Philips Bailiffs

[MARTIN3030]

The Van charges are well over the top

 

Are they coming from Moscow ?

 

 

Letter looks ok and I agree it should be put in the templates .

[chrismc]

Hello chrismc, saw your last post on my thread and came across to read yours.

 

Your letter looks good to me, I can see it being copied and used by others.

 

How about adding, at the bottom of your letter, "Copy to XXXXXXXXXX Council"?

 

Whether you actually send your local authority a copy at this stage, is up to you.

 

If it was me, I would be at the council offices on Monday with said copy and a list of the charges that Philips made . I would not leave until I had received assurance that it had reached the desk of the chief financial officer, or whatever he/she is called. The sooner the council know what their appointed bailiffs are up to, the better.

 

In any event, the appearance of the phrase on the bottom of your letter should serve to put the wind up Philips and, at least, cause them to comply.

 

Onwards and upwards

 

Elsinore

 

Thanks Elsinore..........it is a good idea to cc to Council, the problem I have at the moment is a do not have a full list or any where near a breakdown of all their charges, only a few charges that are included in the case notes. I know there are a lot of others that have been applied, but cannot argue too much at the moment or give a list to the council until I know for sure. I do not want to give them incorrect information, it would make me look silly.

 

However, my next task I think is to start working through all my bank statements and see what I have actually paid them in total, then offset this againts the actual and original bill or debt they issued me with, that should in effect give me a total lump sum, of all their fees and charges, so I will be looking at that over the next day or so, to see what it all comes too!!

 

The next problem is I gave them 2 or 3 lumps of cash which will not be shown on bank statements and for which I don't think I have receipts for and again are not all shown in the case notes, but I will get a complete list of paymenst made from somewhere and start a claim as soon as I have the right information.

 

Chris

[chrismc]

The Van charges are well over the top

 

Are they coming from Moscow ?

 

 

Letter looks ok and I agree it should be put in the templates .

 

Yes maybe he he

 

But they have shot themselves in the foot, by adding three separete charges which are clearly identified as one is for £40 and the other two for £80, so there can be no denial they are all the same charge!

 

Also they have charged for van visits when the only mode of transport for this particular bailiff is a van, so in effect they could actually charge a van visit every time he came therefore racking up their fees even more!!

[chrismc]

Ok this is the final letter

 

 

RECORDED DELIVERY

 

The Data Controller

Philips Bailiffs & Civil Enforcement Agents

Telford House

Garden Street

Darlington

Co Durham

DL1 1QP

12th June 2006

Account No’s XXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Dear Sir,

Re: Section 7 Data Protection Act 1998

Subject Access Request

Further to my letter dated 30th May 2006, I received today only very limited information in partial compliance of Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 – Subject Access Request.

I did not however receive any information in relation to your companies charges and fees applied to the three above accounts as specifically requested in my previous letter.

I now ask once again for a proper itemised breakdown of charges with relevant dates for each charge, compliant with the National Standards for Enforcement Agents 2002 as issued by The Lord Chancellor's Department with which you have not complied. Under the above Standards and legislation you have a duty to supply the information requested.

May I also point out the following conditions as specified under the National Standards for Enforcement Agents 2002

• Enforcement agencies must keep a complete record of all financial transactions in whatever capacity undertaken.

• Enforcement agents will on each and every occasion when a visit is made to a debtor's property which incurs a fee for the debtor, leave a notice detailing the fees charged to date, including the one for that visit, and the fees which will be incurred if further action becomes necessary. If a written request is made an itemised account of fees will be provided.

I remind you in compliance with S7 of Data Protection Act you have 40 days as from the 30th May 2006 with which to comply. A cheque for £10.00 in respect of the statutory maximum fee payable for this request has already been sent and cashed by yourselves.

Yours faithfully

xxxxxxx

cc. Wxxxx Bxxxxx Council

 

(I am putting cc Local Authority just to put the wind up them a bit more)

[BotB]

The letter looks fine to me and I agree with elsinore's suggestion too.

 

You're right to stick with what you can prove. It will be a shame if you can't find receipts for the cash payments you made but you will be best foregoing trying to reclaim those, if you can't find the receipts and there's no record of them in the bailiff documents either.

 

Check the dates they say they visited/wrote. If no proof, challenge them. You should have had a note through the door each time they visited. Sometimes they put a "description" of your house in the notes as though to prove they were there - in my case I apparantly have a detached house with a glass door - well I can sit at my computer and google earth any address in the uk and tell you if its detached, semi, terraced and that's just one way of doing it - as for the glass door well what the hell does that mean since about 95% of the country must have a door with glass in to some extent. And if they had really seen my house, I can think of other more unique features than the presence of a front door by which to describe it!

 

If by starting a claim you mean issuing in the County Court, don't jump straight into that yet. Get your figures worked out first and request a refund from them of xxxx amount and the reasons why you are asking for it.

[shellshocked]

I was told by a bailiff today that he charges 75p per mile petrol and £35 per hour.

 

Bailiff charges are illegal if my local court is anything to go by.

 

Friend of mine had £120 debt with council at old address but because they kept chasing at old address didnt get paid.

 

Almost 2 years later bailiff turns up but wasnt in first time so fees for 2 visits.

 

Bill was

£120 fine

£60 bailiff fee first visit.

£120 bailiff fee second visit.

Total bill £300

 

She offered to pay £150 so the bailiff got £30 for his time, refused. They took inventory and said if she didnt within 2 days they take items out of house.

 

Friend got an injuction order against bailiffs disallowing them access to property, this was done on the basis they refused payment and the judge said the person hiring the bailiff should pay the fees not the person owing the cash.

 

Week later got letter of bailiff willing to accept £120 in post and debt will then be settled.

[chrismc]

The letter looks fine to me and I agree with elsinore's suggestion too.

 

You're right to stick with what you can prove. It will be a shame if you can't find receipts for the cash payments you made but you will be best foregoing trying to reclaim those, if you can't find the receipts and there's no record of them in the bailiff documents either.

 

Check the dates they say they visited/wrote. If no proof, challenge them. You should have had a note through the door each time they visited. Sometimes they put a "description" of your house in the notes as though to prove they were there - in my case I apparantly have a detached house with a glass door - well I can sit at my computer and google earth any address in the uk and tell you if its detached, semi, terraced and that's just one way of doing it - as for the glass door well what the hell does that mean since about 95% of the country must have a door with glass in to some extent. And if they had really seen my house, I can think of other more unique features than the presence of a front door by which to describe it!

 

If by starting a claim you mean issuing in the County Court, don't jump straight into that yet. Get your figures worked out first and request a refund from them of xxxx amount and the reasons why you are asking for it.

Thanks BotB

 

Some cash payments are noted in their case notes, so got them there, I am still routing through old files to see what notices, letters I can find that were put through the door, as I cannot beleive everything their case notes say.

 

What I mean by claim is the next letter in the chain, asking for refund of fees back etc, once I know exactly what they owe me, no where near court yet, I will not miss out a link in the chain with this lot, don't want them to have a chance of wriggling off the hook.

 

Chris

[BotB]

Good job! You'll get there in the end - its funny how they are all at 6's and 7's when they get challenged.

 

I've just been messing about on google earth again - I suppose I should revise my statement that any address is visible - some stuff in the rural areas is too blurred at close magnification to see anything but fuzz - my house is easily discernable tho' can even see next door's car parked on their drive - not sure where I must have been the day the pic was taken, no sign of my car.

Amazing technology.

[chrismc]

not sure where I must have been the day the pic was taken, no sign of my car.

Amazing technology.

 

You weren't hiding it from someone were you

 

thanks for the encouragement though BotB

[chrismc]

Bailiff charges are illegal if my local court is anything to go by.

 

Friend of mine had £120 debt with council at old address but because they kept chasing at old address didnt get paid.

 

Almost 2 years later bailiff turns up but wasnt in first time so fees for 2 visits.

 

Bill was

£120 fine

£60 bailiff fee first visit.

£120 bailiff fee second visit.

Total bill £300

 

She offered to pay £150 so the bailiff got £30 for his time, refused. They took inventory and said if she didnt within 2 days they take items out of house.

 

Friend got an injuction order against bailiffs disallowing them access to property, this was done on the basis they refused payment and the judge said the person hiring the bailiff should pay the fees not the person owing the cash.

 

Week later got letter of bailiff willing to accept £120 in post and debt will then be settled.

 

That is interesting shellshocked, I have been working out payments made etc today, see below how much I think they have ripped me off for.

[chrismc]

Ok guys my letter above will be sent of tomorrow, in the meantime today I have spent most of the afternoon trying to decipher their very limited case notes and some of the fees they seem to have noted and added to my accounts and plenty of others and payments made they just seem to have ignored.

 

As near as I can work out and this will need to be updated once I get all the proper paperwok through, this is where I stand.

 

Original debt £1604.36 (paid in full)

Amount Paid to Bailiff £2958.31

 

I my view therefore an overpayment of £1,353.95 for maybe 3 or 4 calls and a few letters put through the letterbox!! this will need to be adjusted once all documents are in hand, but I originally thought it was close to £1000 so I don't think I will be far off.

 

It just goes to show how much they can add on in fictitious fees and charges, nearly doubling the original debt, I have no doubt it would have doubled and more if I hadn't paid it off early.

 

Lets hope they respond this time to my DPA/SAR.

[elsinore]

 

Original debt £1604.36 (paid in full)

Amount Paid to Bailiff £2958.31

 

 

Wow!! chrismc, that's jaw-dropping!! I've no doubt you are going to enjoy resolving this one!!

 

Your council are going to be severely embarrassed when they see the final figures.

If Philips do not lose their contract with the council then I imagine that you, your councillor and your M.P. will want to know why.

 

I would have thought a local authority had a duty (legal obligation?) to monitor the performance of their appointed agents. Something that your council clearly overlooked.

 

This is the sort of case that, with the support and impetus given to it by CAG, could have far-reaching implications.

 

Looking forward to reading the continuation of your story.

 

Onwards and upwards.

 

Elsinore

[chrismc]

Wow!! chrismc, that's jaw-dropping!! I've no doubt you are going to enjoy resolving this one!!

 

Your council are going to be severely embarrassed when they see the final figures.

If Philips do not lose their contract with the council then I imagine that you, your councillor and your M.P. will want to know why.

 

I would have thought a local authority had a duty (legal obligation?) to monitor the performance of their appointed agents. Something that your council clearly overlooked.

 

This is the sort of case that, with the support and impetus given to it by CAG, could have far-reaching implications.

 

Looking forward to reading the continuation of your story.

 

Onwards and upwards.

 

Elsinore

 

Yes I agree Elsinore I was amazed at the figures, but I checked and checked and without proper documentation from Philips it is the best I can do, but I am fairly sure the amount will not be too far out, unless they come up with a genuine reason that is. Even if you add up what they are legitimately allowed to charge for visits, vans, WP's etc it will come to no where near what they look to have charged me!!

 

Maybe that is why they only sent me very inadequate and basic information and hoped I would go away, or maybe they are so incompetent they do not actually have the proper records, but in that case I am sure I can go after them anyway and let them prove I am wrong, or maybe get them under some other regulations or whatever.

 

It will, be interesting to see what they say to my next letter. If I can prove all this I will also be making an appointment to see the Chief Executive at my local council. May aswell try and throw a few more spanners in the works while I am at it

[chrismc]

I forgot to mention, I have also found out that Philips charge 5% for all payments I made on my debit card, (over £100.00) I have included it in the figures above, but I wonder if they are allowed to do this, or in fact is any business allowed to do this??

 

Surely that must be a penalty for using that method of payment??? I know they may pay Merchant Fees for credit/debit card payments but it won't be 5% I am sure

 

Has anyone else come across this before?

[elsinore]

I forgot to mention, I have also found out that Philips charge 5% for all payments I made on my debit card, (over £100.00) I have included it in the figures above, but I wonder if they are allowed to do this, or in fact is any business allowed to do this??

 

Surely that must be a penalty for using that method of payment??? I know they may pay Merchant Fees for credit/debit card payments but it won't be 5% I am sure

 

Has anyone else come across this before?

 

Most businesses now have an element of credit/debit card payment and the amount of commission will depend on a number of factors. Some businesses can and do pass on the charge to the card user, but many now absorb it as a business expense and charge all customers/clients the same, irrespective of the method of payment.

 

It could well be as high as 5% in Philips case, because of the perceived risk. However, I know there is a difference between what you pay a merchant for a credit card transaction and what you pay for a debit card transaction. I will check it tomorrow and let you know.

 

You just might have another sum to add to your claim!!

 

Onwards and upwards

 

Elsinore

[BotB]

I my view therefore an overpayment of £1,353.95 for maybe 3 or 4 calls and a few letters put through the letterbox!!

 

Thieving toads!

 

The 5% charge is recoverable. Remember, its 5% of what they weren't entitled to in the first place so yes, they pay the lot back.

[chrismc]

 

Thieving toads!

 

The 5% charge is recoverable. Remember, its 5% of what they weren't entitled to in the first place so yes, they pay the lot back.

 

Yes I agree too, that is why I included it in the above figures, in my view I have paid it on charges that were unlawful as you back up, so they should pay it back!! end of argument

[elsinore]

 

Thieving toads!

 

The 5% charge is recoverable. Remember, its 5% of what they weren't entitled to in the first place so yes, they pay the lot back.

 

BotB's quite right, of course, charge unlawful, premium unlawful.

 

But here's a bit of extra ammo. I checked my old business merchant account this morning. We paid just under 4% of the value of credit card transactions, BUT we only paid 40p per transaction for debit cards!!! I can't see why Philips' contract would be very different from this.

 

Thieving toads, indeed!!

 

Go get'em chrismc!!

 

Onwards and upwards

 

Elsinore

[chrismc]

BotB's quite right, of course, charge unlawful, premium unlawful.

 

But here's a bit of extra ammo. I checked my old business merchant account this morning. We paid just under 4% of the value of credit card transactions, BUT we only paid 40p per transaction for debit cards!!! I can't see why Philips' contract would be very different from this.

 

Thieving toads, indeed!!

 

Go get'em chrismc!!

 

Onwards and upwards

 

Elsinore

 

Thanks Elsinore for the help, I have also looked at Merchant Services and found fees of £10/month for the facility and .39p per transaction. So when I paid for example £350.00 on a debit card they could only charge me .39p in the above example, but actually charged £17.50 which is a mark up of around 4500% I work it out as. Not bad work if you can get it hey!!

 

Most of my payments by Debit Card were for £200.00 they added £11.75 on to each of these, around 3000% mark up

 

I have sent off my second letter (above) to them today requesting all the other information they decided not to send me, so I will wait and see what their response is. They now have around 30 days left to respond.

[shellshocked]

more info no that injuction.

 

she got it because they got physical with her and was caught on camera. When the judge ruled that she wasnt responsible for bailiff costs that came as a surprise. The aim was to keep them out of her house only.

[Rich44]

I've just been messing about on google earth again

 

Check out Microsofts version its even better than Google Earth

 

 

http://local.live.com/

[stuffed by the vat man]

i am a bailiff. i may be able to help. there are many bad bailiffs and many good honest ones. i am keen to expose the bad ones. email me with your queries ant i will try to help.

[martonman]

I also have an embarrassing admission.

 

I was once in the employ of a debt recovery firm.

 

Difference is, I could sleep nights. I would call on folk with outstanding bank, utility, catalogue debts etc. and genuinely be able to help them.

 

What we used to do is charge the claimant a percentage of the money recovered. No fees were ever added on to the householder.

 

All I did was work out a fair weekly or monthly repayment plan, sometimes as little as £5 a month for a £1000 debt and arrange for our collector to add the client to his or her round.

 

Councils by employing bailiffs to collect on council tax arrears and PCN's are not serving the public interest. All the bailiffs do is target the underprivileged and uneducated, by adding on their illegal and extortionate charges they make the situation far worse for thousands of people. Get the lot of them struck offand tell your Council to stop using them.

[chrismc]

We seem to be getting invaded by Bailiffs at the moment, there are a few arouhnd here!! but seriously your input is welcome. Thanks Stuffed-by-the-VAT-Man and Martonman for your help.

 

Martonman.....there are ways of doing a job and you can sleep soundly at nights and there are other ways where you just don't give a damn about your victims.

 

When and Original debt of £1604.36 turns into an amount paid to the Bailiff of £2958.31 as in my case therefore an overpayment of £1,353.95 it is time to fight back!! I paid in full and ahead of time too!!

 

I am not 100% sure of the final amount yet it may be lower than the above but won't know until I get all their fee/charges breakdowns etc as their case notes leave a lot to be desired, I will be asking for whatever it is though back you can be sure of that!!

 

Thanks for your input guys!!

 

Chris

[martonman]

The difference between what I used to do and what bailiffs do is that I almost always left a household with a 'thankyou' from the householder. A debt that had been worrying them was suddenly down to a few affordable quid a month, with no charges, no added interest and no threats. It was a very ethical way in which to collect outstanding debts and one which local councils should seriously look into when they are finally forced through public pressure to ditch the bailiffs.

 

Bailiff companies are usually run by ignorant money-grabbing shysters who in the main use cheap self-employed ill-educated reprobates to collect for them. These idiots thrive on the easy targets. One once had a friend of my wife in tears during a call. She called me before letting him in and I arranged to meet the guy an hour later at the house, saying I would bring some cash for him. Let's just say that I explained to him the error of his ways and he never called back. Complaints were issued to his company, to the Council and to the Court, the arrears were taken back on by the Council immediately at the original amount and everyone was happy, apart from the bailiff.

 

What these bailiffs have done to you is disgraceful, take them for every penny you can and make sure that your councillor, your MP, your local paper and everyone else knows exactly how they have abused their position.

 

In particular complain to your local court, it is they who approve the certificates that bailiffs have to have by law in order to enforce in your district. Enough complaints = cancellation of or a refusal to renew the certificate.