Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please bear with me here i shall try and make this short but with all the detail, but i need help ASAP as there is limited time allowed for this process. I have been with my company 4 years and have advanced through the technical ranks to my current position,  we have an annual report which goes from 0-4 and for three years i have never scored lower than a 3. I was promoted to the role i am in now as an area quality assurance lead and the location was for the NE ( i live in the NW) eventually a similar role became available for another role in the NW. I asked my line manager if he minded me applying for it and he had no issues, i applied sat the multi stage interview and was given the role. My role is now classed as "at risk" of redundancy as we are moving from 4 regions to two which means they are also moving from 4 roles to two roles in my position. Two people are considered safe and myself and another at risk, my question is what is the criteria to separate safe from at risk . In the documentation received from my company it is below, i have zero issues and i know cv against cv mine wins, i was even selected by the company as a company mentor because of my experience in engineering and leadership. This is a closed group of maybe ten people and i am the only non senior executive included.    ·         Performance and Behaviour : I have zero behaviour issues, no issues with performance from my current line manager.  ·         Performance Improvement/ Disciplinary Records   : Zero disciplinary's and no performance issues, in fact my line manager on record has said I'm forthcoming ·         End Of Year Rating : Issues explained below Now my line manager was leaving the company and he did tell me "there was some politics involved with you getting that role, the city build manager and head of area build had promised it to their lead engineer (something they had no right to promise as it has to go though the process ) anyway from day 1 it became very clear that i would not be accepted for this reason within their community although i did just try to help them achieve quality and specification as that was my role. After a few weeks it became very apparent as to why the role had been promised to their man, i found issues where properties had been signed off as ready to accept subscribers when they were not ready (for bonus and stat reasons) and several quality issues i discovered which we could remedy and improve our productivity (unfortunately this would highlight that these issues had been there and not dealt with) My new head of area build (part of this trilogy of him, city build manager and lead engineer)  clearly did not want me there (for the reasons stated) but paid lip service, i had highlighted that i needed to walk off some structured with our canter of excellence counterparts ( as this was part of my role to link in with them for national issues) and he responded by saying i am not to walk them off, and that we have sufficient engineers to do that task (by saying this he could make sure that the engineers would take them round to structures that are A not the ones i have highlighted, and B would have very minor issues) This battle went back and forth over the months where i tried my best to build up the relationship with  them, my attitude was ok you have made some mistakes here, but we are all a team and even though you have hidden issues i can help you remedy them and hopefully we can do so and keep them off the radar,  but they just never did, So moving forward to October last year (2023) this is getting near to annual review time, now i had helped the company out massively by working a substantial amount of weekends and nights to fix issues, and i said i would take most of the time as TOIL ( as agreed with by my previous head of area build) this was 30 days. My current head of area build said i needed to put my leave in as it had been flagged as having a large amount. When i did input the leave (it would result in me taking all of December off) he was unhappy with me and was extremely curt in his responses as he could find nothing on the system for my TOIL , i explained the situation, my line manager would ask if i could work the hours, i would, and when i wanted leave he would authorise (we had an good working relationship, he was an excellent manager) he ended up going to HR to ask their advice and a teams call was set up with myself, head of area build and HR, it was confirmed by HR that it was a company error, when you want to input TOIL there should be a dropdown option in the leave menu and one of the options would be TOIL, this had not been setup on mine. So the company authorised the leave explaining that this should have been done and hadn't, i did say that this is the way it had always been and pretty much everyone on my team then operated this way, TOIL had never been discussed and none of had this option available. So i entered my leave from 4th December - 2nd January,  My line manager was an outside contractor and was leaving the company on the 15th December. On my return i found that we had a new head of area build, it would be a temporary position as they were not going to fill the position permanently and he would be covering his role (Scotland) and this role (NW). I contacted him to say that i had not received my end of year report yet and when would this happen as i had not sat with my line manager tor mine. A little over a week later my HoAB and i had a teams call, it was a introduction meeting and end of year report, he said that he had received feedback from the outgoing manager and he had given me a 2 (i have as explained before never scored lower than a 3) he asked hoe long i had been in the current role (just over a year) as this grade can mean you are new to the role and need a little supervision, haven't built up relationships with stakeholders etc. So he explained what my grade and bonus would be and if i had any feedback, i explained that this was unfair, i had proof that i had not met my targets (i say targets as there were never really any set, but going from emails and conversation we have had, and the job description) i had even created Powerpoint presentations which were very complex into how our network works from beginning to end  as there was distinct lack of knowledge here and i am a lead trainer / assessor (this btw he was extremely impressed with) He did say he had spoken to people in the centre of excellence which o believe was the head of operations, and he did look confused as to the disparity in feedback from them and the original manager that wrote my report. I contacted HR to raising my concerns that i had not sat with my line manager to go through my report,  had i had the chance to do so, i could have rebutted anything said as i had proof of my achievements even though he had set no defined targets, i could prove that i had been extremely active in identifying and remedying issues, HR did come back to me and these are their comments  1) "Your rating was submitted by your manager at the time xxx xxxxxx and he should have carried out an EOY review with you. The rating would not have been provided in this review but feedback should have been shared" [this never happened] 2)  Initial ratings where then discussed and reviewed during a calibration process (for your team) this will have included HOABs and RDs. During this session ratings can be challenged and changed. I can confirm that your rating was not changed as a result of this session and it remained at the rating that xxx submitted. 3) xxx did provide thorough feedback to xxx xxx in a handover so if not already done so it may be worth speaking with him to understand that feedback further.   4) In terms of reputation and the concern you share – ratings are not made public and are private to each individual. 5) And this first line obviously is incorrect " As far as i can see this would be the only separator they could have measured me on to separate safe from not safe, and if so the company did not follow its own procedure. My current line manager said " an error had occurred as you had not received the option to  sir with your manager for your review, and the company needs to make sure this error does not happen again) Well then they are admitting there was an issue and it needs remedying not sweeping under the carpet. All of this is documented. To remind the rating of a 2 is not a concerning grade. Please see descriptor below Generally, needs little supervision but does on occasion require direction/supervision. Does not always anticipate changes to the work environment and could adapt more quickly. May be seen as a strong performer in certain situations or by some audiences but may not perform at that level in all situations. May need some development or guidance to carry out some elements of role. May not consistently demonstrate the right behaviours. May have been on Performance Improvement during the year but has since shown strong improvement        
    • Also, what is the value of the dress and have you refunded the purchaser?
    • Simon Case was at the Covid inquiry yesterday. Finally. ‘Eat out to help out’ launched without telling official in charge, Covid inquiry hears | Covid inquiry | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Simon Case, who was responsible for Covid policy at time, calls Boris Johnson’s Downing Street the ‘worst governing ever seen’  
    • I think for the moment you will have to wait for the return of the dress to you And then take some decent photographs which will show the damage very clearly. You will have to provide these to parcel to go but also you will need them as evidence for the court if that's the way this matter goes . Let us know when you get the dress and you have the photographs. It would be helpful to see the photographs here. In the meantime I suggest that you start reading as many of the stories on the subforum as you can manage in 2 or 3 days and that means quite a lot. In particular read the pinned posts at the top of the subforum which will explain the principles involved which you will probably have to use if you bring the matter to court. When you have done the reading, when you have received the dress and when you have the photographs then come back here and we can go to the next step      
    • Solid blocks of text are very difficult for people to follow and especially when they are using small screens such as telephones. This discourages people from giving you the kind of help that you need. Please will you make sure that your posts are properly spaced and punctuated in future.  I have done this one for you on this occasion
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Bailiff discussion ( moved from hijacked thread )


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5121 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 401
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

My vote goes to Number 6

 

Strange I had you in mind Terminator lol

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps no.6 could team up With Terminator like Batman and Robin.

 

Hmm Which would be which.

 

:D

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
Perhaps no.6 could team up With Terminator like Batman and Robin.

 

Hmm Which would be which.

 

:D

 

Peter

 

I say we nominate one person and then have a vote. Im nominating our friendly baliff.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say we nominate one person and then have a vote.:grin:

 

Sound democratic thinking ,

 

I agree and nominate Number 6

 

Reasons

Excellent campaigning credentials

legally clued up

articulate

and most importantly,he is not on line at the moment so he can't refuse

 

Inascapable logic I think

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought but are bailiffs all subject to regular Criminal Record Checks?

 

The reason I ask is that i have just been reading an article where the local councills are starting to insist that CRB checks are done on their employees including councilors.

 

This came as a bit of a shock to me as I presumed that this would have been a requirement for any one working in the public sector especially those with access to our council taxes etc.

 

In the case of bailffs who are put in a position of power over what are sometimes vulnerable people i would have thoutht it would be a pre requisite that they had a enhanced CRB accreditation.

Any of the bailiffs on here help me out

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what really pussies me off. A bailiff can break the law and go away in 5 mins and to undo what he has done the debtor has to chase around the system for years on end. Even then no joy in cases.

CLICK HERE FOR A LOOK AT ALL OF MY FILES: http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/bailiffchaser/

do not forget to click on my scale if i am giving you the right advice or advice is making sense click my scales otherwise others think i am not helping you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought but are bailiffs all subject to regular Criminal Record Checks?

 

I am going to push for an answer to this.

 

As the new law will give the right for them to enter your home it would be nice to knowthat you are not entertaing a convicted thief or worse.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can remember them coming to our house for a none paid store card they were sent by the court. On the little leaving card it had hand wrote that if you are not in they will come with a lock smith to gain entry. After later speaking to a solicitor they advised me that it’s a load of rubbish unless they have already listed the goods which they hadn’t. Was very upsetting at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very sloppy of the bailiff to leave evidence of such a well used and totally illegal practice that they use to scare people who arn't aware of the law.

I would have used that card as evidence to take them to the cleaners.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
Just a thought but are bailiffs all subject to regular Criminal Record Checks?

 

I am going to push for an answer to this.

 

As the new law will give the right for them to enter your home it would be nice to knowthat you are not entertaing a convicted thief or worse.

 

Peter

 

Now am I correct in saying that they can only force their way into you home if it is with a valid court order.Then of course there is the HRA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought but are bailiffs all subject to regular Criminal Record Checks?

 

Bailiffchaser's letter on here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/30373-my-mp-bailiffs.html

 

mentions 'a strict criminal record check' as part of the new TC&E bill.

 

I hope they don't leave it to the Home Office to do it!:o

 

Elsinore

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have sent the following to my MP

 

Dear

 

I am a member of the consumer group CAG which petitions against unlawful penalty charges.

Please find the document I have attached which I ask you to read.

As you will see it describes in some detail the disquiet surrounding this governments new bill regarding the baillif industry and those who engage them.

Furthermore a number of constituents from different areas have written to their MP's expressing great concern that considerable powers are being invested in an industry known for it's very sharp and frequently illegal practices.

One member has received a reply via their MP from Harriet Harman which not only does not address the problems raised but it is clear that Ms Harman does not understand her governments own bill.

I particulary like the bit about bailiffs being able to seize family pets

Can see the headline now "family pet taken by bailiffs & will be disposed of unless parking ticket paid..........4 year old Samantha distraught

Has this government gone completely mad!

They appear to be being allowed to run amock.................Please do something.

Regards

Let see what happens

Link to post
Share on other sites

On our local news bulletin tonight and this from Teletext:-

 

Bailiffs find dead couple

 

A couple were found dead in their St Helens home when bailiffs came knocking at their door, police have revealed.

 

Alan Brown, 57, was found hanging in the hallway of his semi-detatched house. His wife Joan, 56, was in a bedroom. Tests showed she died of asphyxiation.

 

It is understood that Mr Brown was a former worker at the Ravenhead Glass factory, but was made redundant in 2001.

 

RIP

 

Elsinore

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

 

Just a quick update for you all.

 

The issue with Rossendales has now been resolved on my behalf by Alison from the Bailiff Watchdog.

 

I cannot thank Alison enough and would recommend her to anyone who needs help with an industry, that although they try to justify themselves by quoting laws that they have read from a script, is blatently daylight robbery and no matter how much bf1uk or any other bailiff try's to tell me different, i will never believe a word you say again.

 

Rossendales can in my opinion now go and take a long walk on a short cliff and with some look all fall in the water.

 

The bailiff industry in this country is an absolute farce and how some of these people can sleep at night is beyond me. Why on earth should anyone bother getting any proper qualifications and get arrested for bank robbery when you can just become a bailiff, its simple, all you need to do is learn a script (b1fuk will probably comment on this using verbal rubbish).

 

Alison thank you very much for your help and i wish you and your organisation against the modern day bank robbers :) we have come to know as bailiffs :)

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
On our local news bulletin tonight and this from Teletext:-

 

Bailiffs find dead couple

 

A couple were found dead in their St Helens home when bailiffs came knocking at their door, police have revealed.

 

Alan Brown, 57, was found hanging in the hallway of his semi-detatched house. His wife Joan, 56, was in a bedroom. Tests showed she died of asphyxiation.

 

It is understood that Mr Brown was a former worker at the Ravenhead Glass factory, but was made redundant in 2001.

 

RIP

 

Elsinore

 

I'd call that corprate mansaulaughter it's about time these b***ards were brought to book.Reading this has made me even more determined to have my day in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailliffs can only force their way into anyones property for any purpose whatso ever unless

A...They have a warrant of entry and

B must be accompanied by an a police officer or officers,

 

NO copper then you can cop him even if he has got an entry warrant.

 

Sparkie 1723

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick thing. obtained judgement for £4000 against jbw here is the link for the judgement posted here as unable to attach any attachments.

 

 

bailiffchaser - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

CLICK HERE FOR A LOOK AT ALL OF MY FILES: http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/bailiffchaser/

do not forget to click on my scale if i am giving you the right advice or advice is making sense click my scales otherwise others think i am not helping you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now am I correct in saying that they can only force their way into you home if it is with a valid court order.Then of course there is the HRA.

 

Currently Bailiffs can only enter your home without your consent if they are pursuing a criminal warrant issued by the Magistrates court or The Custom and Excise Dept in pursuit of gathering evidence of criminal proceedings. Recently they gained the right to force entry to recover fines imposed by the Magistrates court under warrant.

They also can force entry if they have a signed authority to a lien on goods provided by the householder on a previous visit.

Usually a visit of a bailiff with a warrant issued by the Magistrates court will be accompanied by a police Officer in order to prevent a breach of the peace.

 

This as far as i am aware is the situation at the moment but this all may change when the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Bill.

This bill is currently being debated in the House of Lords and its initial draft was introduced to the HL in June 2006.

 

I and others on this thread have been in touch with the Department of constitutional affairs raising our concerns on various aspects of the new legislature.

 

Our concerns centre on the apparent disregard for the individuals rights that have existed under common law for 800 years.

 

This law if passed will give Bailiffs (renamed enforcement officers) the right to us force to enter dwellings without the owners permission.

And threaten the owner with a custodial sentence if he should physically interfere.

Amongst other atrocities it will allow enforcement officers to enlist the help of unlicensed individuals to help enforce the warrant also it gives them the righ to enforce a warrant on a public highway which means that they can stop you in the street and use reasonable force to relieve you of your possessions.

 

In a reply i received from the Department of constitutional affairs they stated that this would." stop people from evading paying there debts by simply closing there door.

 

It seems that the right to peace and security in your own home is dependant on you remaining solvent.

 

What next Debtors Prison.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi i have asked this question in my own thread but i think the title isnt attracting the right people lol i had 2 council tax debts with equita i got them to send me statement of account including charges which i got today to find both accounts had bailiff fees of £75 and enforcement fees of £110 now i never let them in yes they did come round a few times but delt with both accounts at the door at the same time in the same visit now if ive read right they can only charge me for the first 2 visits at a total cost of £35 per account but where do i stand with the £110 as i cant see anything anywhere stating that they can charge anything else apart from visiting fees and levy which they didnt do please can someone help or point me in the right direction.

thank you xxx

WHEN THE WORLD GETS IN MY FACE I SAY HAVE A NICE DAY :lol:

 

MY SUCCESSESS

HSBC £5,735.35 :D

MUM IN LAW £2112.00 WIN FROM HALIFAX :grin:

MUM £3580.00 WIN FROM NatWest :grin:

AUNTIE 2 NATWEST WINS £1865.00 AND £2541.00

EQUITA BAILIFFS £293.00 REFUND :grin:

MBNA £871.16 WON WITH CI AT 24.49%

WELCOME FINANCE CHARGES £600 APPROX didnt even need letter lol

CAP ONE WON WITH CI AT 29.9% £994.26

 

CLAIMS ON THE GO AT MO

mbna ppi

NatWest cc at mcol (ppi next)

welcome ppi

first response charges

 

IF I HAVE HELPED IN ANY WAY HIT THE SCALES IN BOTTOM LEFT CORNER THANK YOU ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
Now am I correct in saying that they can only force their way into you home if it is with a valid court order.Then of course there is the HRA.

 

 

This as far as i am aware is the situation at the moment but this all may change when the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Bill.

This bill is currently being debated in the House of Lords and its initial draft was introduced to the HL in June 2006.

 

I and others on this thread have been in touch with the Department of constitutional affairs raising our concerns on various aspects of the new legislature.

 

Our concerns centre on the apparent disregard for the individuals rights that have existed under common law for 800 years.

 

This law if passed will give Bailiffs (renamed enforcement officers) the right to us force to enter dwellings without the owners permission.

And threaten the owner with a custodial sentence if he should physically interfere.

Amongst other atrocities it will allow enforcement officers to enlist the help of unlicensed individuals to help enforce the warrant also it gives them the righ to enforce a warrant on a public highway which means that they can stop you in the street and use reasonable force to relieve you of your possessions.

 

In a reply i received from the Department of constitutional affairs they stated that this would." stop people from evading paying there debts by simply closing there door.

 

It seems that the right to peace and security in your own home is dependant on you remaining solvent.

 

 

What next Debtors Prison.

 

They were abloished years ago but they may be on the way back:D Seriously though it's about time that this shower who supposedly run the country stepped in. For example finding the root cause of the problem and the first place that they should look at is the finiancial institutions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received 11/01/07

 

From MP

 

Thank you for your email of 10 January.

As a matter of fact, I have been concerned about this question of bailiffs for some months and have had various discussions with relevant parties.

I am glad to say that my colleagues who are leading on this for the Opposition are now putting down amendments seeking to include regulation of bailiffs on a much firmer basis within this Bill.

I am absolutely persuaded that the cowboys have to be stopped from acting in the way in which they clearly are prone to act.

I hope that we shall be able to persuade the Government to change its mind. If not, then I am minded to include proposals for further regulation of bailiffs in the Conservative Policy Review which I am currently chairing.

 

Yours sincerley

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...