please help - threatening visit from MArston when already paid fine

[Bailiff Advice]

Hi.

 

just spoken to martsons.

 

I requested for the audio file for the conversation when i made the payment and if it turned out it was my mistake and was told to call in 10 days to make a payment then i would py but couldnt pay all in one go.

 

I was told that i need to pay £420 in one payment or my goods or car will be taken and sold.

 

I then said i dont have any goods of value and im staying at my girlfriends place until i move to gib. in 2 weeks.

 

I was then told that they could either just issue an arrest warrant, or block my passport to stop me leaving the country.

 

 

.

 

I am sorry but I am confused here. In post number 8 you said that you had already moved to Gibraltar and from your above post you are saying that you told Marston's yesterday that you are saying at your girlfriends until you move to Gibraltar IN TWO WEEKS time. If you have told Marston's that you are leaving the country then you can surely understand WHY they will not be willing to accept a payment proposal.

 

Secondly, with regard to the payment that you thought that you had made to Marston's you have said above that when you call the company yesterday you questioned them on the payment and they stated that it was 'a mistake'. Can you elaborate on this.

[caledfwlch]

And for the avoidance of doubt, marstons can be given an arrest warrant issued by the magi's, but they cannot apply and get it themselves.

 

I am amazed Certificated Arrest Officers, or whatever they are calling themselves this week haven't been attacked and seriously injured and murdered by now.

 

Their existence isn't common knowledge, the government appears to have suppressed as much information as possible on them in fact, so a person would have a good chance of proper doing a CAO over, and getting off on "I thought he was a burglar"

[caledfwlch]

Listen go and get some accurate legal advice online from qualified legal professionals for free. It sounds more than feasible that Marston could issue a European arrest warrant. I read EU law including commercial in terms of transactions; European law is about bringing countries in their Community to be 'ever closer', which are actually words in the original founding Treaty: Treaty of Rome, 1957. Thus, ideas developed such as free movement of goods, services, persons, and finances.

 

 

There are lawyer forums online who have there bored retired legal professionals/ barristers/ solicitors. As a graduate of law, I had access to many premium legal databases and these lawyers do also. Trustee me, once law is in you it just does not leave you and these retired/ other legal professionals will have many years of experience of any legal situation you can possibly think of. One I went to was giving advice on a land interest that many people haven't heard of, but I have since i studied property law; that is, a right to use another's land owing to many years use: Prescriptive Act easement. I am sure you will find what you're looking for without having to pay anyone or phone up expensive solicitors etc. If you're worried, it's times to do something about it, is my advice.

 

What on earth are you on about?

 

A European Arrest Warrant is a Criminal Warrant that is used to trigger Extraditiion within the EU.

 

In the UK, a special unit of the Met deal with the EAW's and travels around the UK Arresting the subjects of the Warrant, and flying them to the Country that is after them.

 

It has nothing to do with Marstons or Bailiffs. I think you have misunderstood the posts here.

[caledfwlch]

What I am failing to grasp is what EU extradition law has to do with Courts issuing arrest warrants for non payment of a fine.

 

Oh, an EAW could be used to get a fine evader who has legged it to Eire, say, but that is because evading fines is a criminal offence, and the EAW is there to allow the law to reach wanted criminals within the EU.

 

I doubt the Council would be able to use an EAW to get someone who owes them council tax.

 

It doesn't have anything to do with this subject, where a Bailiff is threatening to get the OP arrested.

 

I would like Grumpy to provide some proof that Marston's have any input as to when someone gets arrested which he seems to be suggesting.

[caledfwlch]

"...haven't been attacked and seriously injured and murdered by now.." is a tad extreme, don't you think?

 

Bailiff's are getting attacked, more so since the new legislation came in last year.

 

Do you really not think it amazing that a special type of bailiff whos job is arresting people the courts want has not yet been attacked?

 

If you answered the door and some guy dressed like a security guard tried to arrest you, and when you ask "are you a copper?" and he says no, would you accept his word that he can arrest you, or would you resist, since to your knowledge "security guards" don't have any power of arrest?

[caledfwlch]

And how many of my or your neighbours know of that specific act?

 

I know full well they can, most people don't.

[AndyOrch]

DX, all's am saying is that persons on here are generally not legally qualified to offer advice in many areas, and I did a law degree but I know am not qualified in many things.. I still understand the law in general however. Wouldn't it make sense to sign post where others can obtain the best help for them in their individual situation, where others here do not hold that particular competence?

 

And how would you know that having only been a member for 2 weeks?

 

We do not advocate posters redirecting traffic from our forum to other forums....please desist from this now.

 

Regards

 

Andyorch

[caledfwlch]

Who even knows what laws there are unless someone studied it or another person tells someone else. Bailiffs have the right to use reasonable force too. If a bailiff goes beyond reasonable force, he or his employer could be sued too. Which law, when you said "since the new legislation came into power last year" were you talking about?

 

No they don't. Bailiff's are not allowed to use force. Certainly not against a Debtor. IIRC one of the eyebrow raising elements of the new legislation was it had to specifically state they arent allowed to use force against Debtors.

[AndyOrch]

Irrelevant posts removed and thread tidied.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[ploddertom]

Think you may find that the majority of "arrest warrants" are issued where the "arrested" person

is given an opportunity to appear at their local Court to explain why they have not paid their fine,

they appear under their own recognizances.

 

 

This is a far cry from the arm up the back situation you may be envisaging.

 

 

If they fail to turn up then the chances are it will be the boys in blue that turn up to invite them for a short holiday.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

No plodder. That's not quite right. They have been given chance to appear before.

They then refuse to pay and usually an arrest with bail warrant is given where the debtor is met with signs and goes about their merry ways until the court date.

If that doesn't work, I.e they won't sign, are being shielded, dont turn up etc, then an arrest warrant without bail is issued to the EA. Not to the boys in blue.

[ploddertom]

 

If that doesn't work, I.e they won't sign, are being shielded, dont turn up etc, then an arrest warrant without bail is issued to the EA. Not to the boys in blue.

 

 

Surely they don't just turn up unaccompanied in case someone kicks off?

[Bailiff Advice]

Surely they don't just turn up unaccompanied in case someone kicks off?

 

The Bail Warrant if anything is less intrusive on the debtor as the PURPOSE of the visit is to personally serve notice on the debtor that they are to appear in court for the purpose of explaining why they have failed to pay the court fine. The enforcement agent will not be attending for the purpose of taking control of goods.

 

Payment of the full amount will naturally cancel the need to attend court.

 

If payment is not made and the debtor fails to attend court then an arrest warrant would be issued and it would usually be the case that an EA would not attend the premises without assistance.

 

On your point about an EA attending unaccompanied, with bailiff enforcement in large cities (Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester, London etc) there will be a large number of bailiffs working in each area at any one time they will be able to call on assistance from another EA close by. Enforcement agents are in touch with other agents many times a day via mobile and with sat navs can be at the scene of a 'difficult' enforcement within minutes.

[Peterbard]

Bailiff's are getting attacked, more so since the new legislation came in last year.

 

 

Hi

 

Is there any documented evidence for this, i am not saying it is not so, but my understanding was that there has been a decline in bailiff related violence ?

[mikeymack2002]

There are a few reports that have been made on Scoop as well as local press releases, but that means using Google.. Plus a few on CAG too...

[Peterbard]

Yes, I know there has been an increase in reported cases, but i think it is due to the rise in social media. I would be interested to see if there was any empirical data.

[Bailiff Advice]

Yes, I know there has been an increase in reported cases, but i think it is due to the rise in social media. I would be interested to see if there was any empirical data.

 

The last figure was from an article in CCR Public Sector by the then Director General of CIVEA. The article was around the middle of last year (I have a copy on the computers at work).

 

He stated that there had been around 900 REPORTS of bailiffs being subject to assault. It is my understanding that this figure had been obtained by CIVEA from responses to a questionnaire to all enforcement agents.

[Bailiff Advice]

Yes, I know there has been an increase in reported cases, but i think it is due to the rise in social media.

 

Social media and very poor advice from internet sites is mainly to blame for bad behaviour by bailiffs and attacks on bailiffs.

 

Take for example the astonishing increase in the number of silly Facebook pages around. There is even a new one to 'bailiff proof' your car by using a 'Promissory Note'. Each site has two things in common:

 

One: To ensure that payment does not get made to a bailiff/enforcement agent

 

Two: To ensure that bailiff charges are never paid.

 

Comments are best reserved for the 'discussion forum' and may indeed be best served by a new thread. I will give some thought to this later today.

[Peterbard]

Social media and very poor advice from internet sites is mainly to blame for bad behaviour by bailiffs and attacks on bailiffs.

 

Take for example the astonishing increase in the number of silly Facebook pages around. There is even a new one to 'bailiff proof' your car by using a 'Promissory Note'. Each site has two things in common:

 

One: To ensure that payment does not get made to a bailiff/enforcement agent

 

Two: To ensure that bailiff charges are never paid.

 

Comments are best reserved for the 'discussion forum' and may indeed be best served by a new thread. I will give some thought to this later today.

 

No need, really it was just an observation. My query was more about the effects of the new regime on bailiff violence. The hope was that the new rules would clarify the position and reduce the incidence of violence by making the procedure easier to understand.

This seems to have worked in other aspects of enforcment quite well. The problem with "googling " is that you come up with individual incidents and this does not give a picture of the overall situation.

I thought that perhaps one of the agencies had come up with some data.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Most arrest with bail are dealt with by single EA's.

Arrest WITHOUT bail are carried out by two EA's.

[brassnecked]

How many third parties that just happen to answer the door as in new occupants, as the debtor has moved are arrested because they cannot give ID the bailiff saying the warrant is to the address so whoever is the occupier must be arrested?

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

When confronted with an arrest warrant for an individual, i have never had anybody refuse to id themselves. If they did, then it would just be a call to the police and get them to come out and id the person for us. Even though the warrant has been issued to us, the police can and do take over if needed. If it wasn't the person, then no problem, if it was, then the judge would obviously be informed. What actions he would take when he finds out the debtor has been lying....i have no idea, but i am sure it would influence his decision somewhere down the line but that's only a guess.

[Ruleoflaw]

The body which represented Bailiffs in fact wanted a provision in the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 for 'using reasonable force.'

 

 

Thankfully, the government told them that the criminal law already provides this, in which it does to an extent.

 

 

Reasonable force as a statutory provision in said 2007 Act would be like a licence/ excuse for a bailiff to beat someone up even if the occupant put there hands on them, as this is battery not assault.

 

 

However, thankfully that criminal law is developed in this area but not so thankfully that a Crown Prosecution Service clerk with potentially only a few GCSEs may make this decision in some circumstances. For many years the police never needed qualifications either.

 

What is interesting is that a person in actual occupation of the property (land) whether through lease or freehold (ownership) has what are called 'over-riding' interests, which in effect prioritises their rights above others including banks: Schedule 2 (i think), Land Registration Act 2002.

 

 

However, how many people actually know this or rely on it in court?

In this country, we see a signed authority from the court - or letter from a bank - and think that we have no rights, except if you were to pay some expensive lawyer for his expertise, that is.

[AndyOrch]

Thread is verging on becoming a discussion...lets keep to the thread topic in hand.

 

Andy.

[brassnecked]

Hive the discussion type posts into a discussion thread.