Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • 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

Levy made on car I owned, but now no longer own


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4363 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

Hi

A bailiff is claiming they have made a levy of my 'goods' from "outside the property" in October 2010. I did own a car at this date (on finance, so didn't actually really own it) They are using this levy as basis for enforcing a liability order made against me just before I went bankrupt in Nov 2011. Im aware that if there was no levy made before the bankruptcy then the liability order would make no difference and the council tax debt would still be provable in the bankruptcy (and written off) I believe this is why they are still pursuing me for the debt despite my bankruptcy.

My conundrum is....... even if they accurately identified my car as an asset (I live on a main road in a terrace and often my car would be parked some way down the street) and it is listed on the Levy, what happens now?, as the car was returned to the finance company shortly before the bankruptcy and I am obviously no longer i possession of it. Would this make the Levy void?

any advice would be greatly appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

As the car was on finance the levy was invalid any way. Didn't you inform the bailiff of the finance at the time? Others will know more about the specifics of bankruptcy and council tax.

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

1) They can't levy on a vehicle that is owned by a finance company or oi they did by mistake, once the finance is proved, the levy would have to be removed, therefore null and void.

 

2) They would have to have given you paperwork at the time confirming the levy. They can't just note the registration of a vehicle that happens to be parked near your house.

 

Suggest that if the bailiffs action is in regard to a council tax liability order, that you write to the council authorities council tax dept, advising them of the situation. If you have any proof of the bankruptcy that you send a copy and in the letter also explain about the car the bailiffs have mysteriously applied a levy on. It would be up to the council authority to resolve this with the bailiffs. Send a copy to the bailiffs, as well, so they know you are in contact with the council.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still have paperwork for the return of the car..... I believe the bailiff was there specifically to check out my property and gain access to make a levy.... I wasn't in at the time (or they never knocked) until yesterday I had no idea they had this levy - I'd been fighting from the stand point that a levy hadn't been made therefore the liability order didn't stick and the debt was still provable in bankruptcy, therefore I didn't still owe the debt!! they are shocking as they send me letters, despite the bankruptcy asking for £130 per month!! If i had that kind of spare cash my insolvency agent would want to know about it first!!!

They have also added astronomical fees which is a separate issue I will be detailing in a formal complaint to them, the local authourity, and the bailiff regulatory body - before I take it further.......

I have written them a respectful letter today asking for a full breakdown of the fees they've added and details of the levy they believe they have - if they do actually provide me with this info i'll hang them with it!!!

many thanks for your reply

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) They can't levy on a vehicle that is owned by a finance company or oi they did by mistake, once the finance is proved, the levy would have to be removed, therefore null and void.

 

2) They would have to have given you paperwork at the time confirming the levy. They can't just note the registration of a vehicle that happens to be parked near your house.

 

Suggest that if the bailiffs action is in regard to a council tax liability order, that you write to the council authorities council tax dept, advising them of the situation. If you have any proof of the bankruptcy that you send a copy and in the letter also explain about the car the bailiffs have mysteriously applied a levy on. It would be up to the council authority to resolve this with the bailiffs. Send a copy to the bailiffs, as well, so they know you are in contact with the council.

Many thanks :) I am CC-ing the council tax dept into all correspondence from this point forward :) I can't believe they think they can get away with this - I have certainly never received any confirmation of a levy made of any of my goods!!!! its like they've plucked it out of thin air! :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you the sole person responsible for the Council Tax at the time this happened or did you have another half that lived with you. The reason for asking is that if there was another living with you at the time then they may turn their attentions to them for payment.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

nope - it was just little old me. tbh I have no idea how I idn't pay the CT. I moved to the area at a time of extreme trauma in my life and only stayed there for 3 months - I can only think that it just slipped through the net as all other bills, utility etc were paid in ful and up to date. It was a year after leaving before I was contacted by the council about the debt, at which point I already knew I'd be going the bankruptcy route and my advisor at the citizens advice bureau told me to ignore it as it would all be written off with the bankruptcy. it turns out that they filed the liability order just before i could file the bankruptcy. The contention has solely been this issue of the levy (or not)...... hence need to check. the only thing they could have listed is the car that I had at that time (but went before bankruptcy) happy to know that renders their levy void :)

many many thanks to all

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi icklepoyser

 

Will all my debts be included in my bankruptcy?

 

 

Certain debts cannot be included in your bankruptcy, these are:

  • any fine under the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980;
  • any obligation under an order made in family proceedings or under a maintenance assessment made under the Child Support Act 1991 (except an obligation to pay a lump sum or to pay costs);
  • any obligation under a confiscation order made under the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986, section 71 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 or under Parts 2, 3 or 4 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002; or
  • a debt to the Student Loans Company for loans under the Education (Student Loans) Act 1990 or The Education (Student Support) Regulations 1998.

This means that you will still have to carry on paying these debts and will not be released from them when you are discharged.

 

This info is from the Insovlency Service Website here is the link:

 

http://www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency/personal-insolvency/bankruptcy-what-is-bankruptcy/how-will-bankruptcy-affect-me

 

Also are you still Bankrupt at present and not been Discharged?

 

If you are still Bankrupt then you may have to inform your Trustee in Bankruptcy of this action to keep on the right side of your Bankruptcy.

Edited by stu007

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Yes I am still under the bankruptcy - my insolvency is aware of the dealings with the bailiffs and the issue as I email him with updates regularly.

I am aware of what is not included in bankruptcy (hence why I still have a huge student loan to pay when I start working again :-( )

Thanks for clarifying that the council tax debt is included - as I've mentioned, the issue has always been about this levy they claim they have as this will affect the sturdiness of the liability order the made just before I went bankrupt.....

As it appears this levy is probably fictitious or relating to a vehicle I don't own therefore rendering any levy void I am a very happy bunny at present :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's possible they are saying they have a levy, in a vain attempt to extort fees from you, their reasoning being the Lo and CTax arrears are in the bankruptcy, but as they make things up as they go along and considerthemselves always right, that somehow the unlawful, and therefore non existent levy, allows them to pursue you outside the bankruptcy for their fees. Thoughts? Either way they are cruising between Bob and no hope, and Bob has left town. What bailiff company is this?

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

Hi

 

Now the Bailiffs state they had a levy on that vehicle from October 2010 but were you ever notified of this levy before proceeding to sell the vehicle?

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Now the Bailiffs state they had a levy on that vehicle from October 2010 but were you ever notified of this levy before proceeding to sell the vehicle?

 

The finance company took the car back according to the OP, as it was their property.

 

From what I have seen about this, bailiffs will sometimes make an error in applying a levy on a financed vehicle and when they give the debtor the paperwork, they ask them to supply any information that might make the levy invalid i.e. details of finance co. owning the car or it belongs to a company. It sounds like the OP was never given any paperwork and the bailiff company did not check who owned the car.

 

A previous thread may be of interest. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?262730-Has-a-bailiff-quot-levied-quot-upon-a-car-that-is-NOT-owned-by-you-...-LOCAL-GOVERNMENT-OMBUDSMAN-S-Report-!!!!

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bailiff has no levy, the finance company reclaimed the vehicle, and Op should send a copy of the finance agreement if they still have one to the bailiff inviting them to track the vehicle and tow it as the new owner will likely sue them

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

Hi

 

Now the Bailiffs state they had a levy on that vehicle from October 2010 but were you ever notified of this levy before proceeding to sell the vehicle?

 

After two years the bailiff will be seen to have 'abandoned' his 'levy' by not acting on it at the time ......laugh.giflaugh.gif

 

WD

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

wow - i've just popped back in to update the specifics of the situation and see quite a few more responses - which i wasn't notified of :(

Anyway..... update.....

firstly I wrote to the bailiffs (Bristow & Sutor) to enquire about the Levy to which they replied that a levy was made in Oct 2010 at the address the council tax is owed for (of which i moved out of in March 2010) on a Peugeot 205 - This car was obviously not mine as I was no longer living at the property and had moved back to Derby from Rugby. They went on to say that as they came to realise I no longer lived there they "re-levied" at my current address on 6.1.2012........ I have never let a bailiff into my home so can't see how this has happened...:???:

I called the national debt helpline who have been fantastic with advice on this issue - They advised that the Oct 2010 Levy was invalid and illegal as they levied goods I didn't own. They also stated that as this first levy didn't realistically exist Bristow & Sutor couldn't have "re-levied" - if anything the Jan 2012 levy was their first levy. However, as I went bankrupt in Nov 2011 this second levy was also invalid!!! and the debt would be provable in the bankruptcy....:whoo:

I set about writing the bailiffs a formal written complaint setting this out and also mentioning their fees (they had charged me for making the Oct 2010 levy!!) I have received their reply this morning.....:-x

They state that they have yet to see evidence from me that the vehicle levied in in Oct 2010 wasn't mine - basically I have to show evidence that i don't/didn't own the vehicle!!:!: BUT that they have abandoned this levy anyway.... and "re-levied" on 6.1.2012, they state that the bailiff recorded meeting me and levied distress in the living room (I had a conversation with a bailiff through my front room window - from which you can see clearly into my front room) they go on to state that "It is irrelevant whether we levied before or after your bankruptcy was granted" explaining - "The liability order was issued in 11.08.11, prior to your bankruptcy, it is valid and so is the subsequent levy in place":mad2:

I rang them this morning to enquire about the goods they have listed on the Jan 2012 levy, they produced a 'vague' list of items - Black Phillips TV (my TV is a BUSH TV!!) 2 piece cream suite (My suite is brown!!) a wooden bookcase, a wooden cabinet (I don't own a wooden cabinet) a wooden table with 4 chairs.

Their letter goes on to state "We respectfully make you aware that although section 285 (3) of the Insolvency Act 1986, may suggest we cannot proceed

after the making of a bankruptcy order no person who is a creditor of the bankrupt in respect of a debt provable in the bankruptcy shall -

(a) Have any remedy against the property or person of the bankrupt in respect of that debt, or

(b) Before the discharge of the bankrupt, commence any action or other legal proceeding against the bankrupt except with the leave of the court and on such terms as the court may impose.

 

However, it has a proviso at the end that the restriction is subject to section 347 (limited right of distress)

(8) Nothing in this group of parts affects a right to distrain otherwise than for rent and any such right is at any time exercisable without restriction against property comprised in a bankrupt's estate, even if that right is expressed by an enactment to be exercisable in like manner as a right to distrain for rent :!:

(9) Any right to distrain against property comprised in a bankrupt's estate is exercisable notwithstanding that the property has vested in the trustees. :???:

 

For what its worth this may as well be written in Russian for all Ive understood!! They concluded their letter by stating that basically they can still continue their distress action against me despite the bankruptcy and have given me 8 days to pay them £766.10!!!

 

Does anyone have any thoughts? any advice?

I also complained to the council at same time of complaining to B&S - I'm waiting their response......

cheers :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if they have a recording of the Bailiff in your house, ask to see it!!

 

And ask why, if he performed a levy in the house, you have not signed the WP....

 

I would think also that as a Business, a Bailiff is actually breaking the Data Protection Act by not informing you that he is recording, he cannot claim the covert rights of a private citizen, he is a "professional" working a job.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever they claim levy is of insufficient value to cover the debt, £7,700 of goods need to be levied to cover the debt, In any case you should check with your OR as to whether this bill is included in the BR imho

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

Thanks guys :)

I questioned the issue of not having signed a walking possession agreement and they said they didn't legally have to get my signature!! :???:

thanks for info re: how much they need to levy to cover debt - is this ratio stated anywhere or me to reference in letters?

I've just fired off another letter to the council as I found Rugby borough Councils Council Tax Recovery Procedure & Legislation Manual which contained obviously sections on bailiff conduct, and i referenced specific point where they haven't behaved themselves!!! then rounded off with the info on here about the government paper advising that councils are responsible for bailiff conduct!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ratio is a generally used "rule of thumb" based on the prices fetched at auction for goods sold at aucrion by bailiffs which is around 10% of their original cost/value

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 ratio is a generally used "rule of thumb" based on the prices fetched at auction for goods sold at aucrion by bailiffs which is around 10% of their original cost/value

 

That seems – in a round about way – to agree with what this Manchester City council's "bailiff Code of Practice" says....page 30.

 

.....The bailiff should not remove goods for sale unless it is anticipated that the sum realised will be sufficient to settle a reasonable proportion of the account outstanding to the Council (30% to 50%), including costs. As a general rule, the value of the goods can be divided by 5 to give an approximate value if auctioned.

 

(Please note: For Business Rates in some cases the bailiff may still remove goods if the value is less than 30 - 50%, i.e. so that ongoing trading ceases or if it is likely to become insolvent.)

 

 

 

NOTE:

 

The information above is the council's policy and not necessarily law, however, this Local Government Ombudsman's Report, particularly the conclusion at page 8, will give you something to consider on that score.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...