Is the Bailiff always the bad guy?

[hhh_88873]

with the growing popularity of the new sheriffs tv show and the fact that often people who have been screwed over have no one else to turn other than the bailiffs

and the sheriffs,

 

My question is are the bailiffs and sheriffs always the bad guys?

 

For instance you win a judgement and a sheriff operates for you. or youve been a victim of crime and the bailiff goes out to get your compensation that youre rightly entitled to.

 

Is every bailiff and sheriff in the wrong from the outset?

[bazm]

You're very brave! Likewise for bailiffs collecting taxes. Those of us who pay taxes get annoyed when pro debt-avoiders or freedom of the land idiots cause us to end up paying more. Yes I know there are vulnerable debtors out there. Hopefully the new bailiff reform will help to recognise these cases.

[unclebulgaria67]

It is a bit like asking whether all supermarket ready meals offer poor nutrition. The answer is some are bad and some are good.

 

We don't get too many posts on CAG, where someone is praising a bailiff for helping them get their money back. You would not expect it, because these online forums are mainly for people who have problems.

[ploddertom]

If Bailiffs operated within Legislation or claimed fees correctly then this Forum would not exist. Unfortunately we very rarely hear of those who do their job correctly and of course there must be a lot who do.

[brassnecked]

If Bailiffs operated within Legislation or claimed fees correctly then this Forum would not exist. Unfortunately we very rarely hear of those who do their job correctly and of course there must be a lot who do.

 

This is absolutely correct, and I wonder if the new fee structure will prove equally devastating to the can't pays as in lower income earners, who used to have some help with council tax, or someone on benefits having to pay 30% of the bill from their £71 per week JSA or £110 couple rate. They will undoubtedly fall into arrears, have a Liability Order gained against them, and a bailiff knocking threatening to take all their worldly goods and chattels. A tenner extra is unaffordable to them, let alone £380 at the first knock. Then there is the interpleader effective after April that a neighbour or even a randomer who happened to park their car by the debtors house may be embroiled in when the bailiff takes their car for that third party debt citing Observer v Gordon, "it was nearby 'guvnor, so am entitled to assume it belongs to the debtor".

 

Can we expect suicide rates to go up or threats of it as as happened in the housing sector?:

 

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/care/staff-deal-with-suicide-threats/7001555.article

 

It isn't always the bailiff, the majority do their work correctly, and some even help debtors it is more likely to be the system at fault as it both causes and permits the transgressions to occur with no effective check and balance.

[sillygirl1]

I know a bailiff who isn't a bad guy, he does his job and is looking to move on from the industry back into mainstream security.

 

I have had experience of a bad unlicenced bailiff but with Tomtubby's help in the early days on this forum he was sent packing.

 

Some debt collecting agencies behave as if they are bailiffs when they are 'common debt collectors' and give everyone else a bad name, whether it is deserved or not.

 

Sadly the government seems to think that bailiffs are the way forward for many councils to keep their targets on council tax collection - when they should be using bailiffs as a LAST resort, rather than a FIRST resort.

[Peterbard]

The use of bailiffs to collect court judgments from business and people who are avoiding repaying debts which they can but will not pay is a completely different scenario to the one which make up the majority of posts on here and other forums I|MO.

 

Take the collection of council tax arrears for instance, there the authorities have a variety of enforcement options, attachment of earnings , they can do third party orders , or remove money from benefits , yet the vast majority of enforcement is placed in the hands of the bailiffs.

 

The reason is that the other measures cannot legally be done, most have no savings to take they are already subsisting on the minimum allowable under law, it is not possible to legally take anymore off them and expect them to live. So what happens the debt gets transferred to the bailiff , as if the debtor can magically not only produce the money they owe but in addition find the bailiff fees.

 

The problem is then further compounded by the fact that it is in the bailiffs financial interest to levy goods and make repeat visits (currently), the fact that they are operating a "business" off the back of people in debt is to my mind morally unconscionable.

[brassnecked]

Very good and accurate analysis Dodgeball, this distinction is conveniently overlooked by the lawmakers when they set fees and methods. The interpleader system will be a case in point, the fear is that it will lead to a spate of third party seizures that will be detrimental to the debtors neighbours or even a randomer parking their car outside the debtors home in a terraced street while they go to work.

 

The bottom line is that while bailiffs and HCEO exist there amongst their ranks, will always be a minority that will abuse their powers and the system whatever regulatory framework or fee scale is in place.

[Clunks]

I think this is an excellent topic.

 

Time and time again I read threads on here and think 'really?'.

 

I bet there are a large number of posts on here which are just fabricated lies, or only partially tell the truth about the situation.

 

There are a large number of posters on here too (and they know who they are) where following the original post they make judgements on the Bailiff, the company, and the situation. Quite often Bailiffs and the companies are labelled because the originators post is true of course, and all Bailiffs are the same.

 

Where as those of us in the real world know only too well that there are rogue bailiffs but also excellent bailiffs out there. Likewise there are customers who are honest and others who fabricate lies and others who are out to avoid paying their debts.

 

Everything you read isn't always the truth.

[hhh_88873]

The reason I ask is I'm considering undergoing the certification process myself but i point blank will not work for councils.

 

My intention would be to solely do criminal work such as arrests, fines and compensation for victims of crime, and eventually to move into high court enforcement for employee tribunals etc.

 

Anyone that knows me through here will know I'm a totally ethical and moral guy and will not do anything to make done one in trouble even worse off, indeed looking over my history and problems myself on here I think it's pretty obvious I've got little time for those that abuse the process and powers that are given to them.

 

My big question is does my personal beliefs in being totally ethical and doing the right thing mean it's just not gonna be a suitable role for me, despite my total aversion to working for councils and only wanting to do work that will help those who have been the victims of crime?

[wonkeydonkey]

If your thinking of being a self employed bailiff you will of course be depending on contract work from other companies therefore, if your 'ethics' get in the way of seeing them in pocket you will soon find work dries up.

[Peterbard]

Nah, why would you want to take a job which continually entails bringing people bad news ?

 

If you fancy enforcement join the police force or the army.

 

Don't get me wrong one of my most respected friends is an ex HCEO and he runs a charity now to help educate people with money problems, however he went into the profession with a degree and at management level. A certified bailiff is in it for the business of making money, morality does not(and cannot) enter into it sadly.

IMO

[Surfer01]

with the growing popularity of the new sheriffs tv show and the fact that often people who have been screwed over have no one else to turn other than the bailiffs

and the sheriffs,

 

My question is are the bailiffs and sheriffs always the bad guys?

 

For instance you win a judgement and a sheriff operates for you. or youve been a victim of crime and the bailiff goes out to get your compensation that youre rightly entitled to.

 

Is every bailiff and sheriff in the wrong from the outset?

 

We don't have sheriffs in England any more. They only operate in Scotland. The company that are being filmed has the company name "Sheriffs" which can be confusing although they only employ bailiffs in England.

[hhh_88873]

I find it interesting that the amount of horror stories on here that it seems so many people believe that the Enforcement industry is the party thats in the wrong. Ok, Ive had problems and fallen behind in bills before now, but it does seem like theres many, many people on here that believe the system owes them a living and that they shouldn t have to pay bills that the rest of us. And dont even get me started on the whole 'freeman of the land bs'...........

[brassnecked]

I find it interesting that the amount of horror stories on here that it seems so many people believe that the Enforcement industry is the party thats in the wrong. Ok, Ive had problems and fallen behind in bills before now, but it does seem like theres many, many people on here that believe the system owes them a living and that they shouldn t have to pay bills that the rest of us. There are many who genuinely cannot afford the bills due to a reduction in income/withdrawal of benefit And dont even get me started on the whole 'freeman of the land bs'...........

 

You can have a laugh at FMOL. The real issue is that government policy, coupled with horrendous utility bills, and Council Tax that is an imposition with no relation to ability to pay, as in many Social Homes, as in council/HA are actually in the higher bands so in some circumstances the council tax can be more than the rent, or even a mortgage.

[tomtubby]

If you are considering a career as a bailiff you will need to carefully read the new certification procedure.

 

We are expecting this 3rd and final statutory regulation within a week ( if not sooner).

 

There will no longer be a "Form 4" but there will be a replacement will this will centre ONLY on the bailiff's FITNESS to hold a position of certificated bailiff.

[brassnecked]

Will they be able to subvert or pervert this into litigation as per the existing Form 4?

[tomtubby]

 

Will they be able to subvert or pervert this into litigation as per the existing Form 4?

 

 

brassnecked

 

In answer to your question.....only time will tell.

 

Every industry (whether it is an insurance company opposing a household/motor claim or a bank opposing a PPI claim) will be looking for the "loophole" in the agreement/contract for the purpose of gaining a financial advantage. Sadly, the bailiff industry is no different.

[tomtubby]

 

Will they be able to subvert or pervert this into litigation as per the existing Form 4?

 

 

 

The Form 4 (as we know it) will become obsolete in 8 weeks time although I suspect that the terminology may still be used by debtors. Hopefully from 6th April debtors will use a "Form 4 Complaint" as a very last resort and instead, take their complaint to the local authority or magistrate court FIRST. In that way we will be able to avoid the dreadful cost orders that are coming through from the courts in respect of "vextatious" Form 4 complaints.

 

I will be starting a new thread about two such "cost orders"........

 

One is MASSIVE at over £21,000 !!!.......no need to go to Specsavers. The figure is correct.

 

The second one is just over £4,000 from a County Court in the West Country.

 

It has been a busy few days and the bailiff industry are all over these 'cost orders' like a rash.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Nah, why would you want to take a job which continually entails bringing people bad news ?

 

If you fancy enforcement join .. the army.

 

 

 

 

Well, the values and standards of the Army could not be more different to the way bailiffs behave:

 

 

Army life is based on six core values:

 

 

 

Courage; be brave enough to do the right thing, no matter what the circumstances.

 

Discipline; set a good example and follow lawful orders.

 

 

Respect for others; treat people as you’d want to be treated.

 

 

 

Integrity; be honest and never lie, cheat or steal.

 

 

 

Loyalty; look after your mates and stick with them, even when the going gets tough.

 

 

 

Selfless commitment; put the team, your mates and the mission before yourself.

 

 

As a soldier, your behaviour must always be:

 

 

Lawful, appropriate and totally professional at all times.

[SuperVillain]

In my experience when I get no payment following a CCJ I will instruct the HCEO as a matter of course when I know the debtor's location. Usually I instruct where there is lack of contact with the debtor i.e. ignoring pre-issue LBAs, not responding to the Court Forms, and not responding to Judgment.

 

It often takes the HCEO to visit a debtor to find out they've got no funds to pay, and you're often left thinking.. well if you'd have responded to the LBA and said that it wouldn't have got this far.

 

Obviously this then impacts on how effective the HCEO is. I think in 3 years I've only had 1 full recovery using the HCEO of approx £10k. I've got 8 or 9 debtors in payment plans with the HCEO ranging from £15 to £200/month. 3 who started payment plans then stopped paying. I'd go out on a limb and say 60-70% of claims the HCEO has not made contact in 3 visits so no recovery and a further £72 quid for Client to pay.

 

But if the debtor doesn't respond to LBAs and proceedings then it's really the only option left from a Claimant's point of view (aside from writing off the debt and taking a hit on any extra costs).

[brassnecked]

 

 

 

Well, the values and standards of the Army could not be more different to the way bailiffs behave:

 

 

Army life is based on six core values:

 

 

 

Courage; be brave enough to do the right thing, no matter what the circumstances.

 

Discipline; set a good example and follow lawful orders.

 

 

Respect for others; treat people as you’d want to be treated.

 

 

 

Integrity; be honest and never lie, cheat or steal.

 

 

 

Loyalty; look after your mates and stick with them, even when the going gets tough.

 

 

 

Selfless commitment; put the team, your mates and the mission before yourself.

 

 

As a soldier, your behaviour must always be:

 

 

Lawful, appropriate and totally professional at all times.

 

Not ideal new career for a soldier then.

[hhh_88873]

So an update to this, I am now going to be getting certified, starting the course v soon.

 

I'm doing it solely to get into high court enforcement so as to help people have been unfairly dismissed etc. A colleague of mine that I used to work the doors with is a HCEO so Im trying to see if he can help me with it.

 

However, on a plus point for this site, Ill be able to provide a little insight from inside the business at the least.

 

Hopefully Ill be in a position to help some people on here at the very least.

[HCEOs]

An interesting twist to the original post.

 

Firstly it is Certificated and what course do you intend to do?

 

There are several companies out there offering courses that really aren't worth the paper they're written on.

[hhh_88873]

Its the official enforcement agent certification course Im doing. Through one of the large established firms.

 

So its legit.

 

Only thing I concerned with is Ive told them quite bluntly I wont do council tax or civil work. Theyre happy enough (at the moment) with my plan to only do criminal stuff but well see how long that lasts........