marston Bailiff Forced Entry through locked French Doors

[brassnecked]

I agree to a certain extent BN

but there is still a need for the people who know how to play thew system as a limited company. running up debts and closing down,

happened to me a few times , this is why I am in the position In am in now.

but overall agree out dated in the 21st century, it is called control over the peasants.

Worse culprits for witholding payments are councils and multinationals. OP to their credit did try to negotiate when the bailiff called.

[magicmart123]

I am so shocked at the advice given here. The OP didn't even owe anything (according to their story). They have been complaint and even offered themselves up for arrest. They are suffering from PTSD and should not have to go through this. Marstons obviously overstepped the mark, and this is the best advice on offer, you're an idiot and sniggering at how old the Rolex is? Grandfather could have left it quite recently.

 

Thank you for your support.

That guy has deleted his silly post because he probably used the magic of Google he would know that Rolex have been making watches since 1905..

.my Grandfather died 6 years ago and my watch is a 1983 model Submariner.

 

Surprised they didn't clamp the cars just for the hell of it OP got off lightly there but as far as auction value is concerned, 10% of value at distress sale auction is about right, so a £10K rolex would be lucky to fetch a grand, but I agree with your sentiment Leakie, the bailiff is there to give the debtor hell and force a payment end of, I still think they are not appropriate in the 21st Century.

 

Funnily enough if they wanted to clamp stuff there are actually 60 cars here

they could've clamped because I live in a bungalow on an industrial site incorporating a used car sales business which belongs to my landlord

 

 

so my property is literally surrounded by at least over £90,000 worth of cars .

..none of the vehicles are mine obviously but this, as previously outlined, seems to be irrelevant as they can just seize anything outside my house and I then have to later prove the property is not mine.

..so if it was property they wanted..

.there was plenty.

 

 

I feel they were simply intent on intimidation for instant payment which was eventually elicited under duress.

[Leakie]

Tell me about it Bn 6 months for payment from council , any excuse not to pay.

To the Op

I think you have been hard done by.you offered goods for control to give a breathing space.

thing are getting out of hand with some EA;s but not all

the bad ones need to be got shot of .

this will not happen until things change, if they will be changed, is a different story

 

Funnily enough if they wanted to clamp stuff there are actually 60 cars here they could've clamped because I live in a bungalow on an industrial site incorporating a used car sales business which belongs to my landlord so my property is literally surrounded by at least over £90,000 worth of cars ...none of the vehicles are mine obviously but this, as previously outlined, seems to be irrelevant as they can just seize anything outside my house and I then have to later prove the property is not mine...so if it was property they wanted...there was plenty. I feel they were simply intent on intimidation for instant payment which was eventually elicited under duress.

 

This is my point in an earlier post.

it should not be for the debtor to prove.

The EA should do his/her home work first. then no probs. why should a third party do a section 85 when they are an innocent party, being deprived of goods for the sake of some one else's problem.

[brassnecked]

Leakie, they do it because they can, and hope the third party is so intimidated that they just let the goods go. Lord Denning wanted rid of "Enforcement" in the 1980's and I cannot discgree with the logic, apart from Councils etc who won't pay seem untouchable. Would love to send the bailiffs in to a council owing a bill. magicmart, bailiffs are a law unto themselves, or so they would like you to beleive. Your problem is you ignored all correspondence, resulting in a visit.

[ploddertom]

Going back to the subject of the Gold Chain & Rolex.

 

The EA is not a jeweller & does not carry anything that will tell him if the hallmarks - if present - are genuine or what grade of gold it is. As for the watch then if he is not an expert he could easily have seized a genuine fake brought back from one of Turkeys markets worth £50 or so - no offence intended. Would not have been worth risking an Interpleader claim for these.

[ploddertom]

As for how all this arose then yes the OP may be guilty of ignoring all letters/notices but if has definite proof they did not own the vehicle at the time they should in my view pay up first - to stop further enforcement - the get it taken back to Court & if found in their favour would have all fees reimbursed.

[magicmart123]

As for how all this arose then yes the OP may be guilty of ignoring all letters/notices but if has definite proof they did not own the vehicle at the time they should in my view pay up first - to stop further enforcement - the get it taken back to Court & if found in their favour would have all fees reimbursed.

 

 

Thanks for your input...I have paid in full...and the only way I can prove I wasn't the owner at the time of the offence is to contact the new owner. How would I get this back to Court?

[magicmart123]

Going back to the subject of the Gold Chain & Rolex.

 

The EA is not a jeweller & does not carry anything that will tell him if the hallmarks - if present - are genuine or what grade of gold it is. As for the watch then if he is not an expert he could easily have seized a genuine fake brought back from one of Turkeys markets worth £50 or so - no offence intended. Would not have been worth risking an Interpleader claim for these.

 

The 60 cars outside my house were very real.

[BazzaS]

The 60 cars outside my house were very real.

 

But not reasonably believed to be yours .....

[magicmart123]

But not reasonably believed to be yours .....

 

 

Little bit of a sigh here...not reasonably believed to be mine didn't stop them wanting to remove items that my partner had receipts to prove were hers as quite a few were bought through her eBay account with Paypal/Credit Card receipts to prove apart from the TV which came free with a mobile phone contract 7 years ago...of which she still has a copy of the original documentation relating to it

[Bailiff Advice]

Little bit of a sigh here...not reasonably believed to be mine didn't stop them wanting to remove items that my partner had receipts to prove were hers as quite a few were bought through her eBay account with Paypal/Credit Card receipts to prove apart from the TV which came free with a mobile phone contract 7 years ago...of which she still has a copy of the original documentation relating to it

 

The bailiff can remove cars that belong to you. I did ask yesterday how much both cars are roughly worth and whether they are both yours ?

 

How much was the debt at the time of the visit?

[BazzaS]

Little bit of a sigh here...not reasonably believed to be mine didn't stop them wanting to remove items that my partner had receipts to prove were hers as quite a few were bought through her eBay account with Paypal/Credit Card receipts to prove apart from the TV which came free with a mobile phone contract 7 years ago...of which she still has a copy of the original documentation relating to it

 

Little bit of a sigh indeed.

All they'd have to do is say that it was their reasonable belief, and the number of cars outside made the difference.

 

You'd struggle to show it wasn't their reasonable belief.

Just because you aren't hearing the answers you'd hoped for (bearing in mind this was a criminal court's fine, you aren't saying that they didn't follow procedure [including "further steps" notification]) doesn't mean you can take action against them.

 

Condone their behaviour? No.

However, not condoning it isn't the same as saying "Here is what they have done wrong that you can pull them up on".

[magicmart123]

The bailiff can remove cars that belong to you. I did ask yesterday how much both cars are roughly worth and whether they are both yours ?

 

How much was the debt at the time of the visit?

 

I won't use the exact figure in case Marstons are snooping but we shall call it just under £700. Both cars are mine...and whilst they refused the 2 I offered as they were pre 2008, they wanted the keys to my partner's 2002 Audi and insisted on seeing the logbook that proved it was hers???

[magicmart123]

Little bit of a sigh indeed.

All they'd have to do is say that it was their reasonable belief, and the number of cars outside made the difference.

 

You'd struggle to show it wasn't their reasonable belief.

Just because you aren't hearing the answers you'd hoped for (bearing in mind this was a criminal court's fine, you aren't saying that they didn't follow procedure [including "further steps" notification]) doesn't mean you can take action against them.

 

Condone their behaviour? No.

However, not condoning it isn't the same as saying "Here is what they have done wrong that you can pull them up on".

 

No...all answers are gratefully received and appreciated. I know these guys overstepped the mark...I'm a fool for not videoing the entire event but more of a fool for ignoring a simple letter that would've prevented all of this from happening and wouldn't have cost me a single penny. What I really want to know now is now that I have paid in full how to get this back to Court if I can prove I didn't own the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence

[unclebulgaria67]

As this relates to a DVLA imposed penalty enforced via Magistrates, the easiest way would be to forward this proof to DVLA, with an explanation of why the change of ownership was not advised to them. No doubt DVLA can then ask the courts to revoke the fine and Marstons would then be told to refund what was paid.

 

There is probably a court process, but that usually means paying fees and DVLA would get involved anyway. So the shortcut is get the proof to DVLA and see how they want to resolve this.

[magicmart123]

As this relates to a DVLA imposed penalty enforced via Magistrates, the easiest way would be to forward this proof to DVLA, with an explanation of why the change of ownership was not advised to them. No doubt DVLA can then ask the courts to revoke the fine and Marstons would then be told to refund what was paid.

 

There is probably a court process, but that usually means paying fees and DVLA would get involved anyway. So the shortcut is get the proof to DVLA and see how they want to resolve this.

 

DVLA Response;

 

Dear Mr *******

 

Thank you for your email received on 5/1/17. Your email reference number is *******.

 

If a DVLA enforcement has now been passed to the courts, you will no longer be able to appeal the penalty directly with the DVLA. If you wish to appeal you will need to follow the instructions provided on your court letter.

 

If you wish to pay an out of court settlement, you can contact the DVLA's Enforcement Centre on the telephone number provided below. You will only be able to do this if you call before the court date on the letter.

 

DVLA Enforcement Centre Tel: 0300 790 6808

Opening Hours: Mon to Fri 09:00am - 17:00pm

 

Do not reply to this email. If you wish to contact us again about this response then please use our Reply Form or copy and paste the following URL in to your browser:

https://emaildvla.direct.gov.uk/emaildvla/cegemail/dvla/en/reply_form_vehicles.html

 

When filling in the form the email reference number ******** will be required.

 

Regards

 

E Labuda

DVLA Contact Centre

[Bailiff Advice]

No...all answers are gratefully received and appreciated. I know these guys overstepped the mark...I'm a fool for not videoing the entire event but more of a fool for ignoring a simple letter that would've prevented all of this from happening and wouldn't have cost me a single penny.

 

What I really want to know now is now that I have paid in full how to get this back to Court if I can prove I didn't own the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence

 

Personally, I do not think that the enforcement agent overstepped the mark. As I have said before, when warrant enforcement gets to this very late stage, then full payment is required. If the debt was for around £800 then the bailiff would be looking to secure assets in excess of everyday value of £5,000. That is a fact.

 

Coming back to the important point which is.....how to resolve this matter and get the criminal conviction removed (and the money already paid refunded.

 

The only route is by way of a Statutory Declaration (under Section 14 of the Magistrates Courts Act). Being brutally honest, you will probably face hurdles, but I will explain.

 

A statutory declaration should be submitted within 21 days of 'becoming aware' of the conviction. In your case, this date should be from the date that you received the letter from the court (presumably the Notice of Fine/Collection Order). If you had not received that notice, then it would be from the date that you received the Further Steps Notice.

 

You can apply for a Statutory Declaration 'out of time' (past the 21 day period) but you will be required to outline the reason for the delay.

 

A little know fact about a Section 14 Statutory Declaration is that when applying for the Declaration you MUST include with your declaration, notification as to how you intend to plead.

 

If your application is submitted by post (which I never advise), then you will be notified of a new trial date by post.

 

If you make an appointment to the Magistrates Court for your Statutory Declaration to be heard, then in almost all cases, the application for the Statutory Declaration will be heard first and the case against you will be heard again on the same day and at the same hearing.

 

If you submit a 'non guilty' plea with your Statutory Declaration, then a new trial date will be set and you will be notified by post.

[magicmart123]

Personally, I do not think that the enforcement agent overstepped the mark. As I have said before, when warrant enforcement gets to this very late stage, then full payment is required. If the debt was for around £800 then the bailiff would be looking to secure assets in excess of everyday value of £5,000. That is a fact.

 

Coming back to the important point which is.....how to resolve this matter and get the criminal conviction removed (and the money already paid refunded.

 

The only route is by way of a Statutory Declaration (under Section 14 of the Magistrates Courts Act). Being brutally honest, you will probably face hurdles, but I will explain.

 

A statutory declaration should be submitted within 21 days of 'becoming aware' of the conviction. In your case, this date should be from the date that you received the letter from the court (presumably the Notice of Fine/Collection Order). If you had not received that notice, then it would be from the date that you received the Further Steps Notice.

 

You can apply for a Statutory Declaration 'out of time' (past the 21 day period) but you will be required to outline the reason for the delay.

 

A little know fact about a Section 14 Statutory Declaration is that when applying for the Declaration you MUST include with your declaration, notification as to how you intend to plead.

 

If your application is submitted by post (which I never advise), then you will be notified of a new trial date by post.

 

If you make an appointment to the Magistrates Court for your Statutory Declaration to be heard, then in almost all cases, the application for the Statutory Declaration will be heard first and the case against you will be heard again on the same day and at the same hearing.

 

If you submit a 'non guilty' plea with your Statutory Declaration, then a new trial date will be set and you will be notified by post.

 

Thank you. Do I send this Statutory Declaration to the original Court?

[magicmart123]

Also...does anyone have a Template for this Statutory Declaration as the only one I can find online wants £15 for unlimited access to all his templates

[Bailiff Advice]

Also...does anyone have a Template for this Statutory Declaration as the only one I can find online wants £15 for unlimited access to all his templates

 

You need to contact the issuing court. If you call the court and get an appointment for a Statutory Declaration, you should be given a date over the telephone. You will then have the time between now and the appointment date to get the necessary documentation from DVLA that you will require for the re-trial.

 

When you attend the court on the date given, the court will provide you with a Statutory Declaration for you to complete.

[Bailiff Advice]

Also...does anyone have a Template for this Statutory Declaration as the only one I can find online wants £15 for unlimited access to all his templates

 

There is no need to pay for such a template. Please see my latest post for more details.

[brassnecked]

UB's advice is worth a punt, as DVLA are the instigators , if no joy maybe pass the sorry tale to Watchdog, who have past form for hounding the DVLA.

[adamna]

Some good advice here:

It may assist you to know that one proviso when using force to gain entry is that the court will expect that force is only used in cases where the enforcement agent is satisfied that the debtor is inside the property and refusing to make payment.

Given the circumstances, not quite congruent with:

Personally, I do not think that the enforcement agent overstepped the mark.

[magicmart123]

UB's advice is worth a punt, as DVLA are the instigators , if no joy maybe pass the sorry tale to Watchdog, who have past form for hounding the DVLA.

 

 

Who is UB?

[magicmart123]

Some good advice here:

Originally Posted by Bailiff Advice

It may assist you to know that one proviso when using force to gain entry is that the court will expect that force is only used in cases where the enforcement agent is satisfied that the debtor is inside the property and refusing to make payment.

Given the circumstances, not quite congruent with:

Originally Posted by Bailiff Advice

Personally, I do not think that the enforcement agent overstepped the mark.

 

 

I was outside the house not inside...was trying to negotiate with them then I hear my partner screaming in terror. If the debtor is outside the house and not refusing payment then I do believe there was wrongdoing done on the part of the EAs