Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • A full-scale strike at the firm could have an impact on the global supply chains of electronics.View the full article
    • He was one of four former top executives from Sam Bankman-Fried's firms to plead guilty to charges.View the full article
    • The private submersible industry was shaken after the implosion of the OceanGate Titan sub last year.View the full article
    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4302 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

If the bailiff had levied your mother's car, apart from the levy being invalid (making the levy fee and attendance fee void), the bailiff has charged these fees on the same visit.

 

Even if it was detailed in the council's Service Level Agreement (which it wouldn't), a bailiff wishing to "Levy and Remove" on the same visit and incur those fees, would need to arrive with sufficient transport - vans etc, to remove the goods it anticipated distraining upon.

 

In your case the bailiff levied on a vehicle, he would need to prove that he had arrived in transport sufficiently capable of safely removing the vehicle. A point worth remembering for anyone else incurring both these fees in respect of the same attendance.

 

This is not only relevant for levy and attending to remove fees charges made on the same visit, it also applies to attending to remove in general. If they haven't arrived in suitable transportation and incurred that cost themselves, they will be attempting to defraud you by imposing it, and actually defrauding you if they are paid it.

 

hi i have has a similar problem where bailifs were coming round to collect council tax. i have been paying 40 pond a month since september last year but then the council sent me bil for this years bill and i couldnt afford both so i spoke to the bailif and asked if i could pay a lesser aomunt

 

he told me to write to the office with a statement of earnings which i did the wrote back and said i had to arrange with the bailiff so i paid 20 pound and they then wrote to me saying the bailiffe was coming to remove goods

 

i phoned te bailife back and he told me to write back to tnem and explain agan and offer them what i could pay, they then wrote back saying this was not acceptable and full payment was due in 7 days.

 

i phoned the office several times i was old nothing could be done but keep paying what i could afford so i kept paying 40 pound for 2 month but i kept geting letters sayin after repated requests i had done nothing to clear this debt fone this no immediatly i foned them on the 6/6/12 and asked when th bailif was coming and she told thatno bailif had been asigned yet and to just keep paying my monthly payments.

 

i told her i would pay on the 15/6/12 as thats when my payment was due. on the 9/6/12 i got a letter from equita for 24hr notice to remove my goods payment full in 7 days. on the same day a bailif posted a letter through my door saying and delivered payment full in 24hrs and they may come back at anytime and charge my inexcess of 200 pound.

 

i phoned this bailiif which was a different one to the one i spoke to before and he was told me he was coming on friiday and my bill had gone up by 206 pound. because he came with a van to remove my godds. i had to get my dad to pay this for me i asked him if he could just accept the 458 pound as that was all i had and he said that he would come bak the week after and charge me another 200 pound so i payed it all but i dont think i should have paid that much fees and i dont no what to do

Edited by citizenB
spacing for easier reading
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

hi i have has a similar problem where bailifs were coming round to collect council tax. i have been paying 40 pond a month since september last year but then the council sent me bil for this years bill and i couldnt afford both so i spoke to the bailif and asked if i could pay a lesser aomunt he told me to write to the office with a statement of earnings which i did the wrote back and said i had to arrange with the bailiff so i paid 20 pound and they then wrote to me saying the bailiffe was coming to remove goods i phoned te bailife back and he told me to write back to tnem and explain agan and offer them what i could pay, they then wrote back saying this was not acceptable and full payment was due in 7 days. i phoned the office several times i was old nothing could be done but keep paying what i could afford so i kept paying 40 pound for 2 month but i kept geting letters sayin after repated requests i had done nothing to clear this debt fone this no immediatly i foned them on the 6/6/12 and asked when th bailif was coming and she told thatno bailif had been asigned yet and to just keep paying my monthly payments. i told her i would pay on the 15/6/12 as thats when my payment was due. on the 9/6/12 i got a letter from equita for 24hr notice to remove my goods payment full in 7 days. on the same day a bailif posted a letter through my door saying and delivered payment full in 24hrs and they may come back at anytime and charge my inexcess of 200 pound. i phoned this bailiif which was a different one to the one i spoke to before and he was told me he was coming on friiday and my bill had gone up by 206 pound. because he came with a van to remove my godds. i had to get my dad to pay this for me i asked him if he could just accept the 458 pound as that was all i had and he said that he would come bak the week after and charge me another 200 pound so i payed it all but i dont think i should have paid that much fees and i dont no what to do

 

HI Diane welcome to CAG could you please use this link to start a new thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=168

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi can anybody help me please. i had balifss thratening to take my goods away, i have now paid them in full but they have charged me a lot of money for fees that i dont think are right. is there anyway i can claim these fees back from equita i would be very greatfull for any advice thankyou

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok thankyou. i think i may have already started one sorry. i have never been on any of these sites bfore it is a bit confusing any way i was reading someones post about equita and it was very simalar to mine. equitta have charged me a lot of fees but i have never actual been visited by them i have had contact with them by phone and by letters. i have had a hand delivered letter which has actualy cost me 209 pound. i got a breakdown of there fees but i dont understand them. i was charged for a first visit and a levy fee and an enforcement fee could this be right as i have never even seen the bailiff only spoke to him on the phone

Link to post
Share on other sites

list the fees you have been charged as in

 

Date 1st visit fee £xxxx

Date 2nd visit fee£xxxx

Date levy fee£xxxxx

Date walking possession fee £xxx

Date enforcement fee £xxxx

 

and any other fee you have been charged

 

in the meantime send an e-mail asking them what goods they levied

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they may well have overcharged you. if they only visited once, and didn't levy anything then first visit fee £24.50 is all they get. ass to the "Enforcement Fee" no such animal in the regulations,

 

You need to ask the council

How many Liability Orders they hold for you

When were they obtained

Which tax years they are for

when were they sent to bailiffs for enforcement

Are any still outstanding

 

Then write to the bailiffs using this template:

"From:

My Name

My Address

To:

Acme Bailiff Co

Bailiff House

Ref: Account No: 123456

Dear Sir

With reference to the above account, Can you please provide me with a Breakdownlink3.gif of the charges.

This includes:

a - the time & date of any Bailiff action that incurred a Fee.

b - the reason for the fee.

c - the name(s) of the Bailiff(s) that attended on each occasion a Fee was charged.

d - the name(s) of the Court(s) the Bailiff(s) was/were certificatedlink3.gif at.

e - the date of the Certification.

 

This is not a Subject access requestlink3.gif under the Data Protection Act S7 1998 so does not incur a fee of £10. You are obliged to provide this information.

I require this information within 14 days.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

Ripped off customer"

 

 

Once you have the info post back so Caggers can unpick the fees and see what is legal, and which is dodgy.

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 thankyou for taking ythe time to reply. i received a breakdown of fees but it doesnt have any dates they consist of

debt £680.42

statutory visit fees £42.50

levy fees £39.00

enforcement fee £167.00

card charges£3.50

girobook charge £5.82

total £942.04

paid £942.04

outstanding balance £00.00

 

debt £166.67

statutory visit fee £42.50

levy fee £28.00

enforcement fee £160.00

card charge £1.00

total £398.17

paid £398.17

outstanding balance £00.00

 

 

althoug i have never seen the bailiff i have spoke to him on the phone when i trid to pay him i thought i owed £453. but was told they had put £206. on because they had a warrent and i aked if i could pay the £453. and sort out the balance of the fees late as i didnt think this was right he told me i could but he would come back next week and charge me another £206. all i have had is a hand delivered letter saying i nhad 24 hours to pay or i would incur charges of £200 and a leter came from equita on the same day saying notice for removal of goods and i have 48 hours to pay the full amont

Link to post
Share on other sites

What goods did the bailiff levy, and did he leave you a list? We need this to further unpick the fees, but likely there is room to challenge some of them, Specifically "card charges£3.50

girobook charge £5.82" Where in the Regulations does it permit a charge for a payment book? Nowhere i would opine. the "enforcement fee" masy also be dodgy, if their levy is dodgy, or there isn't one an Attending to Remove fee cannot be applied, and there is no provision to allow a fee called an Enforcement fee, in the regulations.

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 thankyou for taking ythe time to reply. i received a breakdown of fees but it doesnt have any dates they consist of

debt £680.42

statutory visit fees £42.50

levy fees £39.00

enforcement fee £167.00 *

card charges£3.50

girobook charge £5.82

total £942.04

paid £942.04

outstanding balance £00.00

 

debt £166.67

statutory visit fee £42.50

levy fee £28.00

enforcement fee £160.00 *

card charge £1.00

total £398.17

paid £398.17

outstanding balance £00.00

 

 

althoug i have never seen the bailiff i have spoke to him on the phone when i trid to pay him i thought i owed £453. but was told they had put £206. on because they had a warrent and i aked if i could pay the £453. and sort out the balance of the fees late as i didnt think this was right he told me i could but he would come back next week and charge me another £206. all i have had is a hand delivered letter saying i nhad 24 hours to pay or i would incur charges of £200 and a leter came from equita on the same day saying notice for removal of goods and i have 48 hours to pay the full amont

 

 

Something odd here (nothing unusual).

 

The enforcement fees (presumably attendances with transport), are different i.e. £167 in the first instance and £160 in the second. Is this a typo?

 

 

.....i phoned this bailiif which was a different one to the one i spoke to before and he was told me he was coming on friiday and my bill had gone up by 206 pound. because he came with a van to remove my godds. i had to get my dad to pay this for me i asked him if he could just accept the 458 pound as that was all i had and he said that he would come bak the week after and charge me another 200 pound so i payed it all...

 

 

£206 equates to the £167 attendance fee and £39 levy fee and although you don't have dates, it sounds as though from your description that these were both charged on the same day.

 

For all bailiff action which incurred fees it's important that they supply dates. As brassnecked has mentioned, do you know what goods were levied?

 

They should have handed you or left at your property a Notice of seizure of goods and Inventory.

 

It is also important to know what vehicle the bailiff arrived in on his levy/van attendance as it would need to have the capacity to transport the levied goods. If for example he had levied a car he would have had to arrive in a tow-truck.

 

I'd be interested to know what the £200 would be for that the bailiff threatened to charge if he had to return. Perhaps actually removing goods rather than attending with a view to remove...

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

i have asked for dates and times of visits. as i said though i have never had anything levied as i have never actualy had any visits apart from the hand delivered letter. but i phoned the bailif after receiving the letter and he said he came to remove goods but he has never been in the house and that was the first time he hsa been. he said if iwas in he would of took my goods then but as far as i know he didnt even knock but just posted the letter as i was actualy in all day. at first i thought the letter came through the post as i got one the same day from equita that said 24 removal notice which was dated the 6th june but i received on the 9th june and the hand delivered baliff removal payment due in full in 24hrs came the same day. also i phoned the office to ask when the bailif was coming on the 6th and was told no bailif had been asigned yet.so from the 6th to the 9th of june i was charged another 206 pound.

Link to post
Share on other sites

when i phoned equitas office on the 6th/june i was told that no bailiff was asigned yet and to keep paying what i could they must have issued this letter later on it actualy says that despite repeated requests i have failed to clear the outstanding balance and there bailif has been unable to contact me so they are sending removal contracters in the next 24 hrs and that an additional charges in excess of £200 will be added to my debt. how can this be if no bailiff was assigned to me yet. this is the letter that came on the same day that the bailiff posted his letter through the door.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without wanting to sound too optimistic at this stage, it does seem as though they've handed it to you on a plate.

 

If like you say they haven't levied on any of your goods, both the "levy" and the "attendance with a vehicle to remove" fees, will have been obtained fraudulently. See this post ¡¡HERE!!, particularly the LGO Report.

 

Just so you don't have any surprises, I will make a prediction that the bailiff might say they had levied goods (probably a vehicle). However, if they say this you can counter their claim by stating you never received the Notice of Seizure of Goods and Inventory. They are required to leave this when levying goods.

 

SI 1992/613 Regulation 45(5), says so:

 

(5) The person levying distress on behalf of an authority shall carry with him the written authorisation of the authority, which he shall show to the debtor if so requested; and he shall hand to the debtor or leave at the premises where the distress is levied a copy of this regulation and Schedule 5 and a memorandum setting out the appropriate amount, and shall hand to the debtor a copy of any close or walking possession agreement entered into.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not be overly concerned about what they are trying to do. In my view they couldn't win an Ar*e kicking contest. The fact they have failed to give you the dates in your breakdown request suggests they are trying to con you. You should not phone them unless you can record the call. You are definitely doing the right thing by denying them entry to your home and they cannot charge you for sending letters via Royal Mail.

 

As they appear to be obstructive I would put the ball back in the Council's court and demand they fulfil the rest of the request for the dates as the Bailiffs are refusing to do so - remember the Council are 100% responsible for the actions of their Bailiff whether they like it or not. If you are met with a stonewall at the Council ask the person whether they are an employee of the Council or Capita, if the latter request to be put through to someone higher - Head of Revenues possibly. Do not be fobbed off by them.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i received a letter from equita with another breakdown of fees but this time there is only one list of fees and its different from the other one it says

liability order date 31/05/2011

period up to 31/03/2012

my addres

debt £680.42

statutory visit fees £42.50

visit/levy fee £46.00

atendance fee £160.00

paypoint fees £3.80

card fee £3.50

giro book/admin fee £5.82

total £942.04

balance nil

 

 

then they go on about how they noticed the dates werent logged but tthe dates were

22/08/2011, 30/082011, 19/09/2011/, 14/11/2011, 27/04/2012/ , and 09/06/2012 gives me the names of three bailiffs and where they were certified

 

these dates are wrong as the bailiff never came but i may have got a hand delivered letter around august 2011, i had written to equita with a statement of my earnings but i was refused the offer to pay £40 pmth

as they wanted £109 pmth, i phone there office and was told to pay what i could. i was and thats when the first bailiff eas going to come round i phoned the bailiff and he told me i had a week to get the money or he was coming round. he wouldnt accept a propasal to pay monthly payments at first unless i made a payment of £356. and then i could pay £40pmth. i was paying this but then i was getting letters that they was going to call again so again i phoned there office and it was down to the bailiff not putting anything on record but that got sorted out and i have been paying it everymonth and he never came to visit me. i have paid every month till march i missed a payment then i got a letter saying that someone would call and the name of the 2cnd bailiff, so i phoned the bailiff and he advises me to write to head office which i did i explained to them that i was struggling and asked if i could reduce my payments and i made a apyment of £20, they wrote back and said that it was in the hands of the bailif and to speak to him. i phoned him and he didnt seem to know anything about it and told me to write back to them which i did he never came to visit me. i kept paying the £40 but equita wrote back and refused the offer and said tge full balance is now due i rang them and was told there was nothing i could do but keep making regular payments which i did. but i got another letter saying a baliff would be in the area next week which is why i rang on the 6/06/ to find out when they was goona call thats when the lady told me no one had been asigned yet. then the 3rd bailiff has been on the 9/06 and charged me£ 206 extra for putting a letter through my door so i then phoned him and tried to see if he could do anything to help me,he said he would ring the office and ring me back but he never did, so the next day i borowed the money and had to pay £656.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like they're being deliberately obstructive by providing the information one bit at a time and in this cryptic form. Perhaps next time they'll send you just a hint as to what goods they supposedly levied.

 

You need complete lists relating to both liability orders, itemising all charges / dates and items they claimed to have levied.

 

Would you get more sense from the council?

Link to post
Share on other sites

should i write back to them but i dont really know what to say or even ask for. or as you say the council but i dont know where to go from here. i seem to have paid a lot of money for so long to still owe so much at the end of it now i am in debt as i took a loan to pay the first payment of £356. and then another loan for £656 and i have been paying evry month since august last year. oh i dont know all this does my head in how the more you try to pay your debt the more they add on. i wish now that i hadnt payed anythhing as i dont have anything of value that they could of took anyway. but thankyou for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

list the fees you have been charged as in

 

Date 1st visit fee £xxxx

Date 2nd visit fee£xxxx

Date levy fee£xxxxx

Date walking possession fee £xxx

Date enforcement fee £xxxx

 

and any other fee you have been charged

 

in the meantime send an e-mail asking them what goods they levied

 

 

You need the information in the above form for both accounts.

 

Which council are you dealing with? It might be possible to get hold of its bailiff contract with Equita to use against them.

 

Here's Equitas Code of Practice for your interest.

 

See how many times the bailiffs have breached their own conditions.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

well its been a week now since i asked equita again to resend me the information i wanted such as the precise dates of visits and dates the fees were charged and i asked them for a list of goods that were supposedly levied but i havent heard from them yet

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they need a reminder

 

You might have this already, but in case you haven't their email address is:

 

[email protected]

 

for Revenues and Benefits

 

EDIT:

 

Sorry! I see you're dealing with Equita...still, maybe you should involve the council as well.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

hi i got a letter back from equita today with the dates and levys it kind of goes like this

both liability orders were dated the31/05/2011

both levy and attendance charged incured on 09/06/12

the levy was made on 09/06/12 the levy was made on blue volkswaggon passet payment was made following visit 13/06/2012

liability order 2

levy and attendance charge was incured on 27/09/11

folowwing payment being made the case has now been archived and so cant retreive specifics asa to what goods were identified but details would of been left with me

statutory visits of 42.50 were added on both cases in line with visits that took place on the 22/08/11 and 30/08/11

 

firstly no such details were ever left as i have only ever spoke to them on the phone and secondly i dont have a blue vw passat. but i have a blue vw polo so they have levied the wrong car and i didnt even know they had levied a car. can you help me as i dont know where to go from here. thanks for all the help you haven given me so far

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your most recent post suggests there are 3 liability orders.

 

a) One L/O – levied in 2012

 

b) Two L/O's – levied in 2011

Because of this:

 

"
statutory visits of 42.50 were added on both cases in line with visits that took place on the 22/08/11 and 30/08/11
"

 

Ignore above.

 

Just back tracked through thread and should think the gap between levies will be down to broken or revised agreement.

 

However, it seems mutiple visits fees have been charged in respect of the same visit. There is something ruling against doing this in an LGO report somewhere.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...