Can't Pay We'll Take it Away TV programme

[Bailiff Advice]

All Shergroup & now DCBL writs are issued in her name.

 

So, lets assume that a claim was instigated against CS (as in the 'Huntress Search' case) and the court made a similar finding. How would the debtor be able to succeed in enforcing any award given that she resides in Florida?

[brassnecked]

So, lets assume that a claim was instigated against CS (as in the 'Huntress Search' case) and the court made a similar finding. How would the debtor be able to succeed in enforcing any award given that she resides in Florida?

Bring an action in the USA problem would be proving a "crime" in the US jurisprudence, or a cause for action. Claire Sandbrook is dodgy, dodgy, dodgy.

[caledfwlch]

Bring an action in the USA problem would be proving a "crime" in the US jurisprudence, or a cause for action. Claire Sandbrook is dodgy, dodgy, dodgy.

 

Highly unlikely, many if not all States (not sure what the Federal Government thinks of it) have laws specifically prohibiting legal judgements from the UK from being enforced/transferred. Quite rightly too - the laws were only created because of Britain's insane Libel laws leading to "Libel Tourism" so US citizens, resident in the US, were taking other US citizens, resident in the US to Court in London.

 

I cannot see how the endorsement etc of a HCEO can possibly be lawful if they are abroad most of the year - it is not just an issue of how do you enforce a civil money judgement, its the fact that she is also totally outside the checks and balances of the system, as poor as they are - how on earth is she able to keep an eye on, and indeed, delegate her powers to people when she is abroad, surely prior to hiring and delegating her powers, it would be reasonable to expect she has met them, and assessed the "cut of their gib" if you see what I mean.

 

As well as it being impossible to sue her when her people do something wrong, she is also outside the control of the MOJ, and thus denying victims of serious problems have no come back at all

[brassnecked]

Highly unlikely, many if not all States (not sure what the Federal Government thinks of it) have laws specifically prohibiting legal judgements from the UK from being enforced/transferred. Quite rightly too - the laws were only created because of Britain's insane Libel laws leading to "Libel Tourism" so US citizens, resident in the US, were taking other US citizens, resident in the US to Court in London.

 

I cannot see how the endorsement etc of a HCEO can possibly be lawful if they are abroad most of the year - it is not just an issue of how do you enforce a civil money judgement, its the fact that she is also totally outside the checks and balances of the system, as poor as they are - how on earth is she able to keep an eye on, and indeed, delegate her powers to people when she is abroad, surely prior to hiring and delegating her powers, it would be reasonable to expect she has met them, and assessed the "cut of their gib" if you see what I mean.

 

As well as it being impossible to sue her when her people do something wrong, she is also outside the control of the MOJ, and thus denying victims of serious problems have no come back at all

 

Absolutely so Caled, she should not be allowed to carry on as she does, Huntress and the Bridlington Chippie incident proved she is not fit even before she left , they weren't regarded as Sherfarce for nothing. MOJ should stop her from operating in the UK, she can be a sidekick to Dog The Bounty Hunter Stateside then, but she better learn how to use a gun over there.

[Bailiff Advice]

The comments from brassnecked and caledfwlch have summed up the position extremely well.

[brassnecked]

As it stands Caled and BA, if one of her delegated Enforcers messes up, goes to the wrong address like the Bridlington Chip Shop, or even caused a death as in debtor has heart attack or stroke during the visit, and delagated EA is found to be culpable for their action that caused the death; Sandbrook is virtually untouchable unles she voluntarily returns. The US authorities are unlikely to deport her if MOJ request it as she has commited no crime in the USA.

[caledfwlch]

As it stands Caled and BA, if one of her delegated Enforcers messes up, goes to the wrong address like the Bridlington Chip Shop, or even caused a death as in debtor has heart attack or stroke during the visit, and delagated EA is found to be culpable for their action that caused the death; Sandbrook is virtually untouchable unles she voluntarily returns. The US authorities are unlikely to deport her if MOJ request it as she has commited no crime in the USA.

 

Well, she isn't a US Citizen, is she? If not, then they would likely deport, but it would take years.

 

The more likely event is a seriously turned over Business sueing for major losses, and either being unable to because she is not resident in the UK, or getting one, she ignores it and enforcement is impossible, because most if not all US States have banned the transfer of Civil Judgements from the Courts of England & Wales and Scotland because of the lunacy of our libel system.

[mikeymack2002]

http://www.findlaw.co.uk/law/dispute_resolution/litigation/basics/500437.html

 

 

But don't forget that since she is "working in the Uk an AoE can still be made as can a 3rd party debt order

 

 

An attachment of earnings order: compels the debtor’s employer to make regular deductions from the debtor’s earnings and pay them into court. Third-party debt order: where a third party owes money to the debtor, the court can order the third party to pay the creditor the whole of that debt, or enough to satisfy it. A charging order: the debt can be secured against the debtor’s home.

 

Taken from the above link

[caledfwlch]

Here is 2 photo's to show just how much Bob and Co are attempting to mislead debtors regarding their powers via their form of pseudo Police dress. The second photo is of an Essex Police Constable and PCSO.

 

 

[mikeymack2002]

This sort of thing is covered here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/16/section/90

[caledfwlch]

This sort of thing is covered here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/16/section/90

 

It really is difficult to see why they have not been arrested. White shirt and plain body armour? Ok, not perfect, maybe body armour should be worn under coat, but not so police looking - it's the fact they are using the chequered pattern - it is an image that is so tied into the Police that it even has a special name - Stiltoe Tartan, (sometimes as Police Tartan) it was iirc, designed and brought on in their fleet livery, uniforms etc by a Scottish Police Force in the 50's

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sillitoe_Tartan

 

There is NO innocent Civilian use for Stiltoe Tartan, on Uniforms, not when it is placed in a position identical to where some forces place theirs. I have said uniforms, because I cannot recall whether I have seen motorway repair vehicles with tartan or if they only use that stripey effect.

[HCEOs]

As mentioned above and many times before, if nobody complains, nothing will happen.

 

This is true of any complaint regarding an enforcement agent/officer and like every HCEO company we would have to respond to a complaint made to the HCEOA.

 

A compliant can be made by anybody and not just those involved in the case.

 

Sorry, but is no use just bleating about issues on a forum unless you're prepared to complain yourself.

 

What I would say is that the EAs pictured above have changed their attire slightly for the latest series of the show (no blue and white chequers).

[mikeymack2002]

How can you successfully complain to an industry that regulates itself ?? Also it will have to be a debtor that complains as it is/was they whom was the recipient of the issue!

[HCEOs]

How can you successfully complain to an industry that regulates itself ?? Also it will have to be a debtor that complains as it is/was they whom was the recipient of the issue!

 

The progress of a complaint depends on its seriousness and whether the complainant appeals the decisions reached at each stage.

 

Yes, after the complaint process is exhausted with the company involved the industry regulates itself for the next few parts of the complaints procedure but it is then passed to an external barrister and then to the Senior Master.

 

And as I said before, the complainant may not be a debtor. The spate of TV shows has seen complaints from members of the public due to the actions of various enforcement agents.

 

My point is that whatever the HCEO, whatever the firm, we are all answerable to the public by a robust complaints procedure.

[mikeymack2002]

A new view is about an HCEO that resides in a different country and how can they really be able to keep their doers in order from such a distance. Since the HCEO is responsible for the actions of anyone working for them or under them. I do understand what you are saying and agree that the TV shows do show the difference to what the public perceive is right, or wrong maybe that the Government should task a proper complaints system and or regulator that is totally independent from the enforcement industry, just like the FCA/FOS for credit and so on? Would you agree with this or have you got your own views you could share on this matter?

 

 

Thanks for the input

[Deadwood]

The progress of a complaint depends on its seriousness and whether the complainant appeals the decisions reached at each stage.

 

Yes, after the complaint process is exhausted with the company involved the industry regulates itself for the next few parts of the complaints procedure but it is then passed to an external barrister and then to the Senior Master.

 

And as I said before, the complainant may not be a debtor. The spate of TV shows has seen complaints from members of the public due to the actions of various enforcement agents.

 

My point is that whatever the HCEO, whatever the firm, we are all answerable to the public by a robust complaints procedure.

 

In practice, the legal profession looks down on debtors especially judges and the view that's taken is that if you can't or won't pay you're thrown to the dogs. Whether it's can't or won't is irrelevant, the law is the law, you owe money, you pay it. simples. The fact that HCEO enforcement is costly or unfair is not their problem, it's yours.

[Bailiff Advice]

 

I do understand what you are saying and agree that the TV shows do show the difference to what the public perceive is right, or wrong maybe that the Government should task a proper complaints system and or regulator that is totally independent from the enforcement industry, just like the FCA/FOS for credit and so on? Would you agree with this or have you got your own views you could share on this matter?

 

 

The Ministry of Justice have made the point very clear that we will not see a regulatory body being appointed (independent or otherwise). There are changes being considered at present and one such change will hopefully allow a complainant to make a direct complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. At present, such a complaint many only be made via the complainants local Member of Parliament.

[caledfwlch]

The Ministry of Justice have made the point very clear that we will not see a regulatory body being appointed (independent or otherwise). There are changes being considered at present and one such change will hopefully allow a complainant to make a direct complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. At present, such a complaint many only be made via the complainants local Member of Parliament.

 

What is there stated reason? Given there are regulators for people who simply have the power to phone up and ask you to pay a debt, you would think an area of business that involved people being able to enter homes and remove property would be far more in need of a regulator.

 

I suppose the big difference is as Bailiff's come under the MOJ as such, the MOJ doesn't like any of its parts to be under scrutiny. There aren't even any real way to complain about a Judge who is clearly either taking bribes or is continually making judgements in error of law.

[Deadwood]

At present, such a complaint many only be made via the complainants local Member of Parliament.

 

I didn't know that. I contacted my MP who was a Solicitor before becoming an MP about the problem of Sherforce overcharging me, there wasn't a glimmer of interest. He said as it was a legal matter he couldn't do anything.

[outlawla]

I didn't know that. I contacted my MP who was a Solicitor before becoming an MP about the problem of Sherforce overcharging me, there wasn't a glimmer of interest. He said as it was a legal matter he couldn't do anything.

 

I'm guessing if the issue wasn't considered a legal matter he would have similarly been disinterested and would do nothing because it was not a legal matter.

 

There ususally has to be something in it for them to get interested, like they can use the issue for political point scoring.

[Bailiff Advice]

I didn't know that. I contacted my MP who was a Solicitor before becoming an MP about the problem of Sherforce overcharging me, there wasn't a glimmer of interest. He said as it was a legal matter he couldn't do anything.

 

It has always been the case that there is no direct access to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. Instead, any approach must come from the complainants Member of Parliament and as you have rightly noted above, you would need to first satisfy the MP that the complaint has merit. This is not such an easy task either.

 

However, as I have mentioned above, this may soon be changing and direct access may well be permitted.

[HCEOs]

However, the original questions about complaints related to the actions of any HCEO or their Enforcement Agents.

 

As explained already, complaints are dealt with through a series of escalating procedures initiating with the enforcement company through to the Senior Master in the High Court.

[Bailiff Advice]

However, the original questions about complaints related to the actions of any HCEO or their Enforcement Agents.

 

As explained already, complaints are dealt with through a series of escalating procedures initiating with the enforcement company to the Senior Master in the High Court.

 

Correct.

[HCEOs]

A new view is about an HCEO that resides in a different country and how can they really be able to keep their doers in order from such a distance. Since the HCEO is responsible for the actions of anyone working for them or under them. I do understand what you are saying and agree that the TV shows do show the difference to what the public perceive is right, or wrong maybe that the Government should task a proper complaints system and or regulator that is totally independent from the enforcement industry, just like the FCA/FOS for credit and so on? Would you agree with this or have you got your own views you could share on this matter? Thanks for the input

 

As you now know, HCEO complaints are handled very differently to that of the general Bailiff sector. I personally believe the end-to-end process to be effective enough as it is. In my earlier post I advised that whilst initial complaints are dealt with by the company then the HCEOA and after this it goes external, finally landing in the lap of the Senior Master who has the ability to withdraw the High Court Enforcement Officers authorisation (granted by the Lord Chancellor).

 

Clearly the compliant would have to be of significantly serious grounds, like not paying clients or fraud for exapmle, for it to reach these higher stages but this will come down to whether the complainant refuses to accept decisions along the way and appeals them.