Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paint is a free programme on any Windows PC. But don't worry, the choice here is not either perfection or nothing. As you say, use your scanner, save the file ... and then use the "choose files" option when you post to CAG to add the file. We can do all the redacting and converting to the correct file type at this end.  The important thing is just to get the info to us. Why not do an experiment this afternoon and see if the above works?  
    • I see they're trying to round up asylum seekers and lock them up for about three months so they can be put on planes to Rwanda. I'm a bit surprised that this is legal.  
    • thought for the day "Prime ministers need a big strategy that tells you where you’re going, you need a bunch of tactics that get you there, and you need the ability to take everybody else with you."   Now I know you are all thinking 'why is the  UKs destination Rwanda ???
    • Asset Link filed for a default CCJ against me, in relation to an old Barclaycard debt which I apparently signed an agreement for back in 2000.   I did not own a Barclaycard in 2000 so I know this is not true.  The CCJ notice was sent to an old address so I did not receive it.  Years later when I found out about the CCJ when I applied for credit, I put an application in to have the CCJ set aside.   As part of the set aside case, I was asked by the judge to provide a draft defence, should the CCJ be set aside.   The defence I provided was that I did not admit to the debt as I had not been provided with any evidence of an original loan agreement.   I won the case and the CCJ was set aside.   Link then filed to court again to make me pay the debt.   We both filed directions questionnaires and the judge allocated the claim to the small claims track.   As part of the directions, additional directions given were as follows ' Additional Directions in a claim for an Assigned Debt - Because the claim is in respect of an assigned debt the Court makes the following directions for the management of claim.  The claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless, before that time, the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents'  It then listed various documents such as an original agreement, deed of assignment, notice of default, statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement etc.     The Claimant failed to provide these documents within the deadline provided and instead I received a copy of a bundle of documents provided by them in preparation for the court date, this was received weeks after the deadline.    I have called the Court to ask if it has been automatically struck out and they advised that it is not automatic and that I should still send my witness statement by the deadline provided, which is Wednesday.  This does not give me much time to prepare my witness statement.   I have never done anything like this before and I am unclear what my witness statement should include.  My thoughts were that I should keep it simple and stick to the facts, like the fact thy have not provided evidence of the original agreement, or the deed of assignment of the debt.   They have provided a copy of a default notice from Baclaycard dated 2015, this states a figure of £550 but the debt they say I owe is £10k.   I am not sure what makes a valid default notice?   I have previously requested proof of the debt from Barclaycard directly and have evidence of emails between us where they have been unable to provide me with the agreement or any documents at all relating to the debt.   Should I include these as an appendix?  Are there any other documents I should include in my bundle?    I have also tried to mediate with the claimants, to save the court costs and time, on a without prejudice basis, but the claimants solicitors refused to mediate.   Should i state this in my witness statement too to show the judge that I have been reasonable and they haven't? Many thanks   Louise
  • 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

Use of Police by Bailiffs/HCEO Companies


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4416 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

I believe that use of the police by enforcement agents should be closely regulated. The Police are being used as a tool to intimidate debtors into paying rather than to prevent a "Breach of the Peace". I think they are being called routinely even when there hasn't been a prior heated "discussion" and the debtor has no previous history. The Police are being used to generate profits for these corrupt companies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that use of the police by enforcement agents should be closely regulated. The Police are being used as a tool to intimidate debtors into paying rather than to prevent a "Breach of the Peace". I think they are being called routinely even when there hasn't been a prior heated "discussion" and the debtor has no previous history. The Police are being used to generate profits for these corrupt companies.

 

The problem that needs to be addressed is that the police are unaware, or inadequately trained of the law in this area, and are under the mistaken impression that they are mainly on the same side as the bailiff, so side with him, even in the face of the bailiffs often blatant misuse of his powers, for which HE should actually be the one arrested.

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

The problem is that police officers receive little or no training in how to deal with bailiffs, even though national guidelines are in existence. Another problem is that ACPO regard bailiff matter as "civil matters". Whether this has got something to do with their relationship with the trade associations bailiff and HCEO companies belong to needs to be investigated. The News International scandal has highlighted the dangers of inappropriate relationships between the police and commercial interests.

 

Any training police are given in dealing with bailiffs should include insisting on seeing the court warrant and the bailiff or HCEO's certificate. Any claims by bailiffs that police officers are required to help them gain entry to a debtor's home should be dealt with as a potential attempt to incite disaffection and be dealt with as such. Where a bailiff has made threats, either by letter, or by telephone or in person, these should be dealt with under relevant legislation, i.e. Malicious Communications Act 1988, Public Order Act 1986, Communications Act 2003. Although, under normal circumstances, arrest is the very last resort, in cases such as these, it should be a case of one and only warning before arrest. Where a debtor is classed as vulnerable, this should be regarded as aggravating factors in deciding whether or not to arrest a bailiff after giving them a warning or arresting them without a warning.

 

The police have been mislead by the civil enforcement iindustry and there will be a payback or, more accurately, a backlash and when it comes, bailiff and HCEO companies will not be prepared for it. I can see police officers coming down hard on bailiffs and HCEOs who cross the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that police officers receive little or no training in how to deal with bailiffs, even though national guidelines are in existence. Another problem is that ACPO regard bailiff matter as "civil matters". Whether this has got something to do with their relationship with the trade associations bailiff and HCEO companies belong to needs to be investigated. The News International scandal has highlighted the dangers of inappropriate relationships between the police and commercial interests.

 

Any training police are given in dealing with bailiffs should include insisting on seeing the court warrant and the bailiff or HCEO's certificate. Any claims by bailiffs that police officers are required to help them gain entry to a debtor's home should be dealt with as a potential attempt to incite disaffection and be dealt with as such. Where a bailiff has made threats, either by letter, or by telephone or in person, these should be dealt with under relevant legislation, i.e. Malicious Communications Act 1988, Public Order Act 1986, Communications Act 2003. Although, under normal circumstances, arrest is the very last resort, in cases such as these, it should be a case of one and only warning before arrest. Where a debtor is classed as vulnerable, this should be regarded as aggravating factors in deciding whether or not to arrest a bailiff after giving them a warning or arresting them without a warning.

 

The police have been mislead by the civil enforcement iindustry and there will be a payback or, more accurately, a backlash and when it comes, bailiff and HCEO companies will not be prepared for it. I can see police officers coming down hard on bailiffs and HCEOs who cross the line.

 

ACPO should itself be investigated, as it is a for profit company, as most police forces now are as they are all registered as corporations on Dunn & Bradstreet, Far from being a union for Chief police officers as it is portrayed, it has a malign and corrosive influence to the detriment of police impartiality. and helps to politicise the police to the detriment of the public.

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

.........Any training police are given in dealing with bailiffs should include insisting on seeing the court warrant and the bailiff or HCEO's certificate.........

 

+1

 

As I've said before, HCEO's are sending allsorts to enforce, the registered HCEO should be present in person. It's very wrong that HCEO companies are sending "security" industry people to enforce, There are a fair number with criminal connections and the debtor may find himself being extorted or burgled shortly after being visited.

Edited by Deadwood
Link to post
Share on other sites

ACPO should itself be investigated, as it is a for profit company, as most police forces now are as they are all registered as corporations on Dunn & Bradstreet, Far from being a union for Chief police officers as it is portrayed, it has a malign and corrosive influence to the detriment of police impartiality. and helps to politicise the police to the detriment of the public.

 

I totally agree with you. In the light of the News International scandal, I can see ACPO's relationships with the trade associations in the civil enforcement and private security industries putting put under the microscope. You are absolutely right about the corrosive influence on police impartiality - ACPO are the ones promoting the "It's a civil matter" line with regard to bailiff misconduct. You are also right about the politicisation of the police -that's why officers are leaving in droves. Morale is at rock-bottom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you. In the light of the News International scandal, I can see ACPO's relationships with the trade associations in the civil enforcement and private security industries putting put under the microscope. You are absolutely right about the corrosive influence on police impartiality - ACPO are the ones promoting the "It's a civil matter" line with regard to bailiff misconduct. You are also right about the politicisation of the police -that's why officers are leaving in droves. Morale is at rock-bottom.

That is a great pity, as a lot of the common sense , and inherent fairness that was typical of the police of old, where a quiet word, and a ticking off did more good than a prosecution, has been lost to a new cadre of apparatchiks who chase targets to the detriment of the public they purport to serve.

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 a provision in the Courts Act 2003 directing the Police to assist HCEO's, well I didn't know that.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/39/schedule/7/paragraph/5#schedule-7-paragraph-4-4

 

This reinforces my comments about the High Court being the Queen's Court and The Police being sworn to the Crown.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only for fairly specific purposes according to paragraph 3, by the looks of it.

"Modern 'currency' is known as 'fiat money': it is artificially created, has no value in itself and the basis for use in exchange is typically a government edict." Paul Morran, Information Rights Unit of Her Majesty's Treasury.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zaniwhoop - I am looking into what assistance the police are actually allowed to provide to HCEOs. Once I have established exactly what assistance the police are required to provide, I will post it up.

 

Deadwood - I will look into what you have posted about the situation of HCEOs using what appears to be crims and post up my findings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...