A must read

[ploddertom]

This was posted earlier today in the Media Section of the site

 

http://renegadeinc.com/the-bailiff-racket/

[brassnecked]

Thanks PT, looks like some FMOL thinking in there but some of the points made are valid, such as the threats to break in for civil debt.

[Bailiff Advice]

A link was posted on SCOOP a couple of days ago but it was after reading the Rengrade website that I decided to pass it by.

 

http://renegadeinc.com/the-bailiff-racket/

[unclebulgaria67]

Lot of truth to this.

 

The SI passed by parliament set the enforcement fees too high. It makes it too attractive to go to enforcement, rather than find other ways.

[Coughdrop]

A link was posted on SCOOP a couple of days ago but it was after reading the Rengrade website that I decided to pass it by.

 

http://renegadeinc.com/the-bailiff-racket/

 

Other articles on that site do look rather iffy, but that doesn't mean there is not some truth in this of course.

 

Lot of truth to this.

 

The SI passed by parliament set the enforcement fees too high. It makes it too attractive to go to enforcement, rather than find other ways.

 

I tend to agree with you UB, though as I remember it, they considered the old fees too low, meaning bailiffs were tempted to add false fees (the infamous Head H among others. The new fee scale was supposed to guarantee a more realistic £75, and then higher fees were for sitting down with the client to spend time looking at income and expenditure to get a realistic payment plan - this has not been borne out in reality.

 

An interesting article.

[Peterbard]

I think the main reason this fee was introduced at this level was to encourage the debtor to settle a at compliance in this it has been extremely successful to date.

 

Personally I see nothing either interesting or relevant in the articles it's the same old drivel seen on fora a thousand times before

[Leakie]

The trouble is DB

 

Those that have got in to trouble with payment (CT) are the ones who are struggling in the first place,

 

And are can not pay, (majority) and not the will not pays

[Peterbard]

Yes Leaks,, so you say..

If they cannot pay their tax they will not be able to pay the enforcement fee,,so it will go back.

 

However the bailiff will have the option to confirm the fact ,by making a personal visit.

[Peterbard]

In aany case this does not have anything to do with the subject, Surprisingly.

[Coughdrop]

I think the main reason this fee was introduced at this level was to encourage the debtor to settle a at compliance in this it has been extremely successful to date.

 

I'm not sure how setting a fee higher than previous fees 'encourages' people to settle. As for it being returned, how many who are in the position and are worried sick about someone coming and removing goods, quite possibly believing they could force entry, know the debt will be returned if they wait long enough?

 

Personally I see nothing either interesting or relevant in the articles it's the same old drivel seen on fora a thousand times before

 

You may not find anything interesting, that doesn't mean others don't. I'm not at all sure it's all drivel, in fact some of it reflects my personal experience. Have you ever had bailiffs at your door for a debt?

[Peterbard]

The explanation regarding reasons fees were set are in the explanations on the regs, and we're discussed at length in the6 consultation and before, of course the possibility of having g to pay another 235will encourage debtors to settle earlier,anywaythe facts are contained in current stats that this strategy is working.

 

Some people find the Beano interesting, fact is it just repeats former fmotl beliefs the same as the rest of the features in there. It is all about conspiracy, one way or another and intensely boring as is this.

[Peterbard]

Missed the last point, having a bailiff at your door hardly providess an with the ability to offer a balanced view of anything really,more likely just gives them an axe to grind d

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

A case two days ago. Debtor claims low income and mental health vulnerability. Client puts us on hold. Client reactivates as debtor failed to respond to their vuln claim form.

Bailiff asked to continue.

Bailiff attends.

Bailiff adds fee and gains peaceful access.

Debtor screams to high heaven and police are called.

Police attend, they are informed of vuln claim and they ask debtor for proof. None is forthcoming.

Debtors brother arrives.

Debtors brother threatens to throw bailiffs and police out and gets arrested.

Once arrested debtors gives in, goes upstairs, and comes back down with 5 5k in CASH!

 

That is what we have to contend with.

So for those of you that think its just black and white, think again. Its not.

That's almost 5k paid back to the claimant that could be a local authority desperate for money, a business struggling to make ends meet, ir maybe an elderly couple screwed over by a con man.

 

Writers of article's like that want us back in the stone age.

[Coughdrop]

The explanation regarding reasons fees were set are in the explanations on the regs, and we're discussed at length in the6 consultation and before, of course the possibility of having g to pay another 235will encourage debtors to settle earlier,anywaythe facts are contained in current stats that this strategy is working.

 

All well and good if you have the initial £75 to pay. For many, £75 is a lot of money, and not an amount you're likely to have lying around. You have ignored completely the point many may simply not have the money to pay, and there will be many scared debtors out there who may not know where to turn for help. The threat of having to find another £235 is quite likely to make many bury their heads in the sand - the wrong thing to do, but many do. This would potentially be helped hugely if EA's were more willing to agree affordable, realistic repayment plans.

 

Some people find the Beano interesting, fact is it just repeats former fmotl beliefs the same as the rest of the features in there. It is all about conspiracy, one way or another and intensely boring as is this.

 

If you find this boring, don't comment and don't read - simple. There are other views though, and people are entitled to find things interesting which you do not.

 

Missed the last point, having a bailiff at your door hardly providess an with the ability to offer a balanced view of anything really,more likely just gives them an axe to grind d

 

Again you have failed to address the point by not answering the question. It could just as much be argued that not having had a bailiff at your door means you cannot understand fully how horrendous it is. Have you had a bailiff at your door?

 

A case two days ago. Debtor claims low income and mental health vulnerability. Client puts us on hold. Client reactivates as debtor failed to respond to their vuln claim form.

Bailiff asked to continue.

Bailiff attends.

Bailiff adds fee and gains peaceful access.

Debtor screams to high heaven and police are called.

Police attend, they are informed of vuln claim and they ask debtor for proof. None is forthcoming.

Debtors brother arrives.

Debtors brother threatens to throw bailiffs and police out and gets arrested.

Once arrested debtors gives in, goes upstairs, and comes back down with 5 5k in CASH!

 

That is what we have to contend with.

So for those of you that think its just black and white, think again. Its not.

That's almost 5k paid back to the claimant that could be a local authority desperate for money, a business struggling to make ends meet, ir maybe an elderly couple screwed over by a con man.

 

Writers of article's like that want us back in the stone age.

 

I suspect very few debtors you attend are able to do the above. It's good to see a potential vulnerable debtor's case being put on hold, though I note it was not the EA who recognised the vulnerability. In the case you cite, clearly they were swinging the lead, and that is always going to happen. For those of you bailiffs who think everything is just black and white, it's not. There are genuinely vulnerable people out there as well who deserve to be treated differently, and who don't always have the ability to cope with everything they should, however they may appear to an EA, or indeed to your client.

[Schindler]

Good post Coughdrop

[Peterbard]

A case two days ago. Debtor claims low income and mental health vulnerability. Client puts us on hold. Client reactivates as debtor failed to respond to their vuln claim form.

Bailiff asked to continue.

Bailiff attends.

Bailiff adds fee and gains peaceful access.

Debtor screams to high heaven and police are called.

Police attend, they are informed of vuln claim and they ask debtor for proof. None is forthcoming.

Debtors brother arrives.

Debtors brother threatens to throw bailiffs and police out and gets arrested.

Once arrested debtors gives in, goes upstairs, and comes back down with 5 5k in CASH!

 

That is what we have to contend with.

So for those of you that think its just black and white, think again. Its not.

That's almost 5k paid back to the claimant that could be a local authority desperate for money, a business struggling to make ends meet, ir maybe an elderly couple screwed over by a con man.

 

Writers of article's like that want us back in the stone age.

 

No one really takes notice if this Grumpy, perhaps one in a thousand, they will never be in a position to alter anything, thank goodness.

 

In the real, world I am glad to say that there are many promising signs regarding the relationship with debtors and bailiffs and those of us who truly understand will continue to support and encourage them whoever or whatever they are.

 

There are good people on all sides, no one is wearing a black or white hat in the real world, just shades of grey.

 

Fora will always attract people with an axe to grind, it lets them get it out of their system, but they contribute nothing in the scheme of things.

[Leakie]

Missed the last point, having a bailiff at your door hardly providess an with the ability to offer a balanced view of anything really,more likely just gives them an axe to grind d

 

That is where you are wrong DB, it is real life experience,

Yes they may have an axe too grind, but this was because some of the unscrupulous Bailiffs in the past.

 

The industry has brought it on themselves,

Your point of view, is from the creditors side. so may be you have an axe to grind as well.

 

I am not having a dig DB

there are two points of view too most things.

 

Leakie

[Schindler]

No one really takes notice if this Grumpy, perhaps one in a thousand, they will never be in a position to alter anything, thank goodness.

 

In the real, world I am glad to say that there are many promising signs regarding the relationship with debtors and bailiffs and those of us who truly understand will continue to support and encourage them whoever or whatever they are.

 

There are good people on all sides, no one is wearing a black or white hat in the real world, just shades of grey.

 

Fora will always attract people with an axe to grind, it lets them get it out of their system, but they contribute nothing in the scheme of things.

 

Some good signs, some not. This forum lets you grind your axe, but as you said no real contribution.

[Peterbard]

Some good signs, some not. This forum lets you grind your axe, but as you said no real contribution.

 

Nlot sure who i am talking to now. But whoever you are, I have no axe to grind against bailiffs or debtors, this is my point. I shall not be answering you any further because you clearly lack any ability to understand what is being said.

[Peterbard]

That is where you are wrong DB, it is real life experience,

Yes they may have an axe too grind, but this was because some of the unscrupulous Bailiffs in the past.

 

The industry has brought it on themselves,

Your point of view, is from the creditors side. so may be you have an axe to grind as well.

 

I am not having a dig DB

there are two points of view too most things.

 

Leakie

 

You have no idea what i am saying, not a clue.

[Coughdrop]

As I said yesterday, I think having had a bailiff at your door makes you more aware of the reality - so ipso facto not having had one means you are less aware of the reality. That doesn't necessarily mean there is any axe to grind, but it does put some in a different position to others.

 

I just wish we were seeing affordable repayment plans being agreed more readily as was, I think, the intent of the legislation. This still seems a big impasse for many.

[Leakie]

Could not agree with you more CD

 

You have hit the nail on the head

[Leakie]

You have no idea what i am saying, not a clue.

 

 

I do DB I do!!

[Peterbard]

As I said yesterday, I think having had a bailiff at your door makes you more aware of the reality - so ipso facto not having had one means you are less aware of the reality. That doesn't necessarily mean there is any axe to grind, but it does put some in a different position to others.

 

I just wish we were seeing affordable repayment plans being agreed more readily as was, I think, the intent of the legislation. This still seems a big impasse for many.

 

No it doesn't, it makes you aware of your reality., It doesn't make you aware of the creditors or the bailiffs it just gives your perspective. Nothing operates in a vacuum, as I thought you would have understood.

 

Judges who hear murder cases do not have to have been convicted themselves in order to deliver a competent judgment you know.(in fact they hardly ever are )

[Coughdrop]

No it doesn't, it makes you aware of your reality., It doesn't make you aware of the creditors or the bailiffs it just gives your perspective. Nothing operates in a vacuum, as I thought you would have understood.

 

No, in fact your comment displays your ignorance in this respect. Following your argument, without the first hand experience you have no reality, yours or anyone else's, as far as bailiffs go.

 

I understand fairly well how things work as well you know, though I don't claim to be the most knowledgeable around, just more knowledgeable than some.

 

Not having first hand experience of bailiffs does not preclude you from offering help, of course, but it does mean you lack an insight that can only be gained from first hand experience.