Debtor found guilty at trial of assaulting and obstructing a bailiff. Adjourned awaiting pre sentence reports.

[Bailiff Advice]

Under section 68.1 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunal Courts & Enforcement Act 2007 it is a very serious offence to obstruct a bailiff.

 

Last week yet another debtor was found guilty of this offence but even more seriously, he was also found guilty of assaulting the bailiff (the bailiff required stitches to his nose).

 

The debt was in relation to an unpaid penalty charge notice. Bailiffs attended the debtors property to request £422. It would seem that previous visits had also been made and on one of the visits, he had sworn at the bailiff before driving off. It was on the 4th visit that the incident occurred.

 

During the one day trial the debtors solicitor claimed that his client had suffered a stroke before the incident and this had led to him being unable to raise his left arm. Unfortunately for the debtor, the medical papers handed to the magistrates did not bear out the stroke claims stating only that Mr Gara had complained of 'weakness' in his arm.

 

After deliberating for 45 minutes, magistrates convicted Mr Gara of assault by beating on March 3rd and also of obstructing a lawful enforcement agent on the same occasion.

 

The presiding magistrate has requested pre sentence reports to be prepared before sentencing at the next hearing on 17th September.

 

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/news/15681/Bailiff-attacked-by-Thatcham-taxi-driver.html

[obiter dictum]

Is it not about time this Dickensian policy of Bailiff enforcement was outlawed, it is the 21st century??

 

Attachment of earnings and benefits are widely used now and will stop these Bailiffs compounding the original debt with astronomical charges on some of the poorest in society

 

They are not used here in Northern Ireland so no excuse to continue with them in the rest of the UK

[ploddertom]

Is it not about time this Dickensian policy of Bailiff enforcement was outlawed, it is the 21st century??

 

Attachment of earnings and benefits are widely used now and will stop these Bailiffs compounding the original debt with astronomical charges on some of the poorest in society

 

They are not used here in Northern Ireland so no excuse to continue with them in the rest of the UK

 

You are preaching to the converted here - unfortunately it falls on deaf ears to those who can make changes.

[mikeymack2002]

Why wasn't the camera rolling on this, something is not right about this . Looks like the EA knew already there could be issues.

[unclebulgaria67]

Why wasn't the camera rolling on this, something is not right about this . Looks like the EA knew already there could be issues.

 

Perhaps there was camera footage. But i bet an EA company watch this and if they don't find it helpful, they find a technical fault with the camera. In the heat of the moment the EO might act in a way which undermines their case and opens them to action by Police or debtor.

 

There is a Data Protection issue with film footage taken by EO's. If the footage is regularly not available, at some point people will start to ask questions.

[obiter dictum]

Quick Queston

 

If a Bailiff or plod come onto your property boundary wearing these body cameras,

 

I take it you are in your rights to request they turn them off??

 

After-all they are no longer in the public domain, but on your personal property

[unclebulgaria67]

Quick Queston

 

If a Bailiff or plod come onto your property boundary wearing these body cameras,

 

I take it you are in your rights to request they turn them off??

 

After-all they are no longer in the public domain, but on your personal property

 

You can request. But they may refuse and you cannot do much about it. It would be up to a Judge whether the footage could be used in evidence.

 

You argue privacy rights, they argue defence rights etc etc. Not as if you can get a Judge to suddenly appear at the scene to make a decision.

[brassnecked]

Is it not about time this Dickensian policy of Bailiff enforcement was outlawed, it is the 21st century??

 

Attachment of earnings and benefits are widely used now and will stop these Bailiffs compounding the original debt with astronomical charges on some of the poorest in society

 

They are not used here in Northern Ireland so no excuse to continue with them in the rest of the UK

 

As per PT, my footer declares my opinion of enforcement, indeed Lord Denning in the 1980's was actively seeking to kill it off, but here we are in 2015, and the bailiffs still act as if it is 1215 and King John and the Sheriff of Nottingham are still around.

[theronstar]

Would it make a difference if the bailiffs were made to work in-house at the different borough councils?

[citizenB]

Would it make a difference if the bailiffs were made to work in-house at the different borough councils?

 

It would ensure there was some accountability for the Bailiff's actions.

[Old Cogger]

Bailiff!s Judge Jeffries said !I was only doing my job! they hung him as well!

[Bailiff Advice]

UPDATE,

 

The case against the debtor has been further adjourned until 8th October.

[brassnecked]

UPDATE,

 

The case against the debtor has been further adjourned until 8th October.

if guilty as charged why the delay?

[mikeymack2002]

Would the bench not want pre-sentence reports (PSR)

[Bailiff Advice]

The case was heard yesterday. I will make enquiries with the court and post back.

[caledfwlch]

It would ensure there was some accountability for the Bailiff's actions.

 

In a climate where Council's budgets are being horrendously slashed, and they are desperately trying to come up with "get rich quick" schemes to fill the blackhole? I suspect In House Enforcement would be equally bad, if not worse. There would not really be any more accountability either, since, legally speaking, A Local Authority or anyone seeking to hire EA's is equally, vicariously, etc liable for the actions of the employees of the EA Company it contracts.

 

My local Council, Ceredigion, recently announced it was creating or significantly increasing charges for a variety of "Services" only to finally discover at a late stage, that every single one was outwith their legal control, any changes would have to be by legislation etc, either from the Welsh Senate, or Westminster.... We are not exactly talking about Professionals, when talking about most of the Management Sphere of local authorities, we are dealing with people who's ambitions and desires far outreach their abilities. Probably a problem of local and central Civil Service as a whole.

 

I bet in house enforcement would see debts being transferred over to enforcement far quicker, as the new TCOG fee's on top it would be immediately identified as a new extremely lucrative revenue stream on top of hitting tax collection targets.

 

Perhaps the only real benefit would be that at least Rogue EA's and potentially management could also be done for Malfeasance in Public Office etc when caught.

 

I caught a news article the other day saying that complaints against Police Officers/Forces have risen hugely recently, with a vast bulk of the complaints being on the lines of Constables/Forces failing to do their duty, and I did wonder if it would be worth or possible to do a Freedom of Information Request to get a basic breakdown of the actual complaint contents - as I wondered how many of those complaints might actually turn out to be instances of Constables/Superior Officers only "talking bailiff" refusing to investigate criminal action by EA's and so on.....

[Bailiff Advice]

Would the bench not want pre-sentence reports (PSR)

 

Indeed they did MF and this is why I had entitled the thread as follows:

 

Debtor found guilty at trial of assaulting and obstructing a bailiff. Adjourned awaiting pre sentence reports.

[Bailiff Advice]

UPDATE:

 

As mentioned earlier, the defendant had another court hearing on 17th September and the case was further adjourned until yesterday.

 

At yesterdays hearing Mr Gara was found GUILTY. The court imposed the following:

 

A Community Order requiring him to undertake 150 hours of unpaid work.

 

A Compensation Order of £400

 

Victims Surcharge of £60

 

Crown Prosecution Costs of £500

[mikeymack2002]

I guess the use of a MF is getting very expensive judging by the new amount now due. Plus having to do CS as well, is the risk and costs really worth using an unqualified MF?

 

 

Further to post #16 my Council has got to cut by 45m from their budget and the cost of Policing is going up too.

[wonkeydonkey]

UPDATE:

 

As mentioned earlier, the defendant had another court hearing on 17th September and the case was further adjourned until yesterday.

 

At yesterdays hearing Mr Gara was found GUILTY. The court imposed the following:

 

A Community Order requiring him to undertake 150 hours of unpaid work.

 

A Compensation Order of £400

 

Victims Surcharge of £60

 

Crown Prosecution Costs of £500

 

JasonB the (McKenzie in this case) frequently claims his 'Law Firm' charges the sum of £2500 to represent 'victims' in court. That forum needs to remove all links to Mr B especially his ' telephone consultation' hot line,

[Bailiff Advice]

JasonB the (McKenzie in this case) frequently claims his 'Law Firm' charges the sum of £2500 to represent 'victims' in court. That forum needs to remove all links to Mr B especially his ' telephone consultation' hot line,

 

WD

 

No, he was not involved in this case. This defendant had been represented by a solicitor specialising in criminal proceedings as opposed to 'The Guru' who masquerades as a Lawyer.

 

The background story to this case is here:

 

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/n...xi-driver.html

[wonkeydonkey]

WD

 

No, he was not involved in this case. This defendant had been represented by a solicitor specialising in criminal proceedings as opposed to 'The Guru' who masquerades as a Lawyer.

 

 

 

The background story to this case is here:

 

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/n...xi-driver.html

 

Sorry my comments were not meant for this thread I intended to post here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?453447-Another-debtor-found-guilty-under-Section-68(1)-of-TC