My council tax debts over the years

[leetwin]

Not sure about that. There are 3 debts, and therefore he is allowed to charge for 2 visits per debt per year if he doesn't make a levy.

 

He is only allowed to make one charge per visit, so to charge for 6 visits and 3 levys he would have had to have attended your property 9 times.

No bailiff is going to bother doing that - they're too lazy.

 

So you challenge their fees, ask them to justify them - make a Subject Access Request separately. Make sure you've amended any previous posts if it's necessary. Use a standard letter always and get all your documents sorted out so you're ready for them.

 

 

They've actually been to my house 4 times before but each time it said on the letter they left that it was for debt san-t 19722 and not the other debts which he's listed as San-t 19723 and san-t 19724 so surely they can't suddenly claim that when they turned up it was for another debt anyway they've already shot thereselves in the foot

 

Also does it have to be the same bailliff as i've had different bailliffs for the 1st 3 visits and each one put a different amount on what he left

[djrichie_t]

Remember on the log book it says 'The registered keeper is not necessarily the legal owner'

 

I would get a friend to write a letter claiming the car is their property even though you are the registered keeper

[leetwin]

Remember on the log book it says 'The registered keeper is not necessarily the legal owner'

 

I would get a friend to write a letter claiming the car is their property even though you are the registered keeper

 

As a matter of fact it was the father in law who actually paid for the car originaly so the bloke who sold it could confirm that anyway

[leetwin]

Can someone please try and provide me with a subject access request letter that I can ammend and send and some idea of a basic letter that I can send to query they're fee's.. I also need to send one to the council too...

many thanks

[chris600uk]

does it have to be the same bailliff as i've had different bailliffs for the 1st 3 visits and each one put a different amount on what he left

 

 

no

[leetwin]

Hi would like to give people an update on this action and ask some advice again... Basically at the end of January I paid the council direct all the council tax I owed them but I never paid B & S any of they're fee's as I sent them a letter asking them to look again at they're fee's. They did reply to me about this saying they're fee's were believed to be legal and as such they wouldn't reduce they're fee's and that according to law they're fee's were now part of the liabilty orders. They then gave me till 11th February to pay them or they were coming back for the car basically.. I decided to call they're bluff and they never showed then last week I recieved a letter saying that as I hadn't paid they were now advertising my goods for sale and I now had until the 11th March to pay.. Well today was the deadline and even though I am in a position to pay I was wondering what is the best course of action for me now and do you reckon its just scaremongering letters from them?? Should I-

 

A- Pay them and pursue the fee's back through a small claims court?

B- Call they're bluff again and hope they go away?

c- Is they're another course of action I can take such as complaining to the courts about all individual baillifs

and also the firm for agreeing with the bailiffs illegal fee's?

 

The major problem I have is that I cannot do without my car as my son has ADHD and therefore cannot go to the same school as my other children so we have to travel quite some distance on the school runs and therefore if it comes to it I would begrudgingly pay then try and pursue it later. But I have this feeling that they are just scaremongering and if they was coming to my property then why didnt they turn up in Feb when they threatened it.... I have also looked on they're website and cannot see my car advertised as they said it was gonna be.. What do people think and what is my best course of action??

Any help would be much appreciated

 

ps- I would also like to add that according to the online payments page for the council it states that I owe them nothing so they haven't paid B & S anything as if Bristows letters were right then surely they should have had they're fee's first out of what I paid the council. Also is there anyway that I can get it in writing that the liability orders have been satisfied as that would be proof if they do turn up and I phone the police

Edited March 12, 2009 by leetwin

[chris600uk]

They did reply to me about this saying they're fee's were believed to be legal and as such they wouldn't reduce they're fee's and that according to law they're fee's were now part of the liabilty orders.

 

Very interesting, you should really write back and ask them to quote the legal text that supports that statement.

 

 

Although I suspect that it's either bs or they are confused about the law themselves.

 

See here:

The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992

 

You see, if they don't levy S45s3 says that once the amount on the liability order is paid including charges up to that point the levy can't go ahead.

 

But if they do levy then S45s4 says that charges up to that point are included, because the bailiff has seized goods, their fees are taken care of either by the sale of the goods, or the debtor paying the bill and the bailiffs fees to release the goods.

 

Nowhere in that section does it mention bailiff fees .

 

A Liability Order is made by a Magistrates Court - and the order doesn't include Bailiff fees.

 

Most people won't have read the Act, and I suspect that's what your bailiffs are relying upon.

 

Hope that's clearer........

[chris600uk]

A- Pay them and pursue the fee's back through a small claims court?

 

I wouldn't do that

 

 

B- Call they're bluff again and hope they go away?

 

No, I would directly challenge them in writing if they are wrong because that's the only way to keep them honest. First I'd want to establish beyond any doubt that what I was saying was right - which is quite correctly the point of your post.

 

c- Is they're another course of action I can take such as complaining to the courts about all individual baillifs

and also the firm for agreeing with the bailiffs illegal fee's?

 

 

First of all I would challenge what they've said in writing - and warn them that if they don't stop misrepresenting their powers and attempting to charge excessive fees you will complain to the court about individual bailiffs. (form 4 complaint) and if necessary about the bailiff company (section 46 complaint).

There is the other stuff, like harrassment, and the possibility that their actions may be considered fraudulent (Fraud Act 2006).

 

 

according to the online payments page for the council it states that I owe them nothing so they haven't paid B & S anything as if Bristows letters were right then surely they should have had they're fee's first out of what I paid the council.

 

Funny you should say that; although the council are contractually obliged to pass accounts to the bailiffs, once the liability order is settled - before any lawful levy is made - the bailiffs have no right to pursue any fees.

The council has no obligation to give the bailiffs any money at all.

[tomtubby]

In the first instance bailiff fees are deducted FIRST with the remainder being paid to the council. That is why if payment is made to the council for just the liability order and a bailiff has visited, the Liability Order will not have been settled as the bailiff co fees MUST be paid first.

 

In your case, B & S know that although these Liability Orders are individual orders, they are similar to individual parking tickets and this has been debated in court on many occasions where it has been made CLEAR that a bailiff CANNOT charge multiple charges for enforcing more that one court order at the same time. In addition, goods can only be levied upon ONCE.

 

I would suggest paying a levy fee and a toal amount of £42.50 for 2 visits. On the matter of the Head H Fee (Redemption of goods) of £24.50...have they yet confirmed under which statutory right they can charge this ?

 

Finally, put EVERYTHING IN WRITING.

[leetwin]

I wouldn't do that

 

 

 

 

No, I would directly challenge them in writing if they are wrong because that's the only way to keep them honest. First I'd want to establish beyond any doubt that what I was saying was right - which is quite correctly the point of your post.

 

 

 

 

First of all I would challenge what they've said in writing - and warn them that if they don't stop misrepresenting their powers and attempting to charge excessive fees you will complain to the court about individual bailiffs. (form 4 complaint) and if necessary about the bailiff company (section 46 complaint).

There is the other stuff, like harrassment, and the possibility that their actions may be considered fraudulent (Fraud Act 2006).

 

 

 

 

Funny you should say that; although the council are contractually obliged to pass accounts to the bailiffs, once the liability order is settled - before any lawful levy is made - the bailiffs have no right to pursue any fees.

The council has no obligation to give the bailiffs any money at all.

 

Cheers Chris I thought it was strange that they didnt turn up last month after there threats (in fact I suspected as much thats why I never paid)... I have already written to them once regarding these fee's though so is there any template on here I could use to make cut and paste to them... Also should I mention in the letter that I am considering complaining to the courts on a form 4 just to show I have a bit of knowledge of things. They even had the cheek to quote bits of the council tax legislation to justify there charges they quoted

" (3) If, before any goods are seized, the appropriate amount (including charges arising up to the time of the payment or tender) is paid or tendered to the authority, the authority shall accept the amount and the levy shall not be proceeded with"

This was to justify that I still owed them there charges and they're costs were part of them. Luckily yourself had already put me right on this matter... Cheeky gits

[leetwin]

In the first instance bailiff fees are deducted FIRST with the remainder being paid to the council. That is why if payment is made to the council for just the liability order and a bailiff has visited, the Liability Order will not have been settled as the bailiff co fees MUST be paid first.

 

In your case, B & S know that although these Liability Orders are individual orders, they are similar to individual parking tickets and this has been debated in court on many occasions where it has been made CLEAR that a bailiff CANNOT charge multiple charges for enforcing more that one court order at the same time. In addition, goods can only be levied upon ONCE.

 

I would suggest paying a levy fee and a toal amount of £42.50 for 2 visits. On the matter of the Head H Fee (Redemption of goods) of £24.50...have they yet confirmed under which statutory right they can charge this ?

 

Finally, put EVERYTHING IN WRITING.

 

TOMTUBBY

 

So what you are saying is that if I pay them for one levy and £42.50 for liabilty order SAN-T 107299 then legally they cant try and claim back any of the other fee's??? What should I also put in the letter I send with the cheque????

 

 

With regards to the redemption fee they stated as quoted by them that "the redemption fee is also made under schedule 5 at the time of the levy and is payable for the release of the goods back to your control once payment of the balance is made"

 

Dont know if this is right???

 

I also have a printed statement for each of the liability orders which clearly state that fee's were applied on the same dates ie-6/11/08, 21/11/08 and the levy on each was 16/1/09 as was the redemption fee

 

They also state on the letter that they sent that in there words-

"under the terms of the liability order and council tax (administration & enforcement) Regulations 1992 (as amended) you are liable to pay both Council Taxand costs incurred by both the Local Authority and ourselves. Each Liability order is subject to the charges detailed in Schedule 5 of the regulations."

 

Another thing I was wondering is if the letters that they left for each visit state that it was for liability order san-t 107299 then surely even if it was legal to charge each one they can't suddenly claim that these visits were for seperate liability orders and also if they got this wrong then surely they have written down the wrong amount owed for each visit so they are in theory trying to defraud me... Just a thought I may be wrong

Edited March 12, 2009 by leetwin

[hallowitch]

don't know if this will be of any help to you but in in my daughters case which was much the same she had 2 accounts sent to bailiffs and there charges for visits on both accounts were added on same day they also levied both accounts on same day and put the same goods on both Levy's

we wrote to the bailiff who said there charges were correct

we then wrote to the council after a few phone calls from the council to the bailiff and my daughter they removed all charges from second account tomtubby is the best bailiffs advice you can get and chris600uk is not to far at the back of him

good luck and don't give up

[chris600uk]

TOMTUBBY

 

So what you are saying is that if I pay them for one levy and £42.50 for liabilty order SAN-T 107299 then legally they cant try and claim back any of the other fee's???

 

That's right tt is saying exactly that. Although they may have an attempt if they're feeling lucky

 

With regards to the redemption fee they stated as quoted by them that "the redemption fee is also made under schedule 5 at the time of the levy and is payable for the release of the goods back to your control once payment of the balance is made"

 

Dont know if this is right???

 

Council tax (administration and enforcement) regulations act 1992 section 45 subsection 4

 

Although the bailiff cannot vary the Liability Order which does not include his fees and is therefore IMHO all that you are legally obliged to pay, once he has seized goods lawfully they are his property, and he is entitled to hold them (ie in wpa) until you either pay the required amount to release them or he sells them.

 

I also have a printed statement for each of the liability orders which clearly state that fee's were applied on the same dates ie-6/11/08, 21/11/08 and the levy on each was 16/1/09 as was the redemption fee

 

tt has already explained that case law precedents allow you to dispute those charges, they know perfectly well that they cannot make multiple charges on one visit - because they are unfairly increasing the debt thereby reducing the debtors ability to repay the original debt, particularly because it is the bailiffs practice to take their fees first and pay the council afterwards.

Notice I said "practice", that's not their right.

 

 

They also state on the letter that they sent that in there words-

"under the terms of the liability order and council tax (administration & enforcement) Regulations 1992 (as amended) you are liable to pay both Council Taxand costs incurred by both the Local Authority and ourselves.

 

They should be on CBeebies Storymaker! Have a read of Section 45 subsection 3 yourself and I defy you to find bailiffs fees mentioned anywhere in that paragraph.

The terms of the Liability Order are set out in the Liability Order which is an order made by the Magistrates Court - maybe in bulk, but a court order nevertheless - no mere bailiff may alter it, only the court can do that.

The costs incurred by the local authority are those made public each year or so, and refer to the cost of applying for the Liability Order.

 

 

Another thing I was wondering is if the letters that they left for each visit state that it was for liability order san-t 107299 then surely even if it was legal to charge each one they can't suddenly claim that these visits were for seperate liability orders and also if they got this wrong then surely they have written down the wrong amount owed for each visit so they are in theory trying to defraud me... Just a thought I may be wrong

 

Not in theory at all...................., they really are trying to defraud you and it usually works.

That's why the bailiff industry was worth 6 Billion last year - imagine that! Every debt in the UK has been increased in total by £6,000,000. And the council tax are only chasing 1% in arrears of all CT collected each year.

 

 

You have to be very persistent and pursue them for EACH separate mistake/error/fraud like a terrier stalking a rat - keeping meticulous records and carefully researching each letter you send, and sending a scanned email copy of each letter to the council tax department, the head of the council tax department, your councillor and your MP.

[leetwin]

Hi folks, Just tp let you know I haven't had time to write to B & S yet but i've got another query as I had my council tax bill today for this year and there is no mention of any arrears at all which is what I was wondering if the arrears aren't (ie-B & S's fee's) on the bill then surely that means that I haven't got any arrears so B & S's fee's can't be legal or surely the council would have added it onto this years bill like they did last year when I still had 2 liability orders outstanding they were added onto the bill..

[leetwin]

Hi with regards to this matter i've just had a visit from a van team with regards to removing my vehicle which wasn't at my property luckily... Anyway they have now charged an extra £90 on top of the fee's they already put on.. What I would now like to know is how do I now halt them from taking the car.. The bailliff reckons I now have 5 days to contact B & S with an offer of payment or they will be back and put extra charges on... Am I now best to put in my complaints about themselves and they're bailliffs or phone them up explaining that they're wrong AGAIN as they do not seem to care if they're in the wrong they just do as they please.... What should I do??

[Voxter]

they levied before you paid the council, so they arent going away.

[leetwin]

they levied before you paid the council, so they arent going away.

 

I wasn't saying they was going away but I know there charges are incorrect and will only pay what they are entitled too nothing more... Why should they be allowed to extort extra cash out of me???

[dx100uk]

merged all the yearly threads

 

dx