Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Daft question - but you filed the defence on-line on MCOL as dx indicated, right?
    • We looked up the e-mail address so communications would be in writing.  If you do stuff on the phone the other party can just deny the contents of the conversation.  They can't deny what's written in an e-mail. So time to sort Pete out.  Check the following for accuracy and change anything I've got wrong.  Then e-mail Pete this evening.  I was thinking of threatening the pub with legal action but let's initially be nice.   Dear Pete, Re: PCN no.XXXXX, claim form no.XXXXX on 23 July 2022 I was a customer at your pub and I attach proof of purchase. I was picking up my cousin Ms XXXXX and her family as she was working as a cook with you at the time.  I entered the pub through the back door, went to the bar, and ordered a drink and a meal.  At no point did any bar staff alert me that I needed to add my registration number or did I see any signs advising me to do so.  I then took a seat outside in a small seated area so I could chat to my cousin while waiting for her to finish work.  We were joined by the management of the pub and bar staff during my time waiting  I was shocked a few days later when I received a demand for £100 from Civil Enforcement Ltd.  i contacted the pub and was told "don't worry, it's not enforceable". Well, that information turned out to be nonsense because I have now received a county court claim form from CEL. I contacted the pub again on XXXXX and was extremely disappointed to be told "there's nothing we can do". Of course there is something you can do.  You are the organ grinder.  You called CEL in.  You can call your dogs off.  Your pub has absolutely superb reviews on Google Maps regarding the way in which you treat guests.  Do you really think customers should be dragged to court?  I'm sure you don't. I am therefore requesting that you intervene and instruct CEL to cease court action. Yours, XXXXX
    • Thank you - Defence has now been filed Doc_20240501_182920_Redacted.pdf
    • The US central bank has left interest rates unchanged again, noting a "lack of further progress" toward lowering inflation.View the full article
    • The US central bank has left interest rates unchanged again, noting a "lack of further progress" toward lowering inflation.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Council tax bailiff


julie1961
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6397 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

My husband has suffered 2 suspected heart attacks over the past 12 months so has had a bit of time off work. We fell behind with the council tax & the council took us to court.

I have today had a bailiff at the door from Jacobs certificated bailiffs( Paul Rollings ), I was in the middle of a family crisis so couldn't speak to him & he said he would call later, I asked him to call after 5pm when my husband would be in but he said because he lives out of town it would be too late so would call at 4pm. I couldn't get back home in time & he called this time leaving me a final demand, the letter says notice of further attendance to seize goods.

I am now frantically worried about this & don't know what to do. Do I let him in or not, do I sign anything, will they take my furniture?

I know whan my husband comes home it will upset him & I don't want him to be ill again. Could anyone advise me please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

theres a whole section on this but ive been there!

 

read more for the legalities as to what you could and shoudld do but ....

 

dont let them in.

 

try calling them and the council tomorrow. only make an offer to pay that is realistic.

 

there was a programme about bailiffs on bbc website a while back. have a search on that as that gives a few clues.

 

also it may be worth calling the CAB now to hear their thoughts

 

i realise this may all bea little vague but good luck!

when i win ...... 5% goes back to the site!

 

Halifax- 14/6/06 Data Protection Act.28/6/06 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) - (Subject Access Request) handed in person. 2/7/06 Prelin sent for £3297. 19/7/06 LBA sent SETTLED

Halifax cc- 26/7 prelim for £140 - 14/8 LBA sent - 21/8 £ 70 offer - 22/8 Halifax agreed to pay £140 after call SETTLED

Halifax loan #1 - SETTLED

SMPL- 20/6/06 prelim sent for £610 4/7 sent lba after no reply. MCOL 29/9

Rooftop Mortgages - 20/6/06 prelim sent for £225. 29/6/06 letter rec'd saying no! /2/7/06 LBA sent

Capital One- 24/6/06 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent. 2/7/06 prelim sent for £137. 19/7/06 LBA sent MCOL 29/9 SETTLED

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand how you feel believe me I have been there.

 

First of all do not let him in your house,

 

Secondly do not sighn anything.

 

If he has not been into your house there is nothing he can do and he will have to send it back to the council.

 

Dont be fooled by him saying he can make arrangements for you to pay it in weekly instalments as that is just a ruse to get in your house.

 

Once you have let them in and sighned his walking possesion he can then force his way in, but he needs to gain peacefull entry Keep your doors locked and watch your windows.

Try and negotiate by post try and do everything in writing.

 

But the main thing at the moment is not to let him into your home.

 

Zooman has put a good letter on here for you to send them to try and make an arrangement you can afford.

 

You need to send one to the council as well.

 

Good Luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks to both of you for your relies.On the letter it says they have a Liability Order issued byt the magistrates court, this is what has worried me. Does that give them rights to enter & take my stuff?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No Julie it does not give them the right at all.

 

They need to gain peacefull entry to take your goods, if they have never been inside your home there is absolutley nothing they can do.

 

Dont be intimidated by anything he says to the contrary and Please Please do not sighn anything at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem Julie just remember dont let him in.

 

You dont even need to answer the door if you feel intimidated by him.

 

In fact if you are on your own it may be best not to answer the door because sometimes they will try and get passed you.

 

 

Good Luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem Julie just remember dont let him in.

 

You dont even need to answer the door if you feel intimidated by him.

 

In fact if you are on your own it may be best not to answer the door because sometimes they will try and get passed you.

 

 

Good Luck

I can understand this sort of reaction but is it really the best way forward? To ignore the bailiff means he will keep attempting to do his job which of course will entail even more costs. If the money is owed then the council will not interfere as it has issued a 'warrant' to the bailiff to resolve. If the bailiff cannot gain entry he may well have to take goods which are not inside the house (i.e. car) and then cannot be accused of disproportionate distraint if that's all that is available. One way or another the bailiff is not going to rest until all avenues have been exhausted. Either you'll be lucky and avoid a very large bailiff bill or you won't and end up paying far more than if you had co-operated from the start. I know it's difficult to know what to do but you should be aware of all your options and potential outcomes. You won't necessarily beat the bailiff by keeping your doors closed and hiding behind the curtain!

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are strict charges laid down in law for what the bailiff can charge. Something like £22 for the first visit and £16 for the second. If he cant get in then thats all he can charge. Obviously £38 wont pay for his time so he will try and extort money out of you illegally, just stand up to them, theyre nothing but criminals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope this helps.

 

Forgive me if you have already tried this, but if your income fell below a certain level, then the council will send you forms for proof of income etc.

 

It may depend on your area but it is fair to assume that if your income was/is low, they won't be able to charge you so much council tax anyway if you just can't pay it?

 

Court costs can then be levied. Well you can't get blood out of a stone can you? (at least not after banks drank the last drop...:eek: )

 

Just keep paying £5 a week and agree this with them. If your income is found low, you may well get this back anyway.

 

Hopefully after issuing the forms to you, and you aggreeing (even over the phone) for you to repay a little a week, the council will withdraw the baliff immediatly.

 

Good luck,

Moff

Link to post
Share on other sites

blfuk1

 

I understand everything you are saying and I know that you yourself are a bailiff it is very unfortunate that more were not like you, but unfortunatly this is not the case.

 

I gave the advice on personal experience and what I have learned over the last few months.

 

I do not believe that Julie would be given any help at all from the firm involved, and I stand by my advice do not let them in your home at all and write to the bailiff firm and the council using the letter on here from zooman.

 

Unfortunatly far too many people are not aware of there rights.

 

And I say again DO NOT ALLOW THEM INTO YOUR HOME

 

DO NOT SIGN ANYTHING.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone, I am not letting him in, I will send the letters off today & see what happens. I have even closed my back curtains as I don't have nets or blinds up at the back & I don't want him looking through the window.

He can't touch the car as its my fathers & its a motability car.

I will put an update on here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

Julie 1961,

 

Do not let him the door, do not sign anything..

 

Also send an email to [email protected], outline the problem and I guarantee you will get help straight away.

 

The people there will help you resolve this problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He came yesterday but I didn't open the door. He wrote down the details of the car outside which is a motablity car & posted a notice of seizure through the door. My daughter rang him & told him the car didn't belong to me & he had no right to do that. She told him I had sent a letter to them with an offer of payment which was the full amount divided by 24 months as says on the template letter, he said they would not accept it as they expect the amount to be paid within 20 weeks which would be around £160 per month. I am on carer's allowance & my husband is on a very low wage, there is no way we could pay that. My daughter told him they had no right to refuse as I am not refusing to pay. Anyway the letter has been posted to them & we will just have to see what happens now. He said he will not be calling to my door again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He came yesterday but I didn't open the door. He wrote down the details of the car outside which is a motablity car & posted a notice of seizure through the door. My daughter rang him & told him the car didn't belong to me & he had no right to do that. She told him I had sent a letter to them with an offer of payment which was the full amount divided by 24 months as says on the template letter, he said they would not accept it as they expect the amount to be paid within 20 weeks which would be around £160 per month. I am on carer's allowance & my husband is on a very low wage, there is no way we could pay that. My daughter told him they had no right to refuse as I am not refusing to pay. Anyway the letter has been posted to them & we will just have to see what happens now. He said he will not be calling to my door again.

 

Clarification: Minor point but I see this claim all too often that bailiffs have to accept any offer a debtor makes as they are not refusing to pay. Bailiffs are acting on an order of the court; they are not debt collectors. They are not attending to collect a debt but to execute a court order. They are under no obligation to accept any part payment at all and only do so to suit their own or their clients' policies. Their prime objective is to seize goods under the terms of the order in respect of an amount previously demanded and not paid. Offers and acceptance of arrangements to pay usually take place before the court authorises the use of bailiffs to take alternative action - seizure of goods.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see you advice getting worse. adviseing pepole to let ballif in now now.

 

I presume you are referring to this:

 

I can understand this sort of reaction but is it really the best way forward? To ignore the bailiff means he will keep attempting to do his job which of course will entail even more costs. If the money is owed then the council will not interfere as it has issued a 'warrant' to the bailiff to resolve. If the bailiff cannot gain entry he may well have to take goods which are not inside the house (i.e. car) and then cannot be accused of disproportionate distraint if that's all that is available. One way or another the bailiff is not going to rest until all avenues have been exhausted. Either you'll be lucky and avoid a very large bailiff bill or you won't and end up paying far more than if you had co-operated from the start. I know it's difficult to know what to do but you should be aware of all your options and potential outcomes. You won't necessarily beat the bailiff by keeping your doors closed and hiding behind the curtain!

 

It should be taken in context and read properly. It is not advising anyone to permit entry or deny it. It simply suggests a possible outcome of avoiding the bailiff - from a bailiff's point of view. You can obviously take it or leave it.

 

The fewer the facts, the stronger the opinion. Arnold H. Glasow

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...