Hi Guys...I'm new on here and would like a little advice re: Jacobs Bailiffs please??

[Lisasickofbailiffs]

The 1st Bailiff I dealt with no longer works for the company, its his fault that they're chasing me now as he told me both accounts were linked and the £200 I was paying a month (which was the min he would accept and by paying it its got me into mortgage arrears!) covered both accounts, when in fact it didn't!!

I've told them everything but they don't listen and just talk over u when u phone, when u send letters its like they skim through them and answer them like a politician!!

[brassnecked]

Have they removed any goods, and actually advertised and put them on sale at auction? If not the header h fee is invalid imho

[Lisasickofbailiffs]

No, nothing removed whatsoever, and the walking possession was done outside and he wrote my car down and then asked what tv I had (make and colour) and wrote that down too! I sold the car he wrote down after account was paid or so I thought so now the new bailiff has done a dvla check on me and is saying he's going to take my car for the £110 fee I owe them!!

[ploddertom]

Since raising his levy in May 2011 how many times has he been back to see you since up until the date of his "Attendance Fee"? Had you been payin regular amounts for this account?

 

PT

[ploddertom]

No, nothing removed whatsoever, and the walking possession was done outside and he wrote my car down and then asked what tv I had (make and colour) and wrote that down too! Unfortunately that will be hard to argue, I'm not doubting it happened though - I sold the car he wrote down after account was paid or so I thought so now the new bailiff has done a dvla check on me and is saying he's going to take my car for the £110 fee I owe them!! - he can't

 

PT

[Lisasickofbailiffs]

The tv wasn't listed on this accounts walking possession order tho, it was on the 1st debt that was paid in full in Feb, the only thing on this one was the car I sold, hence him saying he's going to take my new car!!

[ploddertom]

The tv wasn't listed on this accounts walking possession order tho, it was on the 1st debt that was paid in full in Feb, the only thing on this one was the car I sold, hence him saying he's going to take my new car!!

 

He cannot take your new car, you did break the law by selling your old car without his permission and he could sue you for that - but I doubt it. Is it possible you can answer what I asked in Post 29?

 

PT

[Lisasickofbailiffs]

Hi again guys,

I've been away with work and my stupid phone wouldn't let me post on here so now I'm back with my PC I'll fill you in with whats been happening and answer ploddertom's question in post 29....

From May 2011 when everything was sorted with the previous bailiff I was paying £200 per month every month, on time and didn't have any more visits from any bailiffs, I made all the payments for what I was told was my linked account and my last payment was for £99 on 7th Feb 2012. I was then given a message that my account was clear with Jacobs. I thought it was all settled but then I received a letter from them stating I had a Broken Arrangement asking me for £180!! I sent a letter by fax requesting a rundown of charges which when I had received I then faxed a letter and asked for more time which was ignored, the Bailiff arrived on the 18th April and slapped his £110 so called Attendance fee on.

I have contacted the council and asked them to intervene regarding this as suggested on here...this is the reply I received from the council pasted below:

 

Dear [EDIT].

 

I write with reference to your recent correspondence regarding your dispute with Jacobs bailiff company in relation to their outstanding fees.

 

I have spoken to our account manager at Jacobs, who has provided me with a rationale for the fees of £110.00 which are currently outstanding, and for which they continue to pursue payment.

 

On the 18th April 2012 a bailiff attended your property with the intention to obtain payment in full for your outstanding debt. As he was unsuccessful in obtaining contact with either yourself or [EDIT] , he left a letter at the property advising that payment in full was due within forty eight hours to avoid a further visit whereupon goods would be removed. I am advised that you contacted Mr [EDIT] by telephone on the 20th April 2012, whereby you disputed the outstanding amount and that a subsequent call was made to Jacob’s head office in relation to your grievance. Under the circumstances it was deemed inappropriate for a further visit your property to be made on the 20th April 2012 whilst the matter was investigated.

 

I can confirm however that having considered your complaint, Jacobs advised you that the fees which had been imposed were correct. The fee which you are disputing is an Attendance/Van fee, which is charged upon a bailiffs attendance to your property with a view to removal of goods (where goods are not removed). I am satisfied therefore that the bailiff company which we have instructed to recover this debt have acted appropriately, and that the fees incurred as a result of your non adherence to your payment arrangement, are correct.

 

May I respectfully request therefore that you contact Jacobs directly in order to discuss the repayment of their outstanding debt.

 

So now what do I do??? Any suggestions guys????

Lisa x

Edited June 4, 2012 by ims21
Names removed

[ploddertom]

Typical response from the Council - believing everything the Bailiff says as Gospel.

 

If I read this correct they have charged you a Van/Attendance fee for your original debt from May 2011. They also agree the other debt from August 2011 is now clear. If this correct then there are several errors in their thinking. If they contend that the 1st debt was not paid with the other one then they should have raised that issue no later than September 2011, having left it for so long tells me they abandoned their levy therefore meaning the levy fee and any & all associated charges must be removed. The following posts are my interpretation of what should have been happened/been charged.

[ploddertom]

Debt 1 - £230

25 May 2011 - 1st Visit - £24-50 - probably correct

27 May 2011 - Levy Fee £30, WPA £12, Header H Fee £24-50

Providing the WPA was signed by yourself then they are permitted to charge this fee. Header H Fee has been discussed previously and should not have been charged - they need to provide proof of date of sale, advertising, when the goods were removed etc.

 

How much did you pay towards this debt & the dates they were paid - prior to the 2nd debt. Their is also a contention that the levy may have been invalid as the goods seized may have been necessary for your work.

 

18 April 2012 - Attendance Fee £110 - my contention is that the levy has been abandoned after all it is 11 months since it was made. The fees should be removed and replaced with a 2nd Visit Fee of £18-00. In my view you would be due a refund.

[ploddertom]

Debt 2 - £1033-50

1 August 2011 - 1st Visit Fee - £24-50 - probably correct

2 August 2011 - Levy Fee £54, WPA £12, Header H Fee £24-50

Providing the WPA was signed by yourself then they are permitted to charge this fee. Header H Fee has been discussed previously and should not have been charged - they need to provide proof of date of sale, advertising, when the goods were removed etc.

 

The difficulty of the levy is that you described your TV but they then also included your car from a previous levy on it which is not normally allowed but as said in the previous thread they abandoned that levy. Again it may be that the car should not have been seized as it is need for your work. That then leaves the TV and with all the will in the world it is no where near enough to cover the basics of what would be needed were it to be removed for sale. In my view the levy is not worth the paper it is written on. Again I believe you are due a refund as the levy should be removed and all charges associated with it to be replaced by a 2nd Visit Fee of £18-00.

 

Dou you know exactly how much has been paid on this debt and the dates the payments were made.

[seanamarts]

subbing

[Lisasickofbailiffs]

Prior to the 2nd debt which was passed to them on 22nd Jul 2011 (But they didn't advise/visit me until 1st Aug 2011) I had paid 3 payments as follows:

27th May 2011 - £51.50

27th Jun 2011 - £45.50

28th Jul 2011 - £45.50

The 50p on each of the totals is the extra 50p charge they charged me for paying via debit card, which there is a separate charge for listed with the fees!!

 

The 2nd debt payments were as follows:

2nd Aug 2011 - £50.50

1st Sept 2011 - £200.50

1st Oct 2011 - £200.50

1st Nov 2011 - £200.50

2nd Dec 2011 - £200.50

5th Jan 2012 - £200.50

7th Feb 2012 - £99.00

 

Which I make to be a total paid of £1152 (which includes the 7 charges of 50p every time I paid with a debit card!!)

 

Any ideas how I move on with this now please? As on Wednesday Jacobs are gonna start trying to chase me again for this £110!!!

Lisa x

[seanamarts]

1st account - owed £230.00 to council

 

Fee's £66.50

£24.50 1st visit

£12.00 WPA

£30.00 levy

Cannot charge H head fee at this stage.

 

Total = £296.50

 

2nd account - owed £1033.00

 

Fee's £90.50

£24.50 can be argued that it should be classed as second visit fee of £18.00

£54.00 can be argued that items levied would not cover fee's and cost, so unlawful levy. £00.00

£12 WPA. did you sign? as above levy unlawful. Have you a copy of the levy.

Cannot charge for Hhead fee at this stage.

 

Total £1123.50 (or £1041.00 if levy argued.)

1st account & 2nd account total =£1420.00 (£1310.00)

 

Total amount you have paid £1294.50

 

Amount outstanding £115.50 ( or £5.50)

 

This is my calculations at 4 in the morning, I have used your figures on what is owed and what you have paid, please correct if any figures are wrong.

Going by their calculations and not including the H head fee's it does look as if you owe £115.50 in their fee's, however to me they should not be charging certain fee's as the levy was unlawful and as the 1st bailiff has stated that the accounts were added together, so in hindsight you owe just £5.50.

[lookinforinfo]

Am I wrong in thinking that if the Council has now been paid the warrants have now been satisfied? If that is the case then the bailiffs have no more rights

than I do to pursue Lisa for any money she may owe. They are trespassing and using threatening behaviour.

[seanamarts]

If only fee's are owed, then they would have to pursue them via a small claims court. However they could request from the council their fee's that are owing, if any. Then the debt would become outstanding again and the bailiff would carry on with the enforcement.

 

I suppose it would be down to the council whether they pay the bailiff fee's, if not the bailiff would either lump it or make a claim.

[Lisasickofbailiffs]

Hi again guys,

As I thought I've had a letter off Jacobs which was waiting for me when we got back from working away....giving us yet again 7 days to pay, stating that their client has advised them to continue to persue for the debt!! Who do I contact now? The council again? Or Jacobs again? The letter says that if not paid they will add more fees! Fees getting added to fees!! Great!!

I'll post the exact letter on here in the morning when I'm home but some help on my next course of action would be great.

Thanks Lisa xx

[dx100uk]

yea ofcourse they did

 

phone the council and ask them!

 

i bet they know nothing about it.

 

dx

[brassnecked]

Ask Council what is going on, and remind them that they are themselves liable for any inappropriate action or unlawful fees applied by their agent Jacobs.

[Lisasickofbailiffs]

If you look back a few posts brassnecked/dx100uk I posted the councils response to me stating that their fees were unlawful saying they'd spoken to their client contact at Jacobs who told them the fees were lawful and the council just accepted this as gospel!!

The letter I received from Jacobs reads as follows:

 

Dear Mrs xxxxxx

Balance outstanding at Todays date £110

 

We are writing to inform you that we have now been instructed by our client to continue action on your account.

 

We therefore request that you forward payment in full by return or if you cannot pay in full immediately, you contact our office to discuss the matter within 7days.

 

Failure to comply with the above request will result in further recovery action which will incur further costs.

 

Jacobs.

[seanamarts]

We are writing to inform you that we have now been instructed by our client to continue action on your account.

 

If your account is paid up, what action are they going to implement. They cannot levy on goods for their fee's alone. I would offer them the two visit fee's they are entitled too and ask them to explain in full for the other fees that they warrant is owed.

[brassnecked]

Yes offer them First and Second visit fees, as a full and final, any more they need to justify with a breakdown, and remind them that as the liability with the council is discharged they would have to go down the small claims track, and justify their fees as genuine and lawful in court, and therefore there is no liabilty order now that allows them to levy Jack Excrement.

[Lisasickofbailiffs]

Yes offer them First and Second visit fees, as a full and final, any more they need to justify with a breakdown, and remind them that as the liability with the council is discharged they would have to go down the small claims track, and justify their fees as genuine and lawful in court, and therefore there is no liabilty order now that allows them to levy Jack Excrement.

 

They've already had a 1st visit fee which I've paid on this account in 2011! So do I offer them a 2nd visit fee? Is it legal for them to add more fees to a fee?

Lisa x

[brassnecked]

They've already had a 1st visit fee which I've paid on this account in 2011! So do I offer them a 2nd visit fee? Is it legal for them to add more fees to a fee?

Lisa x

Not if the Liability Order is satisfied, and the council said so, they cannot then enforce on that LO for fees alone, so no they cannot legitimately add fees to fees and levy for the fees alone, if the council say debt discharged

 

BUT technically the fees should be deducted by the council, and handed to bailiffs first, so you could pay the second visit fee into the council, and tell Jacobs that is what you have done. Or point out you have already paid the first visit fee so all they are getting is £18.50 Others will know more

[outlawla]

Not if the Liability Order is satisfied, and the council said so, they cannot then enforce on that LO for fees alone, so no they cannot legitimately add fees to fees and levy for the fees alone, if the council say debt discharged

 

BUT technically the fees should be deducted by the council, and handed to bailiffs first, so you could pay the second visit fee into the council, and tell Jacobs that is what you have done. Or point out you have already paid the first visit fee so all they are getting is £18.50 Others will know more

 

I got several FOI responses from different councils about this.

 

At the time, most of the councils stated that they only pass on the fees to the bailiff firm if they receive payment over and above the amount owed to the council (when payments are made directly to the authority). I suppose if the bailiff hasn't collected the debt, the council is unlikely to pay them for doing so, unless this is paid additionally to the council by the debtor.

Edited June 19, 2012 by outlawla