Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm removing two posts here – one because it refers to "… All from the same ethnic background" and the second one referring to the fact that the customer was Spanish. The first, particularly by king12345 has a strong racist tone about it and is completely unwelcome here.  king1 2345 has been here long enough and knows very well that this is not what we do. ==============================================================================   In terms of the building and insurance problem, it certainly sounds if you are being treated very badly and we would be very happy to help. Unfortunately I find your story is rather unclear – probably because there is a lot of narrative and I'd be grateful if you could clarify your story and in particular breaking down the insurance job and the rest including giving their values. Do you know if the insurance money has been paid to the customer or is the insurance company simply waiting for some kind of approval. You say that the insurance company has signed the job off and so this suggests to me that they are satisfied but what worries me is that they may already have paid the money to the customer who is merely withholding it from you rather than authorising the direct payment of the insurance money to you. Your story needs substantial clarification please. Finally, does your customer own the property? If you are not sure then you should consult the land registry website to ascertain the owner of the property
    • update:  Tried with new micro filter and still no difference in the speeds.  Called plusnet and they sent this 🤪 although looks like there was interference in the line which i never picked up   
    • Hi dx100uk   He is the information you asked for.   OC: Capital One    Type of debt: Credit Card    When taken out: 29/10/2017   Current owner: Capital One    Defaulted date: Hasn’t Defaulted    Outstanding sum: £156.52   ———————————————————————   OC: Vanquis   Type of debt: Credit Card    When taken out: 21/05/2018   Current owner: Vanquis   Defaulted date: 31/05/2019   Outstanding sum: £355.00   ———————————————————————   OC: Ocean    Type of debt: Credit Card    When taken out: 09/09/2018   Current owner: Ocean   Defaulted date: 07/06/2019   Outstanding sum: £318.00   ———————————————————————   OC: Instant Cash Loans T/A Payday Express   Type of debt: Payday Loan   When taken out: 22/01/2014   Current owner: Instant Cash Loans T/A Payday Express   Defaulted date: 04/06/2014   Outstanding sum: £492.00   ———————————————————————   OC: NatWest   Type of debt: Current Account    When taken out: 05/08/2003   Current owner: NatWest   Defaulted date: 30/04/2016   Outstanding sum: £468.00   ———————————————————————   OC: British Gas   Type of debt: Utility Gas Account   When taken out: 01/08/2015   Current owner: British Gas   Defaulted date: 06/09/2018   Outstanding sum: £712.00   ———————————————————————   OC: British Gas   Type of debt: Utility Electric Account   When taken out: 01/08/2015   Current owner: British Gas   Defaulted date: 06/09/2018   Outstanding sum: £819.00
    • Thanks DX re counterclaim. Just to clarify regarding witness should I just put one on the N180 and at court just take a witness statement from partner?  
    • I am hoping someone can advise me regarding my salary. I work as an emergency response driver for a private medical transport company. I work 6 x 24 hour shifts on call(total of 144 hrs) followed by 2 rest days(48 hrs). I work from my home address, with a company vehicle parked outside. During my six on call shifts, I must be available to respond to any task given to me (by phone-call) within a certain time. As you can imagine, while on call I am very limited to what activities I can take part in. Due to the nature of my role and the need to respond within 30 minutes to 90 minutes I am somewhat tied to my home. Obviously I cannot consume alcohol, go for family meals, go shopping etc. Even while attending hospital appointments, popping to the shop I must wear my uniform, take the vehicle with me and be contactable and ready to respond. It has been brought to my attention that on call time is now classed as working time if you must be at the disposal of your employer during that on call time.   Is that correct and if so, should I be paid at least the minimum wage while on call. I am currently paid an annual salary of £22,000 for being on duty an average of 6,570 hours per year which would put my hourly rate at well below the minimum( not including annual leave).   Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
  • Our picks

Recommended Posts

To cut a long story short a bailiff keeps pursuing me for debt I do not owe.

The bailiff has been informed numerous times in writing about this and yet this continues.

 

I have retained a solicitor and the solicitor has on my behalf contacted the bailiff too.

One reason for having to use a solicitor is I am deaf and cannot easily deal with the bailiff myself.

Despite having been notified I am deaf they have failed to make any adjustments at all.

 

The solicitor has spoken to the bailiff on the phone, and written to the bailiff twice now demanding that they fix their records.

They have been provided with evidence I am the sole occupier of the address and that the debtor fraudulently registered the debt to this address.

 

The bailiff has however failed to respond in writing but has provided my solicitor with read receipts for the emails.

Additionally the bailiff was contacted by the old landlord of the Defendant who confirmed the debtor lived at their address, not mine.

 

Yesterday they sent another enforcement agent round who attempted to gain access and left a handwritten note demanding I deal with this within 24 hours. 

 

What do people suggest?

I'm particularly interested in breaches of the Equalities Act and harassment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the debt is nothing to do with you.

so they cant force entry 

ignore them.

 

 


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I don't want to ignore them. I want them to stop.  I want to sue them, and will do so.

 

I have no idea what the debt refers to. All I know is the debtor falsely registered himself as living at this address - his neighbouring address and then moved out. 

 

Edited by schwepppes33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailiffs, not HCEO, working on behalf of the council to collect a debt for something but I have no idea what.  

 

I cannot say which, not least as they may be reading. 

So far for the Claim we have 

"Article 5(1)(d) of the GDPR states that

“1. Personal data shall be:

(d) accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date; every reasonable step must be taken to ensure that personal data that are inaccurate, having regard to the purposes for which they are processed, are erased or rectified without delay (‘accuracy’)”

·        The Defendant has failed to ensure that the personal data it holds concerning the Claimant and his residence at the Address are accurate.

·        Furthermore despite being repeatedly informed by the Claimant that the personal data held by the Defendant i) was inaccurate and ii) asking that this inaccurate data be rectified the Defendant appears to have taken no steps at all to rectify the data. This occurred despite the Claimant specifically informing the Defendant that the Defendant’s actions taken in reliance on the inaccurate data was causing the Claimant distress and anxiety.

·        Article 82 (1) of the GDPR states that :

Any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of an infringement of the GDPR shall have the right to receive compensation from the controller or the processor for the damage suffered.”

 Furthermore Recital 146 of the GDPR says that data subjects should receive

"full and effective compensation for the damage they have suffered". These provisions of the GDPR are given effect in English law by virtue of sections 168 and 180 of DPA18.

·        In the case of Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 311 the Court of Appeal noted, in the majority of cases the type of loss suffered in a breach of privacy and data rights is one of moral damage, or distress, rather than identifiable pecuniary loss and that it was appropriate and right that damages be awarded where distress and anxiety can attributed to a breach of an individual’s rights under the GDPR.

The Notifying Email stated, inter alia, that: “In event that BAILIFF contact the Address again in respect TO DEBTOR, causing yet further harass (sic) and distress to SCHWEPPES33, he will take legal action against your organisation including exercising his rights as a data subject under the GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. SCHWEPPES33 has no desire to do this, however having repeatedly informed you and LOCAL COUNCIL that DEBTOR does not live at the Address and yet he continues to be contacted in relation to these matters.” "

My solicitor however specialises in GDPR, and we are interested in basic stuff about harassment and the experiences of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they wont be stop hiding details.

 

dx

 


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" I cannot say which, not least as they may be reading. "

 

Pity...if we knew who... we could probably advise a solution on how we have dealt with them in the past and what their next move is likely to be.Possibly pull a few string for you.

 

" My solicitor however specialises in GDPR, and we are interested in basic stuff about harassment and the experiences of others."

 

Wrong type of solicitor...enforcement has no connection to GDPR

 

Andy

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bailiff is not responsible for the warrant he enforces, it is the creditor or the court you need to confront. As long as the power to enforce,  as issued through the correct  legal process is sent to the Bailiff, he  can enforce.

You say you do not owe, you therefore must find out why someone has shown differently. There are different processes, depending on the kind of debt.

For Bailiff Enforcement Law you need to look at the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act and associated instruments. 


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might have difficulty suing the bailiffs as Dodgeball infers. They are acting under the instructions of the Court and they must therefore carry out those instructions.  It would seem more realistic that the Council are the ones at fault by providing the Court [and then the  bailiffs] with an incorrect address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is incorrect.

The code of practice of the UK debt collection trade body says members should "take prompt steps to correct data, both internally and with credit reference agencies, where it is aware that the data is inaccurate or out of date."

 

Although they have been given the address details by the original creditor and initially pursued that debt in good faith based on this information, they have been repeatedly informed it is incorrect. They have been informed by me, by the fraudster's landlord, by the post office, and by solicitor on multiple occasions. 

 

What is initially an attempt to collect a debt in good faith ceases to be when notified otherwise.

Imagine if a bailiff visits, and then your solicitor contacts the bailiff, sends evidence that the debtor does not and has never lived here and used it fraudulently, and the exact same bailiff a month later turns up again.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thats for debt collection agencies {DCA's] not bailiffs.

they are not even remotely the same.

 

dx

 


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, schwepppes33 said:

This is incorrect.

The code of practice of the UK debt collection trade body says members should "take prompt steps to correct data, both internally and with credit reference agencies, where it is aware that the data is inaccurate or out of date." Although they have been given the address details by the original creditor and initially pursued that debt in good faith based on this information, they have been repeatedly informed it is incorrect. They have been informed by me, by the fraudster's landlord, by the post office, and by solicitor on multiple occasions. 

 

What is initially an attempt to collect a debt in good faith ceases to be when notified otherwise. Imagine if a bailiff visits, "and then your solicitor contacts the bailiff, sends evidence that the debtor does not and has never lived here and used it fraudulently, and the exact same bailiff a month later turns up again.

It is not for a  bailiff to "correct" a warrant from the court, in fact it would be an offence for him to do so. A bailiff cannot be held liable for a defective writ or warrant in any case..

When you find your detriment, complain to the accuser. He should then call off the enforcement.

My advice to you, if you really want any, is to forget about the law you think you understand and just look at how you have been wronged.  If it is real complain to the person demanding payment. When you find your detriment, complain to the accuser. He should then call off the enforcement.

Edited by Dodgeball

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thanks for your help everyone... whilst I have a legal team working for one of the big four running this obviously a bunch of people on an internet board are right, and award winning lawyers are wrong. 

 

The company is both a debt collection agency and a bailiff.

 

Enforcement agencies have obligations to act in accordance with prevailing legislation, and in a professional, ethical and proportionate manner. This includes a specific requirement to comply with Data Protection legislation (see above).

 

The enforcement agency has ignored a SAR made by my solicitor on my behalf, including an attempt to get the camera footage from previous visits where they were informed the debtor did not live here.

 

CIVEA guidelines are clear that agents are required to check information is correct. CIVEA guidelines state clearly that upon the proof being given the debtor does not live at this address, then the case will be referred back to the creditor so that the records can be updated. Despite requests from my solicitor we have not been provided with any evidence that this this has happened. Proof of residence provided has been to the criteria set by CIVEA.

Enforcement agencies must operate a comprehensive complaints procedure and acknowledge within ten days. CIVEA time frames apply too. This has been broken. The enforcement agency also told my solicitor they would reply within seven days and assured her over the telephone that the records would be corrected. They have failed to reply.

Enforcement agencies must make available details of complaints procedures. This has not happened.

Enforcement agencies must recognise their role in ensuring vulnerable people are protected. No advice or assistance has been given regards to this. As I am legally deaf I have problems with understanding and speaking English.

 



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go ahead and try and sue them if its playing out like you said. I hope youre ready to possibly pay out tens of thousands of pounds to the bailiffs, as well as pay your own legal costs. When you could have sorted this cheaply and quickly.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CIVEA has a code of good conduct that is mandatory for all its members. The complaint process system is mandatory. The firm is legally required to have a private complaint system and resolve it, and has not.

The creditor has been notified over a dozen times that its information is wrong. The creditor knows the information is wrong as its own records show me to be the sole resident of the address. It continues to ignore this and has repeatedly violated court procedure in applying for warrants where it knows the debtor does not live.

We are suing them separately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we know what numpties have been advising this gentleman, 

 

I take it you have already sent the proof of your none residence to the creditor? There is of course nothing to stop you copying this to the bailiff if you wish.

 

The kind of claim you refer to does not exist in this context, if your "solicitor" says it does. Then I should request proof of any such action In is context, followed by sight of his diploma.

Civea says no such thing incidentally.

I get the feeling you have been told this body (CIVEA)represents the public? It does not, it is a document prepared and used by the bailiff industry, it also has no legal standing, guidance only.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"

I take it you have already sent the proof of your none residence to the creditor? There is of course nothing to stop you copying this to the bailiff if you wish."

 

Yes! More to the point the creditor is the local council and knows I live alone because I pay council tax and get a single person discount. I am the only person here on the electoral roll. They know too that the debtor has never lived at this address. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do know incidentally that a Bailiff, or AE(enforcement Agent) can enforce wherever you may live or carry out your employment, he is not restricted to the address on the writ/warrant.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, schwepppes33 said:

"

I take it you have already sent the proof of your none residence to the creditor? There is of course nothing to stop you copying this to the bailiff if you wish."

 

Yes! More to the point the creditor is the local council and knows I live alone because I pay council tax and get a single person discount. I am the only person here on the electoral roll. They know too that the debtor has never lived at this address. 

 

Then, if you have gone through the councils complaints procedure you need to escalate it to the Ombudsman. 

Now we are talking sense, have you asked the authority to hold enforcement until the matter is resolved?

Are the Bailiffs aware that the matter is the subject of an ongoing complain?.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Well thanks for your help everyone... whilst I have a legal team working for one of the big four running this obviously a bunch of people on an internet board are right, and award winning lawyers are wrong. 

Love to know which lawyers they are, as for what youre saying, they certainly wont be winning any awards, infact theyd get a  pretty bad reputation.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dodgeball said:

You do know incidentally that a Bailiff, or AE(enforcement Agent) can enforce wherever you may live or carry out your employment, he is not restricted to the address on the writ/warrant.

I know because I actually use them myself ... 

I know too that the firm I use actually refuse to enforce where the debtor no longer is. They get evidence of it, and then that is that.

Page 5 of the CIVEA guidelines refers specifically to the Data Protection Act.

CIVEA guidelines also say that creditors must not issue an instruction knowing the debtor is not at an address. The creditor has done so.

What we are left with is the creditor wrongly seeking to enforce judgments knowing the debtor is not at the address, and the bailiff repeatedly seeking to enforcement judgments knowing the debtor is not at the address. The council has actually ignored the complaints procedure. 

We have gone one better and reported both to the ICO. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, lets see all successful actions by the ICO in the bailiff arena. Despite what you say, I recognise the line oif thought and also the person who advises other people to take action under these false ideas. There are victims all over the internet. 

 

It is nothing to me what you do, but nevertheless, what would it cost you to check up on these claims, and these individuals.

 

Google is our friend sometimes.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GDPR is new law so there won't be many... I'm confident it will hold. The Code of Conduct stresses that the statutory obligations outweigh other things. 

The bailiff has a statutory obligation to me but it does not have a statutory obligation to collect the debt. In fact it can refuse to do so citing the CIVEA standards or simply pointing out that the debtor does not live there.  MOJ guidelines stress that they must "act within the law at all times, including all defined legislation... and comply with Data Protection legislation". 

The MOJ published the CIVEA code which specifically says "Before seeking access to premises an enforcement agent should ensure, where possible, the debtor is still resident at that property."  It's right there in the CIVEA Code of Conduct and Good Practice Guide which the MOJ says is the minimum acceptable standard. 

What people here are missing is this man owes the debt, he does not live at this address. It is a point of data accuracy, and one that the CIVEA code explicitly references. It is not about bailiff powers or anything else but about the statutory duty that the bailiff owes to me.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really might be helpful to you if you would reveal the name of the bailiff company. If you don't want to put it up in public then you could email it to us at our admin email address. We will keep it confidential that he may find a way of helping you.

However, it will not do you any harm at all to identify the bailiff company it can only help and I really have no idea why you are being so protective of them


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...