Jump to content


Baliff petition;Stop them getting a legal right to forced entry;Peter Bard


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3587 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

All we need now is for Blair & his other cronies who took us to war on a known lie to be brought before the courts charged with treason & crimes against humanity

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 973
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I've been wavering but now the Tories will get my vote on this plus their declared intention to scrap ID cards etc

 

JC

 

As you will know, I personally have a website that provides advice to the public on all matters regarding a bailiff visit and I simply cannot tell you how many e-mails and messages were received in the office yesterday saying exactly the same.

 

Clearly, this announcement should have been made LONG AGO!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
All we need now is for Blair & his other cronies who took us to war on a known lie to be brought before the courts charged with treason & crimes against humanity

 

What you suggest will never happen so its pointless making this statement.

 

Right or wrong, the government of the day took a decision based on the information available to them and as its entitled, asked the Armed Forces to plan an intervention, which they did, thats what you pay and armed force to do.

 

By us you mean soldiers (though retired) like myself, unless you have served you have no right to make this statement so apologise to those that have and leave it alone, its history.

I'm not an expert so check everything I tell you, however click me scales if I've been useful.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

 

There is no freemasonry like the freemasonry of Golf

Link to post
Share on other sites

conar do keep up. There is already an arrest warrant out for Blair & an attempt was made in Asia to arrest him but he hid away surrounded by his private security. Their crimes are so serious that they WILL catch up with them & I understand he won't be the only one.

 

Remember Blair & his cronies have caused the deaths of 10's of thousands of mainly innocent people

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my gawd the government didn't make a decision Blair & Campbell did & they lied to everyone else in order to justify their crimes

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regular readers and contributors to this thread will be pleased to know that Vera Baird lost her seat in Redcar yesterday.:D

 

Els

BANK CHARGES CAMPAIGN CONTINUES - PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION

 

Aktiv Kapital £300.00 SETTLED IN FULL

Capital One £741.47 SETTLED IN FULL

Citi Cards £1221.00 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(personal) £3854.28 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(business) £7487.97 SETTLED IN FULL

 

What poor education I have received has been gained in the University of Life

Link to post
Share on other sites
Regular readers and contributors to this thread will be pleased to know that Vera Baird lost her seat in Redcar yesterday.:D

 

Els

 

Nasty woman

 

She lost because Labours Asian mate closed the steel foundry a couple of months ago putting thousands out of work ............... despite Mendelson claiming they wouldn't

Link to post
Share on other sites
Regular readers and contributors to this thread will be pleased to know that Vera Baird lost her seat in Redcar yesterday.:D

 

Els

 

And there was me thinking that today was a bad news day !!!

 

I was WRONG!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
conar do keep up. There is already an arrest warrant out for Blair & an attempt was made in Asia to arrest him but he hid away surrounded by his private security. Their crimes are so serious that they WILL catch up with them & I understand he won't be the only one.

 

Remember Blair & his cronies have caused the deaths of 10's of thousands of mainly innocent people

 

JC you need to get out more, If this was truly the case then an arrest warrant would have been issued in the Hague.

 

Like it or not Blair had a legitimate mandate as HM Prime Minister to take the action he did as the HoC voted and the armed forces were deployed to war.

 

Regardless of the rhetoric Sadman Insane killed many tens of thousands of his own people for no reason whats so ever. You can not argue that Iraq is a better place now than it was under his regime.

 

As for the deaths you spk of there are always casualties in war, in most cases the Armed Forces put themselves at risk to ensure that these were minimised.

 

I have spoke to many of my fellow vets, we all agree we'd do it again, as once the dust had settled the people in the main were extremely grateful to have got out from under the jackboot of a maniac.

 

If you weren't there you have no real right to comment.

I'm not an expert so check everything I tell you, however click me scales if I've been useful.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

 

There is no freemasonry like the freemasonry of Golf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have every right to comment & don't you tell me otherwise. Also I've certainly fought in more honourable wars than you

 

Also you may wish to excuse your involvement in the conflict by believing the Spin The HoC did vote on it but only after being told Iraq had WMD AND they could mount an attack within 45 minutes. We went to war & thousands died based on a lie

 

I also have friends who are there & they tell a completely different story to the propaganda bring uttered by this government

 

As for the issuing of a warrant. It does not have to be issued by the Hague & anyway for all we know there could be a secret warrant already issued

 

Never mind I assume you have to justify your actions by claiming we have a right to make regime change when we don't like the regime where next Iran?

 

And its' estimated that the numbers killed by our intervention exceed 100,000 & as for protecting civilians I suggest you watch the Apache video of the crew murdering unarmed civilians then bragging about it

 

This is 2010 & excluding the 100 years war, which was an on off thing, thanks to Blair & his warmongering cronies this country has been at war longer than at any time in it's history

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have every right to comment & don't you tell me otherwise. Also I've certainly fought in more honourable wars than you

 

Also you may wish to excuse your involvement in the conflict by believing the Spin The HoC did vote on it but only after being told Iraq had WMD AND they could mount an attack within 45 minutes. We went to war & thousands died based on a lie

 

I also have friends who are there & they tell a completely different story to the propaganda bring uttered by this government

 

As for the issuing of a warrant. It does not have to be issued by the Hague & anyway for all we know there could be a secret warrant already issued

 

Never mind I assume you have to justify your actions by claiming we have a right to make regime change when we don't like the regime where next Iran?

 

And its' estimated that the numbers killed by our intervention exceed 100,000 & as for protecting civilians I suggest you watch the Apache video of the crew murdering unarmed civilians then bragging about it

 

This is 2010 & excluding the 100 years war, which was an on off thing, thanks to Blair & his warmongering cronies this country has been at war longer than at any time in it's history

 

'If' you have served you should know better than to make the comments you have. What is the point of belaboring a point on who or who is not at fault after the event.

 

It is and still isn't our job to question the orders that were given, you do a disservice to those that went and did not return with the remarks you have made.

 

I cannot comment on the Apache helicopter incident as I've not seen nor do i intend to see the clip you mention.

 

You were not in the chopper so you can't comment on what was or was not said, how do you know the tapes have not been doctored by people with an agenda.

 

JC, If you feel the way you do put your medals (if you have any) in the post marked No 10 and send them in protest, that would at least be an Honorable action, carping here isn't.

 

In closing, I'm not going to respond to your tosh anymore I lost friends in FI, and both GWs, those that did return are not the people they were and some WALT spouting claptrap about who or is not at fault is just not that important in the great scheme of things.

 

end of

I'm not an expert so check everything I tell you, however click me scales if I've been useful.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

 

There is no freemasonry like the freemasonry of Golf

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

end of

 

Good! Thread back on topic.:rolleyes:

 

Els

BANK CHARGES CAMPAIGN CONTINUES - PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION

 

Aktiv Kapital £300.00 SETTLED IN FULL

Capital One £741.47 SETTLED IN FULL

Citi Cards £1221.00 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(personal) £3854.28 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(business) £7487.97 SETTLED IN FULL

 

What poor education I have received has been gained in the University of Life

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is and still isn't our job to question the orders that were given, you do a disservice to those that went and did not return with the remarks you have made.

 

end of

 

 

What is it with these people and their "following orders", just like the Nazis.

 

We all have a right to question our so called superiors, this isnt communist China, although the Russians have more rights than us these days.

 

That is the whole point of this forum, we don't want to be told what to think thank you very much, and we can make up our own minds, and make decisions too.

 

As for your illegal war, like in most wars before them all those on our side who died, have wasted their lives, since they were not defending their people here on our shores.

 

One of the reason the war is allowed to drag on today is because of the moronic mindset that says 'we must keep losing men, to honor lose who have died so far'. We have to pull out now, save OUR boys from death, and face up to the fact that those lost so far, died in vain.

 

Sorry for getting off subject again, but those old donkeys really get my goat.

 

 

Back to the council tax, I am just starting my war with the bailiffs now, and didn't know about this forced entry lark.

 

If a bailiff has an accident on my property who is liable for any claims?

 

I have let my council tax get behind a little (6,000) and they are knocking at my door every day, racking it up further.

 

What are their 'rights' when on your property?

 

Can I for example clamp their vehicle when it is parked on my drive?

 

Can they damage my property in pursuit of their job etc?

 

I am new here, but I am sure I will be a regular contributer to the forum!

Link to post
Share on other sites
What is it with these people and their "following orders", just like the Nazis.

 

We all have a right to question our so called superiors, this isnt communist China, although the Russians have more rights than us these days.

 

That is the whole point of this forum, we don't want to be told what to think thank you very much, and we can make up our own minds, and make decisions too.

 

As for your illegal war, like in most wars before them all those on our side who died, have wasted their lives, since they were not defending their people here on our shores.

 

One of the reason the war is allowed to drag on today is because of the moronic mindset that says 'we must keep losing men, to honor lose who have died so far'. We have to pull out now, save OUR boys from death, and face up to the fact that those lost so far, died in vain.

 

Sorry for getting off subject again, but those old donkeys really get my goat.

 

 

Back to the council tax, I am just starting my war with the bailiffs now, and didn't know about this forced entry lark.

 

If a bailiff has an accident on my property who is liable for any claims?

 

I have let my council tax get behind a little (6,000) and they are knocking at my door every day, racking it up further.

 

What are their 'rights' when on your property?

 

Can I for example clamp their vehicle when it is parked on my drive?

 

Can they damage my property in pursuit of their job etc?

 

I am new here, but I am sure I will be a regular contributer to the forum!

 

You need to start your own thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could there be some light at the end of the tunnel

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-knowledge/260583-coalition-our-programme-government.html

 

 

We will provide more protection against aggressive bailiffslink3.gif and unreasonable charging orders, ensure that courts have the power to insist that repossession is always a last resort, and ban orders for sale on unsecured debts of less than £25,000

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

BANK CHARGES CAMPAIGN CONTINUES - PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION

 

Aktiv Kapital £300.00 SETTLED IN FULL

Capital One £741.47 SETTLED IN FULL

Citi Cards £1221.00 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(personal) £3854.28 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(business) £7487.97 SETTLED IN FULL

 

What poor education I have received has been gained in the University of Life

Link to post
Share on other sites

My gawd did you read her mitigation argument in which she essentially said "if you ban me I'll have to hire taxis the cost of which will fall upon the public purse so just fine me" Do these people have no shame at all. Like she cared about the 'public purse' when she was milking it for all it was worth. What a cow!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 11 months later...

HI

Long time no see.

This seems to be rearing its ugly head again, for those who arn't familliar with the history, and with the upcoming consultation in mind here is a letter from the dim and distant that illustrates the origin of the problem.

 

Pretty accurate i would say

 

Dear All

 

Wednesday 27 June 2007 was a good day to make bad law. While the press were focusing on the transition of power to Gordon Brown, the House of Commons finished dealing with the Tribunals, Courts & Enforcement Bill. The Report Stage was quickly followed by the brief Third Reading, and the Bill was passed without any changes to the bailiff law. In spite of efforts by backbench Labour MPs, the Government easily rebuffed changes - including a regulatory body for bailiffs, changes to the powers of entry and re-entry and provisions for vulnerable people.

 

After a few formalities, the Bill will receive Royal Assent, when it will become the Courts, Tribunals & Enforcement Act 2007. Although it will then be 'law', that will be in an technical sense only. It won't become law in the sense that bailiffs can act on it until the various provisions are implemented. At the moment, we have no idea when the new bailiff provisions will be implemented, although I think it unlikely they will all be implemented at the same time. (But it will be interesting to see how long it will take for some bailiffs to begin acting as if the Bill is law already. Yesterday, I was reminded of the report of bailiffs who had claimed the Bill was in force a few days after the draft was published last July!)

 

Of course, the most difficult of the new provisions might never be implemented. I recall how, after the Courts & Legal Services Act 1991 was passed that it dawned on officials that the new provisions for administration orders were unworkable. I think it had something to do with the definition of the word ‘debt’. Those provisions were simply left ‘on the shelf’ and the remedy to them is now in Part 4 of the TCE Bill – 16 years later!

 

I have now given up predicting how the new bailiff provisions will work in practice. Actually, I don’t think anyone really knows how it all will work. First, a lot depends on the regulations to be made, particularly the new fee scales. Second, the new procedures need to be interpreted in the light of commercial risk. I still think it entirely possible that the Government has done inadvertently what the Scots did inadvertently in 2002 – that is, pass new law that effectively ended seizure of goods from people’s homes. But we must wait and see.

 

I anticipate bridging the gap between what the new law says and what Ministry of Justice officials says it means will create challenges for practitioners and debt advisers. This won’t just be limited to Part 3 (the bailiff provisions) but include all the other enforcement measures and the debt relief provisions.

 

The Courts & Legal Services Act 1991 also contained a new definition of the goods that bailiffs couldn't seize for certain types of enforcement: when the new law was implemented, the Lord Chancellor’s Department issued ‘Best Practice Guidance’ on how it should be interpreted. Unfortunately, a few years later the High Court said the Guidance did not accurately explain the law! I expect history to repeat itself!

 

Since the Bill started its passage through Parliament, in the House of Lords last November, I have had the privilege of working with some intelligent people of goodwill of all political conviction who have wanted to cooperate to develop good bailiff law. Unfortunately, there weren’t enough of them to dent Government resolve.

 

Looking ahead... I think the Enforcement Law Reform Group will meet again when the first consultation paper on the regulations is published. At that meeting, we should consider afresh the Group’s membership, in case any of the interest groups that have been welcome guests at recent meetings wish to join formally. The Group also needs to consider candidates for the Chair, as I indicated at the last meeting. There is no need for hasty decisions on either of these issues but we should make a start.

 

With my best wishes,

 

Philip

 

Philip Evans

Chair, Enforcement Law Reform Group

 

 

Peter

Edited by caro
Remove phone number
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you any more info on the upcoming consultation please Peter?

 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...