rossendales Rosendale bailiff arranged removal date.

[linzi855]

Hi

 

 

im looking for some advice,

a few months ago i made 3 payment arrangements with rosendales to pay my 3 outstanding council tax debts off.

 

 

i was paying £20 a week as currently im self employed but only just started up

im not getting money from it

im having to use £20 from my £82 working tax credits to pay them,

 

 

then all of a sudden i was getting letters for more debts,

this was after the council confirmed to me i only had 3 outstanding debts.

 

i cancelled the direct debits and wrote rosendales a letter to find out what is happening.

 

 

its been nearly 2 weeks and i have not heard from them.

 

 

this past week i have had a bailiff at my door every day but i was out working.

 

 

i have never seen or spoke to the bailiff until today when i called her back as i got a letter in my post from her

stating that she has booked a removal date for the 30th Jan to remove goods from my house.

 

 

Now from previous experience i know they are not allowed to gain access

unless they have been invited in before which she has not been invited in ever.

 

when i called her she was rude and

when i told her i was called by rosendales 2 days ago to see what has happened to my arrangement she said

"well why the hell are they contacting you when its been passed on to me,

they should no longer have any contact with you".

 

 

i told her ill call them in the morning.

 

 

ill also add that a month ago i did an expenditure form and offered what i could afford

and they declined it and made a new arrangement for me

which i told them i couldn't afford but they obviously ignored that and sent a bailiff out instead.

 

im just looking for some advice on what i could possibly say to rossendales when i call them

to let them know that threatening wont work as i know they are not allowed to gain entry to my property

and tell them that their ignorance is not fair at all and causing more hassle than it needs to

Edited January 27, 2015 by citizenB
formatting for easier reading

[dx100uk]

something note sitting right here on all this.

 

 

have ever done the following please:

 

 

Here is something to be getting on with.

.

First of all establish from the Council how much was owing etc

.

You need to speak to someone at the Council and ask the following questions:

1 - how many Liability Orders they have against you

2 - the dates they were obtained

3 - the addresses they were for

4 - the period of time each covers

5 - how much each one was for

6 - how much is still outstanding

7 - the dates they were passed on for enforcement

8 - the dates & amounts of any payments

...........................

.

Next you need to send off for a breakdown of the charges the Bailiff applied.

.

Here's an example,

use and ADAPT at will and best sent initially by email backed up by a copy in the post.

.

"From:

My Name

My Address

.

To:

Acme Bailiff Co

Bailiff House

.

Ref: Account No: 123456

.

Dear Sir

.

With reference to the above account, Can you please provide me with a breakdown of the charges.

.

This includes:

a - the time & date of any Bailiff action that incurred a Fee.

b - the reason for the fee.

c - the name(s) of the Bailiff(s) that attended on each occasion a Fee was charged.

d - the name(s) of the Court(s) the Bailiff(s) was/were Certificated at.

e - the date of the Certification.

.

This is NOT a Subject Access Request

uest under the Data Protection Act S7 1998

so does not incur a fee of £10. You are obliged to provide this information.

.

I require this information within 14 days.

.

Yours faithfully

.

Ripped off customer"

.

[ploddertom]

Do you know how many Liability Orders there are?

 

 

Do you know how much you owe on each one - as confirmed by the Council?

 

 

How many of the letters you have had from Rossendales are Notice of Enforcement letters?

 

 

What are the others you have had?

[Bailiff Advice]

 

I'll also add that a month ago i did an expenditure form and offered what i could afford and they declined it and made a new arrangement for me which i told them i couldn't afford but they obviously ignored that and sent a bailiff out instead.

 

The truth of the matter is that whilst the bailiff is encouraged to consider a payment proposal it needs to be borne in mind that all enforcement companies are guided by the Contracts that they have with their relevant local authority clients. As an example, most local authorities specify that payments can be considered over a three month period or, in exceptional cases.....six months.

 

A further problem is that most local authorities want debts that are with bailiffs paid up by the date of the new council tax year (April 2015). Failing which....debtors will once again fall into arrears with the new council tax bill and the 'spiral' of another Liability Order arises.

[lookinforinfo]

Some bailiffs lie and your one if not actually lying is sailing pretty close to the wind.

You are quite right that as they have not entered your property, they cannot enter and take any goods from your house. But what they can do

if they come round is to take control of goods that are outside your property like a car or garden furniture.

 

However you do have to make sure that you do not let them in as that would heap even more costs on to you than they have already charged.

[linzi855]

Hi thanks for the replies 1stly i will get on to writing them a letter/email to the council and rosendles now thanks for that.

 

last time i contacted council tax they didn't tell me what was outstanding they just told me how many debts i have.

 

am i right in saying that they wont be able to take my van as its my means of work as i am self employed

and without it i can no longer be self employed ( i recall someone telling me this),

 

 

when i stopped my payment arrangements i was sent expenditure forms which i filled in

and they declined my offer which was more than my first payment arrangement by a few pound

this is why i have wrote them a letter.

 

 

the letters that have been pushed through the door are Enforcement agent removal notice

saying additional costs of £110 will be added and failure to contact them will be interpreted as willful refusal to pay.

and this letter is apparently from the enforcement officer in charge.

 

 

on the last letter i received she has hand written on it

"removal date on or after 30/1 or pay £475.52 to clear one case and remainder on installments call me today to avoid removal.

 

 

i tried to upload the image of the letter but i don't know how to do it

[brassnecked]

If your van is not on finance/lease and is worth more than £1350, sadly it is fair game as the new regs allow only a limit of £1350 for tools of the trade. A measure that will put a great many small businesses out of bussiness as they will be unable to deliver their service with their tools and vehicles gone. This will hit sole traders the most as they therefore may well not be able to discharge any more of the debt either until JSA is sorted.

[linzi855]

Hi and thanks my van is worth under £1000 and falling to bits to be honest if i could get a new one they would be doing me a favor but thats not happening. if i change the name of ownership to someone would that stop them from been able to take it if i show that i have sent the logbook off. thats if they come to take it because i defo wouldn't let them in to talk

[brassnecked]

Hi and thanks my van is worth under £1000 and falling to bits to be honest if i could get a new one they would be doing me a favor but thats not happening. if i change the name of ownership to someone would that stop them from been able to take it if i show that i have sent the logbook off. thats if they come to take it because i defo wouldn't let them in to talk

If it is of such low value they might still take it anyway out of spite to pressure you, and argue that as the £1350 is a TOTAL for all tools you have across the board, your spanners, hammers power tools laptop etc are included in the total they can have the van and it's contents/toolbox as the aggregate is £1351.

 

 

Be careful with Rossendales and bear BA's commen ts about time allowed to payback. You need to find any irregularities in Rossendales actions sufficient to ground a Formal Complaint to the council CEO, Elected Leader and yoiur local council member.

[taurusgemini]

If it is of such low value they might still take it anyway out of spite to pressure you, and argue that as the £1350 is a TOTAL for all tools you have across the board, your spanners, hammers power tools laptop etc are included in the total they can have the van and it's contents/toolbox as the aggregate is £1351.

 

 

Be careful with Rossendales and bear BA's commen ts about time allowed to payback. You need to find any irregularities in Rossendales actions sufficient to ground a Formal Complaint to the council CEO, Elected Leader and yoiur local council member.

 

I recall making comment on this situation recently but it came to nothing. It seems that if your work goods are valued at £1349 they can touch nothing, but if they are worth £1351 they can take the lot - taking the figures to the extreme I know, but you get the drift.

 

Surely they should be leaving you with goods worth £1350? For example, if your goods are worth £2000, they can take £650 worth of them? I can't see it being the intention of Parliament to have a situation as stated in my first paragraph, as that would be grossly unjust.

[brassnecked]

I recall making comment on this situation recently but it came to nothing. It seems that if your work goods are valued at £1349 they can touch nothing, but if they are worth £1351 they can take the lot - taking the figures to the extreme I know, but you get the drift.

 

Surely they should be leaving you with goods worth £1350? For example, if your goods are worth £2000, they can take £650 worth of them? I can't see it being the intention of Parliament to have a situation as stated in my first paragraph, as that would be grossly unjust.

 

If they are taking the lot and leaving the debtor no tools to work with whatsoever, when the total is more than £1350, as in £1350.50 then this needs looking at as a matter of urgency. Have you any examples where this has happened? I don't feel MOJ intended bailiffs could take all the tools if they are collectively worth £1351, rather those that are less essential for the job that take the total over, leaving the debtor the £1350 worth to continue working.

 

The tools allowance before seizure should be at least £3000, as specialist tools can be worth £1350 per item, before even considering a van.

[linzi855]

I dont have any tools or anything as i do markets and auctions and i never leave stuff in the van as i dont live in a fantastic area and got broke into alot i keep them all at a lock up so the only thing that is there is my van and the bits falling off my van. not sure if i need to worry about it or not

[brassnecked]

I dont have any tools or anything as i do markets and auctions and i never leave stuff in the van as i dont live in a fantastic area and got broke into alot i keep them all at a lock up so the only thing that is there is my van and the bits falling off my van. not sure if i need to worry about it or not

Keep it away from the house.

[taurusgemini]

If they are taking the lot and leaving the debtor no tools to work with whatsoever, when the total is more than £1350, as in £1350.50 then this needs looking at as a matter of urgency. Have you any examples where this has happened? I don't feel MOJ intended bailiffs could take all the tools if they are collectively worth £1351, rather those that are less essential for the job that take the total over, leaving the debtor the £1350 worth to continue working.

 

The tools allowance before seizure should be at least £3000, as specialist tools can be worth £1350 per item, before even considering a van.

 

I have certainly seen examples of debtors either being told that because their goods are over £1350 they can be taken, or have been taken. Another example - a debtor's only asset is a work van valued around £1500, and is essential to his job. Can the EA take that vehicle leaving the debtor with no van to go to work in, effectively making him redundant? Is that what Parliament intended? Pay the bailiff or lose your income?

[linzi855]

Thanks for all your help i have emailed and sent letter to both rossendales and council so lets see what i get from it or will i just get ignored again

[dx100uk]

Hi thanks for the replies 1stly i will get on to writing them a letter/email to the council and rosendles now thanks for that.

 

last time i contacted council tax they didn't tell me what was outstanding they just told me how many debts i have.

 

am i right in saying that they wont be able to take my van as its my means of work as i am self employed

and without it i can no longer be self employed ( i recall someone telling me this),

 

 

when i stopped my payment arrangements i was sent expenditure forms which i filled in

and they declined my offer which was more than my first payment arrangement by a few pound

this is why i have wrote them a letter.

 

 

the letters that have been pushed through the door are Enforcement agent removal notice

saying additional costs of £110 will be added and failure to contact them will be interpreted as willful refusal to pay.

and this letter is apparently from the enforcement officer in charge.

 

 

on the last letter i received she has hand written on it

"removal date on or after 30/1 or pay £475.52 to clear one case and remainder on installments call me today to avoid removal.

 

 

i tried to upload the image of the letter but i don't know how to do it

 

 

this sounds like rossers upto their old tricks

 

 

theres no such thing as a 'removal officer' or an' enforcement officer in charge'

 

 

that £110 fee is not right for the new rules either

 

 

me thinks as all these are from 'before apr 2014' ??

 

 

they trying on the old game of being able to spoof you out of what they like.

[brassnecked]

I have certainly seen examples of debtors either being told that because their goods are over £1350 they can be taken, or have been taken. Another example - a debtor's only asset is a work van valued around £1500, and is essential to his job. Can the EA take that vehicle leaving the debtor with no van to go to work in, effectively making him redundant? Is that what Parliament intended? Pay the bailiff or lose your income?

Looks like they meant it, conveniently forgetting that they are punishing the debtor severely by throwing them onto the dole and an inevitable Benefit Sanction. It is of course p;ossible that they didn't fully consider the impact of such a low allowance for tools, and the Law of Unintended consequences came into play.

 

Either way OP should hide the van imho.

[linzi855]

i just called rosendales asking why they didnt reply to my letter

she stated that i had 4 accounts with them then 2 others with the bailiffs.

 

 

she told me to send expenditure form in to make arrangements for the 4 they have

but refuse to make arrangements for the 2 the bailiff has.

they have but the 4 on hold for 14 days while they receive my form back.

 

 

i also told them what the bailiff told me on the letter about a removal van

and i said its disgusting how they threaten they asked me to send proof in i told them i already have via email.

 

 

they told me to give them 24 hours to take a look to see where they go from there

but can not put it on hold so no matter what im going to get them at my door.

 

 

after i had a shouting battle with the person on the phone how its not right

and it makes me sick how they let people threaten others like that

 

 

she said we dont threaten people like that blah bla blah.

 

 

i called the bailiff and told them exactly what i got told and told them she said they can not book a removal van

or force into my home and

 

 

the bailiff turned around and said of course we can who told you that

did u ring the main office coz ill call and find out now as they are wrong and call you back

 

 

then the bailiff was confused to why i have seperate accounts and why they have not put them all on to one.

 

 

seems no one knows what is happening here.

[Bailiff Advice]

If your van is not on finance/lease and is worth more than £1350, sadly it is fair game as the new regs allow only a limit of £1350 for tools of the trade. A measure that will put a great many small businesses out of bussiness as they will be unable to deliver their service with their tools and vehicles gone. This will hit sole traders the most as they therefore may well not be able to discharge any more of the debt either until JSA is sorted.

 

Can I just make a point here. The new regulations have certainly given less protection to self emloyed etc but it needs to be made clear that when introducing a 'cap' of £1,350 (vehicles to be exempt) the government had taken not of the recommendation in the Green Paper many years back and had also taken into consideration the 'exemption' figure used by the Insolvency Service in cases of bankruptcy.

 

The Insolvency Service consider that a person should need to get back into the work place so as to provide for his family.....and where applicable....to pay back his creditors. If a vehicle is worth more money....then the Insolvency Service would take the vehicle for the benefit of the creditors and would allow the debtor to retain a figure of approx £1,500 for a cheaper vehicle.

 

Under the new regs, the figure of £1,350 is considered to be 'auction' value so this silly notion that bailiffs would take a vehicle 'valued' at £1,349 is just that. Silly. In fact, only this morning I spoke with a debtor and she was able to get a quick valuation on here vehicle which came back at £1,525 and the bailiff bailiff agreed no to remove it.

 

Anyhow..off topic....

 

If a debtor considers their vehicle to be 'exempt' either because of it's value or the type of work that they do then it is for the debtor to make sure that this fact is brought to the attention of the EA as soon as possible.

[dx100uk]

stop phoning the fleecing bailiffs/companies

 

 

get that info from the COUNCIL that we asked for

 

 

and send that email off to rossers.

[linzi855]

i managed to figure out how to upload the copy of the letter from the bailiff

[E Munch]

Notifying the enforcement agent (or the agency that employs them) should be the first port of call however much someone might decry them and their function.

Prior to the 6th April 2014 the best guidance was to be found in the case of Toseland Building Supplies Ltd v Bishop (t/a Bishop Groundworks.) 1993. In that judgement Lord Justice Steyn clearly stated "If a judgement debtor clams the benefit of a statutory exemption, the burden of showing the exemption applies rests squarely on him." The debtor therefore could not expect the bailiff or HCEO to impose the exemption themselves without being told about it and having it proved.

Since the introduction of the Schedule 12 procedure there has been a specific process mapped out for such claims in the Civil Procedure Rules, rules 85.8 and 85.9. Once again the first step is to make the claim to the enforcement agent though a reasonable enforcement agent may deal with this informally without the need for further steps which involve the creditor and the court:-

Procedure for a debtor making a claim to exempt goods

 

85.8.—(1) A debtor making a claim to exempt goods must, as soon as practicable and in any event within 7 days of the removal of the goods, give notice in writing of the claim to exempt goods (“notice of claim to exempt goods”) to the enforcement agent who has taken control of the goods or relevant enforcement officer and must include in such notice—

(a)their full name and address and that address is their address for service;

(b)a list of all those goods in respect of which they make such a claim; and

©the grounds of the claim in respect of each item.

(2) On receipt of a notice of claim to exempt goods, the enforcement agent or relevant enforcement officer must within 3 days give notice of such claim to—

(a)the creditor; and

(b)any other person making a claim under rule 85.4 or 85.6 to the goods subject to enforcement (“any other claimant to the goods subject to enforcement”).

(3) The creditor, and any other claimant to the goods subject to enforcement, must, within 7 days after receiving the notice of claim to exempt goods, give notice in writing to the enforcement agent or relevant enforcement officer informing them whether the claim to exempt goods is admitted or disputed in whole or in part.

(4) The enforcement agent or relevant enforcement officer must notify the debtor in writing within 3 days of receiving the notice in paragraph (3) whether the claim to exempt goods is admitted or disputed in whole or in part.

(5) A creditor who gives notice in accordance with paragraph (3) admitting a claim to controlled goods or to executed goods is not liable to the enforcement agent or officer for any fees and expenses incurred by the enforcement agent or officer after receipt of that notice by the enforcement agent or officer.

(6) If an enforcement agent or relevant enforcement officer receives a notice from a creditor and from any other claimant to the goods subject to enforcement under paragraph (3) admitting a claim to exempt goods the following applies—

(a)the enforcement power ceases to be exercisable, and the right to execute conferred by any writ of execution ceases to have effect, in respect of such exempt goods;

(b)as soon as reasonably practicable the enforcement agent or relevant enforcement officer must make the goods available for collection by the debtor if the enforcement agent or officer has removed them from where they were found.

(7) Where the creditor, or any other claimant to the goods subject to enforcement to whom notice of claim to exempt goods was given, fails, within the period mentioned in paragraph (3), to give the required notice, the enforcement agent or relevant enforcement officer may seek—

(a)the directions of the court by way of an application; and

(b)an order preventing the bringing of any claim against them for, or in respect of, their having taken control of or seized by execution any of the goods or their having failed to do so.

(8) An application under paragraph (7) must be made to the court which issued the writ or warrant conferring power to take control of controlled goods, or the writ of execution or, if the power to take control of controlled goods was conferred under an enactment, to the County Court hearing centre which is the debtor’s home court.

Procedure for making a claim to exempt goods where the claim is disputed

 

85.9.—(1) Where a creditor, or any other claimant to goods subject to enforcement to whom notice of a claim to exempt goods was given, gives notice under rule 85.8 that the claim to exempt goods, or any part of it, is disputed, and wishes to maintain their claim on the goods subject to enforcement, the following procedure will apply.

(2) The debtor must make an application within 7 days of receiving the notice under rule 85.8(3) which must be supported by—

(a)a witness statement—

(i)describing any goods to which a claim to exempt goods is made; and

(ii)setting out the grounds upon which such claim is based; and

(b)copies of any supporting documents that will assist the court to determine such claim.

(3) In the High Court the debtor must serve the application notice and supporting witness statements and exhibits on—

(a)the creditor;

(b)any other claimant to the goods subject to enforcement of whom they are aware; and

©the enforcement agent or relevant enforcement officer.

(4) In the County Court the debtor must provide to the court when the application is made the addresses for service of—

(a)the creditor;

(b)any other claimant to controlled goods of whom the debtor is aware; and

©the enforcement agent,

(“the respondents”), and the court will serve the application notice and supporting witness statements and exhibits on the respondents.

(5) An application under paragraph (2) must be made to the court which issued the writ or warrant conferring power to take control of controlled goods or the writ of execution or if the power to take control of controlled goods was conferred under an enactment, to the debtor’s home court.

(6) The application notice will be referred to a Master or District Judge.

(7) On receipt of an application for a claim to exempt goods, the Master or District Judge may—

(a)give directions for further evidence;

(b)list a hearing to give directions;

©list a hearing of the application;

(d)make directions for the retention, sale or disposal of the goods subject to the claim to exempt goods;

(e)give directions for determination of any issue raised by the exempt goods claim.

[lookinforinfo]

I really take exception to the warning at the bottom of the notice that not contacting the EA will be treated as wilful refusal to pay.

It is nothing of the sort.

 

 

There may be many reasons why the bailiff is not contacted and none of them would be that the alleged debtor is wilfully refusing to pay.

 

I am pretty sure that bailiffs do come under the OFT guide lines on the treatment of debtors so is that where complaint should be made?

[ploddertom]

E Munch has given us a "Procedure for a debtor making a claim to exempt goods" & to be able to make reference to this it is now Stickied at the top of the page.

 

Many thanks for a valuable post

[linzi855]

Hi just an update

 

 

rossendales sent me a reply asking me to give them 20 days to come up with the information i asked for in my letter, im still awaiting a reply.

 

 

As for the council tax

 

 

i wrote them a letter at the same time as rossendales also sent an email and had no reply what so ever

and its been nearly 4 weeks since writing and sending an email to them.

 

 

what would be my next step.

 

 

as last time i called to ask for information they told me to ask in writing so it gets me no where calling them