Jump to content
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1559 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

 

For most people and yes it is most people, the situation they find themselves in is down to the fact that they haven't dealt with, the creditor , the debt collector, the court, the letter form the authority etc, I would have thought that when it arrived at the bailiff it would be time to take you head form up your backside and deal with it

 

Trouble is sometimes people do not have an option,

Self employed , council won't deal with an arrangement,

Bailiff come charges are added then you can not pay the council Tax,

 

vicious circle is formed

and very hard to get out of.

 

Leakie

Edited by citizenB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would suggest you learn the law, Dodgeball, instead of belittling other posters. Far from it being "FMoTL baloney", as you call it, HRA is a very effective means of keeping local authorities in line. Yes, they are amongst the worst offenders for breaching human rights, social services being regular miscreants. AA -v- London Borough of Southwark [2014] was one of the more serious cases of abuse of human rights by a local authority.

 

Are we to understand posting council staff in a magistrates court on the day council tax liability order hearings take place to prevent people going into the courtroom to challenge a council's claims in order that the council can obtain a liability order by default is permissible under ECHR/HRA? Because according to you it is. In my book, it is Perverting the Course of Justice and breaching Article 6 of ECHR (Right to A Fair Hearing).

 

Thank god for the old bill!

i never, ever thought i would be saying that!!!!

dodgeball - i am not a freeman type person like you keep wanting to put me into..

i am no way near that

but i think very, very freely indeed

thank you 'old bill' for your sensible input...

i have serious health checks coming next week - but i will check in lots

x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AA -v- London Borough of Southwark [2014] was one of the more serious cases of abuse of human rights by a local authority.

 

Are we to understand posting council staff in a magistrates court on the day council tax liability order hearings take place to prevent people going into the courtroom to challenge a council's claims in order that the council can obtain a liability order by default is permissible under ECHR/HRA? Because according to you it is. In my book, it is Perverting the Course of Justice and breaching Article 6 of ECHR (Right to A Fair Hearing).

 

I have been searching high and low for this case OB, do you have link please.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been searching high and low for this case OB, do you have link please.

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/500.html


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief quite a read, I think I will save it for bed time.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That case certainly shows the lengths an LA will go to to cover up their shenanigans.m An LA intercepting anyone trying to contest an LO application is certainly a breach of ECHR Articles.


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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I have finally heard back from JBW, they have refused my request to remove the fees on the grounds that they emailed me twice (I received neither) and sent text messages (again none recieved) the dates they have given for the messages are the day BEFORE I made payment. I have already paid what I owed to the council so the only amount owed now is the £235 fee. I simply refuse to pay it, what will happen now, if the bailiffs re-appear can they add more charges, they WONT be gaining entry so will have no goods to take?? back to court?? Prison??

 

Any help appreciated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest you enter into a formal written complaint to the Head of Revenues at the council threatening to involve the Local Government Ombudsman. Raise serious concerns about the standards at JBW, where they appear to have made false statements about communication sent, to justify charging an enforcement fee £235, when the council tax was paid before they would have need of any enforcement visit.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok I have finally heard back from JBW, they have refused my request to remove the fees on the grounds that they emailed me twice (I received neither) and sent text messages (again none recieved) the dates they have given for the messages are the day BEFORE I made payment. I have already paid what I owed to the council so the only amount owed now is the £235 fee. I simply refuse to pay it, what will happen now, if the bailiffs re-appear can they add more charges, they WONT be gaining entry so will have no goods to take?? back to court?? Prison??

 

Any help appreciated

 

Stop contacting JBW, your wasting your time. No more charges can be added. Sit tight, don't let the EA in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with that is that unless you have paid the full amount due to the EA, the liability order will not be settled and you will still be in arrears.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has paid the council what he owes them, sounds like JBW were trying it on anyway. A LO amount doesn't have any future EA fees on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that the enforcement was with he EA when he paid. If so fees are due.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My understanding is that the enforcement was with he EA when he paid. If so fees are due.

 

Let the EA or JBW take him to a court for their fees, I bet they don't and the £235 looks like it wasn't owed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP may not want to go to court, in any case as said if the full amount owed is not payed the LO will remain active and can be reissued to another EA or an alternative method initiated.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the fee is due they will continue to enforce for it, if it goes back the fee will be paid in part out of the sums already paid wihch will leave a shortfall against the amount owed to the LA.

They will then decide what and how to enforce for the remainder.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP needs to understand that if the amount due to the bailiff is not paid in full the liability order will not be settled.

 

The EA will have to be paid for the fees they collected whilst the debt was with them, the fees they have not yet recovered die, but not fees for any previous successful enforcment action.

 

The TCE says that any payment received will be split and the EA will be due a proportion of the payment.

 

This is not a guess, this is all in the TCE and in particular section 13 of the taking control of goods fees regulations, advising anything other than this is wrong.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The OP needs to understand that if the amount due to the bailiff is not paid in full the liability order will not be settled.

 

The EA will have to be paid for the fees they collected whilst the debt was with them, the fees they have not yet recovered die, but not fees for any previous successful enforcment action.

 

The TCE says that any payment received will be split and the EA will be due a proportion of the payment.

 

This is not a guess, this is all in the TCE and in particular section 13 of the taking control of goods fees regulations, advising anything other than this is wrong.

 

 

But many LA's don't split any money to an EA firm, and what is in the TCE does not necessarily happen day to day . The EA will move on to more profitable cases. Not heard of any LA or EA taking anybody to court for fees only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread temporarily closed


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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread edited tidied and reopened...our apologies Capital_Con.

 

All discussion posts and off topic posts moved to the following thread in the discussion forum.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462467-JBW-visit-today-Council-Tax-debacle-posts(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the fee is due they will continue to enforce for it, if it goes back the fee will be paid in part out of the sums already paid wihch will leave a shortfall against the amount owed to the LA.

They will then decide what and how to enforce for the remainder.

 

When I made the last payment I was told the full amount would be used to pay the LA meaning I owe them nothing. The only amount outstanding is the £235 fee they added. I have already told them that the case was passed over to an EA agent AFTER I made my late payment.

 

They are obviously desperate to get there hands on the £235 which I am point blank refusing to pay, if it goes back to court I am more than happy to explain the situation and hopefully somebody will see sense!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this was the case

then they are just after the fee's

and are just abusing the regs

Nothing changes with the EA companies and nothing will be done if this is the case

 

Unfortunately it will not go back to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If this was the case

then they are just after the fee's

and are just abusing the regs

Nothing changes with the EA companies and nothing will be done if this is the case

 

Unfortunately it will not go back to court.

 

So if not back to court then what will happen? They can knock on until they're blue in the face for all I care!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you written to the Council as UB suggested complaining about JBWs actions. If so what was their response? If not, please do write since you need a complaint process in place so that you

can then complain to the Local government Ombudsman who will I hope put JBW and the Council in their place. But I guess your case is not so cut and dried since you did break the

arrangement albeit only for two days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they can knock all they like, you do not have too let them in,

But the money owed will not go away,

And ignore all there threats of prison etc

As lookinforinfo and UB has said speak to the council, or even better the head of revenues,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1559 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...