Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm at work now but promise to look in later. Can you confirm how you paid the first invoice?  It wasn't your fault if the signal was so poor and there was no alternative way to pay.  There must be a chance of reversing the charge with your bank.  There are no guarantees but Kev  https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09766749/officers  has never had the backbone to do court so far.  Not even in one case,  
    • OK  so you may not have outed yourself if you said "we". No matter either way you paid. Snotty letter I am surprised that they were so quick off the mark threatening Court. They usually take months to go that far. No doubt that as you paid the first one they decided to strike quickly and scare you into paying. Dear Chuckleheads  aka Alliance,  I am replying to your LOCs You may have caught me the first time but that is  the end. What a nasty organisation you are. You do realise that you now have now no reason to continue to pursue me after reading my appeal since you know that my car was not cloned. Any further pursuit will end up with a complaint to the ICO that you are breaching my GDPR.  Please confirm that you have removed my details from your records. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I haven't gone for a snotty letter this time as they know that you paid for your car in another car park. So using a shot across their bows .  If it doesn't deter them and they send in the debt collectors or the Court you will then be able to get more money back from them for  breachi.ng your data protection than they will get should they win in Court-and they have no chance of that as you have paid. So go in with guns blazing and they might see sense.  Although never underestimate how stupid they are. Or greedy.
    • Thank you. Such a good point. They did issue all 3 before I paid though. I only paid one because I didn’t have proof of parking that time, only for two others.    Unfortunately no proof of my appeal as it was just submitted through a form on their website and no copy was sent to me. I only have the reply. I believe I just put something like “we made the honest mistake of using the incorrect parking area on the app” and that’s it. Thanks again for your help. 
    • They are absolute chuckleheads. You paid but because you entered a different car park site also belonging to them they are pursuing you despite them knowing what you had done. It would be very obvious to everyone, including Alliance that your car could not have been in two places at the same time. Thank you for posting the PCN so quickly making it a pity that you appealed since there are so many things wrong with it that you as keeper are not liable to pay the charge. They rarely accept appeals since that would mean they lose money but they have virtually no chance of beating you in Court. Very unlikely that they will take you to Court given the circumstances. Just in case you didn't out yourself as the driver could you please post up your appeal.
    • Jasowter I hope that common sense prevails with Iceland and the whole matter can be successfully ended. I would perhaps not have used a spell checker just to prove the dyslexia 🙂 though it may have made it more difficult to read. I noticed that you haven't uploaded the original PCN .Might not be necessary if the nes from Iceland is good. Otherwise perhaps you could get your son to do it by following the upload instructions so that we can appeal again with the extra ammunition provided by the PCN. Most of them rarely manage to get the wording right which means that you as the keeper are not liable to pay the charge-only the driver is and they do not know the name and address of the driver. So that would put you both in the clear if the PCN is non compliant.
  • 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

Excel Civil Enforcement - I fear this is the real deal :-/


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4421 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

Hhmmm, well R&R entered initially and took a list of my possessions. Is that still withstanding? I'll contact Excel later and post the response I'm given by their goons.

Even with a levy they cannot just break in at that stage, I cannot see how Excel have got hold of this if Ross 'n Robbers are the contracted bailiff to the council, for the collection of council tax liability.

 

Something is wrong imho, as HMRC and Excel along with their operation crackdown are sweet FA to do with council tax enforcement. Mistaken identity with someone who has been to magistrates court?

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

Even with a levy they cannot just break in at that stage, I cannot see how Excel have got hold of this if Ross 'n Robbers are the contracted bailiff to the council, for the collection of council tax liability.

 

Something is wrong imho, as HMRC and Excel along with their operation crackdown are sweet FA to do with council tax enforcement. Mistaken identity with someone who has been to magistrates court?

 

No I don't understand that either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

looking at the first three letters of the scans, it is definatly a court fine and not council tax.

the ref will start with *MC(* being the court area i.e smc is south magi courts).

 

Op crackdown is in force with the police, and arrests can and will be made if need be.

 

Forced entry can be made even without a levy in place for magi fines.

 

Talking through the door wont help as they can and will force entry if you refuse to let them in on HMCS fines.

 

And that letter is a HMCS warning letter.

 

council tax warning letters are very different and give more details on debt origin i.e council ref no, cost added and so on.

 

Ross and Roberts levy no longer exists.

 

If they were unable to collect and returned it to the magi's as such, then it will have been reissued to excel for them to try and collect.

 

I would ring excel tomorrow and find out what the fine is for.

they will have the basic details and can give you the courts ref no for you to speak to them.

at this stage the court will only give you fine details and will refer you back to bailiff for anything else.

 

I would advise paying this any which way you can, or you DO risk being arrested or you CAN lose your household items and cars.

 

Sorry to sound harsh but not alot you can do now.

You would have had multiple letters from magi courts, not to mention original summons or "side of the road" fine and at least 2 from excel.

not only that but this red letter will not be a first visit so you would have recieved notice by hand prior to this.

If you wish to contest that a bailiff has ever visited before, then please be aware almost all bailiffs now have trackers in their vans and either cameras in their vans or on their person.

 

Good luck to you and hope it all works out well in the end. just talking to the bailiff may help.

the office staff will have a script where as the bailiff can decide on his own what to do i.e arrangements and so on.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh God. I've made a massive mistake here.

 

It is, as most have correctly identified, infact a mag court fine (motoring related) and nothing to do with my council tax,

 

I'd completely forgotten about it and now its accrued so many different charges its near twice the original amount.

 

How embarrassing.

Sorry if I've wasted peoples time here.

 

Though, I'm still in the same pickle, albeit its now actually pretty serious.

 

I can muster possibly half of that £810 for Friday, do you think they'd accept that?

 

Is it worth calling the office or should I try and negotiate with the bailiff.

I dont want them anywhere near my home,

 

so I might wait outside the gates for them to arrive instead.

 

Is this the right course?

 

I feel like a right plumb.:roll:

Link to post
Share on other sites

so what you got it wrong

 

we will still help.....

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello :D

 

Im new, in Cardiff and a friend kindly linked me up to you guys.

 

I too have had two red letters from EXCEL civil enforcement Ltd in the last two days.

 

One with OPERATION CRACKDOWN on it, case 2 £238.00

 

One with Removal Notice on it, case 3 £231.00

 

There was a case 1 ...i paid it last year.

 

Case 1 and 2 are motoring offences and Case 3 must be parking tickets, im not sure.

 

If i can explain last year i opened my front door to a Excel representative.

 

He put the door in my face, "im f****** coming in",

 

i put the door back at him and told him in the same language he used that he wasnt.

 

I ended up paying £300 over two months last year, now they are back for more.

 

What are my rights here please? im not a wont payer, im self employed but not working much so i just cant afford to pay.

 

After my door in face incident, i will now be filming any conversation from now on, and i will tell him so...is this ok?

 

Many thanks :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I contacted the court who told me to speak with Excel directly.

 

They told me another bailiff has been assigned and I was given his number, a Mr Durrant.

 

I spoke with him and agreed to pay £510 tomorrow with the remaining amount at the end of this month.

 

I was shocked when he asked, "How about we leave you for a few hours so you can call a few people and get some more money".

 

Quite offended really, thankfully laying hands on the £510 didnt involve asking cap in hand to friends and family

but I do sincerely feel for those people who have to do that, its degrading.

 

Anyhow, 510 tomorrow, I wont let them in,

 

 

I'll get a receipt and await another visit on the 28th of this month.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I was shocked when he asked, "How about we leave you for a few hours so you can call a few people and get some more money".

 

This sort of suggestion will push many vunseable people into the hands of loan sharks, it is absolutely repugnant that a bailiff or enforcement officer would or does encourage a debtor to seek more debt just to pay THEM

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

Yes, its certainly not a good thing to say, but ultimately it sounds like its worked out reasonably well, as long as you are able to afford what you have agreed, and I don't think many people here will be at all shocked by anything a bailiff does or says.

 

Paying money to a bailiff rather than directly to the court does trouble me slightly but I guess if the court just directs you to the bailiff there isn't much else you can do!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I can't really afford it in all honesty, its money owed to others than invariably is pushed to another source. Its not great, but its necessary unfortunately. Yes, the court had effectively 'sold' it, I suppose. Hey, ho.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that I'm sure the bailiff lied about, is that they've said they can take any property even though most belongs to your landlord and your landlord would have to prove its his and collect it. That's wrong. Your landlord can make a statement to say what you told the bailiffs and if they still insist in removing goods that are not yours, they will be breaking the law.

SAFU

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello everyone - a quick update, I received a letter on the 14/4/12 from a company called M3PR: http://imgur.com/A38xX

 

I do owe them the balance of the court fine which is 290.00. Is the content of this letter correct? If I were to pay, for example, next Thursday (26/4/12) would they not accept it because it would be beyond the '5 days from the date of this letter' (which would be yesterday, 19th). If that were the case, then today would be the 'first Friday following the expiry' as they have detailed.

 

I notice that the proprieters of this company are Excel Civil Enforcement so I assume this is just a guise to get even more heavy handed.

 

Can I assume, if they don't turn up today, that my deadline is next Friday? If so, can I pay on the Thursday or will they just ignore the gesture? I wouldn't have thought so. Finally, can they use a locksmith? This is a court fine after all.

 

Many thanks in advance everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume the letter you have received has been sent by 2nd Class using DHL/UKMail etc in which case it was purposely timed to arrive after any date you could comply with. I believe it is a letter designed to intimidate and would ask what goods are they coming to remove as from a quick read of the rest of this thread I see nowhere have Excel either gained entry to your home or been able to seize goods extrenally.

 

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...