Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Bristow and Sutor **Updated, descent bailiff sorted**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4069 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

Hi all.

 

I'm posting this on behalf of a friend/neighbour. I'm afraid that the details are going to be patchy, because her paperwork isn't great and she seems to have done most of this on the phone.

 

She has two liability orders from her local council for unpaid CT. The first is for £179.00, and the second is for £560.00. At initial bailiff attendance, he took down her current circumstances (two adults, one child, both adults currently unemployed) and told her to contact B&S offices.

 

She contacted the offices and agreed to pay £104 a month (!) which would be coming out of her child benefit of £80 topped up by £24 from her JSA. This is barking, she clearly can't afford it. Unsurprisingly, the first payment, which was due beginning of last month by standing order, bounced. She hasn't contacted them by phone since then (and can't - her phone is on incoming calls only and the only number given on the paperwork is an 0871 number which she definitely can't call from a mobile or payphone) but has written to them with no response.

 

She had another bailiff visit on 29/11 while they were out. As far as I can tell from the paperwork she has, she's been charged £42.50 per visit.

 

Can someone please give me an outline of what she should do in this situation? I understand that the council won't take the debt back in order to take payment direct from her benefits due to there being two liability orders?

 

There's no levy in place, and she has no car.

 

Additionally, there's no email address on any of the paperwork, although there is an online account option - this doesn't work, when she tries to log in it just says that due to the type of debt she's not able to make an online payment arrangement.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

has the bailiffs ever been into the property?

 

Bailiff fees should by £24.50 first visit and £18.00 second visit where no levy taken place

bailiffs have lumped the two together charging multiple fees for a single visit

 

being unemployed may fall into vulnerable category

 

If bailiffs have no levy they are powerless keep them out deny any levy and not a lot they can do

 

payments direct to the council online using correct reference number do so weekly so a payment history stacks up

 

council make there own rules up there is no blood in a stone so i would pay them a little amount until things improve

Edited by i hate bailiffs

If i have helped in any way hit my star.

any advice given is based on experience and learnt from this site :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely hasn't had access to the property, 100% certain of that - that's why I know he hasn't levied.

 

Also, she's never received a 'final notice', which I always thought was required before a bailiff attends. The only thing that she's had that could be related to this is a postcard from the Royal Mail saying that they had a letter with insufficient postage and she'd have to pay £1.50 to have it released to her. This arrived after the bailiff anyway.

 

What can she do regards the 'vulnerable' situation? Is there any way she can get the Council to take the debt back based on this? She's too scared to open her door at the minute - I had to text her when I was outside last night.

 

Fees are definitely as I stated - 2 x 42.50.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok the 2 x £42.50 will be first and second visit lumped together

how many visits have bailiffs made

 

it would be worth contacting your local MP explain to them the situation of no work if the council refuse to take it back

 

keep the bailiffs out given time they will give up

If i have helped in any way hit my star.

any advice given is based on experience and learnt from this site :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They've made two visits only.

 

O.K - so, as a beginning point, do you reckon I should draft a letter for her to give to the council requesting that they take the account back, then if that's a 'no' tell her to go down the MP route?

 

If they don't give up soon, she really will be vulnerable in the mental health sense of the word vulnerable. The atmosphere in that house was horrible last night. She won't even open the curtains.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

write to the council and copy in MP will be a good start

 

Any and all payments from now direct to council

Keep bailiffs out deny any levy and they will hand it back to the council given time

  • Confused 1

If i have helped in any way hit my star.

any advice given is based on experience and learnt from this site :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Email for B&S is [email protected]

 

As start she should get the exact figures from the Council. 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

 

There is no law that says she has to speak to or deal with a Bailiff, and as said above definitely do not allow him entry. Have you checked the Bailiff Register to see if he is suitably Cerificated http://certificatedbailiffs.justice.gov.uk/CertificatedBailiffs/ . To claim vulnerability they should write to both Bailiffs & Council outlining their claim & provide proof of same. One other person who should be able to help is the local Councillor(s) who in my view are available 7 days per week up until 9pm, if met by reluctance or refusal go straight to the Leader of the Council & his opposite number.

  • Confused 1

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They may make regular payments direct to the Council in the meantime via online banking, Council website or automated phone. Cash payments may also be made at the Council offices and if met by refusal for this the name & position of the person refusing should be politely requested, this will then form the basis of a Formal Complaint to the Council. Paying in any of these manners shows a willingness to pay and quickly builds a payment history, therefore defeating the Council should they decide to take matters further,

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, thank you for all of this. PlodderTom, I'll send her a Facebook message in a minute asking her to call the council in the morning so I can answer your questions.

 

Just out of curiosity, would it be out of the question for her to ask for an attachment order for the £3.55 (or whatever it is) to come directly out of her benefits?

 

From what she said to me, she's just paying the people who shout the loudest first at the minute, and I'm a bit concerned that she won't keep to a payment plan if she's left to her own devices.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, would it be out of the question for her to ask for an attachment order for the £3.55 (or whatever it is) to come directly out of her benefits?

 

 

That will rely on 2 things:

1 - the Council taking the debt back because of "vulnerability"

2 - they have a Benefit that this can be taken from - not too up on Benefits so don't more

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a shame. Being on benefits doesn't make you automatically vulnerable, does it?

 

There's really a lot of things she needs to sort out before she even looks at paying back more than the bare minimum - she's not even getting tax credits at the minute, so I don't know how she's managing at all. I'm in the exact same situation as her (minus the CT problems), and I couldn't live without tax credits. She is sorting that out now, but I don't see it being resolved before Christmas.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're claiming everything that they are entitled to bar the Tax Credits, which has been a bit of a cock up but to her credit she is sorting that out now.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Quick update on this thread, because I have an ear infection and being upright doesn't agree with me at the minute.

 

I happened to be at this neighbour's house when a B&S Bailiff attended today. I'm shocked to say this, but he was genuinely very decent. He took one look at her account and said that her payments were set at a ridiculously high level, and went on to say 'I'm not even leaving you a letter - it would just rack up more charges and that's not getting you anywhere. I'm going to send your account back to the council, and you can come to a sensible arrangement with them rather than having to worry about us knocking on your door all the time', wished her luck and told her not to worry too much as there are people with far higher arrears than her!

 

So there you go, that's the Annual Decent Bailiff Story. Normal service can now resume. :)

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update on this thread, because I have an ear infection and being upright doesn't agree with me at the minute.

 

I happened to be at this neighbour's house when a B&S Bailiff attended today. I'm shocked to say this, but he was genuinely very decent. He took one look at her account and said that her payments were set at a ridiculously high level, and went on to say 'I'm not even leaving you a letter - it would just rack up more charges and that's not getting you anywhere. I'm going to send your account back to the council, and you can come to a sensible arrangement with them rather than having to worry about us knocking on your door all the time', wished her luck and told her not to worry too much as there are people with far higher arrears than her!

 

So there you go, that's the Annual Decent Bailiff Story. Normal service can now resume. :)

 

:faint:

 

A bailiff that does the right thing, Im impressed, Way to go mr Bailiff. Its a pity we dont hear more stories like this :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are the first to kick off and fire rockets when they get it wrong, so hats off and well done that bailiff. praise where praise is due. now a few more like him, and things may just get better.

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

Thanks Seanamarts. I shall be back with bells on if there's any mischief, but I think it's down to her sorting herself out and making sure she keeps up with any arrangement she makes.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to know how much she's clocked up in fees between me posting here and that particular bailiff turning up, though. She said he wasn't the usual Bailiff, which tells me that she's had a few visits before now.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesnt matter how many visits. They can only charge for 2.

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

If the account is passed back to the Council then all the Bailiff fees will be wiped. There is a danger however that once back at the B&S office it could be given to someone else who might not be quite so forgiving. Did you ever get an answer to the questions posed in Post 7?

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...