Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Firstly did you send the Formal Complaint letter I mentioned in post#6 and also did you send a SAR Request??? Right whoever that was from the Housing Association that stated they can do what they want is very sadly wrong and what they had just done by attending your property and trying to change the lock without a Possession Order from the Court is classed as an ILLEGAL EVICTION as a Notice to Quit does not give the Housing Association the Power to attend you Property and try to change the locks. You need to remember if you leave that property with no possession order from the courts and try to get the council to house you as homeless you will be classed as intentionally Homeless therefore you have no right to be given temporary housing by the Council. (as mention in my post=6). You need to do two thing urgently and they are another Formal Complaint to the Housing and to contact them by phone and not ask but demand to speak to the Housing Manager as to why they tried to carryout and Illegal Eviction without a Possession Order from the Courts by trying to change the Locks to your Property.   Dear Sir/Madam FORMAL COMPLAINT Reference: ATTEMPTED ILLEGAL EVICTION WITHOUT A POSSESSION ORDER FROM THE COURTS Today 18th June 2024 at approx XXXXhrs a Housing Officer attended my Property with a Locksmith to change the locks to my property unaware that I was in the property at the time and breaking into my property all caught on my doorbell camera. When challenged by myself on this matter that the Housing Association required a Possession Order from the Courts to even think about changing the Locks to my Property your Housing Officer was obnoxious and insisted that the Notice to Quit letter gave him all the powers he required to therefore change the Locks to my Property. What the Housing Association have just tried to do is to carryout what is classed as an ILLEGAL EVICTION as you did not have a 'POSSESSION ORDER from the COURTS' and a 'Notice to Quit' Letter does not give your Housing Association Carte Blanche to carry out such action as a Notice to Quit Letter is only the start of any Housing Association process for evicting a Tenant as your Housing Association should be fully aware of. The actions of your Housing Officer were all recorded on my Mobile Phone as well so I have full evidence of the Housing Association actions in attempting an Illegal Eviction which I will also be making the Courts fully aware of when you take this to Court to get a Possession Order. The actions of the Housing Association and specifically your Housing Officer have caused untold stress due to the above and I require an urgent meeting to explain your actions due to the above which I find absolutely disgraceful by the Housing Association and also require the following: 1. Your Eviction Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 3. Copy of your Customer Care Charter (not the leaflet) 4. Copy of your Equality and Diversity Policy (not the leaflet)   
    • the same 3 question on the n180 are asked before the mediation can begin. so you then say ... despite numerous requests dating back over 1yrs the claimant nor their sols have supplied me with requested paperwork to enable me to make an informed decision upon entering into mediation. i therefore refuse. you are doing the same thing again you did last year  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/458251-linkkearns-claimform-old-barclaycard-debt-now-n244/?do=findComment&comment=5232418    
    • I'm compiling a brief list of points to state in tomorrow's mediation call.  it would seem that I have to come to an agreement of some sort. Seeing as most of the defence, lack of genuine paperwork evidence from the claimant, mild threats etc. seems to go in my favour, is it best to mediate for that agreement or to let it run to court?  Short of the 6 year rule playing out, I'm going to have to pay up somehow, so why don't I just end it tomorrow? By paying I mean, not hurling myself off a cliff.    
    • @ReuTheo Thanks very much. Coincidentally, it has now been exactly over 1 year since I sent my parcel with Evri and began my enquiries with them as to where my parcel is (and eventually coming to this forum / starting this thread). I understand how you are feeling. It's why I kept this thread active and detailed, so anyone who reads it, can clearly understand what was happening at each stage of the process, so they don't feel anxious or overwhelmed with the process through MCOL, mediation, arranging for trial, working through the WS / Court bundle, and finally going in front of a judge. The work has been put in so hopefully you (and everyone else) now has a good WS template to use and build the case. I agree the legal language and specifics are not easy to understand at first glance by layman / non-legal persons. What I found useful is reading the WS and researching some of the Acts in my own time so that I could understand the legal speak. This reading / research really helped me to have a clear idea of what the rules/laws are and how they apply to my case (and likely your case also). As you know, this is a self-help forum so you certainly got to put in the time/work to understand your case/argument. It will be worth it in the end (I say this from personal experience - given this time last year, I was banging my head against a wall with Evri and couldn't see the light at the end of the tunnel). Above all else, the team on this forum such as @BankFodder and @jk2054 are a tremendous help with getting the WS in the right state and giving guidance. Don't be afraid to ask questions on this forum - it's for your ultimate benefit (even if sometimes the responses seem harsh - don't take it personally. If my experience is anything to go by, it'll help give clarity and maybe even close a potential gap in your case). Good luck with your case.
    • Boeing's CEO defended the company and pledged that it has learned from past mistakes.View the full article
  • 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4138 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

the finer points of the law!!!!

its easy to understand both sides of the argument, but without the correct paperwork and understanding what the order entiles anyone to do then the correct outcome came,

however, all the claiment does now is go back to court, explain what happend and a judge will issue an order authorising force, so its only delayed what is the outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG!!! how refreshing to see the police actually siding against the bailiff for once. That is, the police siding on the right side of the law and instead of listening to the bailiffs claptrap law that they believe should happen.

 

Beware!!! video has lots of swearing and threatening behaviour. This is all done by the bailiffs, watch how their attitudes change when the police turn up.

 

Even after they have been told they cannot force their way in, they try it on. The fat one should have been arrested for his foul mouth and threatening behaviour.

 

How silly do those bailiffs look now, and the other guy, (lock smith) . They all sounded so professional.. NOT!

 

If I was their employer I would be looking at giving them the boot.

 

Every police force in this country should see this video, This is how to treat the bailiff when he is wrong. The police did their job well. :thumb:

Link to post
Share on other sites

the finer points of the law!!!!

its easy to understand both sides of the argument, but without the correct paperwork and understanding what the order entiles anyone to do then the correct outcome came,

however, all the claiment does now is go back to court, explain what happend and a judge will issue an order authorising force, so its only delayed what is the outcome.

 

No the claimant would not automatically get a judge to sign any documents authorising force to be used. There would have to be a hearing to find out what the issues were. The mortgage holder in default would be given the opportunity to make their case.

 

As for the legal process with documents, the bailiffs in the video should be aware of what the score is with these situations and should have walked away, as soon as they realised that they were not going to gain peaceful possession. The Police have better things to be doing than getting involved in civil situations, where the bailiffs had no powers to force entry.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

the finer points of the law!!!!

its easy to understand both sides of the argument, but without the correct paperwork and understanding what the order entiles anyone to do then the correct outcome came,

however, all the claiment does now is go back to court, explain what happend and a judge will issue an order authorising force, so its only delayed what is the outcome.

 

It basically :spit: on their bonfire though :drum:

 

I hope the video's will be shown at court to show how the bailiffs tried to thwart the law. If that guy who said he was a lock smith carried out forcing the lock, I hope he has the certificate to prove he can do that because if he didnt/dosnt then he can be charged for criminal damage and Im sure a few other misdemeanour's.

 

I would of loved to of been a fly in the car on the way back to the office. I bet you could of heard a pin drop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG!!! how refreshing to see the police actually siding against the bailiff for once. That is, the police siding on the right side of the law and instead of listening to the bailiffs claptrap law that they believe should happen.

 

Beware!!! video has lots of swearing and threatening behaviour. This is all done by the bailiffs, watch how their attitudes change when the police turn up.

 

 

 

 

Even after they have been told they cannot force their way in, they try it on. The fat one should have been arrested for his foul mouth and threatening behaviour.

 

How silly do those bailiffs look now, and the other guy, (lock smith) . They all sounded so professional.. NOT!

 

If I was their employer I would be looking at giving them the boot.

 

Every police force in this country should see this video, This is how to treat the bailiff when he is wrong. The police did their job well. :thumb:

actually the police did not side with the defendent, or the bailiffs, they just made sure the order was carried out within what the order said.

it was not the bailiffs fault, all be it they belived what they were doing was executing a court order

 

good on the defendent in doing some reserch on the warrants and pointing out to the police what excatly the order entitle the bailiffs t do

 

the police needed a conference to establish what the order actually ment

 

seems to me their is an ongoing issue on the case and its still in court, anyways thats for a judge to decide

 

 

but apart from that, all that will happen is the claiment will petertition the court for an eviction order by means of force if neccassary

Link to post
Share on other sites

No the claimant would not automatically get a judge to sign any documents authorising force to be used. There would have to be a hearing to find out what the issues were. The mortgage holder in default would be given the opportunity to make their case.

 

As for the legal process with documents, the bailiffs in the video should be aware of what the score is with these situations and should have walked away, as soon as they realised that they were not going to gain peaceful possession. The Police have better things to be doing than getting involved in civil situations, where the bailiffs had no powers to force entry.

 

We all know bailiffs love a bit of drama uncle B. They like to rile the person in the hope that they get some recompense out of it. Just look how they acted in the beginning of the video, swearing and threatening, they knew as soon as the man called the police they would be in trouble for being on the land. They just hoped the police didnt know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

actually the police did not side with the defendent, or the bailiffs, they just made sure the order was carried out within what the order said.

it was not the bailiffs fault, all be it they belived what they were doing was executing a court order

 

Of course it was the bailiffs fault. If they didnt know what they should be doing then they should not be there in the first place.

 

The bailiff was in the wrong, they knew full well they were in the wrong, they just hoped that the police would side with them because they are bailiffs and bailiffs word is law.

Unfortunate for them that they had an officer turn up who likes to have things checked before proceeding with any action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very impressed.

 

I found it quite disgraceful at the end where the tubby bailiff decided to find another entrance and the one wearing the flak Jacket !! decided he would also push his luck. Were they hoping to provoke confrontation by the police. I was so hoping the police would arrest them :lol:

 

It would be interesting to know what happened next. Did the bailiffs manage to obtain the correct paperwork - did the eviction take place at some other time ?

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very impressed.

 

I found it quite disgraceful at the end where the tubby bailiff decided to find another entrance and the one wearing the flak Jacket !! decided he would also push his luck. Were they hoping to provoke confrontation by the police. I was so hoping the police would arrest them :lol:

 

It would be interesting to know what happened next. Did the bailiffs manage to obtain the correct paperwork - did the eviction take place at some other time ?

 

Citizenb if u read under the video it gives u an update, they reattended with hceo's

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks I will pop back and read underneath.. Missed that !

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Respect to the police

 

"I do hope i get the chance to take you before a judge because i would love to accompany you to prison"

As always bailiffs relying on fear and intimidation not the first time a bailiff has come out with the prison threat,

sadly wont be the last

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

It is an interesting thought - if those guys werent bailiffs.. what would they be doing to earn a living ? Strutting around in flak jackets for heavens sake.. did he think it made him look "big or important" How can we afford flak jackets for them and not for soldiers !!

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

How bleeding obstinate were the bailiffs ! Why didnt they realize they where getting nowhere, go away regroup and sort out the paperwork. They had to have one last go by climbing over the fence. This is one job I wouldn't do regardless of the salary. If they

get sacked for their terrible behavior they can always get a job at Marstons, go straight to the top of the class , exactly the caliber of staff they are looking for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We should form local resistance groups to do exactly this at every reposession, and at as many bailiff actions as possible all round the country. Make it a nightmare to enforce, catch them on film breaking the law, and cost them a fortune.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was only County Court employed Bailiffs who carried out evictions, that is the only way they are referred too in the video also.

 

It would appear from the YT update that the bank went to the high court, who authorised action by HCEO's and the Police then did not do anything.

  • Confused 1

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me that cannot find an EX96 on the Justice web site ?

 

IIRC from the video, whilst it is a vital and important part of making the Eviction/Reposession lawful, it is not a Court Document that would be copied to the poor sod being thrown out, it is an "internal court memo" It's one of those useful "finds" we are not expected to know about it, hence it wont be on the website.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, the behaviour and attitude of the Bailiff's in this matter is appalling.

 

To clarify the position of an HCEO in these matters I would advise that the enforcement of residential repossession order can be carried out by HCEOs if the matter is transferred to the High Court under Section 42 of the County Courts Act 1984, thus obtaining a writ of possession. This often arises where the County Court Bailiff has either failed to complete the eviction or if they have quoted an unreasonable time scale (many have quoted up to 4 months). Not many cases like this are passed to the HCEO though.

 

Providing the writ is correct and valid (I'm unsure if the tenant's claim regarding the CCBs paperwork are correct in the video) then the HCEO should not fail to evict.

 

In a matter like this it would be prudent to attend with the Police who should then arrest anybody that obstructs the HCEO or causes a breach of the peace.

 

Further, the Police should not be siding with anybody, they should side with the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...