Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3980 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 I would be grateful of anyones advice on this as I am now completely confused and dont know what to do for the best.

 

ok this relates to council tax over a period of years due to an apparent overpayment of benefit...their mistake:-x

2006/2007 - £352.21

2007/2008 - £679.75

2008/2009 - £723.57

2009/2010 - £833.79

 

ok..so i had received a letter from the council/court saying they would be doing an attachment to my earnings to recover the monies owing starting from 2006 this began in Sept 2010.

 

Now in June 2011 I was surprised to get a letter through my door from a bailiff for non payment of council tax...they called twice charging £24.50 for each letter

I contacted the council as wanted to know why this was the case. They told me my attachment of earnings was only for 2006/07 but that would continue on to the next years once that was paid but the bailiff was coming for the 2009/2010! I asked them just to keep the attachment of earnings going to pay all of them once each was paid off as there was no way being a single mother could I afford to do both. They said nothing they could do as it was already with the bailiff. The bailiff called again at my house at the end of july 2011 and clamped my car telling me unless i paid in full he was taking it. I didnt have the money..he gave me 1 hour to come up with £600...thanks to family I raised it. he then told me I would have to pay £70 per month..I told him I didnt have that but he said not his problem!

 

at the time of levy on my car the charges were

amount due to council 833.79

first visit fee 24.50

2nd visit fee 18

levy charge 49

walking possession fee 12

vehicle fee 115

redemption fee 24.50

total then due 1076.79

this was obviously then 476.79 as i paid 600

i paid the 70 at the end of the month as he stated as i was scared of him taking my car...even though this meant not paying other bills! the next month i could not pay it, so he turned up at my house again in oct 2011 and charged 115 for attendance to remove goods....if I paid 250 he would leave my car, my mum again helped me out

I then complained to the council and asked them to take the debt back as he had levied my car when it was still under a hire purchase agreement and asked for the fees to be removed they said the fees were just and would not be removed. various amounts of communication happened between the council and myself with me even disputing the amounts owed, I went to the CAB but they werent much help really just told me to appeal and put in a formal complaint, which I did. Letter came back to say I couldnt appeal as had been too long...jokers it was there fault it had taken so long.

This then brings us up to Sept 2012 when i get another bailiff letter...i contacted them via email and said i acknowledged their visit but there was no need for them to come to my property to make a payment arrangement..I filled out an income and expenditure form and emailed it to them and made an offer of 27.05 per month which was pro ratad out with my debitors, they just said they would except payment without prejudice but nothing formal would be in place unless they came to my house and levied my goods. I refused but continued to make these payments each month.

The bailiff turned up at my house again on 1/3/13 this time with liability orders but they dont state which years they are for...he wanted payment in full which was just over £2000!! told him no way i had it he would just have to take the car( no longer under hp agreemnet) I was very distressed and crying as was my 10 year old son...he even said "your mum helped you last time i can drive you to her house and see if she has the money for you!!" after about 45 mins of me having no luck obtaining that kind of money he said he would take £650....my sister bless her used all of her savings to help me...he's now demanding i pay £150 per month until its cleared! I said to him, im a single mother on a low income that figure it just ridiculous..he said nothing he could do they wont take less. Im confused on his charges too, can he charge me 3 times for each thing?? and how can i get my payments reduced?? the attachment of earnings I previoulsy had says about a 7% of my net monthly earnings which is about what I can afford

 

charges this time by bailiff are

amount owed £308.98

1st visit 24.50

2nd visit 18

levy charge 33

walking possession fee 12

redemption fee 24.50

total 420.98

 

amount owed £554.68

1st visit 24.50

2nd visit 18

levy charge 42

walking poss 12

vehicle fee 115

redemption fee 24.50

total due 790.68 - 182.80 + 45 waiting time= total 652.88

 

amount owed 723.57

1st visit 24.50

2nd visit 18

levy 47

walking poss 12

vehicle fee 115

redemption 24.50

total 964.57

 

does this all seem ok? how can they be allowed to make all these charges when it was all in one visit??

hopefully I havent confused you all too lol and you can advise on my best course of action...the bailiff is expecting a payment of £150 at the end of the month :(

 

many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very wrong that the bailiff is charging a fee for each liability order

the fees are wrong charging waiting time

 

vehicle fee is wrong if they were ever to remove the car it would be one vehicle but charged 3 times

 

can you hide the car/garage it for now

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

Contact the council with a Formal Complaint to Head Of Revenues, CEO Leader councillor and your MP regarding the unlawful and excessive fees charged by their agent Constant & Co, for which they are wholly liable, Remind them of the ruling by the LGO in the Blaby Council and Rossendales investigation, where multiple fees on same day amongst other things was rapped, the items once levied cannot be levied again as the bailiff is effectively levying his goods at that point, so any levy and fees charged for them, could be seen as fraudulent, and as per the Blaby ruling MUST be removed.

 

http://www.lgo.org.uk/news/2012/jul/blaby-council-criticised-bailiff-charges/

Edited by brassnecked

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 your quick responses...this last time the bailiff visited my car was in the garage but the garage door was not locked and he just opened it but as far as i was aware i couldnt do anything about this as he hadnt broken in and not knowing any different he told me he was allowed...its very hard to think clearly when placed under stress at 7.30 in the morning so just assumed he could

having read the link to the LGO case would you recommend then I ask the council to apply an attachment to my earning to pay any remaining amount? I cannot afford the £150 the bailiff is asking for

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, there are no dates attached to each fee...only the date on the notice of seizure of goods and inventory which is the 1/3/2013 and he has given me 3 of these each with the charges I set out above

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case you need to send off for a breakdown of the fees. Here's an example of what to use, adapt & use as you see fit. best sent initially by email followed 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"

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent the email as you advised and got this back this afternoon. Even upon closer examination of the notice of seizire of goods on one of them he has definitlely put down the wrong amount even owing to the council!! the amount owed shouldve been £461.93 and not the £554..68 he put on the form.....

 

 

 

 

 

Please find below a table showing the time and date of all bailiff actions incurring a fee [your point a)] and the names of the bailiffs undertaking the visit on those occasions [c)]

 

Case

xxxxx

xxxxx

xxxxx

Bailiff

Visit Date & Time

10/09/2012 12:15

Visit 1

24.50

Visit 1

24.50

Visit 1

24.50

 

25/09/2012 12:40

Visit 2

18.00

Visit 2

18.00

Visit 2

18.00

 

01/03/2013 07:20

Levy

42.00

Levy

47.00

Levy

33.00

 

Walking Possession

12.00

Walking Possession

12.00

Walking Possession

12.00

Abortive Removal Fee

115.00

Abortive Removal Fee

115.00

Schedule 5 Fee H

24.50

Schedule 5 Fee H

24.50

Schedule 5 Fee H

24.50

Waiting Time

45.00

 

 

 

 

 

The fees charged were as prescribed in the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992, as amended [b)].

 

 

 

Both X and Y's certificates were issued by Milton Keynes Court [d)].

 

 

 

The dates of the certificates are 17 December 2012 and 12 May 2011 respectively.

 

 

 

I would be grateful if you would confirm the receipt of this e-mail.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Team Leader

 

Constant & Company

 

1 Studio Court

Queensway

Bletchley

MK2 2DG

( (t) 0845 2747200

 

( (f) 01908 370073

Edited by ims21
Names removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there you have proof of the unlawful charges in black and white.

next step is as Brassnecked post 5.

 

Contact the council with a Formal Complaint to Head Of Revenues, CEO Leader councillor and your MP regarding the unlawful and excessive fees charged by their agent Constant & Co, for which they are wholly liable, Remind them of the ruling by the LGO in the Blaby Council and rossendaleslink3.gif investigation, where multiple fees on same day amongst other things was rapped, the items once levied cannot be levied again as the bailifflink3.gif is effectively levying his goods at that point, so any levylink3.gif and fees charged for them, could be seen as fraudulent, and as per the Blaby ruling MUST be removed.

 

http://www.lgo.org.uk/news/2012/jul/...iliff-charges/

Illegitimi non carborundum

Link to post
Share on other sites

can you remove bailiffs names from your post please and ref no if they are real

 

did you sign the walking possession agreement and did both bailiffs come at the same time on the 01/03/2013 as they have both charged fees on that date

Link to post
Share on other sites

From reading your question it is clear to see WHY a bailiff has acted as he has. In July 2011 your vehicle was on Hire Purchase and COULD NOT be taken. Even though you had no money, your mother managed to help you by paying £600.

 

Fast forward 18 months and predictably, the bailiff is back and even mentioned that your mother had helped you out LAST TIME. So what happens.........this time telephone call to your sister and another payment made of £650 !!!

 

It would not surprise me one bit if the bailiff were to return a THIRD TIME .

 

The fees are shocking BUT...and this is important....you need to be making a FORMAL COMPLAINT to the local authority and copy the complaint to the bailiff company.

 

The basis of the complaint is concerning:

 

Levying upon ( and charging fees) on a car that is exempt as it is subject to Hire Purchase

 

Charging "Multiple fees" when enforcing more than one liability Order.

 

Charging of a "Head H" (redemption of Goods fee).

 

In your complaint you must refer to the highly critical Local Government Ombudsman's report against Blaby District Council and where the Ombudsman made a finding of Maladministration causing injustice.

 

Always remember that the local authority are wholly responsible for the levy and fees charged by THEIR AGENTS and serious questions need to be asked of this council as to why they are permitting their bailiff provider to charge fees that have been so heavily criticised by the Local Government Ombudsman.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I did write to the council back in November 2011 to complain about the fact they had levied on my car whilst still under HP agreement quoting the article written by Andrew Hobley....this was the response

 

"You have stated that they had no right to levy your car because it was still on finance and you have quoted an article written by Andrew Hobley to back this up. In the article Mr Hobley quotes four cases where the levy fees had been charged enrroneously because it was established that the cars did not belong to the debtors. I would agree with his findings and in these circumstances I would instruct the bailiff to refund the cost.

 

However, in your case ownership is not in dispute. You are the owner of the property, albeit, the car is being purchased on finance, which is due to be paid in full in April 2012. The bailiff is legally entitled to levy distress on a vehicle that is subject to a hire purchase agreement provided a default notice has not been issued, in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974. If the bailiff then decideds to sell the vehicle he will have a duty to contact the finance company to advise them how their interest in the assest is to be discharged.

I mus therefore conclude that Constant & Co have not acted improperly and their fees will stand."

 

should I include it in my complaint again?? I dont understand about the redemption fee either? should they not be charging this at all or again like the others only charge once? I would rather the council just to an attachment to earnings to clear any balance..should I offer this in my complaint or do so seperatly?

 

many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isuspect the letter you have received was not written by the Council but in collaberation with the Bailiffs. If indeed what they say has happened then in reality the Finance Co could be had for Breach of Contract and ultimately would have to repay all the payments you had made. You were not the owner of the property, title does not pass to you until the last payment has been discharged.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the finance company didnt do anything...bailiffs levied my car despite me advising it was not fully paid for at the time. When I wrote my complaint to the council I included a photocopy of my HP agreement to prove it was still under finance.

 

I'm still confused on where I stand on that? Should I make a complaint about everything and ask for all charges to be removed apart the ones theyre obviously allowed to charge such as first and second visit fee?? I'm unsure as to what they are actually allowed to charge me for

Link to post
Share on other sites

the finance company didnt do anything...bailiffs levied my car despite me advising it was not fully paid for at the time. When I wrote my complaint to the council I included a photocopy of my HP agreement to prove it was still under finance.

 

I'm still confused on where I stand on that? Should I make a complaint about everything and ask for all charges to be removed apart the ones theyre obviously allowed to charge such as first and second visit fee?? I'm unsure as to what they are actually allowed to charge me for

 

Any levy on the car whilst subject to HP would be unlawful so the levy fee and associated fees must be removed.

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

  • 1 month later...

i understand everyone saying about the fact my car shouldnt have been levied while it was under finance still but what do I say as a comeback to the council when they said this

 

However, in your case ownership is not in dispute. You are the owner of the property, albeit, the car is being purchased on finance, which is due to be paid in full in April 2012. The bailifflink3.gif is legally entitled to levy distresslink3.gif on a vehicle that is subject to a hire purchase agreement provided a default notice has not been issued, in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974. If the bailiff then decideds to sell the vehicle he will have a duty to contact the finance company to advise them how their interestlink3.gif in the assest is to be discharged.

I must therefore conclude that Constant & Co have not acted improperly and their fees will stand."

 

is what they're saying actually true? If not is there anything I could quote from somewhere to back up what i'm saying in that they shouldnt have done it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A vehicle on HP is not yours until the final payment is made. Prior to this it is the property of the finance company.

 

A Bailiff may only seize goods belonging to the debtor. Therefore in this instance he has levied on goods belonging to a 3rd party and was provided proof of same - I assume you gave a copy of the Agreement to them. If the Bailiff approaches the finance company and makes an agreement to sell HP goods then the company are in breach of the terms of their agreement with you and may have to pay you back all monies that you have paid to date, possibly along with damages for breach of contract.

 

If the text from the l;etter has come from the Council then it is obvious the Council don't have a clue and this is a made up response from the Bailiffs. I would respond back to the Council with a Formal Complaint addressed to the CEO telling him to sort it out and have all the associated charges removed or you will either:

a - make a Regulation 46 Complaint at the Magistrates Court naming the Council as Defendant

b - make a complaint to the LGO

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks I am in the process of writing a formal complaint, I just wanted some assistance on how to respond to their claims that it was legal

but yes I provided a photocopy of the HP agreement and sent it to the council with my previous complaint

could you please tell me what - a Regulation 46 Complaint at the Magistrates Court naming the Council as Defendant is

many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

A Regulation 46 complaint is one made under the council Tax regulations which puts the Council in the dock and calls them to account for any unlawful levy, as in one that you are aggrieved with due to it's nature, whether on exempt goods or a levy on a third party car, or some other reason such as on goods insufficient to satisfy the fees incurred in sale and removal, and a portion of the debt. where the levy was obviously made solely to garner fees for the bailiff. As in listing a load of worthless furniture and exempt goods that if sold would make £150 in total at auction for a debt of £1,000 plus fees . There may be a charge for this but i think there are fee remissions for low income and benefits.

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

You will need to apply to the Magistrates court under Regulation 46 of the Council Tax Regulations.

"
The appeal shall be instituted by making complaint to a justice of the peace, and requesting the issue of a summons directed to the authority which levied or attempted to levy the distress to appear before the court to answer to the matter by which the person is aggrieved.

This requires a fee of £200, and will be detailed in Shedule 1 of the The Magistrates’ Courts Fees. Probably the relevant paragraph is 2.4:

"
On commencing an appeal where no other fee is specified
."

You may qualify for remission of part or all of the fees and need to look at leaflet EX160a – an application form is included in the link.

 

One other thing to be aware of is time limitations. This is specified in section 127 of the Magistrates' Court Act 1980:

 

127 Limitation of time.

 

(1) Except as otherwise expressly provided by any enactment and subject to subsection (2) below, a magistrates’ court shall not try an information or hear a complaint unless the information was laid, or the complaint made, within 6 months from the time when the offence was committed, or the matter of complaint arose......

 

I'll check later to see if there's a standard application form for this, if so I'll upload or provide a link.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

well I wrote a letter of complaint to the council and received this response yesterday

 

"with reference to the visit fees , they are specified in the Council Tax(Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 and are lawfully applied to each visit for each case. The issue raised in the Blaby report was one of proportionality and is not necessarily directly relevant in your case since that involved 8 separate cases and 8 separate sets of fees.

You have suggested that the vehicle fees applied by removed as there was no tow truck present and I am told that the bailiffs attended with a vehicle suitable for removing general goods. Should a specific vehicle be required then Constants have a procedure in place whereby they contact local suppliers to provide a van, low loader or tow truck, as required.

You have also raised the issue of a previous complaint regarding goods being levied upon whilst still under a Hire Purchase Agreement and I can see that we corresponded with you in November 2011 and having investigated your case, we concluded that Constants had not acted improperly, copy letter attached.

Your final paragraph deals with the arrangement for repaying the council tax. Our instructions to the bailiffs are that arrears are to be collected as quick as possible and in general the look to recover the debt in a 6 to 8 month period where possible. Given the level of your debt, Constants have advised if you contact them with details of your income and expenditure again they will look again at the arrangement made with you.

With reference to the fees, Constants have advised they have removed the second van fee of £115 as this was added to your account in error. They have also deleted fees of £85 as a gesture of goodwill, and are keen to emphasise it as such, and that it in no way sets a precedent of any description. They have sent you statements of both outstanding accounts which I hope you have received by now. The accounts are on hold until the end of this month to allow you the time to go back to them to re-negotiate the arrangement. I am not prepared to take the cases back for an attachment of earnings order as the amount it would recover would mean the account would not be cleared within a reasonable period.

 

The refund of some of the fees is a step forward at least but I'm still not happy. Would it be advisable to respond and say that although I am grateful for the refund of some of them I am still not satisfied with the outcome and with now proceed with complaint? which route would be the best to go down? the court or the LGO? As a single parent in receipt of working tax credit would I get reduced fees if I made a claim at the court?

 

thanks in advance x

Link to post
Share on other sites

""with reference to the visit fees , they are specified in the Council Tax(Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 and are lawfully applied to each visit for each case. The issue raised in the Blaby report was one of proportionality and is not necessarily directly relevant in your case since that involved 8 separate cases and 8 separate sets of fees."

 

The council are wrong imho, you could reiterate this in a Second Stage Complaint, if they chuck that one out you can refer to the LGO, other Caggers will no doubt have further advice also

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

Your complaint has been upheld so it's worth a shot at downloading / printing this "Form 5 complaint" application (page 18) and either posting or emailing it to your local authority to suggest it submit this to the certificating County Court.

 

  • Form 5 – Notification to County Court of Complaint upheld against Certificated Bailiff

Background and references

 

Rule 13(1) of the Distress for Rent (Amendment) Rules 1999 amended rule 8(1) of the Distress for Rent Rules 1988, thus:

 

 

13.—(1) In rule 8(1) after “shall be made” there shall be inserted “in Form 4 or, where the complainant has conducted a formal investigation into a complaint by a third party against the bailiff, in Form 5”.

 

The relevant amended reference to the original Distress for Rent Rules 1988 is therefore:

 

8.—(1) Any complaint as to the conduct or fitness of any bailiff who holds a certificate shall be made [in Form 4 or, where the complainant has conducted a formal investigation into a complaint by a third party against the bailiff, in Form 5] to the court from which the certificate issued.

 

 

 

The "Form 5" enables the council to notify the county court of a complaint which was upheld against a Certificated Bailiff. This can be considered by the judge in the same manner as a complaint made straight to the court by an aggrieved person, i.e. the Form 4 route outlined in Regulation 8(1) of the Distress for Rent Rules 1988.

Edited by outlawla
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...