Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Post #415 you said you were unable to sell it yourself. Earlier I believe you said there had been expressions of interest, but only if the buyer could acquire the freehold title. I wonder if the situation with the existing freeholders is such that the property is really unattractive, in ways possibly not obvious to someone who also has an interest in and acts for the freeholders.
    • i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.
    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
    • Sars request sent on 16th March and also sent a complaint separately to Studio. Have received no response. Both letters were received and signed for.  I was also told by the financial ombudsman that studio were investigating but I've also had no response to that either.  The only thing Studio have sent me is a default notice.  Any ideas of what I can do from here please 
    • Thanks Bank - I shall tweak my draft and repost. And here's today's ridiculous email from the P2G 'Claims Dept' Good Morning,  Thank you for you email. Unfortunately we would be unable to pay the amount advised in your previous email.  When you placed the order, you were asked for the value of your parcel, you stated that the value was £265.00. At this stage the booking advised that you were covered to £20.00 and to enhance this to £260.00 you could pay an extra £13.99 + VAT to fully cover your item for loss or damage during transit, you declined to fully cover your item.  Towards the end of your booking on the confirmation page, you were then offered to take cover again, to which you declined again.  Unfortunately, we would be unable to offer you an enhanced payment on this occasion.  If I can assist further, please do let me know.  Kindest Regards Claims Team and my response Good Afternoon  Do you not understand the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘cover’ or ‘protection’ (or whatever you wish to call it) on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to pay up in full for both cases, which by then also included court costs and interest. I shall be including copies of both those judgements in the bundle I submit to the court next Wednesday 1 May, unless you settle my claim (£274.10) in full before then. Tick tock…..    
  • 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

please help - threatening visit from MArston when already paid fine


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2977 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.

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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"

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

"...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?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrelevant posts removed and thread tidied.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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?

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 ?

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

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.

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

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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

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?

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

Andy.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hive the discussion type posts into a discussion thread.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...