what are your view please

[stuggling]

Im not sure if I can post the link or even if it has been posted already.

 

I was doing some research in regards to bailiffs and came across this video.

 

my question is ARE THEY WRIGHT? that a court bailiff can not gain entrance with out the relevant documents.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=u8g_tNimjEo

[unclebulgaria67]

In that particular case the answer is yes, as they are trying to repossess the house. But in all other cases, they should provide a legal document confirming the basis for their visit.

[sgtbush]

it has been posted before, and yes only peacful entry was granted on the paperwork, however, the bank reapplied for the repossesion order and in light of the evidence a order was granted with forced entry rights and the familit were evicted as far as im aware

[unclebulgaria67]

it has been posted before, and yes only peacful entry was granted on the paperwork, however, the bank reapplied for the repossesion order and in light of the evidence a order was granted with forced entry rights and the familit were evicted as far as im aware

 

Apparently they were not evicted and are still living there. There is a comment on the YT vid to this effect.

[Mark1960]

I was also led to believe that the family were ultimately evicted-This came from a comment on the original video which was deleted.It went along the lines:

 

"... this time the heavy mob came and Sgt Mo was asked to stand down..."

[tomtubby]

This video is from May 2012. It is heavily featured on "Freeman on the Land" websites

 

 

 

In this particular case, the film maker states the following:

 

"On 31st May 2012, in Potters Bar, England, the Bird family were facing an eviction based upon deception, threats of intimidation by way of crime because; if a man or woman peacefully objects to being evicted then the bankers mustn't use unlawful force and commit a crime if they are to take possession.

 

"Something they have been getting away with for centuries"

 

As I understand it, a 2nd eviction took place a few months later and this time, the court also enlisted the assistance of High Court Enforcement Officers and the FoTL forum referred to them as "fascists"

 

It is "claimed" that the officers used "excessive force" to secure entry (to repossess).

 

The "Freeman on the Land" websites refer to this case as being The PEOPLE v The BANKS.

Edited May 15, 2013 by ims21

[sgtbush]

i love FOTL arguments!!!

 

just one sentance needed

 

birth and berth, this is where the cookoo lot made the mistake