Seriously vulnerable family bullied for over 5hrs by bailiffs

[caledfwlch]

Thanks Regan. Judging by how things are going, I would say that you are right in assuming that, should the council offer compensation, it would definitely come with a 'shut up' clause. My family and I are not very materialistic people. I do not want to have money thrust upon me and be told to go away. The only way I can see this working would be if I could continue to pursue criminal and civil charges against the Bailiffs, I got an apology from the council and assurances that they had taken steps to ensure this never happens to anyone again, and that, all involved would be put on a disciplinary. I know that that sounds like a tall order, but, if they can't promise me any of this, then I would decline any compensation offered and take it all to the courts.

 

Given how they have been so far, you can guarantee any initial "here's some cash, now bugger off and keep quiet theres a good young lady" will be a pittance and a disgrace.

 

Though, saying that, has your new best friend over in corporate complaints gotten back yet, and do you know if she is in full posession of all the facts?

[Annette1973]

Given how they have been so far, you can guarantee any initial "here's some cash, now bugger off and keep quiet theres a good young lady" will be a pittance and a disgrace.

 

Though, saying that, has your new best friend over in corporate complaints gotten back yet, and do you know if she is in full posession of all the facts?

 

I haven't heard anything yet. I have asked her to check that she has everything sent to And from NFDC and RnR regarding this matter, if not, I shall happily send her everything.

[old bill]

Confidentially clauses are not worth the paper they are written on. In any event if there has been any wrongdoing that involves any criminality, even if unintentional, they are not allowed to cover it up. To do so, could be considered as perverting the course of justice.

 

You've raised a very valid point, UB. My understanding of gagging clauses in civil cases is that there must be some over-riding factor that makes it essential, i.e. there must a very good and lawful reason for requiring it. Otherwise, it must be approved by a court. In criminal cases, confidentiality arrangements come under statutory provisions and, more often than not, the DPP will be involved in it at some point. In Annette's case, you have a local authority, which is subject to public scrutiny, that is potentially involved in criminal behaviour through its contractual relationship with a private sector contractor, namely, Capita and its subsidiary, Ross & Roberts. If it is found that Local Government Officers have been involved in criminal behaviour in any way, it is unlikely that NFDC could put a lid on it. If Capita employees are found to have been involved in criminal behaviour, Capita cannot hide behind "commercial confidentiality". Criminal Law, although a complex animal, is simpler in the way it is administered than Civil Law and some of the bullsh*t legal professionals try in the Civil Courts doesn't go down well in the Criminal Courts. As regards Perverting the Course of Justice, it would have to be shown that an attempt was being made to corruptly or unduly influence the outcome of any legal proceedings in progress or that proceedings were initiated as the result of a false or malicious report of a criminal act or civil tort.

[old bill]

Thanks Regan. Judging by how things are going, I would say that you are right in assuming that, should the council offer compensation, it would definitely come with a 'shut up' clause. My family and I are not very materialistic people. I do not want to have money thrust upon me and be told to go away. The only way I can see this working would be if I could continue to pursue criminal and civil charges against the Bailiffs, I got an apology from the council and assurances that they had taken steps to ensure this never happens to anyone again, and that, all involved would be put on a disciplinary. I know that that sounds like a tall order, but, if they can't promise me any of this, then I would decline any compensation offered and take it all to the courts.

 

I think you will find, Annette, that, at the end of the day, NFDC will seek the best legal advice they can get. In my considered judgement, given the circumstances, I think it unlikely that an legal professional would advise them to try and bluff their way out of it or try and bury it. If that were to happen, the legal professional would be in very real danger of being struck-off (solicitor) or disbarred (barrister) or even prosecuted. No legal professional of repute is going to risk their reputation or career or a prison sentence to help a local authority cover up blatant criminal behaviour.

 

You would be well-advised to have the settlement YOU want ready so that they can't try and impose the settlement they want on you. Pre-emptive action, in your case, is something you need to give serious thought to. As to what any settlement should contain, may I suggest the following -

 

1. That NFDC agree to a permanent injunction restraining them from engaging in this and any similar conduct in the future;
   
2. That NFDC pay the full costs of the application to court for the injunction, including the hearing before a Circuit Judge;
   
3. That NFDC agree to the Circuit Judge who presides at the hearing to make the injunction permanent assessing the damages NFDC should pay to you, your husband and daughter for the anixety and losses you have been caused and that NFDC does not seek leave to appeal such ruling;
   
4. That NFDC repay the money Ross & Roberts took from you and your husband and pay damages for the loss of business;
   
5. That NFDC replace all and any equipment taken illegally by Ross & Roberts from the barbershop;
   
6. That NFDC accept full responsibility for the breaches of health and safety legislation by Ross & Roberts at your home;
   

 

There are other causes of claim that could be added to the above list. I doubt very much whether you could force NFDC to take disciplinary action against the employees involved. Obviously, if you put forward settlement terms that are reasonable and NFDC dismiss them out of hand, then you would be justified in hauling them before the courts. Have a good, hard think about the settlement YOU want.

[Annette1973]

I think you will find, Annette, that, at the end of the day, NFDC will seek the best legal advice they can get. In my considered judgement, given the circumstances, I think it unlikely that an legal professional would advise them to try and bluff their way out of it or try and bury it. If that were to happen, the legal professional would be in very real danger of being struck-off (solicitor) or disbarred (barrister) or even prosecuted. No legal professional of repute is going to risk their reputation or career or a prison sentence to help a local authority cover up blatant criminal behaviour.

 

You would be well-advised to have the settlement YOU want ready so that they can't try and impose the settlement they want on you. Pre-emptive action, in your case, is something you need to give serious thought to. As to what any settlement should contain, may I suggest the following -

 

1. That NFDC agree to a permanent injunction restraining them from engaging in this and any similar conduct in the future;
   
2. That NFDC pay the full costs of the application to court for the injunction, including the hearing before a Circuit Judge;
   
3. That NFDC agree to the Circuit Judge who presides at the hearing to make the injunction permanent assessing the damages NFDC should pay to you, your husband and daughter for the anixety and losses you have been caused and that NFDC does not seek leave to appeal such ruling;
   
4. That NFDC repay the money Ross & Roberts took from you and your husband and pay damages for the loss of business;
   
5. That NFDC replace all and any equipment taken illegally by Ross & Roberts from the barbershop;
   
6. That NFDC accept full responsibility for the breaches of health and safety legislation by Ross & Roberts at your home;
   

 

There are other causes of claim that could be added to the above list. I doubt very much whether you could force NFDC to take disciplinary action against the employees involved. Obviously, if you put forward settlement terms that are reasonable and NFDC dismiss them out of hand, then you would be justified in hauling them before the courts. Have a good, hard think about the settlement YOU want.

 

Thanks OB. For some reason, I feel a hesitation in asking for money. I think it is because what I really want is a punishment. Everyone keeps telling me that this is a punishment as the only language these people understand is money.

 

I really wouldn't know where to start in determining an amount. Any ideas would be welcome.

[caledfwlch]

http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/victims-and-witnesses/cic-a/am-i-eligible/Criminal-Injuries-Compensation-Scheme-2008.pdf

 

If you wade your way through to around Page 30, there is a list of the Tariff's the criminal injuries scheme award - it could be a handy guide of what to calculate!

 

For example, temporary mental illness / "Mental Anxiety" depression, stress etc for up to 28 weeks after can gain awards from £1000 to £2500.

[old bill]

Thanks OB. For some reason, I feel a hesitation in asking for money. I think it is because what I really want is a punishment. Everyone keeps telling me that this is a punishment as the only language these people understand is money.

 

I really wouldn't know where to start in determining an amount. Any ideas would be welcome.

 

Punishment needs to be the last thing on your mind. Justice is the thing that should be foremost in your mind. Justice, in your case, would be making sure the two bailiffs who besieged your home are never allowed to do this again, that Ross & Roberts are never allowed to let their employees behave like they did again, that NFDC put their hands up to what they did and put right the financial damage they caused.

 

As to how much NFDC, Ross & Roberts, etc., should pay, please remember that you have to keep any losses to a minimum. However, there is evidence of harassment and of the anxiety you and your family were caused. That has to be taken into account. It is very likely that you will need to engage a legal professional specialising in Civil Litigation to help you formulate a claim against NFDC and Ross & Roberts. They would also be able to advise you as to how best to proceed. If you can find a legal professional who is prepared to do it on a No Win, No Fee basis, great.

 

Punishment is, simply, another word for revenge. It, more often than not, leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. Exacting justice is far better and you come out of it with your dignity intact. Seek out a Civil Litigation practitioner and take it from there.

[caledfwlch]

Punishment needs to be the last thing on your mind. Justice is the thing that should be foremost in your mind. Justice, in your case, would be making sure the two bailiffs who besieged your home are never allowed to do this again, that Ross & Roberts are never allowed to let their employees behave like they did again, that NFDC put their hands up to what they did and put right the financial damage they caused.

 

As to how much NFDC, Ross & Roberts, etc., should pay, please remember that you have to keep any losses to a minimum. However, there is evidence of harassment and of the anxiety you and your family were caused. That has to be taken into account. It is very likely that you will need to engage a legal professional specialising in Civil Litigation to help you formulate a claim against NFDC and Ross & Roberts. They would also be able to advise you as to how best to proceed. If you can find a legal professional who is prepared to do it on a No Win, No Fee basis, great.

 

Punishment is, simply, another word for revenge. It, more often than not, leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. Exacting justice is far better and you come out of it with your dignity intact. Seek out a Civil Litigation practitioner and take it from there.

 

I did suggest to Annette that she contact a few of the more reputable NWNF Ambulance Chasers, purely to get an idea as to whether they think there is a potential case for damages - remember, a very important Surgical procedure had to be delayed due to the stress caused by their aggressive behaviour, I think that needs to be addressed, especially as they knew from the moment they arrived she is extremely unwell and vulnerable.

 

To cheer everyone up I did this for fun!

 

[old bill]

I did suggest to Annette that she contact a few of the more reputable NWNF Ambulance Chasers, purely to get an idea as to whether they think there is a potential case for damages - remember, a very important Surgical procedure had to be delayed due to the stress caused by their aggressive behaviour, I think that needs to be addressed, especially as they knew from the moment they arrived she is extremely unwell and vulnerable.

 

To cheer everyone up I did this for fun!

 

 

I totally agree with you. The matter of Annette's operation being delayed by Ross & Roberts' antics may come under Section 3, Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. As for the joke poster, you don't know how close to the truth you are.

[brassnecked]

Definitely reflection of the cold reality of bailiffs and their actions. If Ross 'n Robbers actions caused Annetes condition to deteriorate, and it was directly attributable to them, ABH? along with any H & S breach

[old bill]

Definitely reflection of the cold reality of bailiffs and their actions. If Ross 'n Robbers actions caused Annetes condition to deteriorate, and it was directly attributable to them, ABH? along with any H & S breach

 

In order to prove ABH you have to be able to demonstrate there was an application of unlawful force against her person, resulting in physical injury. A threat of force is Assault, the actual application of force is Battery. Battery would have to be proven. H & S violations are easier to deal with as the onus is on the two bailiffs involved to prove they complied with their statutory duty under Section 7, HASAWA and Ross & Roberts to prove they complied with their statutory duty under Section 3, HASAWA. Both bailiffs and Ross & Roberts are in the proverbial whatever. It's just a case now of how hard would a court hit them.

[Annette1973]

Thank you guys, great advice, as always

 

CF, that poster is hilarious and, so true.

[Annette1973]

Quick question guys. Can I pursue criminal charges against the female Bailiff as well as put in a Form 4 complaint against her?

[old bill]

In a nutshell, no. You have to decide which court has the appropriate jurisdiction. If what the female bailiff did was purely a breach of her duties as a bailiff, then Form 4 is the more appropriate, albeit more risky, route to take. If, on the other hand, she committed a criminal act or acts, then the criminal route is more appropriate. If my memory serves me correctly, the female bailiff was reading out your medical history loudly in the street. That falls under the ambit of the ICO. As for the risk to your health, resulting in an important surgical procedure being delayed, that comes under the HSE. They will be able to advise which of their inspectorates cover bailiffs. However, ICO and HSE take enforcement action themselves.

 

If you can list exactly what the female bailiff did, it would be easier to decide which route is going to be the most appropriate.

[Annette1973]

In a nutshell, no. You have to decide which court has the appropriate jurisdiction. If what the female bailiff did was purely a breach of her duties as a bailiff, then Form 4 is the more appropriate, albeit more risky, route to take. If, on the other hand, she committed a criminal act or acts, then the criminal route is more appropriate. If my memory serves me correctly, the female bailiff was reading out your medical history loudly in the street. That falls under the ambit of the ICO. As for the risk to your health, resulting in an important surgical procedure being delayed, that comes under the HSE. They will be able to advise which of their inspectorates cover bailiffs. However, ICO and HSE take enforcement action themselves.

 

If you can list exactly what the female bailiff did, it would be easier to decide which route is going to be the most appropriate.

 

Thanks OB. Just finishing lunch, then I will post the list

[caledfwlch]

In a nutshell, no. You have to decide which court has the appropriate jurisdiction. If what the female bailiff did was purely a breach of her duties as a bailiff, then Form 4 is the more appropriate, albeit more risky, route to take. If, on the other hand, she committed a criminal act or acts, then the criminal route is more appropriate. If my memory serves me correctly, the female bailiff was reading out your medical history loudly in the street. That falls under the ambit of the ICO. As for the risk to your health, resulting in an important surgical procedure being delayed, that comes under the HSE. They will be able to advise which of their inspectorates cover bailiffs. However, ICO and HSE take enforcement action themselves.

 

If you can list exactly what the female bailiff did, it would be easier to decide which route is going to be the most appropriate.

 

I thought one was able to take both a criminal and a civil route? ie, the actions that were criminal are the competence of a criminal court, and the actions that are civil, will be regards a form 4 or other route.

 

Though of course, should she be convicted in a criminal court, the Form 4 route is Moot anyway, she will presumably lose her cert automatically.

 

I think a better question to find out is, what exactly are the benefits that can result from a Form 4 - financially etc. Can a Master issue compensation for example?

[Annette1973]

Right guys. Below is a list of the offences the female Bailiff committed. I have only included the ones I have either documented or recorded evidence of.

 

The female Bailiff:

 

1. Charged us default fees of £444.00. We enquired about the fees with Ross and Roberts office, they have written to us saying that they are not on our account at all, however we have 2 letters from the female Bailiff demanding the fee be paid. We can only assume that as R&R are totally unaware of these fees, the female Bailiff intended to keep the money for herself.

 

2. Throughout the 6 hour ordeal, the female Bailiff was threatening, aggressive, rude and intimidating. She only went because the Police moved her on.

 

3. She failed to appropriately supervise her 'Trainee', allowing him to work autonomously for almost an hour. My neighbours were aware of this and have provided a statement to that effect.

 

4. She attempted to get the Police to help her force entry into our home when she did not have the power to do so. The Police have gone on record to confirm this.

 

5. She constantly misrepresented her powers by telling us that she had ordered a Locksmith to break into our home and that if we stopped her she would use force against us. Again the Police witnessed a lot of her claims, as did my neighbours.

 

6. She impersonated a Court Official by claiming that she and her colleague were Court Bailiffs. She informed the Police that she was a Court Bailiff and that they were obliged to assist her in gaining access to our property.

 

7. She breached the Data Protection Act by discussing our debt with an ex employee of ours. She showed total disregard for my medical details and alerted our neighbours to the reason for her visit.

 

8. She Trespassed on our property. We have a 'No Trespassers' notice, which she breached several times. She refused to leave when asked.

 

9. She scared our daughter and our dog. She threatenened to get the RSPCA out to remove our dog incase it bit her when she forced entry.

 

10. She never once showed us any ID. She had no documents to proove that she was collecting NNDR on behalf of the council. She did not show us any documentation at all and did not leave a fee schedule.

 

I would like to go down the Form 4 route as, I believe, this woman needs to have her certificate revoked ASAP. Having said that though, I don't want to waste any chance that this person may get a criminal conviction. Hopefully you guys will be able to advise on my best option.

[Annette1973]

This week just gets better for me. My oral surgery on Monday made me very ill. On Tuesday I got a letter from CICA saying that I had been turned down for an award regarding a crime committed against me a while ago, then, today I get a letter turning me down for DLA. I am seriously on the verge today.....

[brassnecked]

This week just gets better for me. My oral surgery on Monday made me very ill. On Tuesday I got a letter from CICA saying that I had been turned down for an award regarding a crime committed against me a while ago, then, today I get a letter turning me down for DLA. I am seriously on the verge today.....

Send in an appeal against the DLA decision, a high proportion of claims are allowed at appeal

[Old Cogger]

CICA absolute rubbish, told to ring them only to be asked what do you want us to do about it, after claim for fractured scull after robbery, not pay out, woman down the road tripped on curb with slight brusing 900.00 payout.

[Annette1973]

Send in an appeal against the DLA decision, a high proportion of claims are allowed at appeal

 

Thanks. I must admit, they don't know about my diabetes yet.

[Annette1973]

CICA absolute rubbish, told to ring them only to be asked what do you want us to do about it, after claim for fractured scull after robbery, not pay out, woman down the road tripped on curb with slight brusing 900.00 payout.

 

It is outrageous. This particular case involved my brother as well as myself. He got turned down because he had spent time in prison. The reason my brother went to prison was the actual injury he sustained caused him to have psychological problems. He committed a minor offence, due to his difficulties, and got banged up. To make matters worse, our other brother attempted to kill the offender because of what happened to his siblings at the hands of this monster. He has just got out of Winchester Prison.

 

I feel sick Mike. I never cry, but today, I'm so close.

[Old Cogger]

It is outrageous. This particular case involved my brother as well as myself. He got turned down because he had spent time in prison. The reason my brother went to prison was the actual injury he sustained caused him to have psychological problems. He committed a minor offence, due to his difficulties, and got banged up. To make matters worse, our other brother attempted to kill the offender because of what happened to his siblings at the hands of this monster. He has just got out of Winchester Prison.

 

I feel sick Mike. I never cry, but today, I'm so close.

 

 

Try not to get too upset Annette, this weekend try to unwind a little, life is too short to let it get you down, but I understand how you are feeling, seems to me no matter what a lot of us try the system puts us down, keep your chin up you are not alone.

[Annette1973]

Try not to get too upset Annette, this weekend try to unwind a little, life is too short to let it get you down, but I understand how you are feeling, seems to me no matter what a lot of us try the system puts us down, keep your chin up you are not alone.

 

Thanks Mike. It just seems that everybody is trying to kick us when we're down at the moment.

 

My brother and I begged the Judge to put thus person away at the trial. He refused. 2 weeks later this monster got a job in a church hall and raped 2 6 year olds, what is the point? We went through hell to stop this happening again, a 2 year trial, having to move home, for what?

 

Ah, don't listen to me, I'm having a bad day. Saturdays are rarely good for me as it is the only day I am alone in the house, apart from my dog.

[Old Cogger]

Thanks Mike. It just seems that everybody is trying to kick us when we're down at the moment.

 

My brother and I begged the Judge to put thus person away at the trial. He refused. 2 weeks later this monster got a job in a church hall and raped 2 6 year olds, what is the point? We went through hell to stop this happening again, a 2 year trial, having to move home, for what?

 

 

 

Ah, don't listen to me, I'm having a bad day. Saturdays are rarely good for me as it is the only day I am alone in the house, apart from my dog.

 

 

No problem, get it off your chest.