Can Council Tax Arrears passed to Newlyn PLC be recalled back on vunerability **Resolved** grounds?

[matt v atos]

This guy on here can't have a proper discussion without sticking to the facts and not becoming personal.

 

He hates bailiffs and I am a bailiff.

So he automatically slates me with.

He's certainly a character

 

I've tried to offer a bailiff perspective a view an opinion.

He continues to call me a disease. Lol

 

Maybe this is why there's a need for bailiffs because of people with a serious attitude like him

 

I Hate bailiffs too.

[caro]

This guy on here can't have a proper discussion without sticking to the facts and not becoming personal.

 

He hates bailiffs and I am a bailiff.

So he automatically slates me with.

He's certainly a character

 

I've tried to offer a bailiff perspective a view an opinion.

He continues to call me a disease. Lol

 

Maybe this is why there's a need for bailiffs because of people with a serious attitude like him

 

Seems to me there's been name calling on both sides. If this thread continues in this vein it will be closed and some posters may be moderated.

 

This type of action is not taken lightly. As a bailiff your positive input is very welcome, but just as you wish to provide your perspective, please have the courtesy to consider different opinions.

[Talk sense]

My advice would be don't deal with the bailiffs if you don't have to, yes. And most certainly don't let them in! As you and your ilk have got no more right of access than the postman.

 

The liability offers a legal right of peaceful entry.

I didn't know postmen and women had that power.

 

If they do, they do. But I can't see it happening any time soon.

 

You can't see that a liability already grants legal peaceful entry

 

Didn't have to? Future tense? They don't have to let them now, never mind not having to let them in at some point in the future.

 

Not dealing with it first tense is why the bill(s) increase with costs

 

Well, as we all already know, the police will only attend to prevent a breach of the peace, so please don't be trying to pull the wool with that old chestnut. As for Liability Orders or warrants that grant forced entry, with or without locksmiths, they're already available if you can convince a magistrate to give you one. Jolly good luck with that.

 

The police under new regulation are now at liberty to assist the EO in his or her duty. So I would read up on that again.

 

Not a million miles away, no. More like 10 million, with the exception of see above.

 

Zzzzzzzzz

Anything else you don't know??

 

And really...? Your on here giving advice?

In what capacity as a hate campaigner against bailiffs.

You really think that helps people on here.

Poor,inaccurate advice?

 

What was that you were saying? Oh yes...

 

Serious

[Talk sense]

Seems to me there's been name calling on both sides. If this thread continues in this vein it will be closed and some posters may be moderated.

 

This type of action is not taken lightly. As a bailiff your positive input is very welcome, but just as you wish to provide your perspective, please have the courtesy to consider different opinions.

 

I do understand

I have full respect for other opinion.

It's when opinion is voiced disrespectfully I struggle

[Talk sense]

I do understand

I have full respect for other opinion.

It's when opinion is voiced disrespectfully I struggle

 

This then isn't an open forum for free opinion or perspective.

 

This is a beat the bailiff forum.

And no different to all the others

[Peterbard]

Perhaps TS should start his own thread and he can then feel free to put what he thinks is the bailiff line without interfering with others who are trying to help the OP.

[caro]

This then isn't an open forum for free opinion or perspective.

 

This is a beat the bailiff forum.

And no different to all the others

 

 

It is a forum which provides information, ideas and advice to help people with problems in all sorts of areas. Many of our posters have had extremely negative experiences with bailiffs, and so their views are obviously going to be biased against them. That does not give them the right to treat other users on this forum. whatever there background, without respect.

 

 

If you find yourself treated outside the forum rules, please report the posts rather than respond in a similar way.

[brassnecked]

This bickering is not helping LadyDay, in fact as she is fragile at the moment and very worried we should be concentrating on helping her.

 

Lets look at her potential vulnerability under the National Standards, the whole family is vulnerable, unless the TCGA removed that safeguard, so if proof is provided then the EA should notify the creditor and take advice accordingly,

 

"Anyway, my social worker just rang the CT department and explained that under the circumstances, (being diagnosed with a chronic illness and mental health issues) that I should be considered a vunerable person or a vulnerable household.

 

However, the CT call centre operative, who conferred with CT Recovery dept has said that since the CT was in both mine and my OH's name, making him therefore jointly liable for the debt (even though he wasn't aware of it because I was hiding the letters) my specific circumstances made no difference and that there would be no circumstance in which the household would be considered vunerable. "

That may well come back and bite the council on the bum.

 

The way EAs and creditors are dealing with vulnerable debtors under the new rules needs monitoring and any blatant disregard of a vulnerable situation should be notified to MOJ and the local MP.

 

And yes Talking sense, if a debtor doesn't provide proof of vulnerability , but at first appeared normal it is difficult for an EA to assess the situation, How would you or an everyday EA deal with someone Deaf, or Blind, or even Deaf Blind? or looks OK initially then you realise the cannot see or hear you, or is a psychotic or manic depressive who looks normal and starts babbling about Armageddon and the hellFire when you are trying to persuade them to let you in? It's not easy is it.

 

Now let's stop trying to score points, and help LadyDay sort her problem

[caro]

Thank you for this sensible post brassnecked.

 

 

A number of unhelpful posts have been removed.

 

 

Should I need to remind posters to be civil again, the thread will be closed.

 

 

Please don't make me do that because I really do prefer free, polite, speech.

[Talk sense]

It is a forum which provides information, ideas and advice to help people with problems in all sorts of areas. Many of our posters have had extremely negative experiences with bailiffs, and so their views are obviously going to be biased against them. That does not give them the right to treat other users on this forum. whatever there background, without respect.

 

 

If you find yourself treated outside the forum rules, please report the posts rather than respond in a similar way.

 

With respect you can read the posts as mine.

For whatever reason, if it be bad experience or not?

These posters always forget of the original post and bombard with "hate "disease" "idiot" "stupid"

 

Truly. It maybe shows why bailiffs are as they are on occasion( not condoning) and neither should a previous experience with a bailiff warrant any abuse to a bailiff.

 

I've had many a bad experience with debtors.

A lot more experience than these guys with bailiffs.

But do I "hate" all people in debt??

Are they a "disease"

Because debtors in the past have threatened to rape my kids and execute my family????

 

It's a shame that a decent, open impartial opinion that's very rarely heard from a bailiff is greeted with hate posts.

 

Great forum

[Talk sense]

This bickering is not helping LadyDay, in fact as she is fragile at the moment and very worried we should be concentrating on helping her.

 

Lets look at her potential vulnerability under the National Standards, the whole family is vulnerable, unless the TCGA removed that safeguard, so if proof is provided then the EA should notify the creditor and take advice accordingly,

 

"Anyway, my social worker just rang the CT department and explained that under the circumstances, (being diagnosed with a chronic illness and mental health issues) that I should be considered a vunerable person or a vulnerable household.

 

However, the CT call centre operative, who conferred with CT Recovery dept has said that since the CT was in both mine and my OH's name, making him therefore jointly liable for the debt (even though he wasn't aware of it because I was hiding the letters) my specific circumstances made no difference and that there would be no circumstance in which the household would be considered vunerable. "

That may well come back and bite the council on the bum.

 

The way EAs and creditors are dealing with vulnerable debtors under the new rules needs monitoring and any blatant disregard of a vulnerable situation should be notified to MOJ and the local MP.

 

And yes Talking sense, if a debtor doesn't provide proof of vulnerability , but at first appeared normal it is difficult for an EA to assess the situation, How would you or an everyday EA deal with someone Deaf, or Blind, or even Deaf Blind? or looks OK initially then you realise the cannot see or hear you, or is a psychotic or manic depressive who looks normal and starts babbling about Armageddon and the hellFire when you are trying to persuade them to let you in? It's not easy is it.

 

Now let's stop trying to score points, and help LadyDay sort her problem

 

I really hope she solves her problem.

And stand by my initial posts.

[brassnecked]

Thank you for this sensible post brassnecked.

 

 

A number of unhelpful posts have been removed.

 

 

Should I need to remind posters to be civil again, the thread will be closed.

 

 

Please don't make me do that because I really do prefer free, polite, speech.

 

 

No problem caro, now Talk sense there will be points where we and others will disagree about certain methods, but your perspective is valid as a check and balance for the other side. After all we are all here to help. We just have to accept our differences of opinions and learn from each other rather than bicker.

[Talk sense]

I really hope she solves her problem.

And stand by my initial posts.

 

Sorry I didn't answer your question.

 

I'd treat the individual exactly how I'd treat that person if it was my own kin.

With a decency and heart.

Love and respect.

I would spend my day and contact Cnl and social services on that persons behalf if their was no one other present.

 

I've done this all my career, being a bailiff doesn't stop that.

But I agree with some it obviously has.

Which is the problem all bailiffs face.

[caro]

With respect you can read the posts as mine.

For whatever reason, if it be bad experience or not?

These posters always forget of the original post and bombard with "hate "disease" "idiot" "stupid"

 

Truly. It maybe shows why bailiffs are as they are on occasion( not condoning) and neither should a previous experience with a bailiff warrant any abuse to a bailiff.

 

I've had many a bad experience with debtors.

A lot more experience than these guys with bailiffs.

But do I "hate" all people in debt??

Are they a "disease"

Because debtors in the past have threatened to rape my kids and execute my family????

 

It's a shame that a decent, open impartial opinion that's very rarely heard from a bailiff is greeted with hate posts.

 

Great forum

 

With respect talk sense we all encounter problems at work but at the end of the day can go home, shut the front door, take our wages and forget it. Having a bailiff invade your home, sometimes in aggressive and threatening manner, possibly scaring children who see their parents upset is something different and rather more personal.

 

Now please stick strictly to helping the OP and keep on topic.

[caro]

Sorry I didn't answer your question.

 

I'd treat the individual exactly how I'd treat that person if it was my own kin.

With a decency and heart.

Love and respect.

I would spend my day and contact Cnl and social services on that persons behalf if their was no one other present.

 

I've done this all my career, being a bailiff doesn't stop that.

But I agree with some it obviously has.

Which is the problem all bailiffs face.

 

Pleased to hear it. Sadly not all are as sympathetic and it's the problem bailiffs we tend to hear about.

[Peterbard]

Personally i think it is the authorities duty to ensure that cases like this are not passed to bailiffs in the first place, and I think that this is where the complaint should be made.

 

The CT opperator was clearly out of order in my opinion

[Talk sense]

Personally i think it is the authorities duty to ensure that cases like this are not passed to bailiffs in the first place, and I think that this is where the complaint should be made.

 

The CT opperator was clearly out of order in my opinion

 

Absolutely 150%

A great respect for pointing this out.

 

Why would I want to be in that situation ever mind the debtor.

[Talk sense]

Absolutely 150%

A great respect for pointing this out.

 

Why would I want to be in that situation ever mind the debtor.

 

A fantastic post and really appreciated as normally the bailiff would carry the flack and have a misplaced complaint made against them for noore than knocking on a door.

[i hate bailiffs]

The bottom line is

 

This IS A VULNRABLE HOUSEHOLD BAILIFF ACTION MUST NOW STOP

 

There is no argument no ifs or buts simply bailiff action must stop

 

Simples:amen:

[Talk sense]

The bottom line is

 

This IS A VULNRABLE HOUSEHOLD BAILIFF ACTION MUST NOW STOP

 

There is no argument no ifs or buts simply bailiff action must stop

 

Simples:amen:

 

Agreed.

[brassnecked]

Surely alarm bells mus be ringing in a council when one of their own Social Workers is asking them why they are harrassing one of their vulnerable clients. but no it is all about the money. That is the bottom line it is all about money.

 

Now LadyDay you get the evidence from the SW and your doctor, contact your local council member so you can show them how the council deals with vulnerable residents who have fallen on hard times or bad health, by sending in the bailiffs then refusing to consider vulnerability.

[lookinforinfo]

Ladyday I am sorry you are having to go through all this despite the attempts by the new legislation to protect people in

your situation.

I have added a pamphlet from the Ministry of Justice which may help you and while what is said is not not legally binding,

the MOJ would like all parties to use their points as a benchmark.

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/enforcement-officers/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf

 

You might like to read it and point out to the Council that failure to adhere to the MOJ recommendations could lead to

them being guilty of maladministration by the Local Government Ombudsman.

When you see any that you think are relevant to your argument then include them. As suggestions-

 

1] 7. Creditors should remember that enforcement agents are acting on their behalf

and that ultimately they are responsible, and accountable, for the enforcement

agents acting on their behalf.

 

2] 14. Creditors must consider the appropriateness of referring debtors in potentially

vulnerable situations to enforcement agents and, if they choose to proceed, must

alert the enforcement agent to this situation

 

3] 15. Creditors should ensure that there are clear protocols agreed with their

enforcement agents governing the approach that should be taken when a debtor

has been identified as vulnerable.

 

4] 16. Should a debtor be identified as vulnerable, creditors should be prepared to take

control of the case, at any time, if necessary.

 

5] 19. Enforcement agents must act within the law at all times, including all legislation

and observe all health and safety requirements in carrying out enforcement. They

must maintain strict client confidentiality and comply with Data Protection

legislation and, where appropriate, the Freedom of Information Act.

 

6] 70. Enforcement agents/agencies and creditors must recognise that they each have

a role in ensuring that the vulnerable and socially excluded are protected and that

the recovery process includes procedures agreed between the agent/agency and

creditor about how such situations should be dealt with. The appropriate use of

discretion is essential in every case and no amount of guidance could cover

every situation. Therefore the agent has a duty to contact the creditor and report

the circumstances in situations where there is evidence of a potential cause for

concern.

 

7] 71. If necessary, the enforcement agent will advise the creditor if further action is

appropriate. The exercise of appropriate discretion is needed, not only to protect

the debtor, but also the enforcement agent who should avoid taking action which

could lead to accusations of inappropriate behaviour.

[ploddertom]

One thing which sticks out for me is that this seems to go quite a way back before the new Regulations came in. Also have you asked the Bailiffs for a breakdown of the fees charged to date? Sounds as if they may be trying a mixture of old & new. Do you know how many Liability Orders the Council have against you etc?

[brassnecked]

good point PT itf that is the case then the transitional riules might apply, and it must be dealt with under the old rules PROVIDING there is a levy on goods before April 6th

[LadyDay]

Hi, I know thread this has generated a lot of heat but do hope it stays open. We tried to look at previous posts that might have touched on this type of situation after the new legislation in April but didn't find many on any forum so all your opinions are really valuable and I'm sure this thread may be helpful for other people who may at some point find themselves in similar situations. So very grateful.

 

All my health issues still apply today. On some days with the Chronic Fatigue, I can't even get out of bed I'm only in my 30's! It's just that I've begun to stop hiding my head in a hole thinking it would all go away and support is beginning to help me sort things. I didn't think/know anyone would take notice of any of my problems and it's just the kind of mindset/black hole you end up in. When I lost my job, it even took me a YEAR to fill out any forms to get benefits (ESA) even though I was entitled to them.

 

It just now that I know that support might be given, I've got the help to ask the question.

 

Ploddertom & brassnecked. Yes, this did go back years and at the time it was passed to Jacobs balliffs. I know when we finally got a breakdown from the Council, they said there had been 2 liability orders and it had gone to court twice because there were 2 lots of court costs for £95 each that had been added on top. There were also just lots of unopened Balliff letters titled 'pay immediately' '24 hours removal' etc that I couldn't deal with and lots of door knocks, but since somebody finally helped go through the letters it would seem that Jacobs stopped sending letters at some point and then in April (?) this year Newlyns PLC started sending letters? No balliffs have been into the house though (is that how they levy?) and I've not phoned them either for a breakdown of costs.

 

I just started paying the Council directly and they did take the payments off the arrears until there is now £90.60 owed to them and then all this added Balliff stuff ontop. I really don't know if Jacobs will start asking for money from old bills as well as Newlyns??? It's all just got a bit complicated really. I know it was my fault this mess happened but the circumstances were way beyond.

 

Thanks lookinforinfo, that's useful. We'll use this info for the letter as well.

 

Cheers All.

Edited July 13, 2014 by LadyDay