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

[nutter192]

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?

[dx100uk]

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

[nutter192]

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.

[ploddertom]

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

[nutter192]

okay will give them a call now.

[ploddertom]

To claim vulnerability you need to to write to both Bailiffs & Council and enclosing proof of same.

[ploddertom]

When is the "next" visit due?

[nutter192]

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.

[ploddertom]

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"

[nutter192]

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.

[nutter192]

I did not sign the walking possession agreement, it was already filled out.

[ploddertom]

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

[Andy01424]

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

[Andy01424]

will add we paid it Direct to HBC

[nutter192]

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.

[nutter192]

Same, I paid it direct to HBC didnt want to know. accepted the money, but would'nt accept the arrangement officially.

[renegadeimp]

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

[ploddertom]

Does your mum get DLA?

[nutter192]

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.

[Andy01424]

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

[Andy01424]

will add soon as you have paid this amount outstanding [not inc baliff fees] phone HBC ,they have to call Rossendales off as the amount is no longer outstanding to HBC

[ploddertom]

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.

[tomtubby]

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.

[Andy01424]

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 ?

[Andy01424]

ok have an insider lol Nutter have you got any other deductions on your benefits also is the CT bill for both of you ie you both live and are claiming same address