Bailiffs Forcing Entry and Using Restraint - Please Read, Important - Deadline

[tevion]

signed

[seylectric]

Signed by myself and partner, good information, thank you.

[blacksheep1979]

Wow, after bothering to read where this was left off I see the intelect of several members of this forum didn't increase. References to beastiality etc whilst maybebeing very witty and hilarious for 12 year olds have no real place on what is meant to be an adult forum for adult topics. It is no suprise that you have had hard times with debts, as if you treat the money owed and your creditors with such contempt it is hardly surprising that you have had problems. Your ability to reason (which rapidly broke down) also seems to be wanting and this may have also lead to problems. Maybe a short evening class reading philosophy may help.

 

As to my debtor, no they weren't a landlord - keep guessing if you wish but I won't be discussing it in public here as I will probably be branded as evil for trying to regain at least part of what is owed. Oh and just for the curious yes bailiffs were instructed - but it isn't always as easy as that.

[caro]

Please stick to the topic of this thread. If there continues to be personal abuse I will consider closing it. Everyone has a right to an opinion, however long they have been using this site, and may contribute to any thread they wish, as long as it is on topic and within the forum rules. They should also be able to voice it without fear of personal insult from any users on this site. It is fine to discuss and debate, but please make sure that it is withing the rules of the site. For information, they may be found in the link below.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forum-rules-please-read/9-forum-rules-please-read.html

[Cornucopia]

Have done it already! Have heard nothing back as yet. I have said what you said and have offered support if I can give it. Will have to wait and see, he knows who he is if he is reading this!

 

EDIT

 

I did say in an earlier post that I thought that Blacksheep was a very odd name to choose! I still think he's a debt collector!

 

Apologies, there was no intention to offend, although I am actually not sure of what I typed that was insulting.

[Peterbard]

Hi Tevion and Seylectric

 

Many thanks

 

Peter

[tevion]

Please stick to the topic of this thread. If there continues to be personal abuse I will consider closing it. Everyone has a right to an opinion, however long they have been using this site, and may contribute to any thread they wish, as long as it is on topic and within the forum rules. They should also be able to voice it without fear of personal insult from any users on this site. It is fine to discuss and debate, but please make sure that it is withing the rules of the site. For information, they may be found in the link below.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forum-rules-please-read/9-forum-rules-please-read.html

 

 

 

any posting on here by members can be taken as offensive to any other member, whether it was intentional or not. what may upset one member may not upset another. sometimes its not what is written but how it is perceived. this site is about expressing ones oppinion and it would be foolish to expect everyone to either agree or disagree with it. however if we are to be restricted in what we say then whats the point in posting.

it would probably be more productive for us to go on ebay and auction off our belongings before the arrival of the bailiffs

[seylectric]

Fair enough but in this case the post to which caro was referring WAS deliberately offensive - I see the intelect of several members of this forum didn't increase - that's a direct attack. Allow that sort of thing and the whole forum will degenerate into a slanging match amongst members - I've seen it happen! A little more decorum is required I feel.

[tevion]

now that my little poem has been disallowed and removed, i would just like to say that it went ba ba. blacksheep not ba ba blacksheep1979.

so could the cagbot please put it back.

 

ba ba blacksheep is a well known nursary rhyme. i just changed the words abit. if blacksheep 1979 found it offensive in anyway, can i then suggest you remove all of his posting as they have been annoying other members from day dot.

[jonni2bad]

Posts that 'annoy' other members are not removed or moderated. Posts which are seen to be a direct attack at another member or which clearly use offensive personal remarks will be deleted or moderated.

 

Please do not insult our intelligence by suggesting that, for no apparent reason, you decided to make use of a rhyme with the title 'blacksheep' but that it was in no way intended to continue the general abusive nature of many posts in this thread against another member who just-so-happens to share the same name.

 

Simply holding a different viewpoint to many other users should not be a reason for any others to embark on something nearing bullying, which was evident on 15th.

 

If you feel that other posts on here have not been edited and they contain personal insults etc, please report them. It is quite possible that some might have been missed.

[tevion]

Yawn

[oz4725]

Top of the morning to one and all!!

 

Not a bad thread all in all, heated, argumentitive, thought provoking i would say. Not a bad thing in my view, thats the whole idea of a discussion forum is it not.

 

My point in posting? Well the jist of this thread is about giving Bailiffs extended powers so as to be able to force their way into properties. As i read this thread i couldn't help but think of some of the places that i've been to over the last 18 years. Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, N.I., to name but a few. My point?

 

Historically bailiffs like to believe that they are the physically stronger more aggressive and more threatening character. Some may say a bully. Preying on the weaker. Now we plan on giving them power to break in and "restrain you". I can assure you that controlled aggression is something that very few people have and it cannot be taught. Your stereotypical bailiff will now be coming to your house "physched up" and ready for you if you put a foot wrong.

 

So what happens now that we have escalated the situation? Talking wont work because they (the Bailiffs) have used force, so to counteract their force, Joe Public feels the need to use force, the up shot in my eyes - People will die and or be seriously hurt. You may think that is excessive but let me take you back to some of the countries i've visited. The stonger characters forced themselves on weaker people and drove them from there homes. The weaker people fought back to the best of their ability. The press termed it "ethnic cleansing". I've seen first hand what "everyday" people are capable of doing when their homes, themselves, or their loved ones or their possessions are put at risk. I believe it will be a form of "social cleansing". You have it, we (the Bailiffs) dont believe you should have it, so we are going to take it by force.

 

I know that i am capable of standing and smiling at someone if they spit in my face. I know i can repell an attack/assault if someone feels that way inclined, but more worringly, i know that if someone was to attempt to force their way into MY home unarmed or armed, legaly or not, then in a calculated manner which i felt neccessary, i would stop them.

 

At the fear of singleing you out Blacksheep, i ask you to consider the real life day to day ramifications of these powers that you are condoning. In laymans terms, if i wanted to enter your home, aggressivly and with force, i could. For that particular scenario i am physically and mentally more superior than you. I assure you that you will not like it, so how are you going to stop me? You will have to use some sort of weapon. From a debt to a criminal record in a split second. How can these extra powers be of any use? I dont believe they can.

 

Long winded load of old bo**ocks? Probably, but i'll let each forum member make their own mind up on that.

[blacksheep1979]

Fair play - an actual intelligent responce, thank you.

 

I have the choice to pay my debt and stick within the realms of the original contract, if I fail to and fail to notify the original creditors then the debt may be passed to a dca (even if I contact them this may be the case). I have the option to negotiate with the dca, to offer a payment plan on what I believe I can afford again if I don't do this or if the DCA thinks I am taking the **** and can afford to pay more the matter goes to court. From my experiences the courts are very generous to the debtor on the amount they have to pay again if you fail to pay this then bailiffs can be instructed but the debtor has the option to reapply to the court to get the amount reduced.

 

Only if all of these 4 stages are not attempted (ok the first may not be optional) then the creditor could or should be allowed to apply to the court to have the individual assessed for any goods that they have that may be non essential and of value.

 

If a person has ignored all these stages and chances of addressing their debt then there is little other method to recoup the money that they owe and in which case they have brought the matter upon themselves.

 

Yes some people may not be able to pay, but this can usually be found out before the matter goes to court, at the court stage and failing that reapplying to the court to get the amount of payment reduced. Failing that then if there is nothing of value that is not essential for day to day life or work then this will be assessed and there will be no point in sending bailiffs to the property.

[stan5131]

Blacksheep, have you no compassion at all? What about all the people who will be caught up in this? You only have to read the bailiff threads on here to see how many people get visits from bailiffs when the debt isnt even theirs. They turn up at the parents house trying to force them to pay the debt of their kids who have long since left home. And they dont take no for an answer and tell these people all kinds of things like the fact that Mr. xxxx doesnt live there any more doesnt matter, you HAVE to pay or we are taking your stuff.

 

If bailiffs were a bit more respected, and didnt abuse the powers they already have. If they didnt add on unlawful extortionate fees. If they were more professional about their job, then maybe you would not get so much opposition. The truth is that they are not. They are often bullies, liars, and motivated by their own bonuses.

 

As for posts being removed from this thread. I wholly agree with Jonni2bad. Guilty myself of making a few posts out of anger and sheer frustration. But Blacksheep, you have goaded most of us into this. Everyone on this site cares about human rights and civil liberties. You have ridden rough shod over everyones constructive comments and bottom line, you only care about one thing. The money!

[falcon185]

Couldnt have put it better myself Stan ;-) I too have been guilty of posting the odd post out of sheer frustration, as you say Stan, goaded by the blinkered obsession of you blacksheep. I agree too over the comment of you blacksheep riding rough shod over other peoples postings. I on numerous occasions have asked you to READ properly peoples posts on here but all you seem to want to do is be argumentative, the only reason YOU personally want these powers is so YOU can get what your owed by someone else, I sympathise with your situation but two wrongs do not make one right!

I'm Now off the soap box!

[blacksheep1979]

I'm not arguing with anyone - I am trying to logically put forward a counter viewpoint to each point that has been mentioned. Its something that reasonable and intelligent people do when having a debate.

 

As to peoples debts that aren't the current occupiers of the property this would be addressed either in court or via the court representative who came to inspect if there were any non essential valuables.

 

How many chances should people be given to pay? If they continually ignore or refuse to pay I believe that there are enough tiers to weed out the unable from the unwilling.

 

I also continually state that bailiffs who do have powers to enter property should be properly licensed and escorted by the police, which should reduce the likelyhood of false statements and threats.

 

I don't feel I have goaded anyone, I have put forward a reasonable structured arguement for the use of the power of entry and seizure. How is anything I have said any more of riding rough shod over peoples points of view than everyone else regarding my point of view? And there have been few constructive comments and only deemed so because they agree with your point of view - again I bring up the analagy between how peoples views here may be seen as right/wrong, views on white supremacy forums may be seen as right/wrong but to the whole country they may be viewed very different so do not judge others views as to the majority you may be the one who is not right.

 

And what is wrong in the end about caring about what is owed to you, money that possibly you paid out already maybe more than what is claimed back? If the person can pay they should be morally and legally obliged to if they have the means. I do not think it is a wrong that if someone refuses to pay what they owe and more than can afford it that it should be taken from them by any means necessary - if they drag it out so far that it means forcibly taking items from them then there is nobody left to blame other than the creditor.

 

Infact in different circumstances you all bay for your pound of flesh - your bank charges, distance selling, sale of goods act and when you get a ruling you will quite happily send bailiffs into a workplace where they could scare and threaten innocent people. You need to see that both ends are the same you too are after money and will use any means you can find to get it.

 

As for posts being removed I could maybe understand if I had slung muck your way, but I didn't and you could easily have altered or appologised for posts many days after posting them. It is only after they were reported and mods stepped in that vague excuses come out.

[falcon185]

Infact in different circumstances you all bay for your pound of flesh - your bank charges, distance selling, sale of goods act and when you get a ruling you will quite happily send bailiffs into a workplace where they could scare and threaten innocent people. You need to see that both ends are the same you too are after money and will use any means you can find to get it.

 

As for posts being removed I could maybe understand if I had slung muck your way, but I didn't and you could easily have altered or appologised for posts many days after posting them. It is only after they were reported and mods stepped in that vague excuses come out.

 

 

In reply, I fight for what is rightfully mine, what I wont do is condone violence in order to get what I am owed lawfully! Yes, most of us are on here to get back what has been unlawfully taken from us, thats what this site is all about. I make no vague excuse for anything I may or may not have said, I stated I have posted in frustration and I stand by that statement, I am big enough to admit my mistakes, I've made quite a lot in the past. As for Bailiffs being in company of Police officers, there are not enough Police on our streets to deal with rising crime let alone accompany a Bailiff for a civil debt. This in most scenarios will never happen, lack of resources etc... leaving the Bailiffs to do as they want if they are given the new powers.

[blacksheep1979]

But say for arguments sake that the bailiffs to be involved with this scheme were highly trained and licensed and accompanied by police, then in cirumstances where people continually refused to pay, could afford to and had non essential goods that would cover a legitimate debt would it not be acceptable (seeing that they have had many chances to make good and now have brought about this action upon themselves) to send in these bailiffs with police to recover what was owed?

[falcon185]

But say for arguments sake that the bailiffs to be involved with this scheme were highly trained and licensed and accompanied by police, then in cirumstances where people continually refused to pay, could afford to and had non essential goods that would cover a legitimate debt would it not be acceptable (seeing that they have had many chances to make good and now have brought about this action upon themselves) to send in these bailiffs with police to recover what was owed?

 

 

Try reading my post earlier blacksheep, this is what I said at the end of it:

As for Bailiffs being in company of Police officers, there are not enough Police on our streets to deal with rising crime let alone accompany a Bailiff for a civil debt. This in most scenarios will never happen, lack of resources etc... leaving the Bailiffs to do as they want if they are given the new powers.

[blacksheep1979]

and read the first few words of my last post - for arguments sake

 

it was a ficticious pretend it will happen along the lines of for arguments sake say you were sat there with Robbie Williams, Kiera Knightly and David Beckham - hey its never going to happen but it was a for instance in that situation.....

[falcon185]

The problem is, your just trying to goad people into arguments, we are not in a world of pretence this is "THE REAL WORLD" for arguments sake?? You obviously admit in that comment you made, your here to argue. I'm sure Bailiffs breaking in and assaulting people wouldnt listen to a "for instance"

[blacksheep1979]

and you are just trying to argue - for arguments sake is a turn of phrase. So I ask again in an ideal situation with police being present and the bailiffs having been trained and vetted and the person has been given multiple chances to pay, can afford to and has goods that are non essential and will settle the debt that is definatley theirs should the bailiffs be allowed to take goods to cover the debt?

[whirlybird]

Whilst I agree with blacksheep in principle we do not live in an ideal world. Over an 18 month period my world felt like it was falling apart as i experienced 1st hand just how low these people will sink.

My disabled mother has been threatened, neighbours and work colleagues informed of my debts.

This was all down to change of circumstance not high living and holidays.

Given the opportunity i have no doubt that some of these people would have taken full advantage of any powers of restraint they had.

In essence, when you are down already all rational thinking goes straight out the window,you may feel like an injured animal and we all know how that animal will react when its cornered and threatened.

 

These are only my opinions and i am thankful for having found this site eventually x

[PriorityOne]

and you are just trying to argue - for arguments sake is a turn of phrase. So I ask again in an ideal situation with police being present and the bailiffs having been trained and vetted and the person has been given multiple chances to pay, can afford to and has goods that are non essential and will settle the debt that is definatley theirs should the bailiffs be allowed to take goods to cover the debt?

 

Hi blacksheep,

 

If we are now talking about "ideal situations"... we would all have enough money to live on and we would all have jobs for life. Seeing as those "ideal situations" are never likely to happen for most of us, then why should we consider yours as a possibility ?

 

[blacksheep1979]

I'm talking about an ideal situation in this circumstance, which is far more likely to happen than everyone having enough money to live on and jobs for life