Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2878 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I agree with BA

post 24 Bankruptcy is something the council can use.

and as stated the limit before proceedings can be taken, is now £5000,

I think it was £700 before.

 

With regards to the Bailiff threatening Bankruptcy this quite a common threat along with Committal to prison,

It is not up to the EA if this happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Bankruptcy is one of the steps that the local authority can take with council tax arrears. However, given the increase in bankruptcy levels, the debt needs to be over £5,000.

 

Yes but not by a bailff using schedule 12 procedure.

 

It would be another enforcment path. An ea using sched 12 would not return the order after the seven day notice was sent.

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

I agree with BA

post 24 Bankruptcy is something the council can use.

and as stated the limit before proceedings can be taken, is now £5000,

I think it was £700 before.

 

With regards to the Bailiff threatening Bankruptcy this quite a common threat along with Committal to prison,

It is not up to the EA if this happens.

 

Yes I agree they promise anything, not so often in writing though

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

This confirms they do use threatening behaviours to coerce payment as mentioned previously, though as DB rightly states, it is not so often they put this in writing.

 

The OP has been asked quite a few questions now, and appears to post very late at night, so perhaps it is best to wait until they return again to see what they say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

First of all this is definately for council tax arrears, not business rates, my premises is exempt.

 

I have contacted the council this morning, and they say that this enforcement went out to another company August 2015!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. However they sent it back to the council last month saying they could not contact me. How is this possible I have had cars parked outside my house, I have been living in the house, but have heard nothing at all from any bailiff company before. Wouldn't they have taken my cars? Anyway they then instructed Dukes to make an attempt at my place of work. They admit the business address error, but don't know why it happened.

 

As my business has really suffered over the last 2 years, and I nearly got evicted, I did apply for help with my council tax in November last year, but they made is so difficult, because I was self employed that I gave up eventually. Don't know whether this has any bearing on anything.

 

The exact wording of the letter is this

 

Final Notice: Council Tax Arrears

 

An Enforcement Agent (bailiff) has visited you home again today.

Your possessions are now at risk of being REMOVED.

 

Despite numver attempts to contact you we have still not received satisfactory response about you Council Tax Arrears

 

An Enforcement Agent (bailiff) has visited you home again today to take control of your goods and remove them for sale.

 

If you debt is not settled within 7 days of the date above, we will return your case with one of the following recommendations

 

Attachment of Earnings - taking the funds from you at source

Bankrupcy - this will affect your credit rating

Charging order on your property - your could be forced to sell you home

Commital - you could go to prison

 

FAILURE TO CONTACT US WILL BE TAKEN AS YOUR REFUSAL TO PAY.

 

At the top of the letter is the Dukes Refence, then Client Reference where it says Balance Due Today it is blank and where it says date is left blank.

 

There is 2 copies of this letter in the envelope, both exactly the same exept for one has my home address writen across it in pen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

First of all this is definately for council tax arrears, not business rates, my premises is exempt.

 

I have contacted the council this morning, and they say that this enforcement went out to another company August 2015!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. However they sent it back to the council last month saying they could not contact me. How is this possible I have had cars parked outside my house, I have been living in the house, but have heard nothing at all from any bailiff company before. Wouldn't they have taken my cars? Anyway they then instructed Dukes to make an attempt at my place of work. They admit the business address error, but don't know why it happened.

 

As my business has really suffered over the last 2 years, and I nearly got evicted, I did apply for help with my council tax in November last year, but they made is so difficult, because I was self employed that I gave up eventually. Don't know whether this has any bearing on anything.

 

The exact wording of the letter is this

 

Final Notice: Council Tax Arrears

 

An Enforcement Agent (bailiff) has visited you home again today.

Your possessions are now at risk of being REMOVED.

 

Despite numver attempts to contact you we have still not received satisfactory response about you Council Tax Arrears

 

An Enforcement Agent (bailiff) has visited you home again today to take control of your goods and remove them for sale.

 

If you debt is not settled within 7 days of the date above, we will return your case with one of the following recommendations

 

Attachment of Earnings - taking the funds from you at source

Bankrupcy - this will affect your credit rating

Charging order on your property - your could be forced to sell you home

Commital - you could go to prison

 

FAILURE TO CONTACT US WILL BE TAKEN AS YOUR REFUSAL TO PAY.

 

At the top of the letter is the Dukes Refence, then Client Reference where it says Balance Due Today it is blank and where it says date is left blank.

 

There is 2 copies of this letter in the envelope, both exactly the same exept for one has my home address writen across it in pen.

 

 

Is the house owned or rented ?

 

Is the ammount owed over £5000 ?

 

Do they no know your home address ? If you suspect they do you must remove all vehicles from in front of your house or on your drive away from the house or park on a neighbors drive.

 

Do you know what the judgment sum was on this debt ? The bill you have should contain fees which will drop off if the order goes back.

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

If as it says on their letter, they visited my home why did they not post the letter there.

 

Perhaps they have the wrong home address ?

 

You need to tell them and the council that you have received no notices either from drakes (or the previous bailiff ?)

 

That in itself should stop the enforcment. The notices are required before any enforcement action.

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

Hi

 

First of all this is definately for council tax arrears, not business rates, my premises is exempt.

 

I have contacted the council this morning, and they say that this enforcement went out to another company August 2015!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. However they sent it back to the council last month saying they could not contact me. How is this possible I have had cars parked outside my house, I have been living in the house, but have heard nothing at all from any bailiff company before. Wouldn't they have taken my cars?

 

Anyway they then instructed Dukes to make an attempt at my place of work. They admit the business address error, but don't know why it happened.

 

By coincidence, I have been assisting a couple today who thought that the enforcement company would have returned their debt back to the council by now so that they could pay the council tax direct to the council and therby evoid paying bailiff fees. The enforcement company have done no such thing and enforcment is continuing six months later !!! In light of other similar enquiries, I will be amending previous advice and will be telling debtors that an account would very likely not be returned to the council for approx 4-6 months.

 

You have also highlighted another area that has been debated on here. When an enforcement company return an account they do not write to the debtor !!

 

Is the council tax debt in relation to your current address? If not, this could explain the absence of previous correspondence.

 

What is your employment status (ie: self employed or employed)?

 

How much is the amount that Dukes are seeking from you?

 

PS: OOPS...I was typing without realising that another poster has asked some similar questions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry couldn't amend the above. I meant perhaps they had the wrong home address.

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

B

 

PS: OOPS...I was typing without realising that another poster has asked some similar questions.

 

Its OK the grammar is better in yours.

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

Is the house owned or rented ?

 

Is the ammount owed over £5000 ?

 

Do they no know your home address ? If you suspect they do you must remove all vehicles from in front of your house or on your drive away from the house or park on a neighbors drive.

 

Do you know what the judgment sum was on this debt ? The bill you have should contain fees which will drop off if the order goes back.

 

House is owned, definately not over £5000. Yes they know my home address it was on one of the letters. One car is an old van, they can take that if they want, I can't get rid of it. The other car is one I use for business which is only worth about £900, so they can't take that as it is esscential to the running of my business. But I can park it elsewhere. The council lady did a lot of uming and erring, when I asked. She was not sure whether this years would be added on as once you become behind the whole year becomes due, so if one year £1200 if two Years £2400. The amount owed on the letter was left blank as was the date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry couldn't amend the above. I meant perhaps they had the wrong home address.

 

My home address was added in pen to one of the copies of the letters, but perhaps the previous bailiffs had the wrong address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By coincidence, I have been assisting a couple today who thought that the enforcement company would have returned their debt back to the council by now so that they could pay the council tax direct to the council and therby evoid paying bailiff fees. The enforcement company have done no such thing and enforcment is continuing six months later !!! In light of other similar enquiries, I will be amending previous advice and will be telling debtors that an account would very likely not be returned to the council for approx 4-6 months.

 

You have also highlighted another area that has been debated on here. When an enforcement company return an account they do not write to the debtor !!

 

Is the council tax debt in relation to your current address? If not, this could explain the absence of previous correspondence.

 

What is your employment status (ie: self employed or employed)?

 

How much is the amount that Dukes are seeking from you?

 

PS: OOPS...I was typing without realising that another poster has asked some similar questions.

 

I am self employed, and the council tax is for this address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The lady on the council was not in the least bothered about sending them to the wrong business address, and although they admitted this, she said it was not a preach of data protection in any way. When I said that the bailiff had walked around asked if anyone knew me and that they had given detials out over the phone to the company they sent the letter to in error. Her response was well they managed to contact you, and that is what we pay them for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dukes have not stated the amount, it is the council who says it could be 2400 if they decide to add on all of this years.

 

As you are self employed (and therefore not on a employers payroll), an attachment of earnings cannot be applied.

 

The council may only add this year's (2016/17) debt if they have been granted a Liability Order.

 

Very few Liability Orders have been granted by the courts for arrears of this year's council tax (2016/17). Have you received a summons yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BA

 

By coincidence, I have been assisting a couple today who thought that the enforcement company would have returned their debt back to the council by now so that they could pay the council tax direct to the council and therby evoid paying bailiff fees. The enforcement company have done no such thing and enforcment is continuing six months later !!! In light of other similar enquiries, I will be amending previous advice and will be telling debtors that an account would very likely not be returned to the council for approx 4-6 months.

 

Well you may have to alter the time scale a bit more, As I have been with Newlyns since the beginning,of September, But have only had 1 visit at 5am, and a lot of threatening letters.

 

Sorry for the off topic post

 

Leakie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes indeed. A charge on the house may be an option for them, if they have a liability order, the procedure is that they apply to the county court who will issue and interim order and give a date for a hearing to make it permanent. That would depend on what equity was on the proerty and what other charges you may have.

 

The exemption applies to tools or vehicles which, if they were absent would remove the debtors ability to perform his work.

 

This will not be just to take you to work.

 

The other option for them is to issue a warrant for committal, this initially will require you to attend the magistrates court and explain why you have not made a repayment on the debt.

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

I will speak to the council again next week. When the more senior person comes off her holiday.

 

In the mean time are Dukes likely to call at my workplace again, or will it just go back to the council after 7 days as per the letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will speak to the council again next week. When the more senior person comes off her holiday.

 

In the mean time are Dukes likely to call at my workplace again, or will it just go back to the council after 7 days as per the letter.

 

I should think it will be a distinct possibility they will call at your home, usual procedure lock doors and keep cars and anything valuable outside under lock and key. unlikely they will call at your work.

 

After seven days if it goes back, and is closed, they cannot call.

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

Just a thought, but if you drive your car to work, do not park it on a road where they may spot it..

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

Dukes have not stated the amount, it is the council who says it could be 2400 if they decide to add on all of this years.

 

To add this years you would have had to have defaulted on payment and they obtain another Liability Order against you.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In your shoes I would be making complaints as the Council do not appear to have a clue what they are talking about. At best Dukes are being evasive as they will have been instructed by the Council to collect £XXX. Have you thought about contacting your local Councillor(s) - do it over the weekend and they can attack this for you first thing Monday morning - best initial contact is by phone.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...