Coventry City Council Bailiff Equita ( Off topic posts )

[Bailiff Advice]

If you can point me to one post or thread of mine that has cost a debtor money, I will stop posting for good on bailiff help issues.

 

You have already succeeded in getting one thread locked today-Shouldn't you be resting on your laurels?

 

You are a self confessed liar-You never advise debtors-You simply exist to antagonise others.

 

Mark1960, with the greatest of respect, you do not have a genuine desire to help debtors at all. By your own admission, you consider that the only debtors worthy of your assistance are those with council tax debts. You claim that debtors with parking related debts are usually trying to evade payment and you stand back in the wings and allow single parents and others subject to TV licence fines be be conned (by your Guru) into believing that the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 do not apply to magistrate court fines and that by paying the court fine direct to the court (minus bailiff fees) that the warrant will die.

 

You know that the advice is wrong and that it is costing debtors thousands of pounds every day....but you stand back and do nothing.

 

Instead of helping these people and correcting the misleading and inaccurate advice, (as you should do) you spend the majority of your time stalking this forum.

 

You are the main contributor on a 60 page thread on another forum that was set up for one purpose only.....to engage in online harassment of posters on here.

 

You stalk this forum waiting for posters to reply to questions and, if the answer given on the forum is not one that you agree with, then that poster is subjected to vile and spiteful comments by you. Even members of our own admin team have recently been victims of your outbursts.

 

With the greatest of respect, you have a very serious inability to take part in a ‘discussion’. Your stance is that unless others agree with your interpretation of regulations then they will be subjected to personal abuse from you.

 

In short, Mark1960 you are nasty bully and one that has an incredible chip on his shoulder.

[wilko52]

Mark1960, with the greatest of respect, you do not have a genuine desire to help debtors at all. By your own admission, you consider that the only debtors worthy of your assistance are those with council tax debts. You claim that debtors with parking related debts are usually trying to evade payment and you stand back in the wings and allow single parents and others subject to TV licence fines be be conned (by your Guru) into believing that the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 do not apply to magistrate court fines and that by paying the court fine direct to the court (minus bailiff fees) that the warrant will die.

 

You know that the advice is wrong and that it is costing debtors thousands of pounds every day....but you stand back and do nothing.

 

Instead of helping these people and correcting the misleading and inaccurate advice, (as you should do) you spend the majority of your time stalking this forum.

 

You are the main contributor on a 60 page thread on another forum that was set up for one purpose only.....to engage in online harassment of posters on here.

 

You stalk this forum waiting for posters to reply to questions and if the answer given is not one that you agrees with, then that poster is subjected to vile and spiteful comments by you. Even members of our own admin team have recently been victims of your outbursts.

 

With the greatest of respect, you have a very serious inability to take part in a ‘discussion’. Your stance is that unless others agree with your interpretation of regulations then they will be subjected to personal abuse from you.

 

In short, Mark1960 you are nasty bully and one that has an incredible chip on his shoulder.

 

 

That is reprehensible.

 

 

I have openly challenged "my Guru" on more occasions than I care to remember. I do not take sides, If someone is wrong, I challenge them, no matter where they post. Have you forgotten the "Sarah" thread already? How dare you lie and suggest that I stand back and do nothing?

 

 

You have stalked that forum more than I have-You have continually "bumped" the "polly" thread on here, often using your Lackey, aka "Dodgeball" to start things off. I wouldn't be surprised if you were behind my posts on that thread, revealing the truth, being deleted.

 

 

I can participate in discussion-Just not with idiots. Your pussyfooting around bailiffs is wrong. You have a conflict of interest and you dare not upset them-How can you possibly give the best advice if you are worried about upsetting bailiff companies?

 

 

Anyone who has had the misfortune to be stuck on the other end of a phone with you for hours on end will know that you continually name drop these people as if they're B list celebraties

 

 

"oh I walked back to the station with Andrew Hobley"

"Oh Mike Garlands just emailed me"

"Oh Peter Felton says the bailiff industry should police itself"

etc etc

 

 

Get your own house in order before criticising others Sheila.

[mikeymack2002]

Is it really 60 pages long now? Wow.. Which I was allowed back on to view it again as I last saw it at page 22 or something like that. Before anyone states I can, I cannot, see attachment of the screenshot a few days ago... I have edited out the site name so here it is ...

Doc1.pdf

[Peterbard]

Look mark I will say this only once and for your benefit, i am no ones lackey, BA and I mainly agree, that is all.

 

I think that is because at this level we both know what we are talking about. BA like it or not moves in circles where she is privy to upto date information, why should she be castigated for this, I think this is pure jealousy on your behalf.

 

Also unfortunately for you I have been fortunate enough over the years to build up some knowledgeable friends, This is because i have good knowledge of the law and know how to debate without being obnoxious mainly.

This is the truth and no matter how much it upsets you, it is not liable to change any time soon

[Peterbard]

Is it really 60 pages long now? Wow.. Which I was allowed back on to view it again as I last saw it at page 22 or something like that. Before anyone states I can, I cannot, see attachment of the screenshot a few days ago... I have edited out the site name so here it is ...

 

believe much was deleted, but the same formula is also endemic in the rest of the "forum"

[wilko52]

Is it really 60 pages long now? Wow.. Which I was allowed back on to view it again as I last saw it at page 22 or something like that. Before anyone states I can, I cannot, see attachment of the screenshot a few days ago... I have edited out the site name so here it is ...

 

 

Mikey-I recently posted this link for you, I thought you might finf it helpful:

 

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1993/494/made

 

 

Also, if you can find it, have a read of:

 

 

Too Poor To Pay (The Impact of The Second Year of Localised Council Tax Support in London)

Jointly published by CAPG & Z2K

 

 

It is an excellent report, very revealing and very well researched.

[stu007]

This thread will now be Temp closed

[stu007]

Told you it was Temp open

[mikeymack2002]

I was already part of the way through this when writing a paper on UC and debt this was started in 2013(with the link provided). The other I will look into momentarily

 

 

Second link was already in my PDF's but had not fully read this one. Thanks again... here is the link >> http://z2k.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TooPoorToPay-FINAL.pdf

[caledfwlch]

One thing I have always felt was unfair is if you show an I&E

and have for example Sky, the Court or Creditor will say its a luxury, and ignore it

- fair enough if you took it out when in financial difficulty,

 

 

but if you took it out before your troubles, then being made by Court to stop paying it,

or your finances being worked out so the Court is taking so much you cannot pay it is also unfair,

as most things like Sky are under a Contract, and you will incur sometimes large penalties for not paying

, so the Court is forcing you into further debt -

like if your 11 months into a 24 month contract,

 

 

Sky will be expecting 13 months x monthly payments and late payment fee's and so on.

[brassnecked]

One thing I have always felt was unfair is if you show an I&E and have for example Sky, the Court or Creditor will say its a luxury, and ignore it - fair enough if you took it out when in financial difficulty, but if you took it out before your troubles, then being made by Court to stop paying it, or your finances being worked out so the Court is taking so much you cannot pay it is also unfair, as most things like Sky are under a Contract, and you will incur sometimes large penalties for not paying, so the Court is forcing you into further debt - like if your 11 months into a 24 month contract, Sky will be expecting 13 months x monthly payments and late payment fee's and so on.

 

Agree with that Caled

They conveniently ignore that they will be forcing the debtor into breach of contract and further debt, and Sky will probably get a CCJ for the resulting debt, then send HCEO?bailiffs to recover the debt. Other thing is that Sky could be the phone/Broadband provider without any TV so would be significantly less than the full package so more palatable in an I & E. In that circumstance if content only streamed as on demand, no TV license required so one less debit on the I & E.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Andyorch
Removed reference to poster

[brassnecked]

Ban me why don't you you have censored my post. I am really annoyed I'm off.

[AndyOrch]

I have not censored your post at all brassnecked ...I have removed a reference you made with regards to the OP of this thread...which was pointless and irrelevant and gainst the Forums Rules.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[brassnecked]

I have not censored your post at all brassnecked ...I have removed a reference you made with regards to the OP of this thread...which was pointless and irrelevant and gainst the Forums Rules.

 

Regards

 

Andy

OK sorry I broke rules I'm off, had enough of the bickering and backbiting between regulars, getting in the way of proper advice. I give up. I feel like I should be banned or is that binned?

[AndyOrch]

Thread now closed