Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The reason for the photos is to show you weren't displaying a permit.  They are supposed to check that the permit hadn't fallen off the dashboard. There is no point in appealing to PPM.  The very people who deliberately set up the site with rubbish signage to catch motorists out are highly unlikely to find against themselves. You've said several times that you think the company who you met with called PPM in so these are the people you need to contact in writing to request they call PPM off.  Until you do so we're going round in circles. If you don't want them to have your e-mail address simply set up a secondary e-address.  
    • Please see attached redacted judgment for further infoVWFS (UK) LTD - Salisbury CC - Judgment - 20240507 V Final _copy redacted.pdf
    • Make sure the WS is sent 14 days before the hearing. You can e-mail the court theirs.  In the subject line put the case number, the names of the parties and "Witness Statement".  Obviously click on "Return Receipt". Send Simple Simon his by 2nd class post - all VCS are worth - and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • The outlet is in Camden Town and was set up in 2006, a year after my husband established the business, in addition to selling at exhibitions, online, shows, events, and having licensing agreements in some places overseas.  The only thing I have stopped doing since I got ill is the physical stuff, which I’m working on. The business has not changed name or anything like that either. I’m not sure where the original contract with Camden is but the management must still have it. My husband died in Jan 2017, and until Sept 2018, I would take the stock in every week; after that I was sending it in by post. I went in now and then when possible to re-do the display but that was about it. No one had access to any files until 2020. Moved house in 2020 thought would have to pull it all, Covid had just hit as well. The person in question said he would be interested in taking over and paying the rent etc. so I said I would let him sell the pictures for nothing as long as he would ‘keep it warm’ for me.  Obviously, everywhere was closed for lockdown. During this time I was working out how to go forward.  In May 2022 I told him I couldn’t  give anything away for free anymore, and put in place the wholesale agreement.  I’ve disregarded any discrepancies from before this date. I sent over the jpgs electronically, so I’ve still got them too. He hasn’t got any original files like .psds negatives or memory cards etc, I’ve got proof of all ownership/copyright. A co-op is whereby a small number of neighbours work on a rotational basis so they each of them can have time off, that way everyone doesn’t need to be there at the same time, he had never been an employee of mine.  The only reason I allowed him to have the files in the first place as I didn’t want to lose that side of the business.  It’s a good, constant source of income. However, the rent was becoming crippling as I believed there was something fishy going on well before this as there’s so much cash dealt with there, and I couldn’t go in regularly in person, and I’m sure sales weren’t being recorded properly and cash was being pocketed. My husband was too busy to be doing any stock control properly, he wasn't really into paperwork, and the guy who was ‘helping’ me after my husband's death, was making things very difficult for me to implement a solid stock control system by refusing to co-operate on simple things like using email etc. which I thought was a smokescreen, so I severed ties with him just before I made the agreement in question. I sent about 100 images, jpg files, sent via We Transfer. I’ve got the confirmation of which files were sent with dates. I will have to go through closed bank accounts and previous tax returns to get a proper estimate.   Before I made this agreement, I was selling retail there, this is a wholesale agreement so I’ll have to do some calculations but it is definitely in the thousands.  I haven’t got his his home address, and I don't think he's got any sizeable assets. I’m also worried that he might send the files overseas and start selling them there. I know he’s not stupid enough to sell them online. He knows for sure how serious this is, but he’s been chancing it and thinks I’m stupid, if not soft and stupid. I don’t know if this would work but I am thinking that when he does contact me, I tell him we need to talk, tell him I know what he’s been up to, and strongly urge him not to order any more prints from wherever he is having them printed because it will make things much worse for him if he does. Then when I do tell him about the gravity of the situation, maybe a few days later, I think it will scare him into complying because the consequences definitely trump the few quid he thinks he is saving by getting his own printing done. Tell him an amount that I want back for lost revenue, and make it clear that if he doesn’t destroy the files and if I find out he is still doing it at any point down the line, I will seek prosecution for copyright infringement and fraud, which I will. I don’t know how I can enforce any of this without involving the courts though. I will be able to tell, though, and he will know this. And the only reason I am doing this now rather than before, is that I couldn’t prove anything until now.  It was screamingly obvious from the beginning though, as he wasn’t ordering enough from me to pay the rent, let alone make a profit. If I decided to come down like him lie a ton of bricks straight away, how would I go about a cease and desist, would I have to get one from the court? And what do I do about the stock he currently holds? It has also occurred to me that he might file for bankruptcy or similar if things get heavy, where would that leave me? I could put the feelers out for a brand-new person to take it on, obviously without giving them access to files, that is an option. But that comes with its own set of issues. Also, would there be any implications for me, if I kept quiet for now? Let him order again from me as if nothing has happened, as it will be any day and I want to get all my ducks in a row first ideally….   Thanks again
    • I’ve also just realised their online website they’ve got 12 photographs of my vehicle, including close ups of the inside?? Not sure why that’s relevant.  The time stamp on the first photo is 13:57, the PCN incident time is 14:12. 
  • 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 
      • 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2888 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 would prefer not to use this particular thread to fully discuss the 'entry rights' into properties as this is subject that I plan to address in the 'discussion' section of the forum shortly. It is also a subject where there are differing opinions. The countries expert on bailiff law has his views on the point of a 'recoverable licence' and considers that consent to remain on the premises can be withdrawn by the debtor. Recently, there has been a challenge to his opinion (which has been the subject of some interesting discussions with some forum members). Once again, this will shortly be addressed elsewhere on the forum.

 

Can you please forget the subject of committal. This will not happen.

 

PS: I have sent you a personal message and copied it to one of the moderators.

 

Yes - do forget about commital as it is exceedingly rare. Bailiff Advice is correct about this.

 

Regarding entry rights, if they are relevant here and now, would it not be a good idea to share your thoughts on the issue? I'm concerned that with the level of misinformation and pure opinion, rather than fact being posted at present, bypassing the public forum is dangerous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The Heritage people will not let us put up any signs on the front of the building as the frontage is the major feature of the building and it is listed and in a conservative area. I only have a 4 inch sign on the letterbox, that says letterbox for and my company name. As I said earlier they found my company by asking around using my name not my business name, as they had the wrong business name and address, but the correct contact name. The address was also incorrect on the letter. But even the business name they had was a Limited company so that doesn't seem to make any difference to them visiting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Heritage people will not let us put up any signs on the front of the building as the frontage is the major feature of the building and it is listed and in a conservative area. I only have a 4 inch sign on the letterbox, that says letterbox for and my company name. As I said earlier they found my company by asking around using my name not my business name, as they had the wrong business name and address, but the correct contact name. The address was also incorrect on the letter. But even the business name they had was a Limited company so that doesn't seem to make any difference to them visiting.

 

As I mentioned a while back, the simplest route to recover the debt may be via an attachment of earnings now that the enforcement company appear to have found out where your Limited company trade from. If you could address the query that I raised earlier on this point it would assist.

 

To save me time having to read back on past posts, how much are the enforcement company seeking from you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - do forget about commital as it is exceedingly rare. Bailiff Advice is correct about this.

 

Regarding entry rights, if they are relevant here and now, would it not be a good idea to share your thoughts on the issue? I'm concerned that with the level of misinformation and pure opinion, rather than fact being posted at present, bypassing the public forum is dangerous.

 

It is the entry rights that really worry me at the moment, as I said home is not a problem, just a scrap van they could take, which I don't think they would bother with. But work is, during the day they could just walk in and around until they found someone or got themselves lost or hurt. Can I just send them away from my place of work without them getting any kind of walking possession or engaging with them at all. Or would I be better fetching the owner from his other building to come get rid of them. I don't really want to involve him as he can be over zealous when it comes to confrontation and I don't want to make matters worse. it would be better if I could just tell them to go. This week I only have one part time employee at work who is a lady in her mid sixties and it really worries me in case they hassle her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To save me time having to read back on past posts, how much are the enforcement company seeking from you?

 

Allow me to do it for you! The amount was either £1200 or £2400 depending whether it was for one year, or whether the amount for this year was added also. :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned a while back, the simplest route to recover the debt may be via an attachment of earnings now that the enforcement company appear to have found out where your Limited company trade from. If you could address the query that I raised earlier on this point it would assist.

 

To save me time having to read back on past posts, how much are the enforcement company seeking from you?

 

I am self employed, no deductions of earnings order possible, and although there was no amount of the letter I received, it was left blank where it said balance due, the lady at the council seemed to be confused on whether is was 1200 or 2400 as she said they may have gone for a liability order for this years council tax as well. She said better to ring back next week and speak to someone more senior. As I said earlier I applied for help with my council tax last year, but it went on and on, because I self employed they wanted more and more information, and it just went on and on for months, so in the end I gave up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the entry rights that really worry me at the moment, as I said home is not a problem, just a scrap van they could take, which I don't think they would bother with. But work is, during the day they could just walk in and around until they found someone or got themselves lost or hurt. Can I just send them away from my place of work without them getting any kind of walking possession or engaging with them at all. Or would I be better fetching the owner from his other building to come get rid of them. I don't really want to involve him as he can be over zealous when it comes to confrontation and I don't want to make matters worse. it would be better if I could just tell them to go. This week I only have one part time employee at work who is a lady in her mid sixties and it really worries me in case they hassle her.

 

Yes, I imagine this does worry you. Given BA has stated about conflicting opinion, I imagine you would like like to know your options here, or at least the differing opinions so you can try to make an informed decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am self employed, no deductions of earnings order possible. .

 

Given that it is so easy to gain entry into the premises, the focus should be on ensuring that you have documentation to support the fact that the goods within the premises belong to the business.

 

Given the type of business, it may be the case that the sheer size, weight and difficulty with removal etc may to your advantage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am self employed, no deductions of earnings order possible, and although there was no amount of the letter I received, it was left blank where it said balance due, the lady at the council seemed to be confused on whether is was 1200 or 2400 as she said they may have gone for a liability order for this years council tax as well. She said better to ring back next week and speak to someone more senior. As I said earlier I applied for help with my council tax last year, but it went on and on, because I self employed they wanted more and more information, and it just went on and on for months, so in the end I gave up.

 

The ammount on the warrant can only be that on the liability order, the bailiff can only pursue this, also the authority can only pursue the measures mentioned ,committal proceedings etc. on that ammount

 

However there is nothing stopping the council saying that they will only accept a payment arrangement if you include the more recent 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the bailiff know your company title, is it xxxxxx ltd. ?

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

Given that it is so easy to gain entry into the premises, the focus should be on ensuring that you have documentation to support the fact that the goods within the premises belong to the business.

 

Given the type of business, it may be the case that the sheer size, weight and difficulty with removal etc may to your advantage.

 

It would be impossible to remove any of the high value items, without taking out walls and I can't see them taking out the walls and destroying the fascia of one of the top 13 most important building in the city, listed as that by the council, for 2400 council tax. We cant even change a window or have a roller shutter door installed, even have to have permission to paint it. Plus as you say it is very difficult to take something that is 1300 centigrade. Anything else I have would be no use to anyone else and impossible to sell. Its just the hassle to my employee that worries me.

 

What kind of documentation do I need, to prove these items belong to the business and some to the building itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, talking to the owner of my building today, and he had some points I never thought about.

 

Our building no longer has a valid postcode as it as been in disuse for 13 years, when you put in the old postcode only one business comes up, and that is the company name that was on the letter I received from the bailiff.

 

Also I am known by the council due to my dealings with their heritage department, and my efforts to conserve and restore the building. I never give this a thought as I would of thought they were completely different departments.

 

They also know that I am nearly always there as they have seen that I occasionally sleep there, and have living accomodation there. This was once questioned as the building can only be used as a residence by the person using the building as his place of work. Cannot be turned into flats etc. He wonders if they think I live there. That is why they never visited the actual address the council tax was for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking back at some earlier posts of yours and had assumed that you were probably in the same type of business (pottery). Can I please assure you once again that goods belonging to a Limited Company cannot be taken to secure a personal council tax debt. If however the debt was for National Non Domestic Rates (NNDR)......

 

I would prefer not to use this particular thread to fully discuss the 'entry rights' into properties as this is subject that I plan to address in the 'discussion' section of the forum shortly. It is also a subject where there are differing opinions. The countries expert on bailiff law has his views on the point of a 'recoverable licence' and considers that consent to remain on the premises can be withdrawn by the debtor. Recently, there has been a challenge to his opinion (which has been the subject of some interesting discussions with some forum members). Once again, this will shortly be addressed elsewhere on the forum.

 

 

PS: I have sent you a personal message and copied it to one of the moderators.

 

Yes indeed, we have known that bailiffs operating under an "implied right of access", was legally nonsense, and in fact since the new legislation came into force and the entry rights set in them was a none issue..

 

It was good however to see the position as it was clarified and the correct interpretation given to the misquoted case law as a matter of interest.

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

Yes indeed, we have known that bailiffs operating under an "implied right of access", was legally nonsense, and in fact since the new legislation came into force and the entry rights set in them was a none issue..

 

It was good however to see the position as it was clarified and the correct interpretation given to the misquoted case law as a matter of interest.

 

Correct. This is the wrong thread to go into 'implied rights' and 'licences' and this is why I merely touched upon it here.

 

Prior to TCE and the Crime & Courts Act 2013, some may have argued the point about 'implied licences' , 'trespass' etc but I don't believe that this is any longer the case. A challenge may at some time be made to the High Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to contact the council again next week, by letter. But also I am going to start making payments of £50 aweek on their online payment site.

 

Just to clarify, are you stating you intend starting to pay £50 a week once the account has been returned, or are you intending doing this immediately?

 

The reason I ask is that currently the debt will have the bailiff's fees included (£310). The first £75 of any payment made while it is with bailiffs will go straight to them, not one penny will come off the debt. After that, any payments would be divided pro rata, roughly 70:30 or 60:40 (depending on which version you read) between council and bailiff.

 

I would ensure you start paying only after the debt is returned. By doing this, bailiff fees die, so your debt will be £310 less. It also means every penny you pay will come off the debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pro rata on this would be about 6 : 1 . 16.6% to the agent.

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 to clarify, are you stating you intend starting to pay £50 a week once the account has been returned, or are you intending doing this immediately?

 

The reason I ask is that currently the debt will have the bailiff's fees included (£310). The first £75 of any payment made while it is with bailiffs will go straight to them, not one penny will come off the debt. After that, any payments would be divided pro rata.

 

I would ensure you start paying only after the debt is returned. By doing this, bailiff fees die, so your debt will be £310 less. It also means every penny you pay will come off the debt.

 

I wouldn't want Whitsend to be sidetracked by more off topic posts, so it's worth repeating, with the ratios omitted. They are irrelevant. What is relevant is once the account is returned, all the fees will die as they normally do when accounts are returned. It would be a shame for Whitsend to make a payment, only to find she had effectively thrown money away straight into the bailiff's pocket.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this has been gone over about five times in this thread. I am sure that if the OP is unsure she will ask.

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 think this has been gone over about five times in this thread. I am sure that if the OP is unsure she will ask.

 

No, I was accused of debt avoidance when I mentioned fees at the start of the thread. Fees have not been raised specifically elsewhere I don't think. What has been stated is it is best to inform them so any decision is made with all information available. I'm sure none of us want the OP wasting money on bailiff's fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am still hoping someone will be able to advise me if I can make the bailiff leave my premises if he returns. It is hassling my employee now that worries me. His visit was 6th July, so does that mean if he doesn't return by 13th July the debt has gone back to the council and he will not revisit.

 

Also if the council sends this out to another bailiffs, am I going to have to go through this all again, and will their fees come off the payments I make to the council.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am only going to start paying the £50 once the debt is returned as I was advised.

 

I am also going to address the data protection issues with the council.

 

The problem with that is you will not know when that occurs, they may re issue it before you pay or they may still have it when you send your payment.

 

Can you say why you had no notices at your 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

How much do you think your tools are worth, that is how much would the raise at auction ?

 

Do you have any of them listed as assets on your annual accounts.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...