Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

what is the correct way to deal with a bad bailiff


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3128 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

Hi all,

 

I have had a recent run in with a bailiff and im posertive he hasnt followed the correct rules for taking control of goods, im not wanting to debate whether im right or not! i would just like to know the correct way of complaing about it.

 

the complaint would be at the bailiff and possible his company as they were aware of his actions?

 

thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

i would rather keep the details of the action to myself at this moment in time.

 

but the agent was wrong in his actions which led to a clamp being removed myself being arrested, but then released without charge and advised to take civil action against him as its a civil mater not criminal. he tried to bend the rules and got caught out!

 

so im looking for advice on how to procede legaly and in a correct order? who to speak to ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would rather keep the details of the action to myself at this moment in time.

 

but the agent was wrong in his actions which led to a clamp being removed myself being arrested, but then released without charge and advised to take civil action against him as its a civil mater not criminal. he tried to bend the rules and got caught out!

 

so im looking for advice on how to procede legaly and in a correct order? who to speak to ?

 

The correct approach if pursuing a civil action would be to make complaint to the EA's employer and also the creditor. If that did not resolve matters an action under section 66 of schedule 12 of the TCE, or under a common law tort, depending on the nature of the offence.

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

The correct approach if pursuing a civil action would be to make complaint to the EA's employer and also the creditor. If that did not resolve matters an action under section 66 of schedule 12 of the TCE, or under a common law tort, depending on the nature of the offence.

 

This assumes that you wish to claim some kind of damages from them, and that damages are appropriate in your case.

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 phoned the people who employ the bailiff at the time and they didn't want to know and told me a supervisor was not available. Do I still need to write to them as well ?

 

And the council was aware before and during and after but didn't help. I have made a official complaint which they should have replied to by now but they haven't. (10 working days)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would rather keep the details of the action to myself at this moment in time.

 

but the agent was wrong in his actions which led to a clamp being removed myself being arrested, but then released without charge and advised to take civil action against him as its a civil mater not criminal. he tried to bend the rules and got caught out!

 

so im looking for advice on how to procede legaly and in a correct order? who to speak to ?

 

With almost no background information on which to provide an adequate response my suggestion is that you outline your complaint as simply as possible (and most importantly, in date order) and that you write a letter to the enforcement company and mark it Formal Complaint. It may well be that the enforcement agent was not acting correctly but you need to see what the enforcement companies response is before considering your next course of action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I phoned the people who employ the bailiff at the time and they didn't want to know and told me a supervisor was not available. Do I still need to write to them as well ?

 

And the council was aware before and during and after but didn't help. I have made a official complaint which they should have replied to by now but they haven't. (10 working days)

 

Depends on what you are seeking to achieve. Court is a bit dodgy as the enforcement industry appears to be a favourite cousin of Judges, so you may not receive a fair hearing. Better to make sure the council deal with the complaint and go down the local ombudsman route, if you remain unhappy.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I phoned the people who employ the bailiff at the time and they didn't want to know and told me a supervisor was not available. Do I still need to write to them as well ?

 

And the council was aware before and during and after but didn't help. I have made a official complaint which they should have replied to by now but they haven't. (10 working days)

 

Yes you need to make a formal complaint by writing, keeping copies of all correspondence. The civil court is the only effective route to take if you are after a claim for damages, which path you take with your claim will depend on your details of course, the court will decide on the merits of the case, nothing more.

 

Can you tell us why they decided not to charge you, did you cut the clamp off ?

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

Taking any Bailiff or Enforcement Co to Court can be fraught with difficulty not least because of the risk you run of losing and them asking for their costs. You need to establish what part of "bad" you class the Bailiff as. There is another complaint route available - the issue of Form EAC2 whereby the Bailiffs' fitness to hold a Certificate may be called into doubt - again I would imagine this would be defended vigorously and risk of costs against being asked for.

 

If you can establish the Bailiff has indeed broken the law by his actions then you would have a much clearer case but to be honest you need to treat anything you do with caution.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I removed the clamp after giving the bailiff his company and council and police notice of over 24 hours of what I was going to do

 

Did you do this without causing any damage and return it to the EA ?

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 took it off without causing damage to it, then droped it at the police station as lost property with a note with the bailiffs name.

 

Well if you are going to go down that path, then that is the best way to do it. There are places who advise people to throw them in the canal, can you imagine what kind of trouble that would land the debtor in.

 

I take it you want to claim damages or do you just want to get the EA in trouble ? If the former you need to examine your claim carefully before presenting it, ensure that you claim can be justified and your damages are proportionate. Without further detail I cannot be more specific.

.

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 took it off without causing damage to it, then droped it at the police station as lost property with a note with the bailiffs name.

 

That is still a criminal offence.

 

Offences under Schedule 12 of the Tribunal, Courts & Enforcement Act (TCA) 2007

 

Under clause 68 of this schedule, the legislation is clear regarding the actions that constitute and offence during the process of enforcement:

 

A person is guilty of an offence if he intentionally interferes with controlled goods without lawful excuse.

 

A person guilty of an offence under this paragraph is liable on summary conviction to-

 

Imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks, or A fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or Both

Link to post
Share on other sites

Throwing my hat in.

 

Without Lawful Exuse??

 

What if the clamp was applied Erroneously in that the baliff had no auhority, Failed to follow correct procedure, or a hunch? Enforcement will then be unlawful

 

Wlll Schedule 12 then apply??

 

We all know baliffs regular as clock work flout the law such as Foot in the door, threshold and all that

 

Just posting a question as i am ignorant on baliff matters and legislation

Link to post
Share on other sites

Throwing my hat in.

 

Without Lawful Exuse??

 

What if the clamp was applied Erroneously in that the baliff had no auhority, Failed to follow correct procedure, or a hunch? Enforcement will then be unlawful

 

Wlll the regulation then apply??

 

We all know baliffs regular as clock work flout the law such as Foot in the door, threshold and all that

 

Just posting a question as i am ignorant on baliff matters and legislation

 

What if.... That's the point.

 

It would be for the Police to decide whether the EA followed lawful procedures during any investigation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Throwing my hat in.

 

Without Lawful Exuse??

 

What if the clamp was applied Erroneously in that the baliff had no auhority, Failed to follow correct procedure, or a hunch? Enforcement will then be unlawful

 

Wlll Schedule 12 then apply??

 

Your above question is actually very important indeed and let me explain.

 

Every day I receive enquiries or phone calls from the public with 'claims' that a bailiff had:

 

Acted 'unlawfully' ....

 

Had provided a 'fake warrant'...

 

Was trying to enforce for their fees after the warrant had been 'satisfied'...

 

That a vehicle was 'exempt' and that the bailiff was acting 'illegally'

 

etc, etc etc. The list is endless.

 

However, in all cases where there is a dispute...there is a simply, speedy and more important....FREE remedy available under Part 85 of the Civil Procedure Rules. There is a thread on this procedure and I will post a link later.

 

The bottom line is that with a car clamp, it is NOT for the debtor to determine whether or not the device was applied illegally. That is not his decision to make.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What if.... That's the point.

 

It would be for the Police to decide whether the EA followed lawful procedures during any investigation.

 

 

The Police would just turn around and state its a civil matter, but once cut its a criminal matter, go figure!!

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Police would just turn around and state its a civil matter, but once cut its a criminal matter, go figure!!

 

I think that it is the TCE which states that it is a criminal matter to interfere with goods under control MM.

 

TBH The way things stand at the moment, with incorrect advice being given left right and centre, the police and the EA are probably correct in the majority of situations.

People are being told to say that goods are exempt or third party, enforcment notices have not been received irrespective of what has actually occurred.

 

This has happened in all areas of debt, measures are introduced to help people from DCA/ bailiffs etc. These are abused then the measures have to be amended or removed.

 

Anyway isn't there a discussion thread for this, it is not helping the OP :)

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

That is still a criminal offence.

 

Offences under Schedule 12 of the Tribunal, Courts & Enforcement Act (TCA) 2007

 

Under clause 68 of this schedule, the legislation is clear regarding the actions that constitute and offence during the process of enforcement:

 

A person is guilty of an offence if he intentionally interferes with controlled goods without lawful excuse.

 

A person guilty of an offence under this paragraph is liable on summary conviction to-

 

Imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks, or A fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or Both

 

Total rubish !!!! i was released without charge as there was no crime to answer!

 

the officer said his goods were not in control as he hadnt followed the correct course of action! FACT.

 

this sort of rubbish is why i asked for info on how to complain and didnt want to tell the story. as soon as i posted all everyone wanted to do was find out the story and talk rubish which had nothing to do with what i asked

Link to post
Share on other sites

i did raise that point at the station but the police adviced me to complain and take the civil route as if i wanted him charged it would not be in the public interest. but taking someone to court for damage to a £12 padlock is ?

 

there is a culture of helping bailiffs out there! my opinion.

 

i believe the police know that laws are broken by bailiffs all the time but unless there breaking peoples legs they dont ever seem to get charged???? but if you look around you see loads of people cutting off clamps being arrested for pennys of damage and lots of them if not all not even making it to a court room!! with cases dropped. so why keep charging people if there not getting convicted? and more the point why are bailiffs not charged more often?

Edited by koby
i cant spell to save my life :/
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...