Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Peter,   You are spot on.   Todays email.    Dear _______     Thank you for confirming that you are to investigate my allegations that the bank has breached Data Protection laws and also disregarded ICO guidance.   Further to my letter of complaint submitted yesterday 21/01/2021 I wish to include that in 2019 the bank rejected my claim that the balance was statute barred as of sometime in 2014. The bank never provided its reasoning behind the rejection other than implying that a termination was ‘never’ served in 2008 and that the balance was legally recoverable.   Could you please confirm whether you continue to believe that the balance was never statute barred pursuant Sec 6 para 3 Limitation Act 1980 as I believe your intention was to mislead and justify your continued regime off filing a status of 6 on my credit file.   Yours Sincerely
    • It seems to be epidemic. ahem   A record, stating payment arrangement or as in Pauls case condition 6 is put on the file ,then instead of dropping off after six years, it appears as a defaulted live account.  Which means that they record a default and also pursue the debt in court.  All because of what seems to me, to be an error in the GDPR drafting, or more likely translation from its German origin.   I had an argument on the phone with link recently about them recording an arrangement marker, then changing it to a default after six years. It was about the relative harm in recording markers when a default should have been registered.   He seemed the think the AR marker had little or no effect !!, when in many ways it is worse than an aged default. Because it means the subject has recently been through an assessment which confirmed all his disposable income has been used. so what would he use to pay off further credit? A default just indicates that sometime in the past there were problems.  
    • Thanks,  I think they did comply partially with the order of 2018, they send the agreement to the court and some paperwork (well this is what the call handler said to me) but they didn't say anything more.     I will have a look around for more items over the weekend and take stock on Monday.  Think I may email the court and state that I haven't received anything, see if they put that on the file too.    Should have added, when I was reading over all the documents I did find and the letter and stuff asking for copies of the original agreement etc from the solicitor and proof of sale from Lloyds to Lowell - nothing has even been sent to me. 
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Old and new CTAX LO's and dodgy Fees & ROG - Rossendales URGENT


Recommended Posts

Hi,

we had a council tax debt that was settled in full with our council back in July.

However the bailiffs are continuing to pursue us for their fees. 

 

We had an initial incident where the first bailiff had no ID and stated he was from the council and needed to inspect our house (council house).

My partner let him in and he started listing items at which point my partner questioned who he was and he then told her he was from Rossendales reference outstanding council tax. After a discussion she set up a payment plan and he left.

 

Things went on and we missed 1 payment, we rang them and explained and they said it was fine if we can pay double the following month to catch up. We agreed but before that date arrived we had a doorstep visit.

 

It all became silly and stressful, i spoke with Rossendales who just were not interested and so rude its hard to not get agitated and stressed

 

I took out a loan and paid the council directly. I paid the entire debt with them. This did not include any bailiff fees.

 

I logged an official complaint with Rossendales over the conduct. It transpires that the bodycam from the initial visit was miraculously unavailable and also no complaint was logged by Rossendales, however there are notes on our account regarding the complaint!! With the virus etc I guess this has delayed their action

 

today I received a phone call saying I have to pay the council tax debt now or they will remove goods tomorrow. I tried to converse and explain what had happened and was shut down, the agent said he wasn't interested, either pay now or I'll visit tomorrow to remove goods, every time I tried to speak, he spoke over me so we got nowhere. 

 

I'm at at a complete loss as to what to do, I cannot raise a complaint with them without evidence and they're not interested in anything other than causing stress and trying to obtain money or goods.

 

Please can anyone offer advice, do I just need to pay their fees, even with their conduct?

 

Can they still charge fees for a settled debt? What if they do visit?

 

What can they do and what can I do? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

who told you to pay the council directly and not pay their bailiffs fees?

because sadly that is very bad advice since the changes in about 2014 i think it was.

 

you would of had a NOE fee of £75 (which ofcourse you did get?) , and a visit fees of "235, that being the total they can charge = £310.

 

 

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for your reply. I choose to pay the council as I didn't want to deal with the bailiffs after the issues. It was more making a point.

We received a possession order on the first visit which was stated as a council inspection and the man was from the council, it was when he started listing items that it became apparent what he was

 

This is issue, they entered under false pretences

 

is there anything we can do or do we just have to pay to avoid even more fees?

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Splitty13 said:

We received a possession order on the first visit

 

what a possession order 

or do you mean removal of goods order?

 

what was the FIRST written comms from the bailiff or company please

you should have received a notice of enforcement stating a £75 fee and 7 days to sort before a visit?

 

was this debt for you current home ctax debt?

 

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey don't rush to pay, it can't increase anymore, but we need to be sure they followed correct process

 

you have failed to answer some important questions i asked...

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are due later this morning to remove goods at which point the fees increase. I have tried to pay online but it states that the reference number is incorrect

 

It was for council tax from our previous and current address. Its a very long story but the council lost over £1800 of our money and it took months for them to find and try to sort out. It caused loads of issues and caused a nightmare 

 

I do not recall an NOE and cannot see one in my file. We have letters from the council and the court fees added but the first bailiff visit was the ROG order, there was no prior communication from the bailiffs

Link to post
Share on other sites

A visit with only an intention to take control (and/or to remove those goods) cannot therefore attract the fee. 

 

you are opening up a can of worms far too late for this forum

with far too much water under the bridge to deal with properly and correctly at such short notice.

 

were you left or have been given a list of goods taken into control?

 

but i say again i dont believe any of this can happen without a valid notice of enforcement having been already issue  stating the current address.

 

so you have NO other bailiff letters

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A list was made and taken away by the bailiff. 

We logged an official complaint on the 12th March 2020 and have heard nothing until 8th September 2020 when a ROG notice was received, we then called and spoke with a manager but got cut off and couldn't trace who he was when we called back.

Then nothing again until yesterday

Link to post
Share on other sites

so no list of goods sent with the rog?

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

did the ROG have a list of your good attached?

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

then you are under no legal obligation to allow entry

there is no legal right of forced entry on CTAX debts either.

 

i am hoping help will appear today.

 

i suspect the rossers will claim the NOE was sent to your old address or something (then its useless today)

but i can't see how old/new property CTAX liability orders can all be rolled into one

a NOE sent to an old address

then the bailiffs rock up at the new address

do a list of goods

without a NOE being served on the new Address.

 

but the story appears to cover a long periods of time and might be incomplete.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • dx100uk changed the title to Old and new CTAX LO's and dodgy Fees & ROG - Rossendales URGENT

Hi 

Important, when you made the arrangement to pay, did you sign a walking possession order?

 

If you did not they CANNOT come back and take goods off you, nor do they have a right to force entry, it is that document (agreement) that gives them the right.

 

The bailiff misrepresenting himself in that way, is also a very serious offence.

 

Was there any witnesses?

Edited by Peterbard
spel

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Mrs cannot remember if she signed it, I have never signed anything so I assume she did.

 

The misrepresentation to gain entry is my concern and complaint.

I filed a formal complaint on the 12th March 2020 regarding this. 

 

Last night I wrote all the details into an email and sent it to Rossendales, our council,  LGO, CIVEA, HCEOA and a local Councillor. 

 

Rossendales have today officially recorded the complaint although their own system shows notes from March onwards which mentioned said complaint. 

 

I have paid the full amount due to avoid any increase in costs and I am waiting for responses and advice now on how to pursue the complaint.

 

The original agent is apparently well known for his dubious behaviour and is known for similar and may no longer work for them

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it must have been signed. Do we have a name for the EA?   How much in fees did they end up charging, if you dont mind me asking.

 

 

 

Oh, and Civea dont handle customer complaints anymore I believe.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice link Andy?

 

Complaints | CIVEA

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

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...