Can't Pay, Won't Pay - new series

[Homer67]

I caught the first episode in the new series last night

 

 

and was surprised to see the passive aggressive clown Paul Bohil still operating as an HCEO.

 

 

How can this be when he was supposed to have the right to act on the license he was using revoked

(apparently he's never been a certificated HCEO)

 

 

Also the very annoying Brian (fatty wannabe thug) sent for a removal vehicle for furniture from a hotel and a flat bed car transporter turned up!

 

 

Surely that showed he was bluffing as any damage caused by transportation in an unsuitable vehicle would be down to DCBL?

[Bailiff Advice]

I was out last night so will have to watch it on 'catch' up' (hopefully this evening).

 

I suppose a lot will depend on when this latest series was filmed.

[Bailiff Advice]

 

surprised to see the passive aggressive clown Paul Bohil still operating as an HCEO.

 

How can this be when he was supposed to have the right to act on the license he was using revoked (apparently he's never been a certificated HCEO)

 

In fact, he is certificated !!

 

His certificate was granted to him on 12th April and his employer is listed as Direct Collections Ltd.

[Bailiff Advice]

I only managed to watch the first half last night as I was so damn angry at see the way in which the enforcement agent 'forced' their way into the property despite the father CLEARLY advising that he was refusing entry and asking the officer to move away from the door. The father could not close the door.

 

There were so many breaches of the regulations that it is difficult to know where to start.

[unclebulgaria67]

I only managed to watch the first half last night as I was so damn angry at see the way in which the enforcement agent 'forced' their way into the property despite the father CLEARLY advising that he was refusing entry and asking the officer to move away from the door. The father could not close the door.

 

There were so many breaches of the regulations that it is difficult to know where to start.

 

I don't watch any of these ' poverty porn' or other programmes that promote these type of companies e.g Enforcement officers, traffic wardens. Makes my blood boil, because i question the motives of the producers of these programmes and those invested in them.

 

These Enforcement Agents don't follow the rules because they know that not much can be done about their behaviour. Are the Police ever likely to arrest an EA, charge them and gain approval to prosecute ?

 

Who is going to tackle this behaviour ?

[ThedaBara]

I just can't bear watching those programmes... the thought of all those poor people being persecuted and bullied, it really upsets me...

Who but a sadist could sit there with a cup of tea and a biscuit and enjoy watching those less fortunate losing their homes or possessions?

Poverty Porn just about sums it up...

 

TB

[Homer67]

I only managed to watch the first half last night as I was so damn angry at see the way in which the enforcement agent 'forced' their way into the property despite the father CLEARLY advising that he was refusing entry and asking the officer to move away from the door. The father could not close the door.

 

There were so many breaches of the regulations that it is difficult to know where to start.

 

 

I'm glad it's not just me that sits there shouting at the TV them, it makes my blood boil watching these thugs dressed up as officials abusing people.

 

The problem I have is that people watch this program and think that it's correct and they have the right to act in these ways

[silverfox1961]

I am wondering if a complaint should be made to OFCOM about this show. While they don't investigate individual complaints, if enough people complained, they may just take some action.

 

I will try to stay calm enough to watch this episode. Barging past people is wrong and should be stamped on.

[ThedaBara]

I just can't watch people being subjected to such terrible behaviour...it scares and depresses me... it's not entertainment and should not be portrayed as such. TB

[brassnecked]

The way he is going Bohill will be a victim when a burly debtor decides he needs a tolchock, and Bohil gets the three hits as in Bohill gets hit, Bohill hits the floor, and the Ambulance hits 90mph

 

Seriously agree with SF tell OFCOM the show is condoning criminal action by Bohill, highlighting where he has broken the law at each point on the programmes timeline.

[Bailiff Advice]

I am wondering if a complaint should be made to OFCOM about this show. While they don't investigate individual complaints, if enough people complained, they may just take some action.

 

I will try to stay calm enough to watch this episode. Barging past people is wrong and should be stamped on.

 

I am just about to start a new thread regarding DCBL and given it's seriousness, it really does need to get wide coverage. Accordingly, I will be starting the thread in the main bailiff forum and I would hope that the moderators allow it to remain there.

[Conniff]

It's a wonderful show and Bohill is such a gentleman, if only all bailiffs were like him.

[brassnecked]

It's a wonderful show and Bohill is such a gentleman, if only all bailiffs were like him.

You 'avin a larf?

[brassnecked]

I am just about to start a new thread regarding DCBL and given it's seriousness, it really does need to get wide coverage. Accordingly, I will be starting the thread in the main bailiff forum and I would hope that the moderators allow it to remain there.

DCBL need winding up

[trebormoinet]

It's a wonderful show and Bohill is such a gentleman, if only all bailiffs were like him.

Wonderful show ? highlighting peoples misery purely for cheap entertainment to cater for perverse viewers is not my or any right minded individual definition of wonderful.

[renegadeimp]

in relation to conniffs post, i dont think some people here understand sarcasm

[trebormoinet]

in relation to conniffs post, i dont think some people here understand sarcasm

I do not know the poster, I presumed it could be a sarcastic, inflammatory or a genuine response, I do not presume to read the minds of other posters, It is not for me to give lessons on internet protocol but message boards do not provide the same level of interaction as face to face chats that is why we uses emotes to help indicate if a post or comment was in jest or sarcastic etc in order to avoid confusion, unless that is what the poster intended.

 

As for me not understanding sarcasm I think I can be forgiven on this

[trebormoinet]

But now you told me yeh :lol:

[Bailiff Advice]

I am just about to start a new thread regarding DCBL and given it's seriousness, it really does need to get wide coverage. Accordingly, I will be starting the thread in the main bailiff forum and I would hope that the moderators allow it to remain there.

 

The new thread is here and what is outlined in the thread is vitally important.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?469126-DCBL-(Direct-Collections-Bailiffs-Ltd)-enforcing-debts-without-warrants...what-to-look-out-for.

 

As can be read, an officer from DCBL attended premises a couple of days ago to enforce a 'disputed debt' and one that has not been subject to court action and where no judgment has been obtained.

 

The officer closely resembled a Police Officer.

 

He refused to leave the premises unless payment was made. He was demanding in excess of £10,000. As he was refusing to leave....police were called. They refused to attend stating that the officer had a right to be at the premises to enforce the debt !!!

 

The officer remained for over three hours. He only left when he received a payment.

 

The enforcement agent was also demanding 'interest' of 8%' on the disputed debt.

 

He threatened that unless the balance was paid by 5pm, that he would be returning with a 'film crew' (presumably, a film crew from the TV series, 'Can't Pay We Will Take it Away'.

[ploddertom]

I am wondering if a complaint should be made to OFCOM about this show. While they don't investigate individual complaints, if enough people complained, they may just take some action.

 

I will try to stay calm enough to watch this episode. Barging past people is wrong and should be stamped on.

 

Of course it isn't that long ago we had someone claiming to work on the show saying all was hunky dory, puts it into perspective the role of TV company.

[Homer67]

Last night's show was equally horrendous with wanna be thug Fatty Brian demanding money with intimidation from a disabled lady and her partner for a disputed funeral cost. The lady twice offered a payment plan option of £5 or £10 per week (maybe month) which given her circumstances was reasonable which the EA's completely ignored. Fatty Brian then charged off to check her vehicle saying "I bet it's in a communal parking space" whilst grinning like a clever boy, only to find it was a motability vehicle - what did he expect, she is disabled Dumbass! I really don't like him. Ended up they got nothing as the lady had nothing of value.

[HCEOs]

There were so many breaches of the regulations that it is difficult to know where to start.

 

Clearly they and their authorised HCEO couldn't give a monkeys.

[ericsbrother]

all of these people on the programme are inn the position they are in because they failed to respond to the original court claim. Even if they had lost that they would only owe no more than half of the demanded sum and would have had a court agreed settlement schedule in place.

[HCEOs]

all of these people on the programme are inn the position they are in because they failed to respond to the original court claim. Even if they had lost that they would only owe no more than half of the demanded sum and would have had a court agreed settlement schedule in place.

 

Correct. But that doesn't allow for laws and regulations to be blatantly broken time and time again.

[Demitri]

Correct. But that doesn't allow for laws and regulations to be blatantly broken time and time again.

 

Just a little food for thought here. If you were owed money by some particularly obstructive debtor, would you lose any sleep if entry wasn't strictly to the letter of the law? i have been owed a lot of money (to me) in the past and I used to lose sleep over it. It wasn't so much the money, it was the thought of someone taking the proverbial "Michael" out of me. Many a time, I was on the brink of "enforcing" it myself, only to have calmed down by the time that I arrived at the premises of the debtor.

 

I remember one of these programmes showed the ex-footballer, Neil Ruddock who had put his dog in kennels (presumably so that he could enjoy a nice holiday). He didn't pay the kennel owner and then hid behind bankruptcy. When visited, he was driving a fancy BMW and living in a very nice house. He clearly had the means to settle the debt if he wished to. However, he refused to pay, stating that the debt was incurred prior to him being registered bankrupt. I just wonder how many other people Rudduck owed money to in this manner?

 

I just wonder, if I obtained a writ, would DCBL be the company that I would choose to collect, given their approach?

 

I would add that I am on the side of the debtor and do not advocate breaching of legislation. I am also not convinced that evry breach is carried out exclusively by DCBL. I suspect it is convenient for the rest of the industry to point fingers in their direction.