Philips Bailiffs

[chrismc]

Absolutely,they must be beyond reproach............which clearly this bunch arent.

 

Chris knows that,and so do everyone else who has been following this amazing story.

 

:o

 

Yes if this comes off, I am sure there are a lot of others that could benefit too!!

[MARTIN3030]

Just been reading the moneyclaims site as its a place I never visited.

Says there that you cant file against government services........presumably this means local councils then ?

 

That means more costs added to the claim since you have to walk to the court offices or risk getting a town centre parking ticket which is probably against the bill of rights ha ha

 

[chrismc]

Just been reading the moneyclaims site as its a place I never visited.

Says there that you cant file against government services........presumably this means local councils then ?

 

That means more costs added to the claim since you have to walk to the court offices or risk getting a town centre parking ticket which is probably against the bill of rights ha ha

 

 

Darn it!!! well I will just add the cost of petrol driving to and fro then, or could I issue a claim against Mr C personally as the Managing Director of the Council

 

I think or at least I hope, the Council will put pressure on Philips to do something about it. We will have to wait and see!!

[elsinore]

Just been reading the moneyclaims site as its a place I never visited.

Says there that you cant file against government services........presumably this means local councils then ?

 

I think you can sue your council Have look at this thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-knowledge/5182-taking-action-against-local-council-any-help-appreciated.html

 

Elsinore

[MARTIN3030]

Of course you can sue anyone............

 

Its just that the moneyclaim site specifically says not using their site !

 

 

[elsinore]

Of course you can sue anyone............

 

Its just that the moneyclaim site specifically says not using their site !

 

 

 

Serves me right for not reading your post properly. Doh!!

 

Elsinore

[chrismc]

Looking at it you can sue your council providing you have exhausted all other avenues. I hope that is not needed though and they see sense long before it goes that far.

[MARTIN3030]

I think Chris they will be very aware by now that you have done your homework.

In fact I am wondering if the extent of your knowledge and all the info you have put together will scare the life out of them and prompt them to resolve this speedily.

 

I imagine they will be worried about the implications of lots of others knowing about this too.

 

I have found that using my consumeractiongroup e mail address gets very quick responses.

I am sure if they were aware that places like this site was addressing the legalities of their actions they would want to sort things quickly.

 

I dont think you can compare the councils actions and banks as the same I know the banks drag their feet but this is not something the council or the baliffs can do ......especially in the knowledge of the case you have put foreward !

 

[chrismc]

 

I dont think you can compare the councils actions and banks as the same I know the banks drag their feet but this is not something the council or the baliffs can do ......especially in the knowledge of the case you have put foreward !

 

 

Thanks Martin.........I hope you are right and they get something sorted asap.

[chrismc]

Well well! when I got in this evening there was a letter waiting for me from the Managing Directors Office of the Local Authority, basically stating they are going to "thoroughly investigate the matter" their words, and they shall give me a fuller response as soon as possible.

 

Looks like they may be taking things seriously, that is the fastest I have ever had a response from the LA. They now have 13 days and counting down!!!

[MARTIN3030]

Yep just as we were all saying.

 

Theres probably going to be a few overtime hours put in this week !!

 

 

[bs0lth]

Right this is a letter I am hand delivering to my Local Authority, along with copies of all correspondence and payment schedules etc that have been sent to Philips and my Preliminary Approach Letter.

 

Any comments are welcome!!

 

 

Chris

 

I would just like to say that I have been having problems with jacobs bailiffs, they were trying to get me for an unpaid parking ticket, however they didnt have my correct address, a letter arrived from them demanding payment in 4 days... however that was 12 days after the 4 days were up. I phoned them talked to them, hung up and hit my head on the wall a couple of times, as they said that the original charge had occured a further two charges of £94.

 

I will get to the point honestly Im not hyjacking your thread...

 

I was going to pay it then came onto here, read your thread and thought... I wonder....

 

So I wrote to them, asking for a DPA telling them I had recieved no futher correspondence from them, telling them I wanted a break down and copy of all of their "visits" that the further charges refered to and lo and behold this morning a letter arrived saying they were writing off the other charges and I would only have to pay the outstanding charge...

 

Now the point

 

Thanks so much... without your thread I wouldnt have dreamed of writing to them demanding a copy of all of the documentation etc... and would just have paid the further charges. I really hope that you win this battle with them. and get back what they shouldnt have taken from you in the first place.

 

Lynne

[chrismc]

I would just like to say that I have been having problems with jacobs bailiffs, they were trying to get me for an unpaid parking ticket, however they didnt have my correct address, a letter arrived from them demanding payment in 4 days... however that was 12 days after the 4 days were up. I phoned them talked to them, hung up and hit my head on the wall a couple of times, as they said that the original charge had occured a further two charges of £94.

 

I will get to the point honestly Im not hyjacking your thread...

 

I was going to pay it then came onto here, read your thread and thought... I wonder....

 

So I wrote to them, asking for a Data Protection Act telling them I had recieved no futher correspondence from them, telling them I wanted a break down and copy of all of their "visits" that the further charges refered to and lo and behold this morning a letter arrived saying they were writing off the other charges and I would only have to pay the outstanding charge...

 

Now the point

 

Thanks so much... without your thread I wouldnt have dreamed of writing to them demanding a copy of all of the documentation etc... and would just have paid the further charges. I really hope that you win this battle with them. and get back what they shouldnt have taken from you in the first place.

 

Lynne

 

Thanks Lynne I am glad it helped you, it is amazing how much more confident you can tackle these problems when you have hundreds of people on CAG behind you.

 

I had been thinking of going after Philips long before I found this place, but was not sure how to go about it, and although this is not bank fees I am trying to get back it is similar in the way you go about the procedure. I admit I have had to do a lot or research on this subject becaise it is by no means straightforward, but I am slowly getting there,....now read my next report below.

 

Chris

[chrismc]

UPDATE

 

Philips have not responded yet, but the Council have already come back this morning with a second letter from the Managing Director personally and a breakdown of fees given to them by Philips which surprise surprise of course do not match mine at all but they still show they charge nearly £800 on a debt of £1600 - 50% mark up in fees, so they are only a about £200 under my amount, I have to go back and check my figures now, but I am sure I am closer then they are.

 

They now ask me to make an appointment to go and visit the Councils Local Taxation Manager. So I have some more work to do and consider my options and what to do next.

 

They say Philips have given them a figure for fees of only £788.80 Oh so that is quite OK then it is only around 49% - 50% of the original debt, I do feel a bit better now knowng they only made 50% out of me.

 

The Council have sent their own schedule back which does not make sense to me, but remember it was supplied to them by Philips so you cannot believe what they tell you. The fees they have applied to 1st Visit, WP, van fees etc do look reasonable when you compare them to the National Standards, however the Council have completely missed some relevant fee charges eg 3 van visit fees applied for one visit on the same day!

 

Also what Phillips and the Council do no know is I have the original document I signed that was left by Philips and as per one of my first posts iin tis thread clearly prove that what they have written on my document for 1st Visit, WP etc are way above what is fair and reasonable. I am also pretty sure some payments I have made mysteriously do not show up in Philips schedule to the council.

 

I have a lot to get my head round here, but my quick synopsis is I HAVE THEM!! not only on extortionate charges but also lying to and providing altered financial documents and figures to their employers. But before I get too confident I need to go back over all the paperwork again, because they have certainly muddied the waters with what they have provided.

 

Having said all that, I have no idea what Philips miught come up with yet? that could be good for a laugh

 

I will report again when I can take a good luck into things.

 

Chris

[elsinore]

Hi Chris, well that’s good news so far, isn’t it?

 

I’ve just been having a bit of a rant on my thread about local authorities. One of the things that should come out of all this is a requirement for L.A.s to keep their appointed debt collectors under control. Let’s hope that your council are equally appalled at Philips’ antics. We will all be dismayed if they aren’t!

 

Elsinore

[chrismc]

Hi Chris, well that’s good news so far, isn’t it?

 

I’ve just been having a bit of a rant on my thread about local authorities. One of the things that should come out of all this is a requirement for L.A.s to keep their appointed debt collectors under control. Let’s hope that your council are equally appalled at Philips’ antics. We will all be dismayed if they aren’t!

 

Elsinore

 

Yes I agree Elsinore.......if nothing else this should have started a few internal alarm bells ringing and heated telephone conversations between the two, however, it looks to me from what they have sent today that they do not think their appointed collectors have done anything wrong, or at least that is the party line!! but I am sure I can get them to change their minds when I come up with all my evidence.

 

Lots to do yet, but getting there slowly, it will be interesting to see what Philips say though

[chrismc]

I have looked over things the Council sent me yesterday and there are a number of relevant items not accounted for, but also charges the Bailiffs have applied that are not shown in their true light and in the Councils defence they would not necessarily know much about them unless they dissected the information Philips provided to them fully!

 

I claimed they had charged me £1053 in charges, the Council say £788.80 has been applied to my account. If that is correct then they have still applied charges dispraportionate to the debt in my opinion (49%) . But I think I can prove it is maybe another £200 on top of that, the figures they have provided are really confusing though!!

 

But looking at things the Council only have Philips word on the fees and charges they say they have applied to the accounts. So having considered my next action, I think I need to see what Philips reply is going to be, beause you can bet your life it will be different to the Councils and even if it is the same as the Councils I still think £788.80 or above is still unreasonable and dispraportionate and so is the fact that certain fees and charges have been applied in one instance three times on the same day for the same action. How can they argue that is fair and reasonable?

 

Waiting for Philips response though will then give me all the facts to work with and who knows they may even dig themselves a deeper hole in which I can bury them

 

end of update!! - comments welcome

 

Chris

[BotB]

Keep up the pressure.

 

The local authority won't have any info other than what Phillips have provided them. I think the deal usually is that the Council don't pay the bailiffs for recovering any money so they get a free recovery service and the bailiffs get their slice of the action by charging their fees on to the debt they are chasing.

 

Any suggestion that the Council are going to be dobbed in it by maverick bailiffs will not be welcome.

 

Check your figures, take your paperwork with you to the appointment and go through it with whoever you will be seeing. Take a note of what is said. Any suggestion that its between you and the bailiff and nothing to do with the local authority should be politely countered with a reminder they have been engaged to act on behalf of XXXX Council and you are entitled therefore to make complaint to XXXX Council about the financial irregularities and that's what you are doing. Don't argue, there's no point. If you don't feel you are making progress, leave it at that and come back here to update.

 

PS - Local authorities are not government services i.e. the Crown. Therefore they can be sued just like anyone else.

[chrismc]

Keep up the pressure.

 

The local authority won't have any info other than what Phillips have provided them. I think the deal usually is that the Council don't pay the bailiffs for recovering any money so they get a free recovery service and the bailiffs get their slice of the action by charging their fees on to the debt they are chasing.

 

Any suggestion that the Council are going to be dobbed in it by maverick bailiffs will not be welcome.

 

Check your figures, take your paperwork with you to the appointment and go through it with whoever you will be seeing. Take a note of what is said. Any suggestion that its between you and the bailiff and nothing to do with the local authority should be politely countered with a reminder they have been engaged to act on behalf of XXXX Council and you are entitled therefore to make complaint to XXXX Council about the financial irregularities and that's what you are doing. Don't argue, there's no point. If you don't feel you are making progress, leave it at that and come back here to update.

 

PS - Local authorities are not government services i.e. the Crown. Therefore they can be sued just like anyone else.

Thanks again BotB, you are thinking along the same lines as me, but I need to get Philips response before setting up a meeting with the Council, it might just work in my favour even more!

 

Some interesting elements I have just been able to drag out from the Councils schedule are:-

 

Debt to Philips ...........Philips Costs .....Total Paid

474.25 .....................136.50 ............615.13

459.85 .....................243.80 ............705.99

564.26 .....................192.00 ............762.82

106.00 .....................216.50 ............322.50

 

If you look at Philips fees (and this is what the council have supplied - so there is no argument) they are quite a significant portion added to the original debt 29%, 53%, 34% and 204% respectively, and I still have my over billing argument eg 3 times for same event on same day.

 

Bearing in mind Philips whole amount of work in collection of the above amounted to maybe 4 standard visits and a signature of a WP, nothing else untoward then I am sure I could confidently state in court if need be their fees are not fair and reasonable and not in line with the current guidelines and legisiltation, or am I just being overly confident and blinkered?? in my views on this case.

 

..

[MARTIN3030]

I cant see how you can be accused of being overly confident or blinkered since these figures speak for themselves.

As you rightly say they are out of proportion to what they should be and we are not talking of just a couple of quid.

 

Your homework (and I know there has been a lot of it ) should ensure that your case is cut and dry

Unless Phillips have some extremely valid reasons and a very good immagination,it seems there has been a very blatant abuse of their handling of the case they were entrusted to handle.

 

Frankly I cant see how they can justify all of this and at the end of the day someone has got to carry the can......I bet there is a lot of discussions going on behind the scenes now as both the baliffs and the council try to keep their integrity intact.

Headless chickens are words that come to mind...........

 

 

[chrismc]

I think they will need some imagination to argue this one away:

 

On their schedule they state

 

Visit fee £22.50 x 3 (even though they were on the same day) on paperwork left with me that they don't know I have they have listed it as £160.00

 

Walking Possession £11.00 x 3 again as above same day, and on paperwork left with me £200.00

 

Levy Fee £41.00+ £37.00+ £38.00 +£23.00 = £139.00 why 3 fees for the same operation. On paperwork they left me it does state £139.00 the only one that matches up.

 

and then there are the extra van fees etc etc I don't think they will be able to argue these away.

 

..

[MARTIN3030]

Just imagine how many others have been ripped off too ?

In any other scenario they would have been taken to task long before now but baliffs have this idea that they are somehow able to do as they please since they trade on peoples fear of them,and know that people dont really know their rights.

They have gone too long in being unchallenged and in some respects behave like a bananna republic.

It would be great if everyone else who has suffered at the hands of Phillips were also to come out with their charges.

This would undoubtably put an end to it once and for all and send a warning to others,who are getting away with it day in day out.

[chrismc]

It would be great if everyone else who has suffered at the hands of Phillips were also to come out with their charges.

This would undoubtably put an end to it once and for all and send a warning to others,who are getting away with it day in day out.

 

Well Martin....Confucuis says 'every journey starts with one small step' lets hope this is the one small step that others can follow.

 

Now back to reading this fairy story they have sent me

[shellshocked]

what strikes me is this a extroadinary case I think its normal.

 

I watched the tv program bailiffs where they chasing council and business tax and their charges are also too large. Yet noone blinks an eye, presumably because they thinking well they pay late so they deserve it.

[chrismc]

what strikes me is this a extroadinary case I think its normal.

 

I watched the tv program bailiffs where they chasing council and business tax and their charges are also too large. Yet noone blinks an eye, presumably because they thinking well they pay late so they deserve it.

 

Shellshocked........this is by no means extraordinary, it is the norm as far as I can see.

 

Lack of knowledge by the averege man in the street and questionable possibly lawful threats by the Bailiffs is what helps to make it work for them!! and as you say the assumption you are in the wrong because you have not paid a debt or paid it late due to circumstances.