Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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 3991 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

We are paying a charge of £3054.06 at £100 per week agreed.

Charges of bailiff are £25 per £100 - also charged us walking possession fee, enforcements under fee 5 disbursements under fee 12 etc totalling bill of £1255.40.

 

This is a business rent debt that went to court and landlord agreed above terms.

 

No possessions were taken,

no letter sent to indicate court proceedings,

no seizures; nothing.

 

Can bailiffs charge on these terms and this amount?

 

Thank you!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Think so..contact bailiff, bailiff contact solicitor and solicitor says £100 per week acceptable to claimant, although we have paid £200 6 times and they have taken £50 on that occasion - thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The feesthe HCEO can charge are set by their Regulations, there is a provision under Rule 13 to charge miscellaneous fees and it is these that will rack up the charges, but they are challengeable. Have you asked for a breakdown of the fee they have charged?

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes

Percentage fee 78.85

Mileage Fee 24.82

Seizure Fee 2.00

Enquiry fee 4.00

Walking possession fee 5 (2) 56.30

Enforcements under Fee 5 (3) 475.00

Disbursements under fe 5 (3)

No sale inventory fee 6 (2) (b) 152.70

Disbursements under fee 12 252.50

VAT 209.23

Total enforcement fee 1255.40

 

Sounds like the chuffing shipping forecast!

 

Thank you again for your time

Link to post
Share on other sites

You say it went to court, did you end up with a CCJ for this? If so did you defend the action, can you comfortably afford the payments demanded? Were any goods seized? If so can you list them exactly as described on the Notice of Seizure?

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. We never received notification - we were in a depot and the business was not doing well. We had missed some rental but had come to an arrangement with landlords, then we moved to a better site and now business is thriving. We owed about £2300 in rent but they owed us £1600 bond of which they have said they will return once we have paid this..we are still paying - did not defend action because we did owe them but do now think this is excessive..no goods were seized - we just moved and this was initiated but did not have any warning - nothing. We can pay comfortably now but feel increasingly as though we are been taken for a muppet.....also the bailiff came to the house and threatened to take the car but we were still paying and they said it was a mistake and very sorry so just left it - bit traumatic really when he wrote on that he would take the car.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

From wghat you say it appears you may have been overcharged. Is it possible you can scan & upload some of your paperwork - remove all personal identifiers and best done as a PDF file. It will pay to submit a Subject Access Request - costs a tenner but worthwhile as we can probably marry the charges to the events then. Be back later.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. We never received notification - we were in a depot and the business was not doing well. We had missed some rental but had come to an arrangement with landlords, then we moved to a better site and now business is thriving. We owed about £2300 in rent but they owed us £1600 bond of which they have said they will return once we have paid this..we are still paying - did not defend action because we did owe them but do now think this is excessive..no goods were seized - we just moved and this was initiated but did not have any warning - nothing. We can pay comfortably now but feel increasingly as though we are been taken for a muppet.....also the bailiff came to the house and threatened to take the car but we were still paying and they said it was a mistake and very sorry so just left it - bit traumatic really when he wrote on that he would take the car.....

Are you a sole trader or a limited company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you really sure that this company are charging £25 fee for administering payment of £100 ??

 

By coincidence, I am just looking at a copy of a Bill of Costs from a well know firm of High Court Enforcement Officers and they charged a figure of 2.5% commission on all payments received. The company that you are dealing with appears to be charging 25% !!! This cannot possible be right......

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

SIMPLY

 

Been served with writ for £3000

- bailiff charges £1200

 

last July 2012 - claimant agreed on installments

- paid debt off

- bailiff has charged for walking possession fee,

disbursements,

enforcements,

seizures

- nothing was taken, seized, signed, auctioned etc

- took ages to get financial statement

 

- bailiff has taken his fees alongside claimant and added VAT eg

every £100 claimant

£70 Bailiff

£25 bailiff

VAT £5

 

- written three letters with detailed assessment from ourselves ref 2004 regs

- NOTHING BACK

 

- sent SAR

 

- just paying their fees now

 

- are these fees legal if nothing is taken?

 

Thank you!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

We paid the instalments on a voluntary basis but the solicitor/creditor/bailiff dictated how much they were willing to accept - ironic thing is that the creditor now owes us £1600 bond that he won't pay unless all charges (inc bailiff) are complete!! Anyway that is a separate matter but as for original debt - all paid now except for bailiff charges...thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some HCEO charges can only be charged as per the Regulations but the main bone of contention are those that come under Misc and it is these that can be challenged either by writing and complaining or taking it to a costs hearing - which can have adverse implications if it goes against you. As said previously look at Post 6, as if it is approaching the 40 days you may need to send them a reminder to jog their memory.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We will take action if it goes beyond the 40 days...if the charges are justified and legal we will pay and fair enough but there are so many people saying they have been mis-charged that it started the questions in my mind...the majority of costs were for enforcement citing 5 (3) in the fees - if they have taken anything then i am absolutely intrigued..will see..thanks anyway - Night

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...