bailiff laws

[jiggy harris]

hi, am i right in thinking that new laws will allow bailiffs to break into your home to take levys on any!! unsecured loans/credit cards/overdrafts ect...that you may have, any one got any advice on this, thanks

[brassnecked]

hi, am i right in thinking that new laws will allow bailiffs to break into your home to take levys on any!! unsecured loans/credit cards/overdrafts ect...that you may have, any one got any advice on this, thanks

Check the threads on the MOJ consultation sub forum, and check it out

[tomtubby]

Over this weekend I will be issuing two NEWSLETTERS for Consumer Action Group on the forthcoming regulations. This subject will be featured in one of the Newsletters and I will update the Consultation part of the forum tomorrow.

[Conniff]

"The proposals, which aim to make minor amendments to the yet-to-be implemented Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, proposes bailiffs be allowed to charge householders an enforcement fee of £305 in the case of unpaid council tax."

 

i don't call that a minor amendment

 

"The updated National Standards outline the minimum standards of behaviour expected of bailiffs and bailiff firms, including:

• Bailiffs must not behave in a threatening manner or use unlawful force to gain access to a home or business;
  
• Bailiffs should avoid discussing the debt with anyone except the person owing money, and bailiffs must never behave in a way that would publicly embarrass a debtor;
  
• Bailiffs must withdraw when only a child is present; and
  
• Bailiffs have a duty of care towards vulnerable people, such as the elderly, people with disabilities, single parents and unemployed people and must use discretion when collecting debts from these groups. "
  

All things that are already not allowed.

Edited April 14, 2012 by Conniff

[brassnecked]

It is mere tinkering, with crippling fees being added at an earlier stage, if a debtor cannot afford £42.50 in visit fees, they certainly cannot afford an automatic £305, when the bailiff first calls.

[wonkeydonkey]

When you consider the amount of money that has been spent to put this consultation together it seems to me they could have simply made a post on cag, at least they would have quickly discovered the obvious, most people in debt do not want to be in that position and they are struggling, to increase the fees the bailliffs and HCEO's can administer does nothing to allow the debtor to get their head heads above water let alone float along and reduce a debt.

 

Do they really expect people to absorb these ridiculous fees and make headway with their debts...its a bit like expecting a non swimmer to swim the channel without drowning.

 

WD

[brassnecked]

When you consider the amount of money that has been spent to put this consultation together it seems to me they could have simply made a post on cag, at least they would have quickly discovered the obvious, most people in debt do not want to be in that position and they are struggling, to increase the fees the bailliffs and HCEO's can administer does nothing to allow the debtor to get their head heads above water let alone float along and reduce a debt.

 

Do they really expect people to absorb these ridiculous fees and make headway with their debts...its a bit like expecting a non swimmer to swim the channel without drowning.

 

WD

 

Well put WD, they are cosy with their cohorts in the "Enforcement Industry" how legalised burglary, and demanding money with menaces from people with no realistic prospect of paying the new fees is fair and equitable is beyondme, as is the concept that this process is actually an "Industry" the only thing it creates is lives even more broken than they need be. Reality is different on planet MOJ and the moon bailiff!

[sillygirl1]

A change of government should stop this idiocy, if somebody had £305 in the first place they would be able to pay the council tax which is a priority debt.

 

However, as we do know the councils are hand in glove with the bailiffs, and how many bailiff company managers are on the 'committees' of local councils, or even councillors themselves (I am talking about the directors of bailiff companies).

 

The answer to that question should show the real 'drivers' behind this lunacy legislation.

[sillygirl1]

Don't forget that in 2007 when this lumacy legislation was drawn up we were not yet into a recession, and as we know finance is nigh on impossible to obtain.

 

How many people now would think this a good move? Answers on the back of a postcard please - if you can afford the stamp!

[mohmmad786]

And we were thinking that the new law is coming in place cause the bailiffs were bullying and threatening people and the government was gonna do something to help people who are struggling. Now it looks like that if i owned a bailiff company than i would be rubbing my hands together and would want more of these new laws coming in place so i can earn more, **** the common man who is struggling the government seems to be on the side of people who are powerful and who can maybe give donations. SAD really.