Bailiff discussion ( moved from hijacked thread )

[blfuk1]

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:)

 

The bailiff only has authority to do his job if he has a warrant. If you have paid everything, there is no warrant. If he attends later on another warrant, he cannot force entry on the basis of a previous matter.

[DJXplosion]

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.

 

Committal, i take i that means prison eeeek, so my only option really is sell my goods before the bailiff and try and pay the amount cause i seriously do not have the cash for this and wont in a months time either.

[demon_x_slash]

If you read DJX's thread, I believe that you wuld find the bailiff acting in their situation to be unreasonable. They have been under the illusion that the coucnil is sorting out the mistake on their bill - the council had them down as sole occupant, not two people. Instead of receiving an updated bill from the council, or even a letter, they were contacted out of the blue by the bailiff with the threat of an imminent visit demanding payment in full or forced entry 'in their absence (no previous entry) - now, surely it is unreasonable to expect someone to be able to come up with over £1000 just like that? And use those tactics? A few hundred pounds may be a different story; I could probably maybe borrow a few hundred from family if I were really stuck. But over £1000? Surely it is more reasonable in these circumstances to allow a payment plan?

 

A genuine question, now, blfuk: do the OFT guidelines on debt collection not apply to court-appointed bailiffs?

[demon_x_slash]

Committal, i take i that means prison eeeek, so my only option really is sell my goods before the bailiff and try and pay the amount cause i seriously do not have the cash for this and wont in a months time either.

 

NO, NO, NO. You can only be imprisoned if you REFUSE to pay, 'wilful refusal', not if you CAN'T AFFORD to pay. Those old ladies put in prison for a few weeks a while ago were refusing to pay council tax. You cannot afford to pay, through a mistake that was partly your fault and partly the council's fault. Please check your own thread for advice.

[DJXplosion]

If you read DJX's thread, I believe that you wuld find the bailiff acting in their situation to be unreasonable. They have been under the illusion that the coucnil is sorting out the mistake on their bill - the council had them down as sole occupant, not two people. Instead of receiving an updated bill from the council, or even a letter, they were contacted out of the blue by the bailiff with the threat of an imminent visit demanding payment in full or forced entry 'in their absence (no previous entry) - now, surely it is unreasonable to expect someone to be able to come up with over £1000 just like that? And use those tactics? A few hundred pounds may be a different story; I could probably maybe borrow a few hundred from family if I were really stuck. But over £1000? Surely it is more reasonable in these circumstances to allow a payment plan?

 

A genuine question, now, blfuk: do the OFT guidelines on debt collection not apply to court-appointed bailiffs?

 

I still have the hard worded letter at home, signed by the baliff and certain sections, designed to intimidate highlighted with a marker pen this to me is unreasonable and i will be making a formal complaint about this as soon as i figure out how to do this.

 

Regards

[blfuk1]

Committal, i take i that means prison eeeek, so my only option really is sell my goods before the bailiff and try and pay the amount cause i seriously do not have the cash for this and wont in a months time either.

 

A custodial sentance is at the discretion of the magistrates but the council will have cause to apply because of your refusal. If you sell your goods to defeat distress knowing a bailiff has authority to seize them, there are circumstances where the bailiff can pursue those goods but this is very rare.

[niterider]

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.

 

Or, come on blfuk1, its the season of goodwill and peace to all men etc. etc. etc.!!!!!

 

This makes you start to sound like the idiots that are out there using the sort of intimidation and scare tactics to extort payment out of (usually the poorer end of society) people that don't even know the meaning of negotiate(and I really do think your not one of them;) )

 

nite:)

[demon_x_slash]

He's thinking of selling his goods to get the money together to pay, not to avoid a levy. 'Payment in lieu, if you prefer' were your words above. Hackles down, please. DJX's first encounter with a bailiff and you start mentioning prison and 'defeating distress', jeez.

[niterider]

The bailiff only has authority to do his job if he has a warrant. If you have paid everything, there is no warrant. If he attends later on another warrant, he cannot force entry on the basis of a previous matter.

 

Thanks, blfuk1, that's exactly just what I wanted to know! Not that I'm going to put myself in that position again!!!!!

 

nite:)

[blfuk1]

If you read DJX's thread, I believe that you wuld find the bailiff acting in their situation to be unreasonable. They have been under the illusion that the coucnil is sorting out the mistake on their bill - the council had them down as sole occupant, not two people. Instead of receiving an updated bill from the council, or even a letter, they were contacted out of the blue by the bailiff with the threat of an imminent visit demanding payment in full or forced entry 'in their absence (no previous entry) - now, surely it is unreasonable to expect someone to be able to come up with over £1000 just like that? And use those tactics? A few hundred pounds may be a different story; I could probably maybe borrow a few hundred from family if I were really stuck. But over £1000? Surely it is more reasonable in these circumstances to allow a payment plan?

 

A genuine question, now, blfuk: do the OFT guidelines on debt collection not apply to court-appointed bailiffs?

 

Reasonable, has nothing [in law] to do with distress or execution. Once the order is made by the court, full payment is due. The discretion then lies with the bailiff - so negotiate!

 

OFT have agreed that their guidance only applies to the collection of consumer debt (which does not include council tax, fines, penalties etc). However, if a bailiff company holds a consumer credit licence (as it may also collect debt arising from consumer credit agreements), then the OFT may view its behaviour in non consumer collection matters with regard to their fitness to hold a licence. However, they will take a view in line with the rules governing behaviour in acting as bailiffs outside the 'jurisdiction' of the licence. In other words, if a bailiff is not breaching the rules of distress or execution, it is unlikely (in my opinion) they would consider fair bailiff practice as unfair consumer debt practice - in such circumstances.

[Guest MizzPiggy]

Oh Please! Bailiff UK.

 

Here we go again.

 

Bailiff UK I challenge you to find a single council, that would support your theory. In fact in our newsletter in January to the councils about council matters I am more than happy to quote your archiac beliefs.

 

Firstly, the Bailiff can rightly as he stated demand the full amount or levy on goods, BUT....what the council want is the money and would rather the arrangement.

 

So don't be fooled. The Bailiff Companies do in fact negotiate, why it is not in the interests of the Bailiff to negotiate as our office holds proof of, is that the Bailiff himself, remembering you are paying their wages, does not receive money till it is paid in full. No incentive to make agreements which is why we suggest at all times, phone the Bailiff office direct not the Bailiff.

 

If you have problems, phone us. To date Bailiff UK, we have not had one unreasonable office to deal with in relation to council tax that have not negotiated fairly. So it rather disputes your archiac beliefs of heavy handed tactics.

 

The Bailiff you pay his salary yet your led to believe you have no rights. All Bailiff companies do negotiate at different levels. What we do is maintain that the agreements are fair and you are not set up to fail with amounts you cannot afford.

 

Bailiff UK while you quote legislation and the law, that is fine, however it is not as harsh and rigid as you would like people to believe. You are welcome to spend a day here looking through any of our files if you dispute what we state.

 

Obviously you don't want me encouring people to pay on installments, however it is more than reasonable as stated, though, not in your interests.

 

Alison

[demon_x_slash]

Reasonable, has nothing [in law] to do with distress or execution. Once the order is made by the court, full payment is due. The discretion then lies with the bailiff - so negotiate!

 

Hmm. But, as far as I was aware, you can no longer be gaoled in this country for being unable to pay a debt - note unable to pay, not refusing to pay. What can the bailiff do, if there are no goods worth levying on and the debtor genuinely only has, say, £50pcm spare to pay? You've mentioned before the process of referring the warrant back to the court - that happens when it is determined that the debtor cannot pay, correct? But if the above was true, that the debtor only has £50pcm and no levyable goods, then the bailiff would be in effect forced to take the £50?

 

I don't agree with some of your opinions, my dear, but you're a goldmine when I'm attempting to get things straight in my head

[Guest The Terminator]

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.

 

You still haven't answered the question.

[DJXplosion]

You still haven't answered the question.

 

I would actually like to here the answer to this as well.

[blfuk1]

Oh Please! Bailiff UK.

 

Here we go again.

 

Bailiff UK I challenge you to find a single council, that would support your theory. In fact in our newsletter in January to the councils about council matters I am more than happy to quote your archiac beliefs.

 

Firstly, the Bailiff can rightly as he stated demand the full amount or levy on goods, BUT....what the council want is the money and would rather the arrangement.

 

So don't be fooled. The Bailiff Companies do in fact negotiate, why it is not in the interests of the Bailiff to negotiate as our office holds proof of, is that the Bailiff himself, remembering you are paying their wages, does not receive money till it is paid in full. No incentive to make agreements which is why we suggest at all times, phone the Bailiff office direct not the Bailiff.

 

If you have problems, phone us. To date Bailiff UK, we have not had one unreasonable office to deal with in relation to council tax that have not negotiated fairly. So it rather disputes your archiac beliefs of heavy handed tactics.

 

The Bailiff you pay his salary yet your led to believe you have no rights. All Bailiff companies do negotiate at different levels. What we do is maintain that the agreements are fair and you are not set up to fail with amounts you cannot afford.

 

Bailiff UK while you quote legislation and the law, that is fine, however it is not as harsh and rigid as you would like people to believe. You are welcome to spend a day here looking through any of our files if you dispute what we state.

 

Obviously you don't want me encouring people to pay on installments, however it is more than reasonable as stated, though, not in your interests.

 

Alison

 

Alison - yet again you seem to forget what my post was in response to. Let me remind you:

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Watchdog

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

 

As you can see, you stated "They cannot demand the money in full", whereas my correction said, they can! I did not say they wouldn't but gave the reader accurate information to offset your inaccurate information!

[blfuk1]

Hmm. But, as far as I was aware, you can no longer be gaoled in this country for being unable to pay a debt - note unable to pay, not refusing to pay. What can the bailiff do, if there are no goods worth levying on and the debtor genuinely only has, say, £50pcm spare to pay? You've mentioned before the process of referring the warrant back to the court - that happens when it is determined that the debtor cannot pay, correct? But if the above was true, that the debtor only has £50pcm and no levyable goods, then the bailiff would be in effect forced to take the £50?

 

I don't agree with some of your opinions, my dear, but you're a goldmine when I'm attempting to get things straight in my head

 

Non payment of council tax can result in a being gaoled for two reasons, wilful refusal and culpable neglect. On the latter, if at the time the council tax was due and you were required to pay in full (no benefits etc claimed) but did not pay and even though your circumstances later changed, you may be guilty of culpable neglect by not paying when you were able.

[blfuk1]

I would actually like to here the answer to this as well.

 

I believe I have answered the question in stating it is inane. The situation would never arise as I would deal with it before it reached the stage of bailiffs being involved - as could anyone else.

 

Hypothetically or otherwise, the question cannot be answered in any other way - by me.

That's the best you're going to get!

[Guest MizzPiggy]

The situation would never arise as I would deal with it before it reached the stage of bailiffs being involved - as could anyone else.

A moral judgement by Bailiff UK i think. Assuming everyone has money or affordability in all circumstances?

 

I again state Bailiff UK, if my information is so inaccurate, please feel free to spend a day in my offices. I noted no comment on the statement I made about we pay your fees, in regards to council tax etc, hence why agreements are not in your interests? Clarification would be good.

 

Bailiff UK, not everyone has enough money to survive and often situations arise that place people in this vulnerable group. I wish you would not keep quoting the law as it is in its unreasonableness, as there is reason.

 

Many people are not out to avoid responsability. They are the bad boys that are defiant. People will pay what they can with reason. We have no right to judge on judge this. Not everyone is the bad boys.

 

Alison

[blfuk1]

The situation would never arise as I would deal with it before it reached the stage of bailiffs being involved - as could anyone else.

 

A moral judgement by Bailiff UK i think. Assuming everyone has money or affordability in all circumstances?

 

I again state Bailiff UK, if my information is so inaccurate, please feel free to spend a day in my offices. I noted no comment on the statement I made about we pay your fees, in regards to council tax etc, hence why agreements are not in your interests? Clarification would be good.

 

Bailiff UK, not everyone has enough money to survive and often situations arise that place people in this vulnerable group. I wish you would not keep quoting the law as it is in its unreasonableness, as there is reason.

 

Many people are not out to avoid responsability. They are the bad boys that are defiant. People will pay what they can with reason. We have no right to judge on judge this. Not everyone is the bad boys.

 

Alison

 

No. How can a personal observation regarding my own priorities be seen as a moral judgment on everyone else! How utterly absurd.

 

I'm a bailiff and better placed than many to KNOW that there are a great many people who are in dire straits. I imagine I have met many more than you have. My point, which again you have missed, is that anyone who is not in a position to pay (at the time when they should pay) is able to come to terms with the creditor. If for example, you cannot afford your council tax (at the time its due) then you apply for the various forms of assistance regarding your circumstances.

 

If at the time you should pay you can but don't and later your circumstances deteriorate, then that is culpable neglect - by not paying the tax when you could. Even then, councils take the bailiff route as a last resort. Contacting them at the point your circumstances change or even as late as when a liability order is obtained, will usually result in an arrangement to pay. This can be evidenced by the fact that less than half of liability orders obtained by councils are actually passed to bailiffs to enforce.

 

Much of the information you have posted here is inaccurate and misleading. For people to make a considered judgment on their options they need clear, concise and accurate information. Quoting the correct laws which apply to their circumstances can only be helpful in determining a course of action or re-action. What point would there be in posting information which simply shows you’re on-side if it misdirects someone to their detriment?

 

I don't think that spending a day in your office will help me although it may assist you in understanding the laws which apply to people in need on this site. As you are a limited company I will decline your offer but continue to work with the more established advice organisations such as Citizens Advice, National Debtline and Money Advice - organisations who acknowledge the need for bailiffs and are prepared to work together to ensure appropriate enforcement.

 

From the way you post information and discuss bailiffs it's almost as if you believe bailiffs are the instigators of action against debtors. Obviously bailiffs are merely a tool in the creditor's toolbox to ensure payment of a sum adjudged to be due. Bailiffs have a set of rules to work by and while clearly some don't fully observe those rules, there's no sense in making people believe that all bailiffs follow that path. If it were not for bailiffs the economy of this country would be critically affected.

 

The role of debt advice agencies is to assist debtors in meeting their obligations in the most practical and least painful manner - not avoiding them.

 

How do you expect bailiffs to be agreeable and enter into arrangements with debtors more suitable to their terms when all you do is attack their very being?

 

Quite mad!

[Number6]

If it were not for bailiffs the economy of this country would be critically affected.

 

I'm sorry but that's the biggest load of dingos gonads I've heard since I last heard Tony bLiar say that the war in Iraq was justified!!!!

 

Pete

[blfuk1]

I'm sorry but that's the biggest load of dingos gonads I've heard since I last heard Tony bLiar say that the war in Iraq was justified!!!!

 

Pete

 

It's an opinion you're entitled to Pete but not based on any actual fiscal data. According to Government Economists (privately of course), it is sadly the case. It is only by bailiff action that hundreds of millions of pounds of taxes and fines are recovered - and that's leaving aside penalties. Britian is the most indebted society in western Europe and unless the debts are recovered on an ongoing basis, the economy would be in serious trouble.

[Guest The Terminator]

I believe I have answered the question in stating it is inane. The situation would never arise as I would deal with it before it reached the stage of bailiffs being involved - as could anyone else.

 

Hypothetically or otherwise, the question cannot be answered in any other way - by me.

 

That's the best you're going to get!

 

Obviously you don't want to answer the question which is perfectly straightforward.This leads me to beleive that you would go for option one which is hypocritical to your postings

[Number6]

A fine cannot be "recovered" as it was never spent in the first place.

 

Pete

[Guest MizzPiggy]

Bailiff Uk, I do beg to differ and you can hold your opinions or state them here, to which people can read. You have every right to do so and state and quote the law and state and quote how you interpret it.

 

The difference is, that without our service like that of others such as the CAB no one would know their rights and you would be a law unto yourselves.

 

Bailiffs - your comment about how the country would be affected without you does make me laugh a little as without you, the consumer would be in less financial debt.

 

Oh Please!!!How did everyone survive before decriminalised parking and parking wardens that are like the Grinch!? There was a civilised system of fairness where you got a fine and there was a judge and you had a hearing and there was order. Now you are judged by a computer...that is like the show Little Britian...computer says..no.....

 

I challenge you to ask anyone that has received help from our service, while you quote facts and law and how it is, and put fear into them, that has not seen a more reasonable side of the system when we have dealt with them. Our only role is to factually, and I mean factually, to which again you will come back with the words misleading and I will correct you, a fair look at the system as it really is in the year 2000 and it is not half as rigid as you state.

 

You stated...

The role of debt advice agencies is to assist debtors in meeting their obligations in the most practical and least painful manner - not avoiding them.

 

How do you expect bailiffs to be agreeable and enter into arrangements with debtors more suitable to their terms when all you do is attack their very being?

 

We don't attack unless they do something wrong, I assure you many bailiffs know this and there are great companies out there.

 

We help and assist with people with organising payments and not avoiding their debts. We do not condone avoidance.

 

However, for every bailiff that is a rogue, thinks and behaves out of the law or guidelines, we will object to accordingly. Why shouldn't we have reasonableness.....what is fair to us...after all.....we are paying your wages!

Again you have avoided answering my statement....

 

So don't be fooled. The Bailiff Companies do in fact negotiate, why it is not in the interests of the Bailiff to negotiate as our office holds proof of, is that the Bailiff himself, remembering you are paying their wages, does not receive money till it is paid in full. No incentive to make agreements which is why we suggest at all times, phone the Bailiff office direct not the Bailiff.

 

And please note...................

 

I WILL NOT COME ON HERE AND ADVISE AS YOU DO. PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS TO WHICH YOU TRY USING LAW AND LEGISLATION TO UNDERMINE OR HAVE INTERPRETED IN YOUR HISTORIC WAY TO INTIMIDATE TO GAIN PAYMENT. BAILIFFS ARE NOT UNREASONABLE, YES THEY ARE NEEDED, HOWEVER COSTS NEED TO BE REASONABLE AND RESPONSABILITY FOR THEIR BEHAVIOUR BETTER MONITORED.

 

Interesting to note as you stated before....some spoil it for others...you are right...but look at your own industry..the public are not the enemy..they pay your wages remember, so we are the good guys! winks....

 

Alison

[Number6]

It's an opinion you're entitled to Pete but not based on any actual fiscal data. According to Government Economists (privately of course), it is sadly the case. It is only by bailiff action that hundreds of millions of pounds of taxes and fines are recovered - and that's leaving aside penalties. Britian is the most indebted society in western Europe and unless the debts are recovered on an ongoing basis, the economy would be in serious trouble.

 

A seperate issue altogether but the annual cost of the actions in Afghanistan and Iraq would cover all of the UK's bad debt three times over.

 

The amount of money wasted in mismanagement of and provision of non health related treatment by the NHS would again more than cover all of the UK bad debt provisions.

 

I could go on.

 

There are many other ways to "recover" monies that bailiffs collect on.... attachment of earnings, withdrawl of benefit, etc. Bailiffs are an anachronism.

 

To state that bailiffs are crucial to the UK economy is laughable and egotistical in the extreme. I don't think even Gordon Browns ego would be big enough to claim that.

 

Pete