Transferring or selling a vehicle to avoid bailiff enforcement.

[Bailiff Advice]

With bailiff enforcement, goods belonging to the debtor become 'bound' from a certain date (more on this later).

 

In simple terms, this means that unless the person who acquired the goods did so in 'good faith' .....for 'valuable consideration' and most importantly; 'without knowing about a warrant' then the transfer or sale will not be considered valid and accordingly, the goods (mainly a motor vehicle) can be seized by the enforcement agent.

 

It is becoming a very common situation indeed for debtors to attempt to 'sell' (or transfer) a car to a friend, partner of relative after receiving correspondence or a visit from an enforcement company and given the frequency that this is happening, enforcement companies are naturally requiring 'evidence' of the 'sale'. By way of an example, the following is an ongoing case that was posted on a very large social media site on 5th February:

 

 

Background:

Mother found guilty of obstructing a High Court Enforcement Officer...told by Judge to expect to be sent to prison. - Bailiffs and Enforcement Industry - General discussions - Consumer Action Group

 

The poster stated that she had received a visit from a bailiff representing Marston Group in relation to one penalty charge notice. She confirmed that she knew of the debt.

 

She refused to speak with the enforcement agent and as a consequence, her vehicle was clamped. Given that the vehicle cannot be removed unless a period of two hours has passed, the enforcement agent left the property.

 

She was encouraged to deflate the tyre on her car and remove the wheel clamp. She did so. Stunningly, she then posted on the site to ask whether it was true that if she took the clamp to the police station, that she would not be prosecuted !!! It would seem that she was another person who believed JasonDWB's (The Guru's) inaccurate theory. She was told to move her car and keep it hidden.

 

The following day, (February 6th) she posted that the enforcement agent had located her car. It was removed to the vehicle pound and the debt has significantly increased by way of the sale stage fee of £110 and she is now also being charged storage fees.

[Bailiff Advice]

After the vehicle was taken this lady was advised to transfer ownership of her car to her husband (this is despite the fact that bailiffs can remove jointly owned goods). She was told to backdate the V5c by one week.

 

She is incurring £18.00 per day storage.

 

She has confirmed that the car was purchased by her father for £6,000 and that the insurance is in her name (although her hubby is a named driver).

 

On 10th February (5 days after she ‘sold’ her vehicle), her husband (as the new owner) telephoned Marston Group to ask for the release of 'his' car. He has encountered a problem. The debtor is now worried because Marston's are asking him for proof of 'sale', transfer of insurance' and evidence of payment made to 'purchase' his wife's car.

 

This lady has not only been led into committing a criminal act by removing the wheel clamp, she is also in the position whereby her debt has increased by £110 for the removal fee and £150 to date for storage with ongoing daily fees of £18.00.

 

It would seem that the debtor's husband has now encountered another problem. Marston Group are asking for evidence that he taxed the vehicle on the same day of purchase. All posters so far responding have advised the debtor that such a question is not relevant and that her husband should refuse to provide details. In fact, the question is very important indeed and this is because:

 

Since 2014 when changes were made to road tax it is now the case then when a vehicle is sold that the previous road tax becomes

VOID.

The previous owner will receive a refund from DVLA (if they had purchased one years's tax in advance) and the new owner must obtain a new car tax on the day of purchase.

[*RainbowTears*]

BA,

 

From what I've been reading about online, this is indeed becoming a common trend.

 

People who post looking for help once the EA/Bailiff has turned up to clamp/bound cars, the OP are being actively encouraged to lie/deceive & behave in a manner they wouldn't normally do.

 

There are so many sites/groups that these people turn too, whether in desperation or hope. That they then blindly follow what they are told to do, whatever the consequences.

 

Yet none of these sites/groups have any formal legalese behind them & despite not doing so, set themselves up like they are the last word on it! It beggars belief...

 

Some (many) of these OP who go seeking help, will sadly find themselves in a much worse off situation than they started with.

 

But there's nothing neither you, me or anyone else can do to stop it.

 

It's akin to dropping a penny in the ocean. You ain't got no chance!

 

But someone, somewhere has to speak up & if your post helps one person to not go down this route, it's a start!

[mikeymack2002]

This topic was discussed recently on a another thread. As has it been discussed in depth about taking advice from the Internet again very much in depth. (To death I might add)

 

Do we really need yet another thread discussing these topics again?

 

If you take advice that is not professional you will ALWAYS run the risk of getting advice that is wrong (Possibly) or that others disagree with. That goes for ANYONE that charges for advice.

 

Especially those that have their own business in this industry that are neither qualified nor approved nor have the relevant licenses from the relevant bodies...

 

Roll on the spring when these people could see changes to the law in the very near future...

 

There are numerous bodies that already speak up for others already..

 

Ultimately you are responsible for what advice you seek and take no one else is....

[Peterbard]

Not so sure MM, if there are one or two forums giving correct advice, just by the law of averages it must decrease the chances of the person hitting on of the loony ones.

[citizenB]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?459585-Mother-found-guilty-of-obstructing-a-High-Court-Enforcement-Officer...told-by-Judge-to-expect-to-be-sent-to-prison.&p=4856809&viewfull=1#post4856809

 

Is this the same or similar lady in post # 5 of this thread ?

[Peterbard]

Personally I think these discussion threads have a great value, in that the casual visitor may see the issues and the arguments and decide to use the information to explore the subject themselves. It is essential that they re kept on topic though.

[mikeymack2002]

I haven't taken it off topic just a gentle reminder that this has already been discussed on several levels. Maybe instead of a new thread updating one of the many out there would assist posters with other information as well. Just my views that's all..

[*RainbowTears*]

Personally I think these discussion threads have a great value, in that the casual visitor may see the issues and the arguments and decide to use the information to explore the subject themselves. It is essential that they re kept on topic though.

 

100% agree.

 

I personally haven't either read or replied on the other thread, so I am sure I'm not the only person.

 

Topics like this need to be kept in the public eye, as it's about a serious situation that's become an ongoing issue for a lot of people in reality.

 

I won't name sites/groups I'm aware off that give out the terrible "not so helpful" information that BA states in her OP. But there is a lot.

 

I've read about posters who do not have the funds to pay for proper legal help, who believe blindly what they are told, as they don't know any different.

 

Why would they? As they find themselves facing EA action (who can behave in a intimadating/threatening manner) & not knowing which way to turn, so they turn to the Internet in their desperation.

 

Even bad advice is advice after all for those in this situation.

[Bailiff Advice]

This topic was discussed recently on a another thread. As has it been discussed in depth about taking advice from the Internet again very much in depth. (To death I might add).

 

In fact, MM the other thread is in connection with an entirely different matter altogether.

 

That thread (and indeed it's title) made clear that the subject was concerning a lady who has been arrested for 'obstructing' a High Court Enforcement Officer. She has been told that she can expect a prison sentence when she returns to court at the end of this week.

 

In that same thread I did indeed mention this person's case. However, on reflection, it really does deserve its own thread given the serious (and frankly very common) situation of debtors attempting to 'sell' or 'transfer' goods (mainly a vehicle) after receiving a letter or visit from a firm of bailiffs.

 

To avoid any further confusion, I have made a note on the other thread as well.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?459585-Mother-found-guilty-of-obstructing-a-High-Court-Enforcement-Officer...told-by-Judge-to-expect-to-be-sent-to-prison.&p=4860721&viewfull=1#post4860721

[mikeymack2002]

This action is not limited to EA action it also applies to the sale of a vehicle that has one of those logbook loans on. These too have been shown on digital TV. This is where the loan applicant has taken the loan and then sold the vehicle at some stage. then the recovery agents go to find and seize it back.. Just an observation here..

[Peterbard]

Sorry MM you are off track s well as off topic.

 

Selling a vehicle under a bill of sale is theft. This is disposing of goods whilst bound under the TCE 2007.

Edited February 14, 2016 by citizenB
spelling

[Bailiff Advice]

This action is not limited to EA action it also applies to the sale of a vehicle that has one of those logbook loans on. These too have been shown on digital TV. This is where the loan applicant has taken the loan and then sold the vehicle at some stage. then the recovery agents go to find and seize it back.. Just an observation here..

 

And sadly MM there are too many cases where this happens as well. There are checks that purchasers should almost certainly make when buying a vehicle and the most important one is to carry out an HPI check. Not too sure myself and to how this is done or whether there is a cost but a link would be useful.

[mikeymack2002]

There are numerous way to check if there is any outstanding finance.. Yes there is a payment for this service... It can also be done via text too.... The reason for me adding this information is that the debtor may sell the vehicle at a better price privately instead of allowing the EA to take control of it and selling it at auction for a pittance. Then having to pay the £110-00 fee as well.

 

 

For the information of DB: If the loan company found out the goods have been sold they too can use enforcement so yes very relevant in this case...

 

 

Selling goods under control of the EA is an offence in its own right... As BA says the notice of Enforcement is issued they (any goods) become bound from that point.. The debtor may know that they are going to be subject to enforcement by means of the notice referring them to the arrears of CT and the LA going for a LO....

[Peterbard]

There are numerous way to check if there is any outstanding finance.. Yes there is a payment for this service... It can also be done via text too.... The reason for me adding this information is that the debtor may sell the vehicle at a better price privately instead of allowing the EA to take control of it and selling it at auction for a pittance. Then having to pay the £110-00 fee as well.

 

 

For the information of DB if the loan company found out the goods have been sold they too can use enforcement so yes very relevant in this case...

 

I see so every case of enforcement is relavant here i suppose. I thought we were talking about bound goods being sold to avoid seizure.

 

Hey if we want to talk about the bill of sale act go for it.

[Peterbard]

 

 

Selling goods under control of the EA is an offence in its own right... As BA says the notice of Enforcement is issued they (any goods) become bound from that point.. The debtor may know that they are going to be subject to enforcement by means of the notice referring them to the arrears of CT and the LA going for a LO....

 

Who us takjng about goods under control, is this something else which somehow is on topic , perhaps because it mentions the word goods ?

[Peterbard]

Incidentally selling bound goods is not an offence, sorry to be on topic here .

[mikeymack2002]

Selling goods under control of the EA is an offence in its own right... Is what was said... Also maybe of interest to you https://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/technicalmanual/Ch1-12/Chapter9/part3/part_3.htm

[Peterbard]

Back on topic. In this case the buyer knew the goods were currently due to be come part of an enforcment action, and participated in the attempt to avoid it.

Unfortunately the actions taken by the owner of the goods and her partner had no basis in law, and in fact had no effect

[mikeymack2002]

Selling goods under control of the EA is an offence in its own right... Is what was said... Also maybe of interest to you https://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/technicalmanual/Ch1-12/Chapter9/part3/part_3.htm

 

 

Because you said this Incidentally selling bound goods is not an offence, sorry to be on topic here .

[Bailiff Advice]

 

Selling goods under control of the EA is an offence in its own right... As BA says the notice of Enforcement is issued they (any goods) become bound from that point.

 

In fact I did say that goods become bound from the date that the Notice of Enforcement is issued but I should perhaps correct that statement.

 

When do goods become 'bound'?

 

 

In the case of a

High Court writ of control

the goods are bound from the time that the writ is received by the enforcement agent.

 

In the case of a

warrant of control

issued by the county court or magistrates’ court, the goods are bound from the time the warrant is received by the enforcement agent.

 

Where there is no court writ or warrant (this would apply to council tax and NNDR) the goods are bound from the time when the Notice of Enforcement is received by the debtor.

[Peterbard]

With bailiff enforcement, goods belonging to the debtor become 'bound' from a certain date (more on this later).

 

In simple terms, this means that unless the person who acquired the goods did so in 'good faith' .....for 'valuable consideration' and most importantly; 'without knowing about a warrant' then the transfer or sale will not be considered valid and accordingly, the goods (mainly a motor vehicle) can be seized by the enforcement agent.

 

It is becoming a very common situation indeed for debtors to attempt to 'sell' (or transfer) a car to a friend, partner of relative after receiving correspondence or a visit from an enforcement company and given the frequency that this is happening, enforcement companies are naturally requiring 'evidence' of the 'sale'. By way of an example, the following is an ongoing case that was posted on a very large social media site on 5th February:

 

 

.

 

First post on this thred

[Peterbard]

Bound goods are not the same as goods under control MM.

 

I wonder if a separate thread going into what the binding of goods means may be of use, and also what is meant by in good faith and what the different outcomes are.

I notice there is misunderstanding of this, not so much on here but elsewhere it is not at all understood

[mikeymack2002]

No need for a new thread all covered under schedule 12.... See part 2 (4)(1) onwards

[Bailiff Advice]

In fact I did say that goods become bound from the date that the Notice of Enforcement is issued but I should perhaps correct that statement.

 

When do goods become 'bound'?

 

 

In the case of a

High Court writ of control

the goods are bound from the time that the writ is received by the enforcement agent.

 

In the case of a

warrant of control

issued by the county court or magistrates’ court, the goods are bound from the time the warrant is received by the enforcement agent.

 

Where there is no court writ or warrant (this would apply to council tax and NNDR) the goods are bound from the time when the Notice of Enforcement is received by the debtor.

 

I should have mentioned that in relation to the above, the relevant legislation regarding when goods become 'bound' can be found under Section 4 of Part 2 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunal Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (link below):

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/15/schedule/12/part/2/crossheading/binding-property-in-the-debtors-goods?view=plain