Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Work from home is "an aberration" that will be corrected as soon as possible says Goldman Sachs chief. View the full article
    • Work from home is "an aberration" that will be corrected as soon as possible says Goldman Sachs chief. View the full article
    • The mini electric vehicle being made by China's biggest carmaker is now outselling Tesla two to one. View the full article
    • https://www.bindmans.com/news/neale-v-dpp-the-right-to-silence-citizens-duties-and-coronavirus-regulations   Perhaps the OP should have said nothing - and risked arrest!   "Firstly, the case calls into question the logic behind aspects of the criminal justice response to the public health crisis created by the Coronavirus pandemic...   "Secondly, it is clear that some police officers have misunderstood and misstated their powers, and citizens’ obligations, under the Regulations and at common law...   "Thirdly, the case confirms reasonable excuses for being outside are not limited to those explicitly set out in the Regulations. Police officers considering whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that an offence has been committed under the Regulations so that an FPN may be issued, or the reasonable grounds for suspicion that are necessary for an arrest, should give proper consideration to any explanation given by members of the public (and what a court might think of them) rather than only recognising those exceptions explicitly listed in the Regulations and/or government guidance...   Fourthly, the case is an example of a failure of the CPS review into prosecutions brought under Coronavirus Regulations, which has found that alarming numbers of cases were wrongly charged..."   Above quotes from the Bindman's article, not the decision.  Case arose from the first lockdown and was in Wales.  Same now?  Also was about not being at home - not mask wearing.    
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1798 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

Ok. I'll keep this shortish. In 2014 I had a CCJ against me for £1320 including court fees this ended up with a bailiff visiting and making an enforcement of goods order. I made a payment plan and have been paying £100 a month ever since for a debt totalling £1660. I paid £400 in June 2015 for a missed payment and to stop them threatening me.

 

Missed payment due to changing bank account. They have charged me another £495 pounds saying that the enforcement went to stage 2 even though no one visited the house. I received no notice of this upgraded enforcement. Also I have discovered they have charged £90 fee initial fee when challenging them today they have added 20% VAT to all fees is this allowed?

 

As far as I'm aware I have paid this debt in full plus some. The Bailiff has been very aggressive and threatening on the phone. I am going to stop them taking anymore money from my card as I believe they are now taking money they shouldn't have . Help please anyone!!

Edited by citizenB
Removed personal information amended title
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, someone will be with you soon with some advice.

 

Meanwhile I have had to amend your thread title and remove the name of the bailiff from your post.

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

 

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

We will need a bit more detail

 

By the looks of things as you missed payment they went to enforcement stage

Hopefully Bailiff advice will be along shortly

Link to post
Share on other sites

For what reason was a CCJ awarded against you ? Was it a consumer debt ?

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

 

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
We will need a bit more detail

 

By the looks of things as you missed payment they went to enforcement stage

Hopefully Bailiff advice will be along shortly

 

No BA is on a course for the next 2 days, so might not get a chance until later in the week.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
No BA is on a course for the next 2 days, so might not get a chance until later in the week.

 

The £495 + vat 2nd stage fee appears to relate to High Court enforcement and is a set fee when the controlled goods agreement is breached and tbey could walk in to take goods to cover the debt remaining.

 

It appears they have to actually attend your house to charge this fee. They may have added it in anticipation, but did not need to come out.

 

You need to enter into a complaint asking for a full breakdown of everything.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

As UB has mentioned I am not available much until tomorrow.

The position is as UB has advised in that if there is a default in the arrangement then a visit can be made and with it the charge of £495. . Would you mind mentioning which company this is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to thread title. It is Marston

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the application of VAT to fees is allowed in HCEO enforcement.

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
As UB has mentioned I am not available much until tomorrow.

The position is as UB has advised in that if there is a default in the arrangement then a visit can be made and with it the charge of £495. . Would you mind mentioning which company this is?

 

Thank you. I have asked twice for a breakdown of all their charges. I have also said to them that they have to actually visit to apply the enforcement stage two but they say they don't need to visit they added it automatically when I missed a payment. Never visited. The man on the phone said they are allowed to add it they don't have to visit to apply it. But If they do have to visit then I only owe them about another £50. Who do I make a complaint to? If it's Marstons then I hold out no hope of them resolving it very nasty on the phone. And surely adding a charge for something they haven't actually done is fraud.

 

Yes it is Marstons

Edited by citizenB
Link to post
Share on other sites

When i have read this before, it mentions an HCEO visiting to obtain payment before the £495 + VAT can be charged. This makes sense to me as the fees relate to work they are having to do.

 

But the Statutory Instrument passed by government just says you only have to breach a controlled goods agreement for stage one and stage two fees to be charged. Read the explanatory notes on page 9 of the attachment.

 

http://www.hceoa.org.uk/images/stories/forms/The_Taking_Control_of_Goods_Fees_Regulations_2014_-_Laid.pdf

 

You are entitled to a full breakdown of your dealings with Marstons and should make an official complaint that they have not provided clear information.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

UB is correct the regulation is here

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/regulation/6/made

 

©the second enforcement stage, which comprises—

(i)where the enforcement agent and the debtor do not enter into a controlled goods agreement, all activities relating to enforcement from the first attendance at the premises in relation to the instructions up to but not including the commencement of the sale or disposal stage;

(ii)where the enforcement agent and the debtor enter into a controlled goods agreement but the debtor breaches that agreement, all activities relating to enforcement from the time at which the debtor breaches the agreement up to but not including the commencement of the sale or disposal stage;

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
UB is correct the regulation is here

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/regulation/6/made

 

©the second enforcement stage, which comprises—

(i)where the enforcement agent and the debtor do not enter into a controlled goods agreement, all activities relating to enforcement from the first attendance at the premises in relation to the instructions up to but not including the commencement of the sale or disposal stage;

(ii)where the enforcement agent and the debtor enter into a controlled goods agreement but the debtor breaches that agreement, all activities relating to enforcement from the time at which the debtor breaches the agreement up to but not including the commencement of the sale or disposal stage;

 

There does seem to be some confusion with this, although the SI is clear.

 

Most.sites including CAB ( and BA) appear to believe that an HCEO has to visit to look to take goods, before they can charge this. I wonder whether there is other legislation that still clarifies what stage 2 actually involved.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on what they take it away for.

 

If itis taken for storage the only fee payable is the second stage fee, if it taken for sale and the accompanying information sent to the debtor then it merits the sale fee in addition. The second stage fee is always payable in either case.

 

I think the issue is the sale fee, rather than the second stage fee.

 

I dont think BA and I disagree on this, it is certainly the opinion of J Kruse, who has written several pieces in his various bulletins and briefing notes about the subject.

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 VAT is chargeable because the HCEO is a trader and thus liable for VAT. The fee is due to HMRC as output tax. This is irrecoverable under the normal procedures and is therefor payable b y the debtor.

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

The OP is not concerned with the sale fee, however there is a thread here which discussed it in detail.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?453200-Removal-for-sale-fee-when-can-it-be-charged&p=4809573&viewfull=1#post4809573

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
Ok. I'll keep this shortish. In 2014 I had a CCJ against me for £1320 including court fees this ended up with a bailiff visiting and making an enforcement of goods order. I made a payment plan and have been paying £100 a month ever since for a debt totalling £1660. I paid £400 in June 2015 for a missed payment and to stop them threatening me.

 

Missed payment due to changing bank account. They have charged me another £495 pounds saying that the enforcement went to stage 2 even though no one visited the house. I received no notice of this upgraded enforcement. Also I have discovered they have charged £90 fee initial fee when challenging them today they have added 20% VAT to all fees is this allowed?

 

Before the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 came into effect in April 2014 the position with High Court bailiff fees was an absolute mess and fees of £5,000 on debts of £10k were sadly commonplace. The new fees regs have made the position far better but it is the case that there is significant confusion as to when the Stage One and Stage Two fees can be added.

 

When a Notice of Enforcement is sent, it will advise that a payment proposal can be set up. A compliance fee of £90 (£75 plus vat) is charged.

 

If payment is made in full of the amount stated on the Notice of Enforcement before the Compliance stage ends, then no other fees are due.

 

If however payment is not made OR the individual wishes to set up a payment arrangement, then in every case the enforcement agent is under an obligation to visit the debtors premises for the purpose of 'taking control of goods'. This visit is the Stage One visit and is charged at £235 (£190 plus vat).

 

The following is where it gets confusing:

 

If the enforcement agent is unable to enter into a controlled goods agreement or a debtor defaults on a controlled goods agreement, the Stage Two fee of £495 will apply.

 

The above is outlined in a bit more detail under item 7.3 of the following Explanatory Memorandum supporting the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/pdfs/uksiem_20140001_en.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have researched online a bit about 2nd stage enforcement, when control agreement breached and it would seem most HCEO companies would not charge this, if they did not have to visit. Most of what i have read online, makes it clear that 2nd stage enforcement fees are related to a second visit to take goods if payment is not made. The fee was set at £495+ VAT presumably to cover the cost of having to make a journey to a debtors residence.

 

But it is a bit of a grey area and how they interpret the SI. One of the Solicitors on the Shoosmiths site commenting on enforcement fees seems to believe the fee relates to a second visit. CAB believe this. Sherriffs Office HCEO seem to believe this.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But it is a bit of a grey area and how they interpret the SI. One of the Solicitors on the Shoosmiths site commenting on enforcement fees seems to believe the fee relates to a second visit. CAB believe this. Sherriffs Office HCEO seem to believe this.

 

And the 'grey area' isn't helped by the wording in the statutory regulations which state this:

 

6 © (ii)

Where the enforcement agent and the debtor enter into a controlled goods agreement but the debtor breaches that agreement, all activities relating to enforcement from the time at which the debtor breaches the agreement
up to but not including
.......the commencement of the sale or disposal stage;

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/en/uksi/2014/1/regulation/6/made?view=plain

 

Question is.....what is meant by 'all activities relating to enforcement' and equally important, how is this interpreted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Logically if you break a controlled goods agreement, it tells you the next steps. The 2nd stage is to attend the property to seek to remove goods unless full payment of the remaining debt and fees are paid. If Marstons are willing to sort out payment without a visit, they are not entering into 2nd stage of enforcement. Therefore they can't charge the £495+ VAT, as that relates to a visit to remove goods or gain full payment.

 

The SI is a bad way to legislate, as it a short piece of legislation that is often not debated and just noded through both houses of parliament. Marstons are interpreting the SI literally, without thinking what the fee is for and knowing most will not go to court to challenge.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the regulations were the result of a public consultation.

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
Actually the regulations were the result of a public consultation.

 

The public did not draft the regulations, as if they did they might have been drafted better. :-)

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...