Chandlers massive charges!

[brassnecked]

If he has no certificate, he cannot seize goods, so all levies and associated fees applied by him are void, and the council are in the doo doo due to vocarious jopint and several liability with and for Chandlers "bailiff"

[lamma]

Statutory rules governing the process of levying distress for rent are not applicable to distress for rates and council tax or for taxes or under the summary jurisdiction.

See the Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Local Lists) Regulations 1989, SI 1989/1058, reg 14 (as amended);

[beer guzzler]

So high all, been a bit of a delay updating. So I have had responses from council and court. He is registered so that clears that up.

The council sent me a long paper letter via snail mail and seem to have given up on email. It basically confirms everything I have said about dates and times charges etc and then concludes that nothing wrong was done and I should return the attached income expenditure form and he will broker a deal with chandlers on my behalf.

 

So, is that it? or what next?

 

I will send the form and make an arrangement to pay the outstanding council tax, but nothing is said about paying the fees.

[beer guzzler]

So I sent this to the council:

I have read through your response and feel that it is much the same as a I have stated to you regarding events times and charges albeit a few details. Instead of resolution to a complaint it reads more as a statement from the bailiff.

 

 

You have not covered the point of the complaint that a £250 attending to remove fee was charged on the same visit as a £57 Levy fee was charged. This is as far as I am aware is not procedure or lawful. A removal fee cannot be charged on the same visit as levy fee. A removal fee can be charged when he returns after levy to remove goods.

 

 

Please could you investigate these points? These are the main points of my complaint and I dont feel these have been covered or resolved.

This was the response I got:

I have reviewed the Council Tax regulations and I cannot find any regulation that prevents the two fees being charged during the same visit. A Levy has to be undertaken before a fee for “an attendance with a view to remove goods” can be charged, but nothing preventing this being at the same visit.

So what next? Any advice? or is my complaint dead in the water?

[outlawla]

Your council don't seem to know how to interpret the law with any consideration to logic.

 

© For one attendance with a vehicle with a view to the removal of goods (where, following the levy, goods are not removed):

Reasonable costs and fees incurred

 

How did the bailiff (with any credibility) have a view to removing goods when he had no idea what (if any) would be available to take. Clairvoyant was he?

[beer guzzler]

Your council don't seem to know how to interpret the law with any consideration to logic.

 

 

 

How did the bailiff (with any credibility) have a view to removing goods when he had no idea what (if any) would be available to take. Clairvoyant was he?

 

Thanks Outlawla, I see this and understand but I get the feeling the council either havent got a clue or are pretending they dont in the hope I will believe them!

 

Has any one got a simple plain english way of putting this that they cannot ignore?

[outlawla]

See if this is any use.

 

Page 45 of the Bailiff Pocketbook

[beer guzzler]

I am about to respond to the council with this:

Thank you for your reply.

I refer to my original email and complaint.

 

I believe the Levy and attendance fee issued on the same visit to be unlawful:

Most bailiff fees are set in legislation when a fee can be charged is also set in legislation

 

A Bailiff attends to levy your goods if he Does not get a levy he can charge a 1st visit fee only £24.50

bailiff makes a 2nd visit does not get a levy he can charge a 2nd visit fee only £18

 

no further fees can be added to the debt unless he levy goods no matter how many times calls

 

Bailiff attends the property and manages to get a levy on goods (car) on this visit he can charge a levy fee if a walking possessions agreement is signed he can charge a fee of £12 (levy fee is worked out on a sliding scale therefore depends on the amount of the debt )

 

there is no such fee as an attendance fee there is an attendance to remove fee that cant be charged the same day as the bailiff levy's goods (until the bailiff gets a levy he has no goods to remove )

 

The next fee following the levy would be the attendance to remove fee when the bailiff returns to remove the goods previous levied

Legislation states Reasonable costs and fees incurred

http://www.bexley.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=3028 &p=0

 

C: For one attendance with a vehicle with a

view to the removal of goods (where,

following the levy, goods are not

removed): Reasonable costs and fees incurred

Could you please explain how you believe that the levvying and charging for levvying and whilst on the same visit attending to remove and charging to remove be logical or legal?

 

Central London county court - Case No 8CL51015 - Anthony Culligan (Claimant) v 1. Jason Simkin & 2. Marstons (Defendants

 

 

2. The Fee Regulations provide for a distinction between the levying of distress and removal of goods. There is a gap between the two stages. The purpose of this "gap" is to allow the debtor to make payment of what is due after the first stage.

 

DJ Avent says at paragraph 50 of his Judgment:-

 

"Accordingly, in my judgment the bailiff should not and, as a matter of law cannot take any steps to remove goods until he has given the debtor a reasonable opportunity to pay what is due at the time of seizure.

 

Could you also now please advise me how to take my complaint to the LGO as I feel my complaint is not being understood or getting any closer to a final resolution.

 

Any changes needed or advice?

 

[beer guzzler]

This is what I finally sent:

Dear Mr Stevens,

Thank you for your reply.

 

I refer to my original email and complaint.

 

I believe the Levy and attendance fee issued on the same visit to be unlawful:

Most bailiff fees are set in legislation when a fee can be charged is also set in legislation

 

A Bailiff attends to levy your goods if he Does not get a levy he can charge a 1st visit fee only £24.50

bailiff makes a 2nd visit does not get a levy he can charge a 2nd visit fee only £18

 

no further fees can be added to the debt unless he levy goods no matter how many times calls

 

Bailiff attends the property and manages to get a levy on goods (car) on this visit he can charge a levy fee if a walking possessions agreement is signed he can charge a fee of £12 (levy fee is worked out on a sliding scale therefore depends on the amount of the debt )

 

there is no such fee as an attendance fee there is an attendance to remove fee that cant be charged the same day as the bailiff levy's goods (until the bailiff gets a levy he has no goods to remove )

 

The next fee following the levy would be the attendance to remove fee when the bailiff returns to remove the goods previous levied

Legislation states Reasonable costs and fees incurred

http://www.bexley.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=3028 &p=0

 

C: For one attendance with a vehicle with a

view to the removal of goods (where,

following the levy, goods are not

removed): Reasonable costs and fees incurred

Could you please explain how you believe that the levvying and charging for levvying and whilst on the same visit attending to remove and charging to remove be logical or legal? Simply put, he has either attended to levy or he has attended to remove goods he has previously levied upon, he cannot attend to do both and charge for both.

 

Central London county court - Case No 8CL51015 - Anthony Culligan (Claimant) v 1. Jason Simkin & 2. Marstons (Defendants

 

 

2. The Fee Regulations provide for a distinction between the levying of distress and removal of goods. There is a gap between the two stages. The purpose of this "gap" is to allow the debtor to make payment of what is due after the first stage.

 

DJ Avent says at paragraph 50 of his Judgment:-

 

"Accordingly, in my judgment the bailiff should not and, as a matter of law cannot take any steps to remove goods until he has given the debtor a reasonable opportunity to pay what is due at the time of seizure.

 

Could you also now please advise me how to take my complaint to the LGO as I feel my complaint is not being understood or getting any closer to a final resolution.

 

Furthermore I request that you now escalate this complaint to the CEO of the council and confirm this by copying him in your response.

 

Regards

[outlawla]

Good points made. See how it goes, it could be used as a template for similar complaints.

[brassnecked]

It should rattle their cage at least, they may decide to look more closely at their appointed agents if they stop to look properly at what they have charged in your case.

[beer guzzler]

I had a response to my email:

 

I would confirm that I am asking for this matter to be registered as stage 3 complaint. I have copied in the Chief Executive’s Personal Assistant to this email. We will review the matters you raise and advise you of your appeal rights and contact details for the Local Government Ombudsman in our response.

Short and sweet!

[hallowitch]

beer guzzler your doing ok well done hopefully they will relies the error of their ways now and remove the fee before it goes to the ombudsman