Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • is the side street solely for access to your garages? who owns the land and thus the road? dx  
    • A local business has been parking on an off-street parking space in front of my garages (in a side street).  I wasn't using them for a while so didnt bother to do anything.  But now a second local business is also using the osp - taking it in turns with the 1st biz.  This has started to nark me.    The employees choose to drive to work.  There is no private parking in their business's street.  But there are some underground secure garages in their street - which cost apx £2.4k/y to rent - which works out apx £6.60/d. (I believe one of the biz owners already rent one for storage purposes).  If the employee had to park on a meter it would cost them £6.60/h - £66 for 10h and have to move every 4h.  They just don't want to pay for parking. I haven't confronted either of them.  Instead I just put 2 clear "no parking" signs in front of the garages. And a note on one of the cars specifically saying that as they don't live or rent in the street and it's private land could they stop parking.   They ignored that.  And just put notes on their dash with a # to call if one needs the car moved.  There is a sign and they've been told in writing to stop parking. And they are just ignoring it.    I don't what a confrontation.    I don't want to go to the expense of bollards (other than maybe traffic plastic ones - but they'll probs just move them).  Council won't do zilch cos it's private land. And police won't get involved - unless I clamp/ tow the cars and then they'd be after me, not the drivers!    What's the best thing to do?
    • yes might be the best idea. you'd only at best get 8% flat interest and that unusual on a GOGW if this was what it was. simply contact the FOS and let them know its resolved. dx  
    • If you’ve ever wondered how you might fare in armed combat, the first 20 minutes of Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan is likely to make you thank your lucky stars you were born too late to storm the Normandy beaches on June 6 1944. I suspect many of us might be driven to identify with those men who were absolutely turned to stone by fear. And yet these young men, mainly conscripts, screwed their courage to the sticking point and did the job the fate had chosen for them, heroes all.   .. UK PM Sunak perhaps thinks he understands mind numbing fear better than many as he dishonorably fled the beachhead to do nothing more than double down on dishonest spin and lies from the safety of a UK studio .. The Normandy heroes who not only held their positions, but advanced through hell to a victory that changed the entire course of history .. undoubtedly hold a different perspective.     from a perspective in TheConversation     .. 'That was the slot that sunaks team offered for the interview
    • Yes, send a message to the purchaser but keep it very friendly and simply that you noticed that the package has now been delivered.  I suggest that you ask them if they want to keep the package still or if they would rather return it and that if they want to keep it then please will they return your payment to you to your PayPal address. Keep it as polite and friendly as possible and then we will decide what to do if he doesn't reply or refuses.  Meanwhile I will have a look at Google earth and see if you are able to spot the gas meter outside the house to get an idea if the delivery is real. Get a screenshot
  • 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

Rundle Bailiffs excessive on Council tax. Someone please help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4048 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 asked the council in several emails and letters for the original bills and liability orders. I am quite at a loss as to what to do, as they keep ignoring all letters. I don't know if the new letter, which isn't an enquiry but appeal will make a difference. Any advice in to forcing them to handing over the information?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Have you spoken to your local Councillor?

He/ she is there to represent you in your dealings with the Council, and will want your vote at the next election.

Some Councillors are a waste of space but most take their reponsibilities very seriuously.

 

Martin g

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi, I am back so it has been like 8 days since I have sent a letter both to council and bailiffs asking for a refund.... But no response. I don't know what to do now. Do I wait a couple more days because it's still good as Christmas period?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I am back so it has been like 8 days since I have sent a letter both to council and bailiffs asking for a refund.... But no response. I don't know what to do now. Do I wait a couple more days because it's still good as Christmas period?

I would give them until Tuesday, then chase it up

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

Ok, latest news.

Some good news, from the original bill after being threatened with the valuation tribunal,

the council looked again at it.

 

They reduced the bill because of evidence that my mother wasn't living there in 2006 and also applied the single persons discount. They refunded back £278.

 

The bad news is, the bailiffs haven't responded back to the appeal for the excessive charges, which was sent on 28th December.

 

The question is what do I do now that the bailiffs haven't replied back with a refund?

 

One of the liability order which they originally said was for 2009, applies to 2006-2007, even though it was only for a £27.50,

the bailiff charges were £ 177,

according to the council she has been cleared for owing anything on this debt.

 

Does the new information change anything with the bailiff?

 

On the other liability order for £488, they did reduction, so I guess bailiff charges still stand but was still over charged grossly.

 

If anyone has been following this thread, thank for for your help. I am going to keep fight for my mother, but I still need your help and I am whole heartedly grateful!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bailiffs have replied and said they can charge me twice for two different liability order on the same day, they are saying that Lewisham council has said it's legal for them to do that? Is there any law to back this up?????

 

Just as you said, that idiot bailiff picked a random car and put a levy on a random car, lucky enough in the appeal letter I explain my mother doesn't have a car, nor driving licence. They say they are doing a dvla search.

 

It looks like they are doing everything thing in their power to pay as little back!

 

The council sent a reductions letter giving my mother an exemption on council tax from Oct 2005 and onwards.... Does this mean the liability order taken out in 2006/2007 is now invalid and could use that to claim back any charges on the second liability dated 2006/2007 order, the bailiffs are are trying to put excessive charges on?

 

I have put an attachment of first the Council tax appeal reduction letter and The Bailiff reply to my appeal letter.

 

Totally clueless. Once again, thanks in advance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me like the usual twaddle the Councils produce. Does this mean your accounts are now clear and actually in credit?

 

As for Rundle's saying they have agreed with the Council to charge multiple fees then you should make a formal complaint about this to the Council in particular reminding them of the various LGO Reports that say otherwise. Have a look here for them http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?374293-Local-Government-Ombudsman-Report-on-Councils-and-Bailiffs

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That reply on headed Bumbles & Co paper is prima facie an own goal, as they have admitted in writing overcharging and misrepresenting the position, as per PT formal Complaint quoting the relevant LGO cases within should do it. Remember to copy it to CEO, Leader and MP.

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

That reply on headed Bumbles & Co paper is prima facie an own goal, as they have admitted in writing overcharging and misrepresenting the position, as per PT formal Complaint quoting the relevant LGO cases within should do it. Remember to copy it to CEO, Leader and MP.

 

In theory their reply is correct, it is the LGO that has ruled this to be unfair/oppressive on several occasions now.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In theory their reply is correct, it is the LGO that has ruled this to be unfair/oppressive on several occasions now.

Thanks PT, you are of course quite correct but the cases are persuasive as to it not being equitable to apply charges in this manner, as caselaw would indicate it is wrong as per Throssel V Leeds CC, and the LGO Blaby Council report

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 for replies Ladies and Gents, greatly appreciated!

 

Hmmm, so by the sounds of it the council will agree with the bailiffs and the only way for me to try and get the money back is by complaining to someone like a financial ombudsman e.t.c

 

Yes, she is in credit with the council and as I said was cleared of most of the debt she was given the liability order by.

 

I will check that other thread out. I am getting the feeling this is going to get complicated. But I will write to the council again and mention that they cleared me of the debt they are double charging me for?

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to remember is that in a majority of Councils none of the "officials" have any idea at all how these things work. Instead they rely on their whiter than white Bailiffs to answer the questions for them - after all they are the experts - aren't they?

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Woofy I don't know if you have read it but here is the LGO report on Blaby Council -http://www.lgo.org.uk/news/2012/jul/blaby-council-criticised-bailiff-charges/

 

The Report stated that though legally bailiffs had been able to charge 3 separate visit fees if they had 3 separate L/Os, if they were all delivered on the same visit then that was

felt to be unfair and the practice had to be stopped forthwith and only one charge made.

As the Council should know that already [and for sure the bailiffs know!] you could write and ask the Council if a ruling by the LGO on Blaby Council had any effect on the way that

bailiffs carried out their work for Lewisham Council?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

it has been a few months and still fighting to get my money back from Rundles.

 

i sent a letter to appeal against their charges and they sent a letter back saying the levy is under investigation with the DVLA.

 

They sent a letter back saying that it was negative and the charges have been removed and it is now paid in full.

 

I asked when they were going to pay back the levy charges we paid to them and additional charges.

 

Their response on the phone was the account was paid in full and charges have been removed?????

 

So they don't owe use anything....

 

What the hell does that mean.

 

... I already paid these charges and now i want my money back because I paid for them.

 

They said we have to send a letter to tell them we aren't happy?????

 

I have already sent a letter to appeal against the charges...

 

. Their response was in my favour.

 

it's like they found in our favour digitally and the case is closed.

 

 

Can someone please give me advice.

 

I have already contact the council

 

they sent a letter finding in the bailiffs favour,

 

this was before the dvla search came back negative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...