Rundle Bailiffs excessive on Council tax. Someone please help

[woofy85]

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?

[martin g]

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

[woofy85]

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?

[brassnecked]

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

[woofy85]

Thanks Brassnecked!

[woofy85]

Edit

Edited January 9, 2013 by woofy85

[woofy85]

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!

[ploddertom]

As the Council are ultimately responsible for their Bailiffs you now ask them to provide all the details of the charges.

[woofy85]

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!

[ploddertom]

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

[brassnecked]

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.

[ploddertom]

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.

[brassnecked]

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

[woofy85]

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?

[ploddertom]

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?

[lookinforinfo]

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?

[woofy85]

Lookinforinfo, I will contact them using that as a reference, thanks.

[woofy85]

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.