Bailiff discussion ( moved from hijacked thread )

[blfuk1]

While you quote Bailiffs are used all over the world, this is correct, but factually and with research, there is not, and I repeat not one other country that the debtor pays the wages of his executioner.

 

What research was this then? I think it is lacking in scope and accuracy. It is generally accepted throughout Europe that debtors pay for the cost of enforcement. I quote from a written recommendation in 2003 of The Committee of Ministers, who drafted the following under the terms of Article 15B of the Statute of the Council of Europe:

 

"The necessary costs of enforcement should be generally borne by the defendant, notwithstanding the possibility that costs may be borne by other parties if they abuse the process".

[blfuk1]

Now let me think! however did we manage before the invention of parking attendants. Fine as I recall.

 

In fact their is a market town nearby that has no restrictions. Needless to say the local traders are very busy most of the week whereas mine which does have restrictions has long standing traders, some from the 18th century closing down, to be replaced by estate agents.

 

As for other restrictions such as speed cameras it been found that a simple flashing reminder sign is more effective than these cameras.

 

I could go on & on & on & on but I won't

 

Is it possible that most of us can be quite adult when the need arises.

 

Yes. But there's always that minority who spoil it for everyone else!!

[DJXplosion]

Hello all,

 

First of all i would like to thank people for the good information that has been posted on here and thank you to the baliffs that have also been posting on here, your information and thoughs are very much welcome (blfuk1).

 

I have recently had a letter posted through a door from a baliff acting onbehalf of an unpaid council tax bill, which to this date is still wrong, but i really have given up requesting it to be ammended, it just falls on deaf ears.

 

Anyhow, at the bottom of this letter it states "As i was unable to obtain access to your effects, i must now inform you of my intentions to re-attend at your premises and that i may remove goods in your absenses".

 

The above text has been highlighted with a fluresent (i think i spelt this right) marker pen.

 

From reading this forumn and this post inparticular, i was under the impression i should of been given a date for this impending visit and that the bailiff has no rights to enter my property while i am not present.

 

The doors and windows of the property are fully secured at all times and so the only means of access would be through forceable entry.

 

I am quite confused now and noteably quite worried that entry to my property will be made without my knowledge or this baliff will once again turn up on a day i have no idea about and add further charges to the account.

 

Regards

[Guest MizzPiggy]

Hansard Extract

 

 

The Government get a free service from bailiffs; the fine defaulter pays their fees: no wonder forced entry falls very short of a last resort. In one case, a bailiff seized a TV, DVD player and 60 CDs from a lone mother, sold them for £72 and gave £30 tothe auctioneer, which did not pay off the disproportionate fine of £1,072. In another case, an unemployed young man on state benefits had a fixed penalty for fare dodging. He is homeless and used his girlfriend’s address; the bailiff called and threatened to seize her property to cover his fine and the bailiffs’ costs. Another bailiff from the same company threatened to seize a pensioner’s property because her unemployed grandson used her address.

While you are out there with incorrect addresses and incorrect details, why should the public wear the brunt of several offices and departments that talk properly. Why should we pay for the inaccuricies and mistakes that cost us money. We pay taxes....why should we pay again? Remind me?

 

Take up the arguement with the Lords that are discussing things quite well I think.

 

"I quote from a written recommendation" as you said...that is correct, a written recommendation ONLY.

[Guest MizzPiggy]

I have recently had a letter posted through a door from a baliff acting onbehalf of an unpaid council tax bill, which to this date is still wrong, but i really have given up requesting it to be ammended, it just falls on deaf ears. Can I ask why that is? I would gather you have written or called etc. Trying to gauge better understanding.

 

I quote from a written recommendation in 2003 of The Committee of Ministers, who drafted the following under the terms of Article 15B of the Statute of the Council of Europe:

 

"The necessary costs of enforcement should be generally borne by the defendant, notwithstanding the possibility that costs may be borne by other parties if they abuse the process". To which the DVLA and Councils do abuse the process.

"I quote from a written recommendation" as you said...that is correct, a written recommendation ONLY.!

[DJXplosion]

I have recently had a letter posted through a door from a baliff acting onbehalf of an unpaid council tax bill, which to this date is still wrong, but i really have given up requesting it to be ammended, it just falls on deaf ears. Can I ask why that is? I would gather you have written or called etc. Trying to gauge better understanding.

 

We have written, called, written, called etc etc until were blue in the face but the promise to include both partners on the bill so we are paying the correct amount just falls on deaf ears.

 

Its quite ridiculous really, like most of the population, we are willing to pay this money off in regular installments, but now its go to this level of £1181.28 (including fee's from the bailiff) we are faced with the prospect of the house being emptied of goods, al lbecause the council are inefficent and cant admit a mistake to save face.

[Guest MizzPiggy]

Understood.

 

This is unreasonable.

 

Do you have any copies of letters written etc? If not, a subject access request to the council can work to view what documentation they have on file. This will verify that you have tried to deal with the matter and make appropriate payment. £10 is the cost though often the councils refund it.

 

The Bailiff Company will accept installments on the amount. We deal with this every day negotiating with bailiff companies to which, we have found the Bailiff companies are reasonable to start on a much lower amount that is reasonable and review in three months. This gives the opportunity to deal with the matter.

 

The first issue is to make an offer of payment so the Bailiff knows you are acting on the matter.

 

Secondly is to tackle the council so that the issue of the debt is highlighted to be theirs not yours and work to get the matter from the Bailiff back to the Council, to which we have had 4 councils this week that have done this on the basis of being wrong! Liability orders that were not in fact valid or mistakingly sought.

 

Firstly though, as said, phone the Bailiff Company immediately and explain the situation in that you are wanting to arrange payment to defuse the crisis of the Bailiff thinking you are avoiding dealing with the issue. It is important that they believe and know that responsability is not the disputed, the way the debt has crept up etc and managed is.

 

Till you make the call to the Bailiff Company they can still pursue and still charge for costs incurred!!

 

Hope this helps. Message me if you need further help or would like the Subject Access request.

 

Alison

[Guest The Terminator]

Yes. But there's always that minority who spoil it for everyone else!!

 

Hope you wasn't refering to me blfuk1.Anyway to put you in the picture

 

1) I owe no council tax or parking fines etc

 

2) My rent is up to date

 

3) I owe to the banks and they have threatened ballif action.Good I hope they do because they won't be crossing my door threshold and they certainly won't be seizing anything.

 

4) This is the question i've been dying to ask you and I hope you give a very straight answer but there are multi-choice underneath:

 

What would you do if a baliff come to your door to take all of your goods?

 

a) Ignore the door

 

b) Let him in and clear you out of all your belongings.

 

c) Break both his kneecaps with a baseball bat( and I condone violence)

 

d) Change your occupation and become a roadsweeper

[Guest MizzPiggy]

My vote! IGNORE THE DOOR!

[JonCris]

Me too!

[tamadus]

me too but the baseball bat is tempting

[blfuk1]

Hansard Extract

 

 

The Government get a free service from bailiffs; the fine defaulter pays their fees: no wonder forced entry falls very short of a last resort. In one case, a bailiff seized a TV, DVD player and 60 CDs from a lone mother, sold them for £72 and gave £30 tothe auctioneer, which did not pay off the disproportionate fine of £1,072. In another case, an unemployed young man on state benefits had a fixed penalty for fare dodging. He is homeless and used his girlfriend’s address; the bailiff called and threatened to seize her property to cover his fine and the bailiffs’ costs. Another bailiff from the same company threatened to seize a pensioner’s property because her unemployed grandson used her address.

While you are out there with incorrect addresses and incorrect details, why should the public wear the brunt of several offices and departments that talk properly. Why should we pay for the inaccuricies and mistakes that cost us money. We pay taxes....why should we pay again? Remind me?

 

Take up the arguement with the Lords that are discussing things quite well I think.

 

"I quote from a written recommendation" as you said...that is correct, a written recommendation ONLY.

 

First the Hansard extract makes reference to three cases - out of 4 million! Exception to the rule. Second, it's not me making an argument - just correcting errors.

 

Third, you are not correct in stating that we are the only country where the debtor pays for the cost of enforcement. My brief extract was simply to highlight how even the concept is agreed at the highest Government levels and that you had published yet another misleading piece of disinformation.

 

You should not make such personal and scattergun attacks with little or no valid amunition and expect to survive unscathed.

[blfuk1]

Hello all,

 

First of all i would like to thank people for the good information that has been posted on here and thank you to the baliffs that have also been posting on here, your information and thoughs are very much welcome (blfuk1).

 

I have recently had a letter posted through a door from a baliff acting onbehalf of an unpaid council tax bill, which to this date is still wrong, but i really have given up requesting it to be ammended, it just falls on deaf ears.

 

Anyhow, at the bottom of this letter it states "As i was unable to obtain access to your effects, i must now inform you of my intentions to re-attend at your premises and that i may remove goods in your absenses".

 

The above text has been highlighted with a fluresent (i think i spelt this right) marker pen.

 

From reading this forumn and this post inparticular, i was under the impression i should of been given a date for this impending visit and that the bailiff has no rights to enter my property while i am not present.

 

The doors and windows of the property are fully secured at all times and so the only means of access would be through forceable entry.

 

I am quite confused now and noteably quite worried that entry to my property will be made without my knowledge or this baliff will once again turn up on a day i have no idea about and add further charges to the account.

 

Regards

 

The letter/notice is a play on words (and your fears). The bailiff can of course remove goods in your absence - provided he does not have to force entry in order to do so (car, garden furniture, etc!).

 

If, as you say, there are no open windows or unlocked doors and a previous peacable entry has not been made, then the bailiff cannot force entry - in your absence or in your presence! Not for council tax anyway...

[JonCris]

First the Hansard extract makes reference to three cases - out of 4 million! Exception to the rule. Second, it's not me making an argument - just correcting errors.

 

Third, you are not correct in stating that we are the only country where the debtor pays for the cost of enforcement. My brief extract was simply to highlight how even the concept is agreed at the highest Government levels and that you had published yet another misleading piece of disinformation.

 

You should not make such personal and scattergun attacks with little or no valid amunition and expect to survive unscathed.

 

More like tip of the iceberg

[blfuk1]

Hope you wasn't refering to me blfuk1.Anyway to put you in the picture

 

1) I owe no council tax or parking fines etc

 

2) My rent is up to date

 

3) I owe to the banks and they have threatened ballif action.Good I hope they do because they won't be crossing my door threshold and they certainly won't be seizing anything.

 

4) This is the question i've been dying to ask you and I hope you give a very straight answer but there are multi-choice underneath:

 

What would you do if a baliff come to your door to take all of your goods?

 

a) Ignore the door

 

b) Let him in and clear you out of all your belongings.

 

c) Break both his kneecaps with a baseball bat( and I condone violence)

 

d) Change your occupation and become a roadsweeper

 

The question is both academic and inane. As the only reason a bailiff would be knocking at my door would be for either breaking the law and not paying a fine or falling behind with local or central taxes, it would simply never happen. I would always prioritise those creditors and if I was in a position of being unable to pay, I would deal with the creditors long before it reached the stage of enforcement.

 

Bailiffs are a last resort option for most creditors. Of 4 million liability orders obtained for council tax arrears, less than half reach the bailiff because more than half make and keep arrangments to pay.

[niterider]

If, as you say, there are no open windows or unlocked doors and a previous peacable entry has not been made, then the bailiff cannot force entry - in your absence or in your presence! Not for council tax anyway...

 

Can someone clear this up for me, but what I don't understand is if a Bailiff has gained a peaceful entry to your property once before, what still gives them the right top gain access to your property at any time?!

 

At what point are they not allowed after the first 'Peaceful Visit' to gain access, even by force?

 

I just don't get it, surely they need a valid reason and still require a warrant of some sort, and in this day and age anyway, I'd have thought any warrant they may have to gain access to anyone's property, there would need to be a police officer present, to make sure the law was adhered to and to give at least a little warming presence to the occupier that the Bailiff was within their rights(what if it was a single mum with 3 kids late at night?), and not blagging or lying through their teeth like most Bailiffs are reported on this site to have done?

 

nite:)

[Number6]

Can someone clear this up for me, but what I don't understand is if a Bailiff has gained a peaceful entry to your property once before, what still gives them the right top gain access to your property at any time?!

 

At what point are they not allowed after the first 'Peaceful Visit' to gain access, even by force?

 

I just don't get it, surely they need a valid reason and still require a warrant of some sort, and in this day and age anyway, I'd have thought any warrant they may have to gain access to anyone's property, there would need to be a police officer present, to make sure the law was adhered to and to give at least a little warming presence to the occupier that the Bailiff was within their rights(what if it was a single mum with 3 kids late at night?), and not blagging or lying through their teeth like most Bailiffs are reported on this site to have done?

 

nite:)

 

Easiest if you read this:

 

Debt Basics - Bailiff Guide

 

Everything is here.

 

Pete

[DJXplosion]

Understood.

 

This is unreasonable.

 

Do you have any copies of letters written etc? If not, a subject access request to the council can work to view what documentation they have on file. This will verify that you have tried to deal with the matter and make appropriate payment. £10 is the cost though often the councils refund it.

 

The Bailiff Company will accept installments on the amount. We deal with this every day negotiating with bailiff companies to which, we have found the Bailiff companies are reasonable to start on a much lower amount that is reasonable and review in three months. This gives the opportunity to deal with the matter.

 

The first issue is to make an offer of payment so the Bailiff knows you are acting on the matter.

 

Secondly is to tackle the council so that the issue of the debt is highlighted to be theirs not yours and work to get the matter from the Bailiff back to the Council, to which we have had 4 councils this week that have done this on the basis of being wrong! Liability orders that were not in fact valid or mistakingly sought.

 

Firstly though, as said, phone the Bailiff Company immediately and explain the situation in that you are wanting to arrange payment to defuse the crisis of the Bailiff thinking you are avoiding dealing with the issue. It is important that they believe and know that responsability is not the disputed, the way the debt has crept up etc and managed is.

 

Till you make the call to the Bailiff Company they can still pursue and still charge for costs incurred!!

 

Hope this helps. Message me if you need further help or would like the Subject Access request.

 

Alison

 

Alilson,

 

Thanks once again for the information and as soon as i get sorted i will be making a contribution to the running of this site.

 

I have contacted the bailiff this morning, suprisingly even though there letter said they are available 8 to 8, i had to wait till 8:45 and be late for work and phone a mobile from my landline.

 

Anyway, she has basically told us that full payment must be made by the 8th of january or they re-iterated that they will gain access to the premises to remove property.

 

I really cant understand why they are not willing to accept some form of short term payment plan, i.e. over 6 months, this is still £200 a month .

 

I accept that these people have a job to do, what i dont accept is them making people ill, making people (My girlfriend) scared of leaving the house and more over, absolutely destroying any type of security people have in a world where there are wars and **** bags waiting to pick your pockets at the first available time.

 

Regards

[niterider]

Hello Pete

 

Thanks, for that, I've read it a few times, but say you've paid your debt, can they still come round, if so why? They could hound you and become a nuisance!

 

Say then after you've paid the debt, 18 months later you've got yourself into a bit of a mess again, can the same Bailiff come back an say "Evening, I'm allowed in as I've been here before!"?

 

Like I said before, my example is of a single Mum with 3 Kids late at night with quite a large figure of a bloke standing at her door?!

 

nite:)

[Guest MizzPiggy]

DJX again, that is unreasonable and they cannot demand the money in full as they have stated.

 

If you would like to give me a call today or email the me then I will if you like negotiate with Rossendales and the Council.

 

Trust me, they are only unreasonable when you don't DEMAND you know your rights.

 

Feel free to get in touch.

 

Alison

[DJXplosion]

Alison,

 

I have taken a note of your phone number and will speak to my partner this evening, as i have left all the letters at home, so dont have any form of reference number to quote.

 

If i could get a payment plan from the, this would relieve a lot of stress both financial and relationship wise as this is causing no end of trouble at the moment.

 

Thank you very much

[blfuk1]

Can someone clear this up for me, but what I don't understand is if a Bailiff has gained a peaceful entry to your property once before, what still gives them the right top gain access to your property at any time?!

 

At what point are they not allowed after the first 'Peaceful Visit' to gain access, even by force?

 

I just don't get it, surely they need a valid reason and still require a warrant of some sort, and in this day and age anyway, I'd have thought any warrant they may have to gain access to anyone's property, there would need to be a police officer present, to make sure the law was adhered to and to give at least a little warming presence to the occupier that the Bailiff was within their rights(what if it was a single mum with 3 kids late at night?), and not blagging or lying through their teeth like most Bailiffs are reported on this site to have done?

 

nite:)

 

A brief overview to assist.

 

The bailiff for council tax is instructed by the local authority to recover the debt by seizure of your goods - or payment in lieu if you prefer. His authority is contained within the liability order granted to the local authority by the magistrates. The liability order provides the bailiff with the authority and power to enter the debtor's property and to seize and remove goods and to make charges for so doing.

 

In answer to one of your questions therefore, the bailiff has authority, from the beginning (issue of warrant) to enter your property and does not need a police presence in order to do so - but, he cannot force entry.

 

In council tax terms, a bailiff will usually agree to permit you to pay by installments, which he will dictate, and generally only if he is able to secure the debt by levying on your goods. This means he will list goods which he has seized but will not remove them provided you keep to the arrangement. If you default, he will remove the goods for sale and has the right to force entry to remove the goods he has levied on.

 

It is an offence in common law to obstruct a bailiff acting under authority of powers granted in statute (council tax included).

 

Just to clarify, the bailiff cannot use force to enter unless he has previously, under the same 'warrant', gained peacable access to your property and goods. If the previous visit did not result in actual entry, then he cannot use force.

 

While many will advocate that you never let the bailiff in, you have to consider the alternative. If he cannot levy on goods, he will not give you an arrangement and may instead remove goods from outside the house (such as a car) without further notice and will clearly not be inclined to give you an arrangement once he has done so.

[DJXplosion]

A brief overview to assist.

 

The bailiff for council tax is instructed by the local authority to recover the debt by seizure of your goods - or payment in lieu if you prefer. His authority is contained within the liability order granted to the local authority by the magistrates. The liability order provides the bailiff with the authority and power to enter the debtor's property and to seize and remove goods and to make charges for so doing.

 

In answer to one of your questions therefore, the bailiff has authority, from the beginning (issue of warrant) to enter your property and does not need a police presence in order to do so - but, he cannot force entry.

 

In council tax terms, a bailiff will usually agree to permit you to pay by installments, which he will dictate, and generally only if he is able to secure the debt by levying on your goods. This means he will list goods which he has seized but will not remove them provided you keep to the arrangement. If you default, he will remove the goods for sale and has the right to force entry to remove the goods he has levied on.

 

It is an offence in common law to obstruct a bailiff acting under authority of powers granted in statute (council tax included).

 

Just to clarify, the bailiff cannot use force to enter unless he has previously, under the same 'warrant', gained peacable access to your property and goods. If the previous visit did not result in actual entry, then he cannot use force.

 

While many will advocate that you never let the bailiff in, you have to consider the alternative. If he cannot levy on goods, he will not give you an arrangement and may instead remove goods from outside the house (such as a car) without further notice and will clearly not be inclined to give you an arrangement once he has done so.

 

So to clarify this point, the baliff has no legal powers to enter my property unless invited to or they find some window or door unlocked????

 

What about the situation where they are stood outside the door and soon as its opened they put there foot in, i know this is a common practise, am i liable then if i slam the door shoot on the foot???

 

Secondly, i have nothing outside my house, so they can take the plants and tree's if they want

 

But if you could clarify something for me. If i tell the bailiff to go away and refuse to give them access to the property, is there anything legally they can do to get into the property if it is fully secured?

 

Regards

[blfuk1]

DJX again, that is unreasonable and they cannot demand the money in full as they have stated.

 

If you would like to give me a call today or email the me then I will if you like negotiate with Rossendales and the Council.

 

Trust me, they are only unreasonable when you don't DEMAND you know your rights.

 

Feel free to get in touch.

 

Alison

 

This is simply not true!

 

Of course a bailiff acting under the authority of a warrant or liability order can demand full payment. It is entirely up to the bailiff whether he grants time to pay under the warrant or not. While it may be considered unreasonable there is nothing in law, regulation or rule which states a bailiff HAS to give you an arrangement. A bailiff can remove goods if you don't pay in full including all costs.

 

If you start dictating terms to a bailiff claiming he HAS to let you pay by arrangement you may well find yourself facing a more determined effort to seize your goods and a refusal of any offer of part payment. Clearly a more amicable form of negotiation would serve you better.

[blfuk1]

So to clarify this point, the baliff has no legal powers to enter my property unless invited to or they find some window or door unlocked????

 

What about the situation where they are stood outside the door and soon as its opened they put there foot in, i know this is a common practise, am i liable then if i slam the door shoot on the foot???

 

Secondly, i have nothing outside my house, so they can take the plants and tree's if they want

 

But if you could clarify something for me. If i tell the bailiff to go away and refuse to give them access to the property, is there anything legally they can do to get into the property if it is fully secured?

 

Regards

 

Jamming a foot in the door is not a legal entry as you are clearly refusing to let the bailiff in. If you refuse access to a secure property then, no, entry cannot be forced (unless you are being pursued for an unpaid fine).

 

The bailiff will return the matter to the council who may then take committal proceedings on the basis of wilful refusal.