Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • nope. shows you've not been reading up. dx  
    • Done! Thanks again. Will update the thread accordingly.
    • Thank you for your message.  I'm concerned that by complaining to the IPC, and escalating the situation, PCM would be even more inclined to cause problems for me and take action to the fullest extent just to make an example of me.  I can still take the above action as a backup plan if PCM decides to go ahead.
    • Mr BankFodder you are a top man. I just received email below and finally they accepted fully refund Good Afternoon, Thank you for your recent email. We are sorry to hear of your recent troubles, we would be happy to accept rejection of the vehicle. The amount of the refund to yourself will be £7,099, this alongside settlement of the finance agreement will be paid in full and final settlement.  By accepting this refund you are confirming that no further claims shall be brought against Big Motoring World or any of its associates in respect of this matter. In order to proceed with the refund we require the following from yourself: - Your bank details (Account holders name – this must match the invoice name, sort code and account number) The bank details can be provided via email. The refund will be processed within 14 days.  
    • How do I transfer my number plate V750? Transfer by post Check the expiry date on your V750 or V778 to make sure it is still valid. Ensure that the registered keeper for the receiving vehicle matches the Grantee or Nominee name on the certificate. Complete relevant sections of your V750 or V778 document and sign it where instructed. https://www.gov.uk/personalised-vehicle-registration-numbers/renew-private-number-certificate  
  • 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

CTAX - police tell me to pay rossers +£300 - we are vunerable & already paying council- HELP


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4250 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

I have just had an a bailiff from Rossendales round who wanted to seize a vehicle on my drive.

The vehicle is a 11 year old vauxhall Astra with body damage, no tax and SORN'd. Maybe worth about 200 quid if lucky.

 

The Notice of Distress merely describes the car and puts the fees as:

 

Client debt and costs outstanding: 415.31

Walking Possession: 38.00

Other: 130.00

 

I called the police as I did not feel safe and they suggested paying the bailiff £300.00 which I did and he wants the balance on Friday.

 

He also wants to make an arrangement for £100.00 a month after.

 

I have already been paying £100.00 a month directly to the Council who whilst did not confirm the arragngement but accepted the money each month.

 

This was on top of the regular payment which is made on time.

 

The bailiff said that he would charge £70.00 for a further 20 mins waiting told him that was rubbish.

 

Cops came along and sided with the bailiff,

the police had no idea on bailiff law and I quoted national standards on vulnerability because I am unemployed and my mum is disabled.

 

He just said that if I did not pay the council tax to the bailiff then I would go to prison for three months.

 

I knew he was talking rubbish because I have been paying it, but did not want to aggravate the situation further.

 

I rang the council who said that I had to pay the bailiffs and told them I was unemployed and mum was disabled,

they refused to recall the balances from rossendales and insist I have to pay them.

 

Questions are do I have to pay the fees that the bailiff has charged?

 

What legislation can I use against the council to force them to take the balance back from them?

 

Should I complain about the police who attended as they did not remain impartial, they said they were there to prevent a breach of the peace?

If there are spelling mistakes on my posts, I blame the gremlins tapping my keys. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

what!!

 

the police are very wrong here.

 

how many visits has rossers made.?

 

they cant have a walkin if they've never been inside!!

 

they cant seize vehicles on the first visit

no levy docs either

 

and £130 'other fee' ... urm...

 

and if yo mum is registered disabled

 

your family IS vunerable!!

 

shold NEVER have gone to the bailiffs

 

 

certainly complain to the CEO.

 

which council is this?

 

Department for Constitutional Affairs - Enforcement - National Standards for Enforcement Agents

.

Vulnerable situations

Enforcement agents/agencies and creditors must recognise that they each have a role in ensuring that the vulnerable and socially excluded are protected and that the recovery process includes procedures agreed between the agent/agency and creditor about how such situations should be dealt with. The appropriate use of discretion is essential in every case and no amount of guidance could cover every situation, therefore the agent has a duty to contact the creditor and report the circumstances in situations where there is evidence of a potential cause for concern. If necessary, the enforcement agent will advise the creditor if further action is appropriate. The exercise of appropriate discretion is needed, not only to protect the debtor, but also the enforcement agent who should avoid taking action which could lead to accusations of inappropriate behaviour.

Enforcement agents must withdraw from domestic premises if the only person present is, or appears to be, under the age of 18; they can ask when the debtor will be home - if appropriate.

Enforcement agents must withdraw without making enquiries if the only persons present are children who appear to be under the age of 12.

Wherever possible, enforcement agents should have arrangements in place for rapidly accessing translation services when these are needed, and provide on request information in large print or in Braille for debtors with impaired sight.

Those who might be potentially vulnerable include:

'

the elderly;

'

people with a disability;

'

the seriously ill;

'

the recently bereaved;

'

single parent families;

'

pregnant women;

'

unemployed people; and,

'

those who have obvious difficulty in understanding, speaking or reading English.

 

this applies to the whole HOUSEHOLD 'a' vunerable person resides there.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They dropped some Final Notice documents round on the 18.9.12, I had been paying monthly so ignored it as I felt they were trying to boost their fees. Today's visit was their second.

 

Its Hastings Council that are dealing with this. I am going to write a complaint letter to them now as above thanks DX.

If there are spelling mistakes on my posts, I blame the gremlins tapping my keys. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to speak to someone at the Council and ask the following questions:

1 - how many Liability Orders they have against you

2 - the dates they were obtained

3 - the addresses they were for

4 - the period of time each covers

5 - how much each one was for

6 - how much is still outstanding

7 - the dates they were passed on for enforcement

8 - the dates & amounts of any payments

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as I know there was no more visits due as Rossendales are going to accept £100.00 a month paid to them instead of the council. Silly way of doing things really.

If there are spelling mistakes on my posts, I blame the gremlins tapping my keys. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case you should send off for a breakdown of the charges they are claiming to be made, the ones you have listed so far are incorrect. Did you sign his Walking Possession Agreement? Here's an idea of what to send them, use & adapt as you see fit & send initially by email backed up by a copy in the post.

 

"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 breakdown 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 Certificated at.

e - the date of the Certification.

 

This is not a Subject Access Request 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"

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right I have the details of three liability orders

 

1st one

 

Date obtained: 01/06/2009

Address: previous address

Period of time: 2009-2010

Orignally: 1573.75

Outstanding: 415.31

Date of enforcement: 8/06/2009

 

2nd

 

Date obtained: 09/03/2011

Address: previous address

Period of time: 2010-2011

Orignally: 1005.00

Outstanding: 1005.00

Date of enforcement: 16/03/2011

 

Third:

 

Date obtained: 07/07/2012

Address: current address

Period of time: 2011-2012

Orignally: 686.30

Outstanding: 415.31

Date of enforcement: 14/07/2012

 

The payment of £300.00 has been paid against the balance of £415.31 although the bailiff has added fees making it 583.31 in total meaning that he is overcharging me.

If there are spelling mistakes on my posts, I blame the gremlins tapping my keys. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as you have 3 Liability Orders it is all the more important to get the breakdown from the Bailiffs. You have time to send that this afternoon and a copy into the post no later than tomorrow.

 

Going to your car, if you follow my meaning I assume it does have 4 punctures. If he was to com back I'd invite him to remove it. In other words the levy isn't really worth the paper it is written on as the vehicle would be lucky to reach £50 at auction. Therefore I feel there is lots of room to argue the levy given he probably only did it to appear:

a - big in the front of the boys in blue

b - to gain a financial advantage for himself and his company

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi we had same problem ,on ours it was because a few times due to financial probs we paid late[ upto 2 weeks from 1st of the month], and it went to Court and passed to Rossendales,what we did was just keep on paying the amount via billpay website,the correct amount per month for our CT,never heard a thing after that even from Rossendales,mind you d they did try it for a bout 4 months say we still owed variable amoints which were all incorrect,HBC after it was cleared removed the £100 Court fee as our CT was paid still within the time scale........

 

what really bugs me is the fact is we were not ,not going to pay just had a bit of finanical trouble,yet as you get 2 warnings they want full amount in one hit,so as said we just kept paying it as pernorm and stuff Rossendales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Request for information sent to Rossendales by email to named person, will get a hard copy in the post by tommorrow.

 

If the liability orders are taken back by the council, do I have to pay any bailiff fees?

 

Also, what evidence would be suitable to show vulnerability? I can send copy confirmation of JSA acceptance and current signing on slip. For my Mum, would I have to get a letter from the doctor or hospital? she is on steroids daily for the condition.

If there are spelling mistakes on my posts, I blame the gremlins tapping my keys. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get in touch with the council and ignore the scummy bailiffs.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

She doesnt get DLA, she's been signed off work since March as shes got Addisons disease which is a disability apparently. Spoke to council on phone said that vulnerability under National Standards was at their discretion didnt want to know really.

If there are spelling mistakes on my posts, I blame the gremlins tapping my keys. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the car is not worth keeping get it scrapped,just keep paying HBC on time and ignore Rossendales just open the door an see who it is and close it agin and walk off they cannot force entry,you will get threats of "prison etc" ignore it ,there is a piece here where you can contest the FEE's they are charging ,but you will hav eto go to Court on that one,you should have paid the £300 direct to HBC,there online payment on Bill pay accepts it....theres a piece on here sry cannot do links that explains it

Link to post
Share on other sites

She doesnt get DLA, she's been signed off work since March as shes got Addisons disease which is a disability apparently. Spoke to council on phone said that vulnerability under National Standards was at their discretion didnt want to know really.

 

So you have some little jobsworth twerp at the Council who thinks JSA & Addisons does not put a household in the vulnerable category. Time to go over their head and go to your local Councillor(s) - if possible show them this site - if they are reluctant or refuse then go straight to the Leader of the Council and his opposite number. Councillors are best contacted by phone and should be available 7 days per week up until 9pm.

 

Do you claim Housing/Council Tax benefit?

 

Seems you have an ally in Andy01424, may be a 2 pronged attack on the Council may work.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is yet another example where it is so important to ensure that you obtain a FULL AND DETAILED breakdown of the fees charged by Rossendales. This must include the date and amount of every fee charged and which account the fee related to.

 

You need to request details of any levy that had been made and the date and account number that any levy related to.

 

What you are trying to establish by asking these questions is whether "multiple fees" have been charged to your accounts.

 

Many people on here will be aware that Rossendales were the subject of a very critical report recently from the Local Government Ombudsman in the case of Blaby District Council.

 

The fees charged yesterday is of concern because the bailiff has charged you an "attending to remove" fee. Firstly, such a fee should only be charged AFTER a valid levy had been made upon goods and NOT at the same time.

 

Secondly.....and this is important....the "intention" to "remove goods" MUST BE REAL. Therefore, the bailiff should have arrived with the INTENTION of removing the car. I would doubt very much that this was the case !!!!

 

This is a complaint that needs to go to the council asap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is why i hate way Baliffs work plodderton lol , as it has been put Recovery Work big money making business,basic thriving off misery,now was thinking as your unemployed and your mum does not work,should they not be asking for a deduction from your benefits as your unemployed,as you have a acessable income? think its a massive £5 a week max, so was you working when you got these arrears or claiming ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...