Marston assaulted me as i tried to remove her from premesis. i got arrested & cautioned!

[brassnecked]

Just picked up on this thread and wanted to ask a silly question!

 

OP stated they had moved 2 years ago, yet the offence was committed 4 years ago! Would the 'bailiff' neeed a warrant and what address would be on that warrant?

 

Or am I talking rubbish??

 

It looks like Marstons did a faulty trace, and added 1 +1 to get 5, debtor has never lived at the house, and at time of fine were estranged from son who incurred the fine.

best ask OP whether warrant had his address, as It is reasonable to assume Marstons data cleansed the warrant.

 

Whatever the whys and wherefores, Marstons will come out of this one looking a little bad, it will do them a power of no good in the long run.

[old bill]

It may depend on what is meant by escorting a bailiff and forcibly removing a bailiff. If she has no injuries and did not seek medical attention then it may be difficult for the charge to stick if its down to the OPs word against the bailiff. For the OP to be charged there must have been compelling evidence but its hard to make accurate comment without seeing the evidence the prosecutor intends to rely on.

 

It does make me wonder if she actually sustained the alleged injuries struggling and lashing out at the OP. If this is, indeed, the case, she and Marston Group are going to be in serious trouble. Also, she needs a medical report proving, beyond all reasonable doubt, that her alleged injuries are consistent with being assaulted. If not, the case is likely to collapse. The other thing that could happen is the CPS could offer no evidence or withdraw the case altogether.

[old bill]

It looks like Marstons did a faulty trace, and added 1 +1 to get 5, debtor has never lived at the house, and at time of fine were estranged from son who incurred the fine.

best ask OP whether warrant had his address, as It is reasonable to assume Marstons data cleansed the warrant.

 

Whatever the whys and wherefores, Marstons will come out of this one looking a little bad, it will do them a power of no good in the long run.

 

If Marston Group data-cleansed the warrant, they are in serious and I mean serious trouble. Certificated bailiff companies are known for data cleansing distress warrants issued by local authorities, but data cleansing warrants issued by HMCTS is an absolute no-no.

[Andy01424]

hi all thought best keep you all updated,

 

have seen the solictor,

he was not to impressed,

also is not happy that the ploice or CPS have not sent the photos or the tape recording of interview and seem to be stalling,

 

also he will know at a later date theres a possibilty that the case is being pushed back as in his words"not serious enough" lol

 

,fun thing about all this 3 days later Marstons got sons correct address and wrote to him

[they didnt get address from me]

 

incident happened on Friday he got letter Tuesday morning.

 

well events turned out to day had a call he has baliffs attending,

 

so went round there surprise 4 police officers as well as baliffs,

so guessing they actually looked at his background,

 

well that turned out eventful,

after he calmed down i spoke to him and said basic let them in

they have a warrant for entry

[these were Court Baliffs] s

 

ave the hassle of lock smiths etc,

 

well after he calmed down he talked to one of the officers and agreed,

 

well the baliffs went in ,

walked round and walked straight back out and told him it would be going back to Court as insufficent goods to levy..

 

..also talking to Solicitor were going for charges against the Martson Baliff for assault,

 

dependant on out come of case of course i would imagine,

 

i have passed this site onto a lot of people who i have met not just for baliff troubles,

 

its a great site for information and help,also my solicitor wanted it to lol once again great site and great people who have taken time to help others freely with advice:whoo:

[brassnecked]

hi all thought best keep you all updated,have seen the solictor,he was not to impressed,also is not happy that the ploice or CPS have not sent the photos or the tape recording of interview and seem to be stalling,also he will know at a laterdate theres a possibilty that the case is being pushed back as in his words"not serious enough" lol,fun thing about all this 3 days later Marstons got sons correct address and wrote to him[they didnt get address from me]incident happened on Friday he got letter Tuesday morning.well events turned out to day had a call he has baliffs attending,so went round there surprise 4 police officers as well as baliffs,so guessing they actually looked at his background,well that turned out eventful,after he calmed down i spoke to him and said basic let them in they have a warrant for entry[these were Court Baliffs] save the hassle of lock smiths etc,well after he calmed down he talked to one of the officers and agreed,well the baliffs went in ,walked round and walked straight back out and told him it would be going back to Court as insufficent goods to levy....also talking to Solicitor were going for charges against the Martson Baliff for assault,dependant on out come of case of course i would imagine,i have passed this site onto a lot of people who i have met not just for baliff troubles,its a great site for information and help,also my solicitor wanted it to lol once again great site and great people who have taken time to help others freely with advice:whoo:

 

Thanks for the update, I have a feeling charges against you will be quietly dropped, as the press would have a field day with marstons, and as they are "High Profile Enforcers" for HMCS and some councils, they won't want dirty washing aired in public.

 

As to the caution, glad you refused as these can cause issues if you need an enhanced CRB, and are handed out like confetti by coppers.

[old bill]

I have a feeling this case will be marked NFA (No Further Action). I would be very surprised, indeed, if CPS decided to proceed. I cannot see why you are being prevented from laying charges against the Marston bailiff at this stage. I know of nothing, in law, which prevents you from doing so. Ask your solicitor to look into this.

[tomtubby]

As the warrant is now to be returned back to the court it is vitally important that contact is made with the court some time towards the end of next week to make a payment arrangement. Bailiff fees of £300 will also be removed.

 

Depending on your circumstances, you can request a Means Hearing

[old bill]

Update on offence of Perverting the Course of Justice

 

I have checked this against CPS Legal Guidance and find that a case does not have to proceed to court in order for the offence to be committed. Having someone arrested on a false pretence is sufficient. It would appear arrest is part of the judicial process.

 

Certificated bailiffs trolling, sorry, trawling this thread, note well and inwardly digest. It is NOT clever or advisable to make false reports to the police. Not only do you risk arrest and possible prosecution, at the very least you risk having your certificate discharged (cancelled) without a hearing. This has happened to a certificated bailiff in the last 12 months.

[Toque]

The baliff warrant is in our sons name who has NEVER lived here he is 30 ...

Marstons have probably made a false declaration to the court.

 

i shall be reporting her to the police for assault [ apparently i cannot do this untill i have been to Court and it been dealt with]

Yes you can.

 

You also have good grounds for making a complaint to the Police that the Marstons person is guilty of Perverting the Course of Justice.

 

i refused a Caution....

Trying to push you into accepting a caution (ie admitting guilt), is disgraceful. You did the right thing in refusing to accept it.

 

Make it clear to both the Police and to Marstons that you will continue to insist on it going to trial and that their person will be required to attend and will be put in the box. That should dim their enthusiasm a bit.

[brassnecked]

Toque, I think the police and CPS will quietly drop this one, and Marston's whose bailiff is prima facie guilty of a number of offences around this debacle will keep schtum, to avoid an unwanted police investigation. I think that this bailiff may have previous for the cry wolf tactic to deflect victimhood from a wronged debtor to themselves.

 

Oldbill has been very active in this one.

[unclebulgaria67]

I am not sure that this will be dropped, as we are talking about a man physically forcing a women bailiff from the front of their property. If there is evidence about this particular bailiff and/or the event that took place, that damages their case perhaps it may be different. Depends on what the CPS have been told, as to whether it goes forward. The OP and their solicitor need to know the basis of any case against them, so they can take any action required.

 

Cynical me thinks that bailiffs acting to collect fines are seen a part of the system, so will receive any help they can from the Police/CPS/Courts etc. Think it will be vital for the OP to have independent witness evidence that he acted reasonably and it was the bailiff who was in the wrong.

[brassnecked]

I am not sure that this will be dropped, as we are talking about a man physically forcing a women bailiff from the front of their property. If there is evidence about this particular bailiff and/or the event that took place, that damages their case perhaps it may be different. Depends on what the CPS have been told, as to whether it goes forward. The OP and their solicitor need to know the basis of any case against them, so they can take any action required.

 

Cynical me thinks that bailiffs acting to collect fines are seen a part of the system, so will receive any help they can from the Police/CPS/Courts etc. ( My thoughts also , as police are woefully unaware how limited bailiff powers actually are) Think it will be vital for the OP to have independent witness evidence that he acted reasonably and it was the bailiff who was in the wrong.

 

BN

[old bill]

Toque, I think the police and CPS will quietly drop this one, and Marston's whose bailiff is prima facie guilty of a number of offences around this debacle will keep schtum, to avoid an unwanted police investigation. I think that this bailiff may have previous for the cry wolf tactic to deflect victimhood from a wronged debtor to themselves.

 

Oldbill has been very active in this one.

 

Absolutely, BN. I am currently dealing with a case on another site where Marstons were told by an HMCTS Enforcement Team to cease ALL enforcement due to the debtor being seriously-ill. Marston more or less told HMCTS to stick their instruction where the sun don't shine and carried on regardless, even lying to the police that the debtor had stolen their own car, which resulted in the debtor being arrested and the bailiff extorting over £400, to which, it appears, Marston is not entitled, from another member of the debtor's family. It is now emerging the bailiff is not registered. He is the third Marston bailiff I have come across that is not certificated. Yesterday, I received emails from HMCTS Certificated Bailiff Register confirming two were not registered. Anyone wishing to see these emails, please PM me your email address and I will forward them to you.

 

The case this thread deals with and the case outlined in this post are just two examples of reasons why Marston Group should be stripped of its HMCTS contract with immediate effect and an embargo placed on it tendering for all and any public debt contracts.

 

Reporting bailiff companies to OFT Credit Fitness Team must be stepped up. Thanks to an amendment to the CCA that came into force in 2006, OFT can fine licence holders up to £50,000 or revoke their licences for breaches.