which i didn't think they could do on the same day. Also I didn't think they could charge for a second van visit if they didn't remove goods? Not that i am sure they even turned up with a van as i wasn't actually home for the so called visit.

 

Also i didn't think they could add costs for payments made by debit or credit card.

 

So can anyone confirm or deny these things and if what i think is correct how should i proceed in getting the money refunded?

 

Kind regards

 

Keith

Edited by SaltwaterRoom
Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to CAG, the regulars will be along later no doubt. but I don't think the first van fee was valid, as he attended to levy, and did so, as he didn't attend to remove the van fee is void imho. Not sure about the second van fee but probably irregular also.

 

The head schedule 5 only applies when goods are seized and removed and is a redemption fee, but bailiffs argue they can apply with a WP

 

Others will know more, but you have come to the right place.

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

First off can you let us know who the bailiff company he was working for, dont name the bailiff

 

He cannot charge for the 1st van fee or the H fee. Cannot charge for a credit card.

 

They cannot have white goods on a levy or a sofa unless you have another washing machine.

Did you default on the payment plan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks PT

 

The bailiff company is Penham Excel Ltd. I notice on here that they were working for a while without a Consumer Credit License as well, but they appear to have renewed this now.

 

I did not have a second washing machine or sofa

 

I did default on a payment, hence why i am guessing they say they made a 2nd van visit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 x Philips TV 32" - is this top of range, flat panel or CRT, how old, when last tested for electrical safety

1 x HP-PC Full System - how old, is it top spec, is this as described as they have not mentioned monitor etc

1 x " Seat Sofa Brown - - does this still have labels attached showing if it is fire retardent

100 DVD's Approx - little value

1 x TV Stand/Silver - no value

1 x Mountain Bike/Red - is this yours or does it belong to a child, again how old, is it top spec

1 x Washing Machine/White - exempt goods

1 x Wood DVD Cabinet - little value

1 x Green Chair - if upholstered same questions as sofa, if not probably little value

1 x Wood Table - unless mahogany or teak or antique will have little value

 

Apart from the seating that has been seized above is there enough seating left within the household for each person incl children to sit on?

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

PT, when we are saying seized we are talking about just being listed against the debt correct, I just want to make sure I am on the same page as you as no goods have been removed. Some of the terms used can be confusing.

 

TV is an old CRT, no idea when it was last tested for electrical safety.

 

The PC was just over 2 months old at the time bought brand new, and "Full System" included base unit, monitor and all-in-one printer. Not top top of the range but cost £600 when bought (I'll also add i use this for working from home when required)

 

The chair is an ikea one (POANG for reference) , other than that and the sofa their was no other seating. Sofa still has safety labels attached.

 

Mountain bike is mine and was 3 months old at that time

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Initial unpaid council tax debt £499.28 09/12/2010 - is this the sum as confirmed by the Council & is that the date is was obtained

Levy Fee £41.00 04/03/2011 - probably OK

1st Visit £24.50 06/01/2011 - OK, but did you know about this visit

2nd Visit £18.00 18/01/2011 - as 1st Visit

Walking Possession £12.00 04/03/2011 - probably OK

Head of schedule 5 £24.50 04/03/2011 - my interpretation of the Header H Fee is:

Goods must have been removed and a public sale arranged, you then pay in full incl all charges/costs. The sale is cancelled and you then retrieve your goods. Therefore if no goods removed and no sale arrange then no Fee. This should be removed.

1st Van Call £135.00 04/03/2011 - cannot be charged at the same time the Levy is made, there has to be a clear distinction between between the two Fees in order to give you time to pay - this Fee should be removed

Debit Card Surcharge £1.50 x 3 - the charging of Card Fees can be seen to be contentious, there is no Regulation that allows this. However if the Bailiff pointed out that paying by Card attract a papayment and you then agreed to that then that may be a different matter. Arguable

2nd Van Call £180.00 23/06/2011 - if you broke the agreement then this may be allowable but as they charged £135 previously then clearly the sum charged this time is not reasonable. See Below for more

Credit Card Charge £15.37 - see the arguments above re Debit Card

 

 

Having looked at the levy they have made I would argue that there is not enough there to fit the criteria should it be necessary to remove and sell goods. In my view there were insufficient goods and the Levy should not have been made. You can argue the case the Bailiff only made a Levy to gain a finacial advantage for himself and his Company - therefore the Levy Fee and all associated costs should be removed in my opinion.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

PT, when we are saying seized we are talking about just being listed against the debt correct, Yes I just want to make sure I am on the same page as you as no goods have been removed. Some of the terms used can be confusing.

 

TV is an old CRT, no idea when it was last tested for electrical safety. In that case the TV is worthless

 

The PC was just over 2 months old at the time bought brand new, and "Full System" included base unit, monitor and all-in-one printer. Not top top of the range but cost £600 when bought (I'll also add i use this for working from home when required) - used PC's have little value, if he has not listed the individual components then in my view we are only talking about the base unit as you could have a 10" B&W monitor with an old Epson dot matrix printer.

The chair is an ikea one (POANG for reference) , other than that and the sofa their was no other seating. Sofa still has safety labels attached. In that case one or the other must be removed from the Levy.

 

Mountain bike is mine and was 3 months old at that time - approx value would be about 10% of purchase price

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem, i totally understand that you can't be answering my questions all the time, you have been a great help.

 

I'll have to check with the council if this is the correct sum, never thought of doing that before.

 

Looking at the original Notice of Distress they lumped the 1st & 2nd visits along with the 1 Van as "Attendance Costs". It was only after i asked for a statement of the account that i saw they charged for a van visit.

 

I did know about the visits, stupidly at the time i thought sticking my head in the sand would help! At least i know better in future.

 

About the van visits, could i argue that the charges are over the top anyway. I checked online and i could rent a van for a day locally for just £33

 

I would also like to point out that this company refused to go into a payment agreement with me over the phone and said that it could only be done after the bailiff had made a levy on goods and served the walking possession. The bailiff tried to get me to borrow the money from family or friends so i could pay the amount in full which i understand they should not do.

 

In regards to the last part of post #11, how would i go about presenting these facts to them and getting the money back. Should i present these facts to them or to the Council?

 

Again, thanks for your help PT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with PT goods insufficient to cover costs and a portion of the principal debt, you could explore the possibility if council are intransigent regarding the actions of their agent Penham Excel, for which they are wholly liable, of a Regulation 46 complaint naming the council as defendant, as you are aggrieved with their bailiffs 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

There is someone who is a dab hand with a letter, I'll see if they are available.

 

When you say you knew about the visits does this mean you were in but refused them entry? Were you in on the second occasion they charged the van fee or do you just have their word for it? If you were out would they have known this?

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that as regards the comments I have made with regard to your goods I am not being disrespectful but trying to function as to how they would be perceived if removed for sale at auction. If your debt was originally approx £500 then the Bailiff should have levied goods to the value of about £5k as their wort is only about 10%.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is someone who is a dab hand with a letter, I'll see if they are available.

 

When you say you knew about the visits does this mean you were in but refused them entry? Were you in on the second occasion they charged the van fee or do you just have their word for it? If you were out would they have known this?

 

PT

 

I knew about the visits as they posted a letter through the door. I was not at home on any of those occassions due to the fact they came during hours i was at work. I only have their word for it that they came with a van on the second occassion as they did this while i was at work too and just left a letter through the door again to contact them or goods would be removed. They knew i would be at work at those times as most people would be that have a 9-5 job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that as regards the comments I have made with regard to your goods I am not being disrespectful but trying to function as to how they would be perceived if removed for sale at auction. If your debt was originally approx £500 then the Bailiff should have levied goods to the value of about £5k as their wort is only about 10%.

 

PT

 

No offense taken i know what you were getting at :)

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also like to point out that i did make the council aware of the charges etc and said i didn't think this was right. I also told the council about penham excel not having a valid Consumer Credit License. All they did was tell Penham Excel this who then came round to cllect the last of the money owed and gave me bull about how he had worked in the business for 20 years and that he knew better than me, after i told him i didn't believe he was within his right to charge for the first van visit. And he also thanked me for informing the council that they didn't have a CCL as they had now renewed it!!! (The council in question is Central Bedfordshire Council fyi)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thanks, I had not read that, but i don't see how it helps now that the bailiffs have been paid in full. Hence why i am trying to find out how i can recover money from the bailiffs who have over charged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You first need to challenge the Bailiffs over their Fees. The chances are they will come back and say they are lawful and can be charged.. When that happens you change tack and tackle the Council as they 100% liable for the actions and charges made by their contractot - in this case the Bailiff. As they usually don't have a clue they refer it back to the Bailiffs who again will refuse. When it gets to that stage there is then a choice of action:

1 - a complaint to the LGO - may take some time before it is sorted

2 - file an N1 in the County Court naming both Council & Bailiffs as co-Defendants

Neither route is particualrly quick but doing this I'm afraid does take some time, it does not solve itself overnight.

 

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...