Bailiff Not on Register??

[beclee]

I posted yesterday regarding a bailiff coming into my home and giving me a Notice of Distress, he left his name on the form and i checked it today and its not showing on

I searched using his surname ( thats all i have) and the company name, the company results dont list a bailiff with his surname?

 

I think they may be trying to frighten me into paying a lump sum that i dont have (single mum on JSA) as he didnt ask me to sign the distress either adn the items arent of any where near the value needed.

 

Can someone advise me on my next steps to try to set up a payment plan

thanks

[beclee]

The only result that shows using his surname is in Birmingham and for a different employer, is this acceptable?

 

Thanks

[sgtbush]

i think the register is only updated once a year in feb, you might be better off ringing direct

[Jamberson]

I know for a fact that some bailiffs use assumed names for work. If he does, that name might show on the paperwork, but not on the official register.

[hallowitch]

go to the court and ask for a means test hearing and get the parking fine sorted at the same time as i said something not right their

 

I believe that the contract with HMCS and marstons gives marsons a 6 months grace before their employer is certificated

 

having said that if he is certificated to a different company then he should not be enforcing magistrate court fines for marstons

 

what company does the register show as his employer

[hallowitch]

contact the County Court Bulk Centre on 0845 4085302 between 10.00am and 4 pm. CCBC Northampton will search the Register for you and will be able to advise you of the county court that issued the bailiff's latest certificate

[tomtubby]

If a bailiff leaves his previous employer his bailiff bond will be CANCELLED.

 

There is also a legal requirement under section 12 of the Distress for Rent Rules that states very clearly that "if there is ANY change to the bailiff certificate" that the bailiff "must without delay" apply to the court for his certificate to be changed.

 

If a bailiff has failed to apply to the court for a new cert, questions need be be asked. For instance, a bailiff may have been sacked by his previous employer for any number of reasons and the previous employer would always write to the court to advise them why they had dismissed the bailiff.

 

Also, does the bailiff have a new bailiff bond?

[beclee]

Thanks for helping, his employer is listed as Philips Collection Services Ltd but even that licence expired in july?

 

I have phoned to get more details but they could only give me an email address for all queries so will update when i get a reply

 

Thanks

[old bill]

I know for a fact that some bailiffs use assumed names for work. If he does, that name might show on the paperwork, but not on the official register.

 

I think you should be commended for revealing what you have, Jamberson. The practice you have revealed is totally illegal. A bailiff certificate and the forms pertaining to its issue are legal documents and any false statements made on them are likely to render the bailiff liable to prosecution and any levy or distress they are involved in potentially invalid or, even, illegal.

 

Hallowitch,

 

It's sometimes quicker to send an email to [email protected] marked BAILIFF ENQUIRY than telephone.

Edited September 9, 2012 by old bill

[brassnecked]

I know for a fact that some bailiffs use assumed names for work. If he does, that name might show on the paperwork, but not on the official register

 

oldbill: I think you should be commended for revealing what you have, Jamberson. The practice you have revealed is totally illegal. A bailiff certificate and the forms pertaining to its issue are legal documents and any false statements made on them are likely to render the bailiff liable to prosecution and any levy or distress they are involved in potentially invalid or, even, illegal.

.

 

I think Jamberson is alluding to the method used in the civil service if a person's name is unusual to take a pseudonym at work, to avoid someone with a grudge tracking them down. this was/is common in DWP/HMRC where Mr or Ms Muppet-Booth, becomes, Mr or Ms Smith. Although i think it would be illegal to use the pseudonym if that person were a bailiff looking for a certificate, they would have to use their real name.

[old bill]

I think Jamberson is alluding to the method used in the civil service if a person's name is unusual to take a pseudonym at work, to avoid someone with a grudge tracking them down. this was/is common in DWP/HMRC where Mr or Ms Muppet-Booth, becomes, Mr or Ms Smith. Although i think it would be illegal to use the pseudonym if that person were a bailiff looking for a certificate, they would have to use their real name.

 

Yeah. A bailiff would have to give their real name when applying for a certificate AND to any debtor on request.

[Jamberson]

I think Jamberson is alluding to the method used in the civil service if a person's name is unusual to take a pseudonym at work, to avoid someone with a grudge tracking them down. this was/is common in DWP/HMRC where Mr or Ms Muppet-Booth, becomes, Mr or Ms Smith. Although i think it would be illegal to use the pseudonym if that person were a bailiff looking for a certificate, they would have to use their real name.

 

Exactly right. He might be named ABC and everything legal will say that - but when he shows up at your door, as far as you're concerned, he's named XYZ.

 

I don't know if it's illegal or not, but I understand it's common.

[brassnecked]

Exactly right. He might be named ABC and everything legal will say that - but when he shows up at your door, as far as you're concerned, he's named XYZ.

 

I don't know if it's illegal or not, but I understand it's common.

 

I think oldbills take on this that they MUST use their correct name on a certificate, is correct, as unless they have been through witness protection or changed name by deed poll, or whatever, they potentially commit an offence if they do not disclose their true identity. Custom and practice cannot overrule Statute.

[old bill]

Exactly right. He might be named ABC and everything legal will say that - but when he shows up at your door, as far as you're concerned, he's named XYZ.

 

I don't know if it's illegal or not, but I understand it's common.

 

Because distress is a legal procedure, everything must be in accordance with the law. If a bailiff provides false particulars to the debtor, he/she risks an invalid or illegal distress or levy. If they give false particulars to the police, they risk being arrested as the police can arrest a person if they suspect they have been given false particulars.

 

If the practice is as common as you say, Jamberson, something needs to be done to curb it - and fast.

[brassnecked]

Because distress is a legal procedure, everything must be in accordance with the law. If a bailiff provides false particulars to the debtor, he/she risks an invalid or illegal distress or levy. If they give false particulars to the police, they risk being arrested as the police can arrest a person if they suspect they have been given false particulars.

 

If the practice is as common as you say, Jamberson, something needs to be done to curb it - and fast.

 

It is almost de-rigeur in DWP and HMRC for frontline staff, and PCS union advise it as a protection for their staff. But it cannot be allowable for anything involving litigation, but I'll bet many HMRC enforcement Officers going out to issue distraint hide behind a pseudonym, so it is likely not so rare amongst certified cockroaches either.

[Jamberson]

Why must it be stopped and fast? It doesn't really make any difference, they are just protecting themselves from retribution. I don't think it's a big deal really.

[old bill]

It is almost de-rigeur in DWP and HMRC for frontline staff, and PCS union advise it as a protection for their staff. But it cannot be allowable for anything involving litigation, but I'll bet many HMRC enforcement Officers going out to issue distraint hide behind a pseudonym, so it is likely not so rare amongst certified cockroaches either.

 

Having relatives working for HMRC, the rules governing the use of pseudonyms is very strictly controlled. Don't forget that they are civil servants and civil service regulations apply. The situation may be different for agency staff. As already stated, distress is a legal procedure, so providing a false name and particulars could negate the levy and/or distress, rendering it unenforceable or even illegal.

[mellymoo74]

Why must it be stopped and fast? It doesn't really make any difference, they are just protecting themselves from retribution. I don't think it's a big deal really.

It has the nice little side effect of making it easy to use one of your few certified bailiffs names if people complain instead of the name of the uncertified person that came round

[Jamberson]

Having relatives working for HMRC, the rules governing the use of pseudonyms is very strictly controlled. Don't forget that they are civil servants and civil service regulations apply. The situation may be different for agency staff. As already stated, distress is a legal procedure, so providing a false name and particulars could negate the levy and/or distress, rendering it unenforceable or even illegal.

 

Are bailiffs civil servants? They work for private companies.

[Jamberson]

It has the nice little side effect of making it easy to use one of your few certified bailiffs names if people complain instead of the name of the uncertified person that came round

 

They can be identified internally by their "working name". Look - even if you hate bailiffs, you surely can't wish for some nutter to go and bludgeon them to death or burn their house down or something?

 

I think it's reasonable for anyone in the firing line to protect themselves that way.

[mellymoo74]

They can be identified internally by their "working name". Look - even if you hate bailiffs, you surely can't wish for some nutter to go and bludgeon them to death or burn their house down or something?

 

I think it's reasonable for anyone in the firing line to protect themselves that way.

 

I don't hate bailiffs I don't like their working practices but that is not the same thing we are supposed to be living in a society that prides itself on transparency so legal name should be used unless they have something to hide

[brassnecked]

Are bailiffs civil servants? They work for private companies.

 

Which is why they should not use pseudonyms, given the problems outsourcing of enforcement has brought to the table, allowing this is tantamount to condoning fraud and other crimes.

[old bill]

They can be identified internally by their "working name". Look - even if you hate bailiffs, you surely can't wish for some nutter to go and bludgeon them to death or burn their house down or something?

 

I think it's reasonable for anyone in the firing line to protect themselves that way.

 

I take your point, but I think you'll find the buggers are doing it to prevent a CCJ or Form 4 complaint being brought against them. Trouble is, the idiots don't seem to realise that it will backfire on them.

[Jamberson]

Which is why they should not use pseudonyms, given the problems outsourcing of enforcement has brought to the table, allowing this is tantamount to condoning fraud and other crimes.

 

That's absurd. I'm not condoning fraud. It's only so they can't be identified by agrieved debtors. They do a job which is guaranteed to generate enemies.

[old bill]

Why must it be stopped and fast? It doesn't really make any difference, they are just protecting themselves from retribution. I don't think it's a big deal really.

 

So you condone certificated bailiffs committing fraud, burglary, assault, criminal damage, theft and all the other criminal offences they are shown to commit and then not be held to account? Is that your meaning, Jamberson, or is it just you getting your colon in a kerfuffle?