Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Vulnerable household vs. Vulnerable adult


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3763 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

I have been studying as always after reading up on various posts,

 

I now have a what I deem a very good question and would like some input please the question is as follows.

 

For enforcement purposes which is the correct "vulnerability" to use as a method of protecting a debtor that falls into either category

 

1.Vulnerable adult. definition here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/446/regulation/2/made

2.Vulnerable household. As mentioned in many a post thanks for looking and replying

3.Does a vulnerable adult have more protection than a vulnerable household?

As under PACE the vulnerable adult is very protected.

4. Does the vulnerable adult give the same protection to the household as well?

IE does the household then become vulnerable and has the same protection as a vulnerable household as stated.

 

If the adult is vulnerable and is the debtor, is it correct that the Bailiff must retire until an appropriate adult is present, as the debtor is at possible risk of being taken advantage of?

 

Also if the Bailiff manages to bluff his way in a lays a levy will this then be deemed as an incorrect levy?

 

How can such an adult now be protected from any Bailiff enforcement action under the new legislation

and what recourse does the appropriate adult have and how would they get help in this matter?

 

To give an example using myself as the subject ok

 

As far as Social Services are concerned they state for safety purposes I am classed as vulnerable, due to my physical as well as mental disabilities.

 

 

Because I am a danger to myself and to others and do not understand the dangers and put myself at risk without understanding the dangers, so I may harm myself or put others at risk of danger or harm, so therefore I have to have a carer to assist me in everyday chores, to make sure that the tasks are done correctly and without danger to myself

 

 

But I am left alone at times to have "free time to myself on my own" so under PACE I get full protection and the need for an appropriate adult before questioning, but what of Bailiff enforcement action what protection would I have from them?

 

MM

Edited by mikeymack2002
typo

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as I've seen here

 

the vul status applies to the whole household regardless as to 'whom' IS vul within that household.

 

any enforcement whatsoever should cease when they are told of the households status.

and must be referred back to whomever called the bailiffs in with no further action taking place

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx dx100uk I was editing as you was posting as I am sleepy and wrote the post slightly wrong, With the new legislation will the rules be easier to protect a vul person and would any fees then still be collectable? so as you can see the question as a whole has many answers, but how many Bailiffs will abide to these rules/guidelines?

 

 

I spend a lot of time in Court and hear the defence state Vulnerable every other word, but it falls on deaf ears on the bench, the bench then give a fine, defendant forgets or is to scared or the like or even just forgets about it.

 

 

I have read many a post where the Bailiff simply disregards the notification by the debtor they are indeed with-in that group and given a hard time, being able to prove it? How, if the Bailiff hears this on a daily basis will they actually learn to accept word of mouth, they won't a debtor will always have to send proof, in my case I have a "blue badge" would this suffice as proof? it does have a photo on the back,

 

 

The definition of this group is significant, but all the bailiff wants is money owed and fees, if not then seizure of goods, which brings us full circle will Bailiffs continue to be brutal with debtors from this group?

 

 

These sort of questions will be on the mind of many and will still be petrified if a Bailiff comes knocking, just look at what has happened with the "bedroom tax" then UC then PIPS when will it all end?

 

 

MM

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like in reality there will be no protection after April, as the benefit changes will mean bailiffs will be ca\lling on vulnerable people who never used to pay council tax, but now have to pay 30% out of their ESA along with Bedroom Tax on their adapted home, the bailiffs may withdraw due to the vulnerability after the first knock and have collected their £75 or so, but they will be back to evict when the possession order for rent arrears due to bedroom tax is granted. The problem is that these changes take a family on benefits, or a minimum wage family below the Applicable Amount, which is the amount of money they need after Rent/mortgafe relief and council tax to live on. Ma\y well be challenges under Human Rights in the near future.

 

It is entirely possible that whoever drafted all this mess forgot to consider the law of unintended consequences in their attempts to protect the vulnerable and as a result it could backfire and make the situation worse for vulnerable people and households.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brassnecked thanks for the comment now this post maybe right up your street so to speak what do you think of this then?

 

 

Looking at the whole picture to include the following

 

 

1. Welfare Reform Act 2012

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/5/contents/enacted

 

2. Prevention of Social Housing Fraud Act 2013

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prevention-of-social-housing-fraud-act-2013

 

3. The Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/part/2/crossheading/ways-of-securing-goods/made

 

4. Proceeds of crime Act 2002

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/29/contents

 

These are all designed to take as much money as possible from offenders, defendants, debtors, and fraudulent benefit claimers and bad credit debtors.

 

 

The Crime Act and Courts and its industry have been hammered and now someone has to pay for that, this is everyone that falls into the above, categories, This is just the beginning of financial ruin for those that do not have a safety net of savings, or are subject to Court orders, including those that owe civil debts, of all categories, they will now be subject to far closer scrutiny of what they owe, if they wont pay up they will get sorted out by the Bailiffs, who in the end will be the winners out of all of this mess.

 

 

The new fees structure is designed to get the debtor to pay in the shortest time, even if this means it takes them below the financial threshold the Government has set for those that are on benefits. But looking very closely at the get out of jail free cards that are being offered in the very short term by the Government means loans taken by benefit claimants will mean that they will have even less being paid to them.

 

 

To give you an idea of what I mean please read the following statement:

 

 

1. Within 15 months UC will be rolled out completely across the UK

 

2. Social Landlords will want a month in advance by the time this comes into effect, or face the possibility of getting taken to court for rent arrears.

 

3. When UC comes out you WILL need to have saved the equivalent of 5 weeks benefit as it will then only be paid once a month.

 

4. If you have not saved 5 weeks worth of money your last pay day will need to last up to 5 weeks. till your first month is paid.

 

5. If you are not in advance by at least one month to include water rates and service charge you will be in ARREARS before you start,

 

6. This means your landlord can seek possession for rent arrears. which means possible Bailiff action at the NEW rates

 

7. If you are visited by a bailiff even to post a letter the new fee is up to £75.00 let alone all the rest of the new fees.. see tomtubby's new posts

 

8. If you are a defendant that owes the Court system money you are up the creek without a paddle.

 

9. If you have ANY CIVIL/COURT debts it is best to get them all sorted out NOW before they get to a Bailiff.

 

10. Make sure you can live on what little money you have as you will need to save for a rainy day this is in a few months even an umbrella will not help you out.

 

 

11. If you miss one months rent when you get the Housing Benefit paid directly to you or use for anything else other than the rent you WILL get caught out short and be on the receiving end of a Bailiff see here for the new fees, courtesy of tomtubby http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?414547-The-Taking-Control-of-Goods-(Fees)-Regulations-2014-released-today.(3-Viewing)-nbsp

 

 

But on a note of hope there is limited funds available NOW for you to take advantage of in the way of DHP's apply for them now so you can at least have your month in advance sorted before you are left with LITTLE or NO money to live on, I have been helping local people get to grips with all the new legislation and I for one will work as hard as I can to help those I can before they find the hole will swallow them up whole, and still be hungry....

 

 

This is not scare mongering but FACT it's already happening and with devastating effect to all those caught so far, like the bedroom tax, cuts in benefits, even as far to go as keeping a roof over your head. Bear in mind most Councils are now sending out Housing Officers to check to see if you are sub-letting, or have a lodger that is not authorised by the council, if caught this will be really bad for you. If this post help you out please click on the black star at the bottom of the page thanks for reading this long post.

 

 

Please just look at all the relevant forums and you will slowly see the whole picture, The benefits system is in a turmoil at you will be affected one way or another, the courts system will make you pay faster and at as higher rate as they can, what little money you have now will be even less in a years time, The people that will get fat on your money are the Government and the Bailiffs......... Who is going to lose in the long run? YOU..... Your thoughts please!!! Sorry for the long post but....... you may find some answers here http://www.24dash.com/news/universal_credit/2014-01-29-Universal-credit-DWP-answers-key-questions-on-housing-payments

 

 

MM

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

mikeymack,I think you have summed up what is highly likely to be the result of all this, so now you could look up United nations Agenda 21, Common Purpose and the Bilderberg group, to get a wider perspective of what is driving the politicians pushing all this out.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

BN I will do thx OMG what a document to read it will take some time to read and digest but will do tomoorow and get back...........

 

 

 

Bilderberg group I know this one

 

 

Common Purpose heavy reading

 

 

United Nations Agenda 21 I need a sleep 1st for this one lol

 

 

My turn If politicians are there to make money for the Government, why then are the Government so frivolous in giving it away? I am not political but want to understand why my little money is not allowed to be mine,

 

 

I have very little and want to be able to have a meal that is not consisting of end of day reductions just so I can eat a meal.

 

 

Why must I pay a Bailiff a huge fee for walking up a path to deliver a letter when the postman does it for 35p? THIS IS A REASONABLLE FEE a Bailiffs fee IS NOT go figure.

 

 

We are taught now that money is tight and we need to spend it cautiously, then WHY DOES THE GOVERNMENT ALLOW SUCH APPAULING ROBBERY? for one person to deliver a letter for 35p then another person walking the same distance with less weight of letters, why the heck will the second letter cost me £75.00?

 

 

This is so wrong in so many ways, but I guess walker two has more weight of mail in his hands, consisting of many 1st contact letters from a Bailiff's firm, both can not do it right, both will bring heartache to the reader. but one will do it for just 35p and say good morning to you with a nice smile whislst walker two will still say good morning with a smile and rubbing his/her hands?!!!!!!!

 

MM

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MM and Brassnecked.

 

I have had serious concerns for a long while at the Taking Control of Goods Regulations. When I responded to the consultation in March 2012 we never had an inkling of "bedroom tax" or "universal credit" and frankly, most people two years ago thought that the country /economy was starting to turn and the standard of living improving. In fact, the standard of living IS improving for those in the very high income bracket but the vast majority of people are struggling more now than even before.

 

There is a further change to income that has also happened recently and this is to do with the changes to child benefit for those on a certain income.

 

Trying to answer your query as to the 'guidelines' for vulnerability with the enforcement sector I am afraid to say that nobody appears to know the answer and we show know more in the next week or so when the third and final regulations about the certification process is released. It is expected that we will see in that document details of the training regime that bailiffs will have to undergo before certification.

 

In order to demonstrate the way in which 'vulnerability' is considered at present with enforcement companies, as many will know, the government consistently state that bailiffs/and local authorities should abide by the guidance outlined in the National Standards for Enforcement Agent. And yet:

 

In the HMCS Contracts with each of the four enforcement companies enforcing unpaid court FINES.......HMCS themselves do NOT have the same criteria as the NSEA !!!! Absolute crazy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I should also add that before the new regs take effect on 6th April we are expecting to see amendments made to the National Standards for Enforcement Agents. I would expect there to be more about vulnerability in that document.

 

Mikeymack......Your excellent posts have demonstrated the importance of debtors WRITING to the councill BEFORE court action to outline their circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tomtubby, I don't think the impact of the welfare reforms reducing income even crossed the minds of whoever was draughting the provisions in Taking control of Goods provisions. The fact that to many even a first visit fee is now even more unaffordable to people on low and middle income, a rise to £380 or so is the straw, on the camels back. I agree that people should contact councils and debtors before bailiffs are instructed, but as many councils are infested by the likes of Capita and Liberata, they may as well attempt to knit fog as deal with some of these people employed by Capita or Liberata rather than the council itself, who are intent on sending bailiffs anyway, whatever the hapless debtor suggests or does.

 

As to vulnerability, being wholly reliant on benefits should of itself ground first level vulnerability, and this would prima facie include minimum wage families who rely on Tax Credits and other handouts to get by. Second stage Pregnancy, from 3 months to term should be automatic vulnerability. Mental Health and learning difficulties should also be automatic, along with reciept of DLA/PIP, and the provision of a Motability Car. Incidentally, will Motability Finance be embroiled in interpleaders when bailiffs unlawfully take a disabled debtors car after April?

 

So many questions, too few answere, too little time until April = Extreme cock up all round, and mayhem in the courts.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...