Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I used to post regularly in order to provide factual information (rather than advice) but got fed up with banging my head against a brick wall in so many cases when posters insisted black was white and I was writing rubbish. I have never posted anything which was untrue or indeed biased in any way.  I have never given 'advice' but have sought to correct erroneous statements which were unhelpful. The only username I have ever used is blf1uk. I have never gone under any other username and have no connection to 'bailiff advice'.  I am not a High Court Enforcement Officer but obtained my first 'bailiff' certificate in 1982. I'm not sure what records you have accessed but I was certainly not born in 1977 - at that time I was serving in the Armed Forces in Hereford, Germany (4th Division HQ) and my wife gave birth to our eldest.   Going back to the original point, the fact is that employees of an Approved Enforcement Agency contracted by the Ministry of Justice can and do execute warrants of arrest (with and without bail), warrants of detention and warrants of commitment. In many cases, the employee is also an enforcement agent [but not acting as one]. Here is a fact.  I recently submitted an FOI request to HMCTS and they advised me (for example) that in 2022/23 Jacobs (the AEA for Wales) was issued with 4,750 financial arrest warrants (without bail) and 473 'breach' warrants.  A breach warrant is a community penalty breach warrant (CPBW) whereby the defendant has breached the terms of either their release from prison or the terms of an order [such as community service].  While the defendant may pay the sum [fine] due to avoid arrest on a financial arrest warrant, a breach warrant always results in their transportation to either a police station [for holding] or directly to the magistrates' court to go before the bench as is the case on financial arrest warrants without bail when they don't pay.  Wales has the lowest number of arrest warrants issued of the seven regions with South East exceeding 50,000.  Overall, the figure for arrest warrants issued to the three AEAs exceeds 200,000.  Many of these were previously dealt with directly by HMCTS using their employed Civilian Enforcement Officers but they were subject to TUPE in 2019 and either left the service or transferred to the three AEAs. In England, a local authority may take committal proceedings against an individual who has not paid their council tax and the court will issue a committal summons.  If the person does not attend the committal hearing, the court will issue a warrant of arrest usually with bail but occasionally without bail (certainly without bail if when bailed on their own recognizance the defendant still fails to appear).   A warrant of arrest to bring the debtor before the court is issued under regulation 48(5) of The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 and can be executed by "any person to whom it is directed or by any constable....." (Reg 48(6).  These, although much [much] lower in number compared to HMCTS, are also dealt with by the enforcement agencies contracted by the local authorities. Feel free to do your own research using FOI enquiries!  
    • 3rd one seems the best option, let 'em default, don't pay a penny, nothing will happen, forget about all of this. As for Payplan don't touch them with a bargepole, nothing they can do that you can't, and they will pocket fees. A do it yourself DMP is pointless as it will just string out the statute barred date to infinity.
    • Because that’s what the email said. Anyway it’s done now. Posted and image emailed.    im doing some reading in preparation for defence but I will need my hand holding quite tightly by you good people.  I’m a little bit clueless
    • why do you need adobe...use a pdf online website. all for now...no get reading up and do not miss your defence filing date no matter what. post it up in good time no!!    
  • 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

Whizzkid v Abbey - Round 2


whizzkid001
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1898 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

Just been broadcast on Meridian TV!!

  • Confused 1

Settled Claims:

Abbey: £4025 Claimed 27/02/06 - Paid in full 19/06/06

NatWest: £4529 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 1/08/06

Halifax: £1150 lba 18/05/06 - Paid in full 07/06/06

Natwest CC: £420 Initial letter 25/07/06 - Paid in full 08/06

Woolwich: £1100 Paid in full 28/2/07 + Default removed

NatWest Pt 2: £1700 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 7/2/07 + Defaults removed

 

Current Claims:

Abbey Pt 2: £2300 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

Alliance & Leicester: £1421 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

 

Refunds pending:

Capital Bank: Swift Advances: Halifax

 

Son's Refunds pending:

Abbey: HSBC

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 407
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Any links to the programme?

 

To see the steps I took to recover unfair bank charges with the help of Consumer Action Group, please read my thread Spiceskull v HSBC.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looked on their site, doesn't appear to be any links to view it :(

Settled Claims:

Abbey: £4025 Claimed 27/02/06 - Paid in full 19/06/06

NatWest: £4529 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 1/08/06

Halifax: £1150 lba 18/05/06 - Paid in full 07/06/06

Natwest CC: £420 Initial letter 25/07/06 - Paid in full 08/06

Woolwich: £1100 Paid in full 28/2/07 + Default removed

NatWest Pt 2: £1700 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 7/2/07 + Defaults removed

 

Current Claims:

Abbey Pt 2: £2300 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

Alliance & Leicester: £1421 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

 

Refunds pending:

Capital Bank: Swift Advances: Halifax

 

Son's Refunds pending:

Abbey: HSBC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck today Chris.

 

To see the steps I took to recover unfair bank charges with the help of Consumer Action Group, please read my thread Spiceskull v HSBC.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers - hoping they've seen sense & haven't filed a defence by 4pm. Of course, they could just pay up.... If not, bailiffs continue to go in! :)

Settled Claims:

Abbey: £4025 Claimed 27/02/06 - Paid in full 19/06/06

NatWest: £4529 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 1/08/06

Halifax: £1150 lba 18/05/06 - Paid in full 07/06/06

Natwest CC: £420 Initial letter 25/07/06 - Paid in full 08/06

Woolwich: £1100 Paid in full 28/2/07 + Default removed

NatWest Pt 2: £1700 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 7/2/07 + Defaults removed

 

Current Claims:

Abbey Pt 2: £2300 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

Alliance & Leicester: £1421 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

 

Refunds pending:

Capital Bank: Swift Advances: Halifax

 

Son's Refunds pending:

Abbey: HSBC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris,

 

Make sure you keep us posted! I'm on the edge of my seat here....!

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

At 3.30 pm I went into court for an update, they said there was nothing noted on the system ref them filing a defence by the deadline. At 3.55pm I then called them, they said the papers were currently with the judge!

 

You can read that 1 of 2 ways, either they failed to lodge by the deadline of 4.00pm & thus lifted the suspension of my warrant or they did file, & he has to decide if - and when - a hearing to decide whether my Judgement is set aside will take place.

Settled Claims:

Abbey: £4025 Claimed 27/02/06 - Paid in full 19/06/06

NatWest: £4529 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 1/08/06

Halifax: £1150 lba 18/05/06 - Paid in full 07/06/06

Natwest CC: £420 Initial letter 25/07/06 - Paid in full 08/06

Woolwich: £1100 Paid in full 28/2/07 + Default removed

NatWest Pt 2: £1700 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 7/2/07 + Defaults removed

 

Current Claims:

Abbey Pt 2: £2300 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

Alliance & Leicester: £1421 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

 

Refunds pending:

Capital Bank: Swift Advances: Halifax

 

Son's Refunds pending:

Abbey: HSBC

Link to post
Share on other sites

The suspense is excruciating...

 

To see the steps I took to recover unfair bank charges with the help of Consumer Action Group, please read my thread Spiceskull v HSBC.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Best of luck mate. Hope it all goes your way.

DPA Letter received by NatWest 11/04/2006

DPA Request expires 21/05/2006

Statements received 15/05/2006

LBA sent 15/05/2006

 

If you find me vaguely coherent, click the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who haven't read story in Sun...

 

 

 

Copyright 2006 NEWS GROUP NEWSPAPERS LTD

All Rights Reserved

The Sun (England)

April 11, 2006 Tuesday

LENGTH: 771 words

 

HEADLINE: I'll send bailiffs into the Abbey

 

BYLINE: Charles Rae, Consumer Editor

 

BODY:

 

 

AN ANGRY dad is threatening to shame a High Street bank -by sending in the bailiffs over a £ 2,500 unpaid debt.

 

Chris Leeves, 44, has successfully sued Abbey for a string of "totally over-the-top charges" for minor infringements.

 

Now the bank is facing the prospect of bailiffs marching into their branch in Aldershot, Hants, and seizing the cash Chris is owed.

 

Fed-up Chris took the bank to court claiming its "extortionate" charges infringed the Consumer Contracts Regulations Act 1999.

 

Slapped

 

He claimed to have been slapped with a bill for up to £ 40 a time for going a few pounds overdrawn or failing to cover direct debit payments for a single day.

 

As a self-employed internet salesman supporting a family, he said the charges were sometimes unavoidable due to late-paying customers and that there was no give-and-take from the bank. After writing to Abbey claiming he would be happy to pay more reasonable fees, the bank refused. So Chris, who lives with long-term partner Claire Underwood, decided to take legal action.

 

He filed his case at Aldershot County Court.

 

Abbey failed to file a defence within a fortnight and jubilant Chris won his case automatically, with the bank ordered to repay the £ 2,590.87.

 

Chris intends to send in the bailiffs if Abbey ignore him again.

 

He said: "If they refuse to respond yet again I will definitely be using the bailiffs. I can't believe they have entirely ignored the court process.

 

"This is money they owe me and just because they're a bank it doesn't mean they can get away with not coughing up."

 

He added "For a long time all the banks have turned around and said the charges are part of their terms and conditions, but people aren't standing for it any more.

 

"I don't deny those charges arose and it was mainly my fault because I had a couple of bad months where income didn't come in.

 

"I did manage to pay them all, but what I objected to was how disproportionate they were to what I had done.

 

"They are way too expensive. One error can often spiral out of control.

 

"A missed payment into the bank can lead to a charge, which then takes you overdrawn and you're charged again. Then a direct debit is missed and they charge you yet again.

 

"It's a vicious circle and it can ruin small businesses."

 

Chris hopes his victory will spur on others to take their cases through the courts.

 

He said: "I know banks are there to make a profit but this is pure greed."

 

A spokesman for Abbey said: "We are sorry that Mr Leeves is unhappy about his bank charges.

 

"However, as stated in the terms and conditions of his account, it is the customer's responsibility to ensure there are sufficient funds to cover any direct debits, standing orders, card purchases or cheques they may write.

 

"Abbey is up front and transparent about all its banking charges. The banking charges which Abbey levies are legitimate and proportionate to the costs incurred by the bank for situations such as returned direct debits.

 

Defend

 

"We have no record of receiving any court claim with regards to this particular case and therefore we didn't, unfortunately, have the opportunity to defend our position.

 

"The judgement was obtained by Mr Leeves by default because Abbey never received the court claim form.

 

"Abbey will be applying to the court to lift the judgment, suspend the warrant of execution and defend the claim. We hope the situation can be resolved as soon as possible.

 

"Abbey's bank account is good value and our charges compare fairly with others.

 

"For most people, banking is free -bank charges are only imposed on those who don't contact us and go beyond their agreed limits."

 

Chris's victory comes just a few days after consumer magazine Which? launched a campaign about bank charges.

 

They issued all current account providers with an ASBO -Anti-Social Banking Order -for the way they charge customers for straying into unauthorised overdrafts.

 

Experts estimate that financial institutions make £ 1.6billion a year from charges.

 

Recently law student Stephen Hone, of Plymouth, was offered a £ 5,000 out-of-court settlement by Abbey after racking up £ 2,000 of charges over six years.

 

The Office Of Fair Trading has also slammed banks and credit card providers for high charges.

 

A spokesman said hundreds of millions of pounds of "unlawful" penalty charges were being raked in by financial institutions each year.

 

They have called on banks, credit card providers, mortgage lenders and other institutions to slash their default charges.

 

He said: "A default charge should only be used to recover limited administration costs. These may include postage and stationery costs, staff costs and a share of maintaining premises and IT systems."

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 3

If you have found this post (or any other post) useful ensure you click on the scales in the top right of that post to give credit where credit is due.:D

 

DO YOU HAVE A WEBSITE AND WANT TO PROVIDE A VALUABLE LINK TO THIS FORUM ? Go to this thread:-http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=52854

 

As ever, with (I believe most if not) all advice given on this website, I am not qualified to give any advice and you are duly warned that any decisions are your own decisions made on your own account and no liability will be accepted for any advice followed ! Use your own judgment.

Seek advice of a qualified, insured, professional if you have any doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting the article.

  • Confused 1

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

CmonCmon

 

Crikey the suspenders are killing me!

 

 

I've PM'd Chris to ask him to update us. I'm nearly wetting myself, I daren't leave the pc for fear of missing it. Ok, I joke.

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Lueeze

So there me in suspenders and you with your legs crossed!

 

God knows who else is in a state about this case PMSL!:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Judge is the only 1 who knows - for tonight at least!! The papers were with him when I called just before they closed so not able to discover what's happened until tomorrow morning/pm I guess! Jeze, no sleep for me tonight..... lol

Settled Claims:

Abbey: £4025 Claimed 27/02/06 - Paid in full 19/06/06

NatWest: £4529 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 1/08/06

Halifax: £1150 lba 18/05/06 - Paid in full 07/06/06

Natwest CC: £420 Initial letter 25/07/06 - Paid in full 08/06

Woolwich: £1100 Paid in full 28/2/07 + Default removed

NatWest Pt 2: £1700 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 7/2/07 + Defaults removed

 

Current Claims:

Abbey Pt 2: £2300 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

Alliance & Leicester: £1421 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

 

Refunds pending:

Capital Bank: Swift Advances: Halifax

 

Son's Refunds pending:

Abbey: HSBC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, it may not be ominous, in that they applied in the last few minutes, maybe he was signing the warrant because they hadn't! :)

Settled Claims:

Abbey: £4025 Claimed 27/02/06 - Paid in full 19/06/06

NatWest: £4529 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 1/08/06

Halifax: £1150 lba 18/05/06 - Paid in full 07/06/06

Natwest CC: £420 Initial letter 25/07/06 - Paid in full 08/06

Woolwich: £1100 Paid in full 28/2/07 + Default removed

NatWest Pt 2: £1700 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 7/2/07 + Defaults removed

 

Current Claims:

Abbey Pt 2: £2300 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

Alliance & Leicester: £1421 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

 

Refunds pending:

Capital Bank: Swift Advances: Halifax

 

Son's Refunds pending:

Abbey: HSBC

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope it goes well for you tomorrow...let's hope the judge gets an early night...

 

To see the steps I took to recover unfair bank charges with the help of Consumer Action Group, please read my thread Spiceskull v HSBC.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dumb question - were the papers there with you today for the follow up story?

 

To see the steps I took to recover unfair bank charges with the help of Consumer Action Group, please read my thread Spiceskull v HSBC.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No - they'll be there if/when bailiffs go in or the 'end' of the story is nigh!

Settled Claims:

Abbey: £4025 Claimed 27/02/06 - Paid in full 19/06/06

NatWest: £4529 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 1/08/06

Halifax: £1150 lba 18/05/06 - Paid in full 07/06/06

Natwest CC: £420 Initial letter 25/07/06 - Paid in full 08/06

Woolwich: £1100 Paid in full 28/2/07 + Default removed

NatWest Pt 2: £1700 Claimed 10/05/06 - Paid in full 7/2/07 + Defaults removed

 

Current Claims:

Abbey Pt 2: £2300 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

Alliance & Leicester: £1421 + adverse credit removal claimed 23/03/07

 

Refunds pending:

Capital Bank: Swift Advances: Halifax

 

Son's Refunds pending:

Abbey: HSBC

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish you all the best with your result please let us know as soon as you do.

 

Everyone is waiting with baited breath

 

If all goes well it will be another nail in the coffin for the banks !!!

 

 

Krystyna

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1898 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...