Make sure all is present & correct before posting

[ploddertom]

Yesterday Bailiff Advice posted about the recent HCEOA developments but was later accused of publishing a link to an article that was some 4 years old. According to others she should have checked each link referred to in her link was correct and not out of date. So we now have a situation whereby others are going to hold us accountable for the content of external sites.

 

Stupid is as stupid does.

[*RainbowTears*]

The only person accountable for that, is the owner of the external site with the link!!

 

Stupid is as stupid does indeed....

 

Spot the brain cell anyone??

[brassnecked]

The only person accountable for that, is the owner of the external site with the link!!

 

Stupid is as stupid does indeed....

 

Spot the brain cell anyone??

indupitably.

[ploddertom]

The moaning Minnie cannot accept that the link posted was for the Home Page only of the HCEOA and then moans about other links contained upon said page for which none of us here have any responsibility.

 

Maybe they should have gone to SpecSavers.

[mikeymack2002]

And the moaning Minnie is?

 

That part of the document was replaced by the national standards a few years later was it not dated at least 2014!!!

 

On this point of this thread it has been noted that there are other errors an omissions posted today as well! But heyho I'm not the professional am I?

 

What I find is that rather than accept it's wrong this usual MO is to attack a poster whom dared to point this out.

 

Nah no Specsavers here but I do say though, sticks and stones make plenty of moans!!!

 

If you wish to pick holes make sure the whole information is correct.

 

I thought that the Clangers was a TV show not real people.

 

As you say should have gone to Specsavers!!!

 

Bye....

[Bailiff Advice]

 

That part of the document was replaced by the national standards a few years later was it not dated at least 2014!!!

 

On this point of this thread it has been noted that there are other errors an omissions posted today as well! But heyho I'm not the professional am I?

 

What I find is that rather than accept it's wrong this usual MO is to attack a poster whom dared to point this out.

 

 

Bye.... ��

 

I was very busy yesterday and not available to comment. I also had great difficulty trying to find out where the error was located. I would be pleased to comment on this thread as it will avoid yet another important thread being destroyed.

 

For viewers who may be wondering what this discussion thread is about, I will try to explain.

 

Since the regulations were overhauled in 2014, there has been a lot of criticism (and rightly so) regarding the lack of information provided on the CIVEA (Civil Enforcement Agents Association) website. CIVEA are the enforcement industries 'governing body' and they represent the interests of approx 2,000 bailiffs. Their website has barely been updated since 2014 and in fact, the last 'news item' was dated February 2014. Even their 'Code of Practice' refers to the Lord Chancellors report from 2002 !!!

 

http://www.civea.co.uk/code-of-practice.htm

 

http://www.civea.co.uk/news.htm

 

 

 

High Court Enforcement Officers Association (HCEOA

 

The HCEOA are the governing body representing High Court Enforcement Officers. There are approx 2,000 bailiffs, but only around 70 HCEO's. Yesterday, on another thread I posted the following:

 

"At the High Court Enforcement Officers Associations AGM last week, they unveiled their new website. Personally, I think that this is an excellent website and one that is very useful for debtors and advisors.

 

The following page (Have you been visited by a High Court Enforcement Officer) includes a very informative 'questions and answers' section:

 

https://www.hceoa.org.uk/faqs/have-y...cement-officer

 

 

This page is one the I have bookmarked as it has easy links to access copies of the relevant statutory regulations".

 

https://www.hceoa.org.uk/regulatory-information

 

 

 

Given the abysmal failure of CIVEA to update their website, I felt that a link to the High Court Enforcement Officers website would be of huge benefit to debtors and advisers alike. Instead of commenting on the good information provided in the above two links, Mickeymack posted this:

 

"But there again this document was published in 7/2012 so already out of date"

 

 

As the HCEOA website had only been launched two weeks earlier, I found his comment most confusing. He then posted the following link and following his post, he then made very derogatory and insulting comments on another social media site.

 

https://www.hceoa.org.uk/images/content/documents/Code-Of-Practice.pdf

 

It would now transpire that this 'out of date' comment by MM relates to this one particular page on the HCEOA's website:

 

https://www.hceoa.org.uk/regulatory-information

 

 

This page has links to ten separate documents/PDF's (most of which are excellent links to the relevant statutory instruments governing the enforcement of debts by High Court Enforcement Officers). One link is entitled: Code of Practice. It would seem that this one page has possibly not been updated since 2012.

 

According to comments that MM has been making since yesterday on other sites, it is his belief (and others) that before starting a thread, I should have opened and read all of the links on the HCEOA website before making my post.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I have emailed the HCEOA to bring this very minor error to their attention.

[ploddertom]

And the moaning Minnie is?

 

That part of the document was replaced by the national standards a few years later was it not dated at least 2014!!!

 

On this point of this thread it has been noted that there are other errors an omissions posted today as well! But heyho I'm not the professional am I?

 

What I find is that rather than accept it's wrong this usual MO is to attack a poster whom dared to point this out.

 

Nah no Specsavers here but I do say though, sticks and stones make plenty of moans!!!

 

If you wish to pick holes make sure the whole information is correct.

 

I thought that the Clangers was a TV show not real people.

 

As you say should have gone to Specsavers!!!

 

Bye....

 

Are you using the excuse CAG is responsible for the content of the HCEOA website?

[*RainbowTears*]

Off topic alert;

 

Can I also clarify that I am NOT Sheila, BA, TT or anyone's long time shill poster.

 

As CAG Admin can confirm, I am only but myself, using one & one only username.

 

Unlike a certain person who would love to believe we are all like him!!

 

Back on topic,

 

So a 2 week old website with loads of info & links, which used a 4 year old document to link too, it's then BA fault for that fact??

 

Gawd blimey, I've heard of nit picking, but that's taking it to the next level entirely!!

 

Back to my game....

[mikeymack2002]

Since the regulations were overhauled in 2014, there has been a lot of criticism (and rightly so) regarding the lack of information provided on the CIVEA (Civil Enforcement Agents Association)

 

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I have emailed the HCEOA to bring this very minor error to their attention.

 

 

This is not a small error in fact quite huge bearing in mind people rely on accurate information in regards to enforcement does it not?

 

 

Did the fact that I pointed this out warrant a thread on my observations? That would be a massive NO!!

 

 

Finally thank you for confirming that what I had written was in fact TRUE. Although I have no axe to grind with anyone except those that cannot or will not verify their information, especially if they do this for a living it is misleading and wrong and could have some serious outcomes if the information is relied upon!

 

 

All it takes is a single error to be incorrect and this is a fact that is NOT in dispute. This is why there are appeal Courts....

 

 

As an observation only how many times have derogatory comments been made on this thread? Is it now wrong to inform someone of an error if so then ........... Ultimately the information was wrong no matter how trivial it was still wrong hence your need to contact the website to inform them of it.

 

 

Suffice to say this could/should be corrected shortly which is a good thing is it not....

[mikeymack2002]

Are you using the excuse CAG is responsible for the content of the HCEOA website?

 

 

No I am using the excuse that a poster linked to incorrect information that could cause issues for debtors nothing more nothing less...

[Bailiff Advice]

This is not a small error in fact quite huge bearing in mind people rely on accurate information in regards to enforcement does it not?

 

 

Did the fact that I pointed this out warrant a thread on my observations? That would be a massive NO!!

 

 

Finally thank you for confirming that what I had written was in fact TRUE. Although I have no axe to grind with anyone except those that cannot or will not verify their information, especially if they do this for a living it is misleading and wrong and could have some serious outcomes if the information is relied upon!

 

As an observation only how many times have derogatory comments been made on this thread? Is it now wrong to inform someone of an error if so then ........... Ultimately the information was wrong no matter how trivial it was still wrong hence your need to contact the website to inform them of it.

 

 

Suffice to say this could/should be corrected shortly which is a good thing is it not....

 

Mikeymack.

 

Since your return to the bailiff section of this forum approx 2 months ago, you have taken to finding fault with almost every thread that I have posted. What is worst, is that you (as Delta157) also make derogatory comments on other websites about posters on here.

 

I would assume (although I do not know) that Plodderom started this thread because this is not an isolated incident by you. It is a continual one.

 

The very minor error found by you was in one of the ten links on one page of the HCEOA's website and was a link to their Code of Practice. Are you seriosuly trying to now say that this one particular document can in any way cause serious problems to debtors. The suggestion is completely without merit.

 

It was noteworthy that you did not even bother commenting on the good information in all of the other links.

[ploddertom]

 

 

No I am using the excuse that a poster linked to incorrect information that could cause issues for debtors nothing more nothing less...

 

 

 

The link was part of a page and not linked directly, I assume you therefore require us all to censor all links on all websites we refer to. You need to get real and smell the coffee, at the moment it sounds as you are being fed a load of bovine in the hope you can start an argument over it. Says it all really.

[Peterbard]

Happens all the time on here, someone makes a good point or post. Certain people cannot stand, or dont UNDERstand it, so they look for anything to detract attention or ridicule it.

 

Sometimes they do it because they do not understand the point being made, sometimes it is pure jealousy, but either way it is silly childish attention seeking and should be ignored.

 

Difficult as it may be.

[mikeymack2002]

BA/PT/DB I have been drafting an extensive response to all of your comments I am just finishing this off and will post shortly.

[mikeymack2002]

Here is my extensive comment>>> No comment....

[josephbloggs]

Really don't know why people take issue with the other poster(s) on the rival forum.

Just dont read it. Simple.

Take no notice!

Ive had messages from people screenshottimg posts accusing me of being a bailiff called "gary brown"

Completly unfounded and based solely on a post i made after seeing a photo on facebook.

I dont care and nor should anyone else.

Dont read it and it wont be a problem!

[Peterbard]

Really don't know why people take issue with the other poster(s) on the rival forum.

Just dont read it. Simple.

Take no notice!

Ive had messages from people screenshottimg posts accusing me of being a bailiff called "gary brown"

Completly unfounded and based solely on a post i made after seeing a photo on facebook.

I dont care and nor should anyone else.

Dont read it and it wont be a problem!

 

yes i know and you are absolutely right, it is not as if you or anyone else ive going to learn anything from places like that the participants are to thick to posses any actual knowledge.

But it is a bit like one of those sores that it is hard to resist picking, you know that it will make it worse but somehow it is hard to leave it alone

[mikeymack2002]

I cant believe that this thread is getting more views than the origin thread lol. Now that's got to be very important!

 

 

Sorry I was wrong it has now had MORE VIEWS...

[Peterbard]

Just your new mates refreshing the page Mm dont get excited.

[ploddertom]

Really don't know why people take issue with the other poster(s) on the rival forum.

Just dont read it. Simple.

Take no notice!

Ive had messages from people screenshottimg posts accusing me of being a bailiff called "gary brown"

Completly unfounded and based solely on a post i made after seeing a photo on facebook.

I dont care and nor should anyone else.

Dont read it and it wont be a problem!

 

 

You arte not the only one to be supposedly someone else. One of BA's friends was supposedly a member on here because it suited them, strange no apology was forthcoming when they themselves realised it was not.