swift bailiff and CTAX debt has levied on my car

[reallyinthecrap]

I receved an email from the LA today as expected. Fair play.

 

The LA are, in their words "In addition I am satisfied with the details provided by XXXX Credit Services regarding the Councils Bailiff Code of Conduct."

 

 

 

• They have denied that on every visit that I offered them a payment agreement which they refused.
  
• They are still insisting that their bailiff is called "Mr FisrtName Middlename" and not "Mr FirstName MiddleName Surname" as detailed on the bailiff search website.
  
• They are claiming that the £170 fee for "Attending with a vehicle with a view to removing" is legitimate, they say "Our bailiff is entitled to charge a fee for one attendance with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods (where following the levy goods are not removed): reasonable costs. Mr MiddleName did attend with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods, levied upon goods but did not remove those goods therefore the fee is applicable. The fee is not dependant on the Walking Possession Agreement being signed."
  
• They still say the "Removal Fee / Where no sales takes place" of £22.50 is legitmate saying "“Where no sale takes place” fee of £22.50 has been charged. The fee is payable under heading “H” of the legislation where no sale takes place by reason of payment or tender and is payable once the account has been paid in full."
  

Stumped. and very lost.

Edited April 24, 2012 by reallyinthecrap
oops

[reallyinthecrap]

the report was finished with...

 

"I trust this e-mail clarifies the position."

 

i wish it did.

[reallyinthecrap]

any thoughts guys?

 

they want to know if i intend to continue the complaint to stage 2?

 

thanks

[brassnecked]

any thoughts guys?

 

they want to know if i intend to continue the complaint to stage 2?

 

thanks

 

Follow to stage 2 as if you want to kick the complaint higher up the food chain, you have to follow the council's procedures, and exhaust them first.

[reallyinthecrap]

but i need to be sure i am correct in saying they are incorrect surely?

[reallyinthecrap]

OK, I've emailed the LA and said that I wish to progress to stage 2 of the complaint procedure.

 

I have no idea what happens next?

 

While the complaint is being looked at could the bailiff return and take my car please?

 

Thanks

[seanamarts]

They have denied that on every visit that I offered them a payment agreement which they refused. This is a very typical procedure. Its basically your word against their's.

They are still insisting that their bailiff is called "Mr FisrtName Middlename" and not "Mr FirstName MiddleName Surname" as detailed on the bailiff search website. I would be inclined to show them a copy of register and ask to see a copy of the bailiffs certificate.

They are claiming that the £170 fee for "Attending with a vehicle with a view to removing" is legitimate, they say "Our bailiff is entitled to charge a fee for one attendance with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods (where following the levy goods are not removed): reasonable costs. Mr MiddleName did attend with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods, levied upon goods but did not remove those goods therefore the fee is applicable. The fee is not dependant on the Walking Possession Agreement being signed." Ask them where does this state in The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 sch5 he can charge this fee.

They still say the "Removal Fee / Where no sales takes place" of £22.50 is legitmate saying "“Where no sale takes place” fee of £22.50 has been charged. The fee is payable under heading “H” of the legislation where no sale takes place by reason of payment or tender and is payable once the account has been paid in full."

 

The head H fee should only be charged when items have been taken, I would also ask where this states in the in the regulations.

This complaint needs escalating to the next stage. I would now start to involve your MP

[reallyinthecrap]

Thanks.

 

Funnily enough, I spoke to a case worker for Jane Hutt, my local AM last week about the issue.

 

I have copied her in on all correspondence inclusing a link to this discussion.

 

They have also advised that I progress this to Stage 2.

 

Does anyone know if the Bailiff can take action while this complaint is being dealt with?

 

Thanks

[wonkeydonkey]

Bailiffs should be put on hold until the matter has been fully investigated....emphasis is should.

 

WD

[reallyinthecrap]

ok. ive escalated it to stage 2.

 

i do hope i am doing the right thing.

 

the LA now want me to write to them detailing what i disagree with in the bailiffs report they sent to me

 

wish me luck!

[ploddertom]

It sounds to me as if the Council speak Bailiff, I would strongly suggest that they are deferring to the Bailiffs for answers as they obviously think they are whiter than white. Do not be at all surprised when they come back and say the Bailiffs have done nothing wrong and everything has been done & charged for lawfully.

 

This will not prevent the Bailiff from continuing with enforcement but he may be a bit more wary as he will know there is an active complaint going on.

 

PT

[reallyinthecrap]

rightly or wrongly i decided to call the the LA today as i was so worried about when bailiff action would start again.

 

the "Senior Revenues Assistant" turned out to be very nice. suprisingly honest and open!

 

i politely explained that i still consider there are unanswered questions relating to my complaint.

 

so. thankfully, the bailiffs were phoned today and asked to hold off for 21 days while this goes on.

 

phew!

[seanamarts]

Thats good news, well done

[reallyinthecrap]

ok, here we go...

 

just had a response from the LA and they have found:

 

"As a result I am satisfied that the fees charged by Swift Credit Services are in line with Government Regulations and are neither incorrect or fraudulent.

 

On the information received I have been unable to substantiate your claims and therefore I have no option but to conclude that the matter has been dealt with correctly."

 

they are still saying that their £170 is reasonable and correct:

 

"The bailiff has confirmed that he attended your property with a vehicle and levied on goods, your car, but did not remove it. Therefore reasonable costs and fees were charged amounting to £170.00. As a result Swift Credit Services have confirmed that you have not been charged for a van as stated in your e-mail and that the charge relates to the attendance with a vehicle."

 

They have offered me the option to take it to Stage 3

 

What do I do?

 

Help!

 

Trev

[Conniff]

Just confirm - do you have a car? is it on hire purchase? have they given you a levy slip?

[reallyinthecrap]

i do have a car, partly paid for by my mother.

 

the levy slip was posted through the post box

[Conniff]

So the car is yours and a legitimate item for levy. But if that is the levy and they turned up with a Transit Luton, then they had no intention of taking the car as they will need a car transporter, so the van fee would not be inclusive and was not a reasonable charge as it couldn't be used.

[st200boy]

I feel for you, I am going through the same, although I can now see light at the end of the tunnel.

 

Take your complaint to level 3, the likelihood is the LA will still back up their bailiffs then you can go to the LGO

 

I did this and I also went to see my MP, who has wrote a piece in the local newspaper and he wrote directly to the the Chief Exec of the council.

 

Whilst all this has been going on in the background I have received a partial refund. If like me you have the proof, which it sounds like you have, do not let them get away with it, this fraudulant behaviour need stopping.

 

Good luck

[Conniff]

And fraudulent it certainly is if they say they did one thing but did it in the middle of the night without any proof to show then what is anyone supposed to think. Bailiffs already have a stinking name because they lie and cheat and bully when they have the upper hand anyway so there is no need to.

[reallyinthecrap]

thats why im going to fight this... as long as im right.. which i hope i am.

 

i get the feeling this is common practice.

 

thanks for the support and help.

[Conniff]

Oh, it's common practice - I would challenge any bailiff in the country to deny he/she has ever lied to a customer.

[st200boy]

Just keep picking at them, they are hoping that you will accept their word and go away, theres no "hope" about it.

 

You have written proof, it feels at times that they have you believing that you must be mistaken and that they are right. This is what they want you to think!!

 

Be strong, stick to the advice given on here, I couldn't have done it without these guys, I almost threw the towel in but decided to keep on at them because I feel so strongly about it that I am determined to play even a small part in getting these practices stopped.

 

Theres always good people on here to boost your moral and help with good advice when its getting to you, have a read of my thread you might get a few ideas from that

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?326730-Made-up-fees-and-council-are-ignoring-me-please-help

Edited April 30, 2012 by Conniff
Added link

[reallyinthecrap]

So the car is yours and a legitimate item for levy. But if that is the levy and they turned up with a Transit Luton, then they had no intention of taking the car as they will need a car transporter, so the van fee would not be inclusive and was not a reasonable charge as it couldn't be used.

 

he turned up in a little silver fiesta van. my car is was bigger than his. lol

[Conniff]

he turned up in a little silver fiesta van. my car is was bigger than his. lol

 

 

 

That's wonderful, what a superb post. My Oh said 'what are you laughing at'.

[reallyinthecrap]

hi guys, sorry, it's me again, im still worried...

 

I have been reading back through a previous posting on CAG which is slightly similar to my situation.

 

In the posting there is a comment from a Cagger saying:

 

"Also, a bailiff cannot levy upon the SAME goods twice."

 

Im not sure if i am reading the above correctly but if I have had a levy on my car once before and paid that off in full can they then levy against the car again?

 

just looking for some extra ammunition to use at Stage 3 of my complaint as I have heard nothing back from the LA since i emailed saying i want to progress to stage 3

 

Thanks