Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3499 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

Can you post back to let us know whether the letters are entitled: Notice of Enforcement. If so, what date are they dated and what date must payment be made by?

 

You say that you have 6 letters. I am assuming that these are for six different accounts (as opposed to being duplicate letters) Is this correct?

 

In order to provide an accurate response can you provide some background information.

 

For instance:

 

What debts do the letters refer to?

 

Has the bailiff ever visited you before and in particular, what action if any has been taken before 6th April (when the new bailiff regulations took effect)?

 

What fees have been charged to each account?

 

Are you working, unemployed, on benefits etc?

 

Is there any 'vulnerability' in the family?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok to start off with the letters are dated and follow the heading Council Tax Notice of Issue of Liability Order. Letters came through post today 1st I have heard of the company. We are on tax credits with my wife working part time as I take care of our 3 kids. Says the balance must be paid in full within 14 days and if I cannot pay in full I must telephone them or write immediately. If I want them to consider a payment plan I must fill in the back of the letter where there is an income and outgoings form. The debt totals £1300 from the 6 different accounts of old council tax , they told me over the phone minimum payment is £180 per month.

 

Thank you for providing the additional information. From what you have said it would appear that you have financial difficulties and in this respect, should be considered as 'vulnerable' by Rossendales. It is important to complete the Income & Expenditure over the weekend and I would assume that once completed it should demonstrate that you are only able to afford to pay £20 per month (or possibly slightly more).

 

Fortunatly you are addressing this matter at the Notice of Enforcement stage (referred to in the regulations as Compliance Stage) so you have a few more days left.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I right in thinking that I would have a good case of pulling this back to be a council matter if not only I agreed to have an attachment of earnings to stand as a guarantor to a payment plan put in place , but also I could claim it be pulled back as my wife is vulnerable as she suffer from major depression and has been on medication quite a few years so this is likely to cause more hardship

 

Thank you for this important additional information which is clear evidence of 'vulnerability'. It is vitally important that in your letter to Rossendales that this is brought to their attention.

 

Just so that you are aware, Rossendales (like many other enforcement companies) review the Income & Expenditure on behalf of their local authority clients to establish whether the debtor is suitable for an Attachment of Earnings Order. If your case is appropriate then Rossendales would suggest this to the local authority so it is best to await their response to your letter.

 

The most important thing to do over the next few days is to get the Income & Expenditure completed. Any problems, please post back.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im lost here whats going on , I used to use this site years ago and was an absolute legend of a place. Now its all about people private messaging and not even knowing whos genuine or not.

 

Mart 2012

 

I can assure you that under the new regulations that took effect on 6th April you are certainly from a vulnerable family. It is vitally important that your case is therefore dealt with by the Welfare Dept at Rossendales and they will determine whether the case is returned back to the council.

 

As I said, they also have a dept that deals with Attachment of Earnings Orders so if this is appropriate given your Income & Expenditure then they will make the necessary arrangements. Have you completed the Income & Expenditure?

 

Can you explain what you meant by the comment yesterday about 'private messaging'.

 

Later this morning one of us on here will assist you with the wording for your email to send to Rossendales so that hopefully your account gets put on hold by the end of the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The private messaging issue was a couple of private messages saying people who were trying to help were real bailiffs trying to get information which was putting me off posting here. My next step I was going to ring the council tax office this morning and explain the situation quoting their own regulations on collecting but not sure if I would be wasting my time. To date the only conversation I have had with the bailiffs was the letter I received and then I phoned them on Friday to ask what was they expecting and they said they wanted the £1300 paid off inside 7 months maximum which leaves it at £180 a month minimum which theres no way we can afford

 

By all means call the council and stress to them about your wife's depression. It would be useful to know the response so please do post back.

 

Just so that you are aware, since the new regulations on 6th April most bailiff companies have to ensure the they address 'vulnerable' cases and far more protection must be given to anyone in this group. By 'vulnerability' I do not mean just health wise as 'vulnerability' covers serious financial difficulty.

 

If the council insist that you speak with the bailiff then please post back and you will receive assistance.

 

PS: Thank you for responding to my question about 'private messaging'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

JUst got we would love to try help you out but we cant as its out of our hands now , even though I quoted section 4.5 in their guidelines they still stuck to theres no way they can pull it back and basically go try tell the bailiffs what you told us :(

 

 

It is important to note that the Guidance (as good as it is) was released a year before the bailiff regulations changed with the governments introduction of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013.

 

The local authorities 'guidance' was introduced following a raft of questions in the House of Commons regarding 'kicks backs' in the contracts with one particular local authority (Harrow Council). Paragraphs 4.4 and 4.5 relate to the Contracts that local authorities have with their bailiff provider and state the following:

 

4.4 Arrangements should seek to safeguard against bailiffs entering into punitive repayment arrangements directly with bill payers. Local Authorities should consider how they manage their relationships with bailiffs to have oversight over such arrangements and set parameters for such agreements. They should be mindful of the impact that repeat visits may have.

 

4.5 Local Authorities should remain prepared to deal directly with individuals at any point. It is perfectly within their gift to call action back from the bailiffs at any time and where there is a case to do so they should consider such action

 

Under 4.5 of the Guidance it is made clear that a local authority could 'call back action' from the bailiffs 'at any time' and that if there is a case to do so...the local authority should 'consider such action'.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/clampdown-on-councils-using-heavy-handed-bailiffs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, local authorities tend to take little notice of the the above Guidance. This is despite the fact that the debt is theirs and they have overall control of their enforcement companies.

 

Be that as it may, your post certainly appears to demonstrate that your family have 'vulnerability' issues and it is for this reason that I have sent a message to one of the moderators. Hopefully this will enable the bailiff company to suspend any further enforcement whilst your circumstances are taken into consideration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The big probllem now is that with council tax ahnd revenue functions outsourced, the actual council don't get to know what liberties the department and the enforcers are taking until Formal Complaints go in. Any vulnerability must be indicated to EA and council with proof at the earliest opportunity. Now can I be banned like neckbeard?

 

The matter of 'vulnerability' is so important and this is the reason why I have also stated that evidence needs to be provided.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have put in writing to the council basically my circumstances and have asked them to look into it for me. Debtline helped me with budget sheets which will arrive tomorrow which I well send to both the council and the bailiffs with the maximum offer I can afford again stating my case which I have outlined on here. I will post further if there are any updates in the meantime and thanks again for all your great advice its very much appreciated.

 

National Debtline are very good and are experienced in putting together a sensible budget sheet. It is important to ensure that you provide some evidence of your wife's health problems. This will greatly assist your case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...