Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm not sure what the form is – would your new suppliers normally have contacted the old supplier to say that there was a change? If you could show that spark should have known that they were no longer dealing with the account holder at the time that they apply for the warrant, then it seems to me that they do bear some culpability. By the way one of the site team mentioned that at some point Marston would contact me. I'm afraid that's not the way it works. I've now referred the matter to Marston and they may well decide to contact you – the Original Poster for more information or simply to inform you that in the circumstances that there is nothing that they are able to do. I'm afraid it's out of my hands and I never asked for or ever receive any feedback about the references I make to them at this level
    • I've forwarded the details of this to Marston – but I'm not sure that there is much that can be done in the circumstances. If the energy company had been informed – or if they had reason to know that their customer was no longer at the address then of course obtaining the warrant was outrageous. As it is, it would seem that the previous tenant hadn't informed them and had simply done a runner – and unfortunately you have taken no action to return any mail to the sender so as far as I gather, there is no reason for the energy company to have known what has happened. Please note that I haven't really looked through this thread very carefully since I originally posted so are not au fait/can't remember all of the details – but that is my sketchy understanding. If this is the case then, although of course something needs to be sorted out – I have to say that it would have been helpful if you had either opened the mail or returned it. I know that you say that you have never had to do this in the past – but maybe it would be good practice in the future. It could be that in the past you have simply been lucky. You are talking about clearing the balance of some outstanding debt which belongs to somebody else? This seems to be extraordinary to me – but then I'm afraid I haven't been following the thread very closely  
    • So here is where things stand at the moment (sorry it's a very long post!):   I moved into this property in November.  I contacted both my electric and gas suppliers to change address and get my accounts moved over.   Electric - I closed my old account from my previous address, opened a new account for this address, set up a direct debit and requested they become the supplier.  The only thing that was outstanding on the account was a discussion about tariffs.  On 21st November they tried to call me but I didn't answer (judging from the time I was probably driving home from work).  I received a payment from them at the end of November from my previous account (which I clearly didn't check as I thought it was money going out for my direct debit).  I incorrectly assumed the call was about tariffs, which tbh, I'm not really fussed about. Their request to become the supplier was rejected but they didn't follow up on it or try to contact me again.  So I, like an idiot, thought it was all sorted out.  It's only now that I've been through my account that I realise they haven't been taking payments. I have spoken to them since Friday and the above is what they have told me has happened.   Gas - I closed my old account and have been trying to get a new account opened since November.  I have had several discussions with them re: the change request being rejected and they didn't know why it was being rejected but to leave it with them.  They told me at the beginning of this month it would be done by the 21st January.  During this phone call they said I could call the current supplier to make sure it goes smoothly but that it wasn't essential as they expected it to be completed by the 21st.  Last week they sent me a final demand for my previous address.  I contacted them to raise a complaint as I thought they were at fault, as I expected it to have been changed as per the above.   I spoke to them on Saturday and have sorted out my final bill and they have advised me to open accounts with the current supplier, Spark, clear them and then I can switch. Interestingly they also told me that Spark went bust in 2018 and it is a company called Ovo who are on the national database as the gas supplier.   Spark - This is the company who changed the meters on Friday.  I have two letters (one for gas, one for electric) that were left with the smart meter they had plugged in in the kitchen, both addressed to the previous tenant.  I obviously did open these on Friday.  Both letters state that they had changed the meters to prepayment meters.  There are several boxes that list current debt, amount of credit on meters etc none of which are filled in.  They also state that a booklet has been left explaining how the smart meter works.  There was no booklet. When I contacted them on Friday they told me that I was in fact on credit meters (I don't know if they changed this remotely when they realised I wasn't the person with the debt).  They also told me they had every right to enter the property and aren't able to check every time who the current occupant is and I should have told them I'd moved in.  I was told that someone would call me at 1pm on Saturday to discuss my complaint, thus far no one has called me.   I spoke with citizen's advice yesterday who really weren't much help tbh.  They said I should have contacted the current supplier when I moved in and provided a copy of my tenancy agreement.  I've moved A LOT over the years and have never had to do this.  I have checked several energy supplier websites and they all state to switch to them or move home simply to contact them and they will basically do the rest, not one of them states that you need to call the current supplier... obviously, on reflection I really wish I had!   My letting agent/landlord have requested that I take any post for the previous tenant to them and they will return it.  They also want confirmation of what type of meter (prepayment or credit) is now in the house.  The locks were changed when I moved in so only myself, the letting agent and the landlord have a key.  None of us let them in on Friday.     My next step is to open accounts with Spark/Ovo, clear the balances since November and then change suppliers.    All of the above have advised me to follow Spark's complaint procedure which I will do but as I said above they haven't contacted me so far re: the complaint I made on Friday.   Should I also contact Marston's to raise a complaint with them?   Whilst in all of this I do appreciate I could have done a fair bit to have made my life easier and probably prevented this happening (hindsight is wonderful!) my main complaint is that neither Spark nor Marston's felt they needed to perform a very simple check and see who actually lives in the property before breaking in.  I cannot for the life of me see how this is acceptable or legal.  Whilst they had the legal right and a warrant to enter the previous tenant's property as far as I am concerned they had no right to enter mine.    
    • I am in the process of looking on the land registry and it's showing on there alongside Lloyds bank,am going to look at deeds aswell  
    • Just a note that these appeal Trade Associations, are bodies these fleecers belong to so they are allowed to operate, appeals almost always fail, and by appealing important protections under POFA are lost as the appeal almost always identifies the driver.  Irrelevant in your case as you own the space, and the PPC have no rights in law over it.  POPLA appeal could also fail as POPLA wouldn't look at primacy of contract and the fact you own the space so can tell the PPC to Foxtrot Oscar. Whole Private Parking Industry is a money machine for unscrupulous ex cowboy clampers.
  • Our picks

baz4iow

HCE HCEO Certas energy CCJ - debt recovery letter

Recommended Posts

Hi,

I’ve recently received a letter from a high court enforcement company regarding an old energy debt.

I’ve spoken with the company regarding the debt but would like some advice on the following as I’m confused.

Firstly

- The letter states that they are to claim the debt in full, if the debt cannot be paid in full then a payment arrange can be made.

 

On the reverse it also states (and I’ve asked and received email confirmation) that they will only enter into an arrangement once an Agent has visited the property

“In order to establish for himself whether payment in full can or cannot be made.

If satisfied payment in full cannot be made, he would discuss an arrangement and ask you to enter in to controlled goods agreement.”

Obviously this will increase the debt and they will get a fee, Is this right? 

Secondly - They compliance fee has had VAT added to it. From what I have seen this is a fixed fee??

Lastly - I have an email from the Creditor to confirm they are happy to proceed with a payment arrange that I’ve proposed so long as it’s paid via the HCE company.

As they work on behalf of the creditor surely the have to follow their instruction? 

Any my advice would be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the energy supplier have a CCJ for this, as it looks like they are coming out to Enforce and Take control of your goods?

 

Moved to Bailiffs and Enforcement Industry Forum, as you will get better advice there.


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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have a CCJ for it for the debt. I’m trying to address the debt but want to avoid their attendance fee (which is just racketeering to me). I’m assuming that I do not have to allow entry to the property? We also have a vulnerable disabled (learning difficulties) living within the property. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make sure all doors are locked, and they cannot force entry, move any motor vehicles away.  Who was the debt to and how much was it, what is the total the HCEO is asking for at the moment?

 

Others will be along soon to help you explore options.


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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Original debt was to Certas energy for £880 and is now £1038 so they are asking for the full amount

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did you know that Certas energy had gotten a CCJ against you?

tell us the history of the debt please

 

the fees etc will be correct as its above £600 HCEO can be used and there are no fixed fees like court bailiffs 

no you do not invite them in, and no you dont 'have' to prove you can afford what you say.

the 'meeting' is a rouse to gain extra seizure of goods powers.

 


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was aware that Certas had obtained a CCJ against me, however at the time I was working away so couldn’t represent myself.

 

I was paying £150 a month towards the energy bill but they wanted to up monthly DD and at the time we couldn’t meet what they wanted.

 

This meant the account was passed to their in house collection team and that we had to make any subsequent orders on a pro forma basis.

 

With the cold winter we had to cancel the monthly DD and put that towards an order of fuel (it does or cooking, hot water and heating).

 

When we went to re-instate the DD they insisted on full payment of the account which we couldn’t do.

 

I thought I’d we let it go to court we could represent and put forward a payment schedule but as I said above i was working away at the time of the court hearing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and you didn't learn from all your past dealing with debt and bailiffs?

 

how long ago was this CCJ and why oh why didn't you come here for help?

 

stick in an n245!!

 

dx

  • Like 1

..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And get a court imposed payment set up, they can't argue with that once Court have agreed paymernts.

  • Like 1

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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve sent in the N245 form and guess who visited Today!

He called me and said that he spoke to my Brother in law at the house

(who has Autism with severe speech and language issues) and that he was going to enter the property.

 

I said that without a signed controlled goods agreement he couldn’t and the fact a vulnerable person was the only one home he wouldn’t be allowed.

 

He got very Shirty and said if I don’t pay in full by the end of the month he would be back with a warrant from the court to enter the property.

 

I’ve opened the letter up that was left and the total is now £2091, nearly £1000 more in fees and VAT!!!

 

Also the guy that visited isn’t listed as a HCEO

but the person who is registered/listed is named on the notice of enforcement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did you tell him you've filed the n245...

 

dx

 


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I didn’t tell him that I filed for the N245, should I have said to him? I was concerned he would attempt to obtain entry if I said anything about submitting the form

 

How do I deal with the extortionate fees that have illegal VAT and the fact that he isn’t hceo registered but acting in behalf is someone that is!!! DX100uk, your right I should have learnt my lesson from past dealings with these companies and their subordinates 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what were you told...

there is no forced right of entry on civil consumer CCJ debt.

 

if your n245 is successful as far as i'm aware that rolls everything back. inc all fees.

 

as for the registration that's not my bag.


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What HCEO company is this?  They can have a supervisory Certificated HCEO, who controls stuff, and have minions working under them calling as well as Certificate holding bailiffs.  That's why Claire Sandbrook being the Registered HCEO  for DCBL, and her living in the USA so cannot exercise due diligence is such an issue..


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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The company are the HCE Group based in Swansea. I’ve looked at their fees and it appears they have added both stage 1 and 2 at the same time for the first visit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have they listed any goods like a car or garden furniture and tried to get a vulnerable adult to sign it?  Did your B I L let him in? as there is no right of entry except peaceful entry thgrough an unlocked door or being invited in.


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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear....how unusual....not.. 


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He wasn’t able to obtain entry or list any goods. I spoke to Northampton courts earlier as they signed for the papers but they have said it was transferred to the high court but couldn’t tell me which one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/08/2019 at 08:35, baz4iow said:

Hi,

I’ve recently received a letter from a high court enforcement company regarding an old energy debt.

I’ve spoken with the company regarding the debt but would like some advice on the following as I’m confused.

Firstly

- The letter states that they are to claim the debt in full, if the debt cannot be paid in full then a payment arrange can be made.

 

On the reverse it also states (and I’ve asked and received email confirmation) that they will only enter into an arrangement once an Agent has visited the property

 

“In order to establish for himself whether payment in full can or cannot be made.

If satisfied payment in full cannot be made, he would discuss an arrangement and ask you to enter in to controlled goods agreement.”

 

Obviously this will increase the debt and they will get a fee, Is this right? 

 

 

This is a very common situation I'm afraid and the reason why a visit would need to be made (before a payment proposal could be accepted) is outlined under Item 7.3 of the Explanatory Memorandum supporting the Taking Control of Goods Fees Regulations 2014 which states as follows:

 

Quote

While the fee structure applies across debt streams, there are two separate fee levels – one for High Court Enforcement and one for non-High Court Enforcement, with the High Court level containing higher fees. This reflects the findings in the 2009 independent report that High Court Enforcement has a higher cost base due to the personal responsibility of a High Court Enforcement Officer (who has writs addressed directly to them) and the fact that they enforce higher value debts.

 

The personal liability of the High Court Enforcement Officer has also necessitated the need for High Court enforcement to have first and second enforcement stages with the associated fees. 

 

The fee structure for High Court cases also introduces an incentive to enter into, and adhere to, an affordable controlled goods agreement. Unless a debtor pays in full at the compliance stage, the enforcement agent is obliged to visit the debtor in every High Court case in order to take control of goods, thereby triggering the first enforcement stage.

 

If the enforcement agent is then unable to enter into a controlled goods agreement (and has to take control of goods in another manner) or a debtor defaults on a controlled goods agreement, the enforcement agent will be under an obligation to remove goods and therefore the second enforcement stage fee will also apply.

 

For non-High Court debt there is no such obligation and therefore we have introduced an incentive to enter into an agreement without taking control of goods at the (earlier) compliance stage which avoids triggering the enforcement stage with its larger fee.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/pdfs/uksiem_20140001_en.pdf

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please can you state where in the legislation it says that in order to enter a payment arrangement a visit must be undertaken?

the supporting document was sent pre-legislation and I cannot find anything in the actual law that outlines this! 

 

The document you’ve linked to is not statutory guidance but a memorandum and does not hold the same weighting as the enacted law....

 

Can you advise the part of the law that states a visit is a must?

Particularly where the client has already written to and instructed the agent to accept the payment arrangement pre-visit? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about here within the explanatory notes, who by the way take the form of a SI, and are law.

 

The fee structure for High Court cases also introduces an incentive to enter into, and adhere to, an affordable controlled goods agreement. Unless a debtor pays in full at the compliance stage, the enforcement agent is obliged to visit the debtor in every High Court case in order to take control of goods, thereby triggering the first enforcement stage. If the enforcement agent is then unable to enter into a controlled goods agreement (and has to take control of goods in another manner) or a debtor defaults on a controlled goods agreement, the enforcement agent will be under an obligation to remove goods and therefore the second enforcement stage fee will also apply. For non-High Court debt there is no such obligation and therefore we have introduced an incentive to enter into an agreement without taking control of goods at the (earlier) compliance stage which avoids triggering the enforcement stage with its larger fee.  

 

Hope that helps, you are wrong in the regards to VAT also, a HCEO is within his wrights to charge them to the debtor, as he himself is billed, by the exchequer. 
 
 


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

Lol sorry BA. Great minds.


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 had an idea that this nonsense would come up, I think thr OP needs to look into the earlier rules.

 

However this guidance does pass through parliament, and is included within the legislation courtesy of Gov,com

 

In truth, it is the reason for the HCEO adopting the two tiered approach, or one of them. So the question is trite.

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

Thanks so to follow on ... what would you suggest the OP does?

 

What routes ref returning the case to court would be appropriate in this instance?

 

are you not suggesting to submit the N244- would doing that be futile for the OP in your view?

 

Is it incorrect to suggest putting the N244/45 in to stay the writ and vary the order?

 

Would it be appropriate to put it to the courts for an assessment of fees in this case?

 

It seems the fees allocated aren’t in line with the fed outlined in correspondence and are about £200 over the permitted calculated fees as per the regard quoted above.

 

are people generally not successful when putting N244/45 forms back to court and what happens to the bailiffs fees when they do?

 

im sure the OP is open to balanced information on both sides. 

Thanks /)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know what you mean by "balanced information", sorry. What I give are facts not opinion, o if opinion is proffered I will mention it.

 

Applications to stay and to vary a judgement are often successful, and the procedure is well detailed on here.

 

The rest is not advisable, the matter should be addressed with the EA before any action is considered . If no attempt is made to avoid a court hearing, it may have a negative impacts on the debtors costs bill.

 

EAs do fiddle fees of course and HCEOs are the worst(in my opinion)

As far as I know , wins are rare,.People are often goaded into taking action on fictitious causes of action, then end up with outrageous costs bills.

I know that the adviser mentioned here has had no winning cases, and several costs bills awarded against his "clients". I suppose it depends on the facts of the case, and the ability of the sol.

Edited by Dodgeball
typos

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

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...