Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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

Transferring or selling a vehicle to avoid bailiff enforcement.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2944 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

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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.
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every single minute of it!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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....

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

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.

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

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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 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..

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

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.

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every single minute of it!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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..

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

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 by citizenB
spelling

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

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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....

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

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.

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

 

 

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 ?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 .

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

 

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.
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...