Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hobnail you don't know Elms too well yet. I am surprised that they got as close as they did to adding up to 30. I think the poor dears get confused because most other letters they send out are to give 28 days notice. They even  have difficulty with their two times table and often consult with the char lady to confirm that 2 plus 2 equals 4.  Just act on the notion that they are total numpties and you won't be far out.
    • To carry on from the above post it may be helpful to go through their WS using their numbers. 9] motorists do NOT accept the contract when entering the land. First they have to read it and understand it and then they realise that a] "No stopping" is prohibitive and cannot offer a contract. b] the signs around the bus stop do not mention who issued the No Stopping signs so it could not have been issued by VCS since the IPC CoP states that their signs should include the IPC logo and the creditor be identified.  10]There is no mention of £100 charge for breaching the No stopping request or if there is it is far too small to read even for a pedestrian. 11] no matter how often VCS say it, it is NOT a contractual clause   22]" the claimant has given the Defendant its contractual licence to enter the site". No it hasn't. This is a road leading to the airport. All sorts of people are going to the airport-travellers, taxis, fuel bowsers, airport staff, companies delivering food and drink for each aircraft, air traffic controllers, buses. It is absolutely ridiculous to attribute VCS wth any sort of permissions. The land owners yes, but not VCS . There can be no sort of analogy between a car park and a major thoroughfare where VCS have no place as it is not relevant land.   23] there can be no contract as there is no offer only a prohibition. And it is not relevant land no matter how Mr Walli attempts to prove otherwise. 25] VCS may have won a few times but none quoted was on an airport covered by the RTA and its own Byelaws. They also have lost more cases than they have won using their prohibitive signs. 26] First one has to consider if there is a contract. Is it relevant land? No. Does a valid contract exist betweer VCS and Peel? NO.  27] the signage at the bus stop may show the conditions ie  no stopping, and restricted zone but not the terms ie is there a charge for stopping and who is the creditor. The last section of the sign is illegible  29] already stated that a WS between VCS and peel is not a valid document 31] it will need more than the Claimants feather to outweigh the case against the Defendant no matter who was driving. 32] there is no law of agency involved. This is not a case of employer/employedd relationship. VCS are muddying the waters because they have no way of transferring the driver's liability to the keeper 33] this a red herring. There is no list of highways at all  on the Highways act 1980 so this is a deliberate strategy to debunk the fact that this road is not relevant land. VCS are put to strict proof that it is relevant land not covered by the Road Traffic Act nor by Byelaws. 34] there ican be no comparison between a railway station and an airport. Totally fatuous analogy.  35] yes the landowners can bring in their own terms but what the cannot do is overrule Byelaws and the Road Traffic Act. 39] surely the paralegal cannot be that ignorant of PoFA. If Bye Laws are involved then the bus stop is not relevant land and so the specious argument about FGW is rubbish   36] what on earth is he talking about with Permits. There is no mention of permits on the signage and even if there were  would it mean that Permit holders were allowed to stop on No Stopping roads? There are enough examples on CAG to counter act their idiocy on continuing charging the extra £60   46] VCS had NO reasonable cause to apply to the DVLA for the Defendants details. No valid  contract with the landowners No stopping is prohibitive therefore cannot form a contract the event happened on a bus stop over which VCS has no jurisdiction the signage either does not show that there was a charge of £100 for stopping, or the font size was too small for a motorist to be able to read it  the signage does not show the Creditor which fails the IPC CoP so not valid the WS contract does not appear to authorise VCS to pursue motorists to Court Given all these factors it seems that VCS have breached the GDPR of the Defendant quite substantially and it would appear right that an exemplary award is made against VCS in the hope that they will drop all further cases at Doncaster airport where they are pursuing motorists on non relevant land.   48] what is this guy on? You weren't in a car park you were on a bus stop 59] this case is totally without merit. I am not surprised that the paralegal will not be turning up. Some statements are pretty close to perjury and others are designed to mislead or misdirect. None of the analogies seem appropriate or relevant. Could have been said in at least half the time without the repetition and trying to make a case where none was there. One particularly bad example of misdirection was in the photographs. The Clearway sign shown near the bus stop is very unclear  unlike the Clearway sign two photos before it which may well include terms and conditions. The one by the bus stop is totally different.      
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote...   your defence doesnt need any return of docs.. carefully read what has been posted here and in the other threads i pointed to in your old thread merged here too.   redwood/harwood or STA or brachers.   just use our enhanced google search box.   uni fees is useful too.   this guy is just in front of you    
    • Tech firm CEO Jeff Lawson warns bosses not to make hasty judgements about their employees.View the full article
    • I have just spent last few hours registering and signing up and filling in all the details.   Below is a POC I have drafted.   The defendant is a parcel delivery company DPD (UK) LIMITED On 09/08/2021 the defendant agreed to deliver the claimant's parcel containing a PlayStation 5 Disc Version value £530, to an address in the UK. The delivery fee of £7.79 was paid by the claimant. Parcel tracking number: ???????? Parcel reference no: ????????? The defendant failed to deliver the parcel and have reported it as lost on 20/08/2021. The defendant refuses to refund the full value of the item and the delivery fee. The claimant seeks £530 being the value of the item, £7.79 delivery cost and legal fees.        (Sorry for being stupid but this POC is supposed to go where it says    " Claim details Why you believe you’re owed the money: " right? Reason why I'm asking is because I don't see anywhere it specifically says what are your particulars of claim)   Tomorrow being the 15th day, I will be ready to click it off (assuming the POC is ok)    I have read a few more hermes/packlink etc stories where they were resolved and gives me hope I will regain my lost money.  Will carry on reading up as much as I can.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3179 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

Hi,

 

I had a visit from the Baillifs regarding unpaid Council Tax.

 

THis was the first visit and I refused to let the Bailif into the house and did not sign a thing.

 

I later paid up the full amount plus the costs over the phone.

 

As I've learnt from reading on here the most they can charge for the first visit is £24.50 if they do not get a levy/walking possession agreement.

 

I've got the court costs from the council ~£80.

 

Basically they have charged me £222 too much..

 

Now as I know exactly how much the council tax debt was, the court costs, the first baillif visit fee and the credit card charge, can I just proceed straight to a LBA for a refund of the costs? Or should I request in writing details of what the false charges are for.

 

According to the council who has online access to the Baillifs website, the case notes show a levy made and walking possession order signed... This is truely false and I've asked the Council to chase this as the document would contain forged information and signatures.

 

Any advise is very gratfully received?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Only thing I can think of is that they have levied on your car? But, i'd have thought they'd have had to put notification through your letterbox to support this.

Good luck with claiming back the charges.

Had a similar incident, bailiffs put notification through my door stating I owed them £256.33 + costs. I contacted the council, the debt amount was £102.88 and sent letters to both the council and bailiff company asking them to explain the charges. I received a second letter (through the royal mail, not handdelivered) stating that I needed to make a payment arrangement for £143.88 (that cost of the debt plus 2 visits).... the council took the debt back as I stated I was unwilling to deal with the bailiffs considering they'd attempted to unlawfully charge me additional costs that weren't due on the account.

Debt now back with the council and all the bailiff charges removed, only had original debt amount to pay, but lodged a complaint with the council about the bailiff and their charges.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply.

 

The only thing they shoved through the letter box was that to contact a mobile number or they would come back with the intention of removing goods..

 

No sign of Walking Possession or anything to indicate something similar.

 

2 car on the driveway at the time. One was a friends and the other was my lease car so they'd not be able to have any claim on that as I'm not the regsitered owner or the registered keeper.

 

I'm trying to complain to the council but after an initial response I've had nothing.

 

it looks like it needs to go through the official complaints procedure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First thing you need to do is write to the bailiffs head office, cc-ing in the council, stating the account is in dispute as you do not believe the charges to be accurate and that you expect no further action to be taken until this situation is resolved. Ask them to provide a full breakdown of costs, including what the fee consists of (showing appropriate receipts if applicable), when they visited, the name of the certified bailiff and the court at which he was certified.

 

Give them 14 days to provide thsi information or advise them you will report the matter to both the court which issued the liability order and the local government ombudsman.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tiglet, I will start the course of action up.

 

Unfortunately, I've already paid in full so I now need to claim the costs back... so asking to hold any action will not really help.

 

Basically, from the bailiffs records, they've said they attended my house on 22nd March, They did not..

 

Also, they have levied on a car which is not mine and charged me levy costs for it.

 

Total costs wew £220 when it should have been £24.50.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one final point..

 

From the councils email, the bailiffs said that goods were seized, they have basically said they levy (which I guess means seized) the car.

 

Does this mean that they would have to physically take the car away?

 

If they did not take it would they have to get us to sign a Walking Possession agreement to leave the car there?

 

The reason I'm asking as that the bailiffs has already agreed that a Walking Possession agreement was NOT signed (despite them saying earlier it was) and are refunding us this charge.. (£11)...

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK sweetie, then you need to send a LBA to the bailiffs to reclaim your charges. It's the same principal, but advising them that unless they provide the evidence or refund your costs, within 14 days you will start a small claims court action against them.

 

pm me or post letter here if you need any advice about doing this.

  • Haha 1

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tiglet,

 

Here's my LBA letter

 

Alexanders Certified Bailiffs

Westmead House

Westmead Road

Sutton

SM1 4JH

 

 

Thursday, 19 April 2007

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Council Tax Account Number: XXXXXX

 

 

My request

 

I am writing to request the refund of the false charges you have levied from me during your only visit to my house on the 5th April.

 

 

I have received from Waverley Borough Council a breakdown of the costs that you have wrongly charged and you have claimed for the following which are false claims;

 

  • A visit on the 22nd March in which you claim you got no answer
  • A levy (seizure) on a vehicle that I am neither the registered owner of or the registered keeper.
  • A levy of the above (2.) when no vehicle was actually removed.
  • A signed walking possession agreement

According to my communications with Waverley Borough Council , you have already agreed subsequently that a walking possession agreement was never signed and are already in the process of refunding this cost (£11). This therefore means you have already admitted to falsifying the claim. Based on this fact, you cannot charge levy costs because no goods were removed, no entrance to the property was granted and the vehicle in question is not mine.

 

I calculate that you have taken £298.26.

 

I am enclosing a copy of the schedule of the charges which I am claiming.

 

I require repayment in full of this money or evidence supporting your charges.

 

If you do not comply fully within 14 days then I shall begin a claim against you for the full amount plus interest plus my costs and without further notice.

 

Furthermore, I shall submit a complaint to Waverley Borough Council and the Association of Civil Enforcement Agents (ACEA).

 

 

And this is my schedule

 

Claimed costs by Alexanders Ltd

Description of charge Charge £

Council Tax Charge 994.00

Summons costs 63.00

Liability Order 20.00

First Visit Cost 24.50

Levy 53.00

Walking Possession Agreement 11.00

Enforcement Fee 220.00

Card Handling Fee 69.33

 

Total 1454.83

 

Actual Costs owed to Alexanders Ltd

Description of charge Charge £

Council Tax Charge 994.00

Summons costs 63.00

Liability Order 20.00

First Visit Cost (5th April 07) 24.50

Card Handling Fee 55.08

 

Total 1156.58

Total of costs overclaims 298.26

 

Please can you let me know if this should be acceptable..?

 

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Herbie

The letter seem fine to me, however you appear to be calculating the card fee at 5%. The majority of Contracts provide for a card fee of 3%

 

The overall amount that you have paid is £1101.50

I would include on the letter "Card fee @ 3% £33.04 , and let them come back to complain. The total amount therefore that you should be asking for is £320.29

 

Just a small final note, I would be inclined to only give until close of business next friday, ie: 8 days for payment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter seem fine to me, however you appear to be calculating the card fee at 5%. The majority of Contracts provide for a card fee of 3%

 

The overall amount that you have paid is £1101.50

I would include on the letter "Card fee @ 3% £33.04 , and let them come back to complain. The total amount therefore that you should be asking for is £320.29

 

Just a small final note, I would be inclined to only give until close of business next friday, ie: 8 days for payment.

 

 

Thanks for you reply, I'll update the card fee..

 

Why only allow them 8 days, is this a reasonable time to allow then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's basically fine, but I would include the following paragraph:

 

"If you believe the charges I have incurred to be legitimate, I would ask you to provide the name of the bailiff, the court at which he was certified, the date you believe the visit took place and what the fee consists of (please provide receipts where necessary)."

 

This can show the court later that although you strongly repuduiate these fees, you have given the bailiffs an opportunity to prove they are lawful before you commenced action - it will look good if it has to go in front of a judge, basically.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would personally allow 14 days - it again would show a judge that you have been reasonable in allowing them sufficient time to investigate - you can state 7 days, but IMO, 14 would look better.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, you two have been absolute stars.. :)

 

I'll post tomorrow via recorded and let you know how it goes.

 

Council are sitting on the fence on this one.

 

but from their last email to me, it appears they are starting to get a little suspicious on what's happend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are responsible for the bailiffs and should look into it for you - if no joy, threaten them with the local government ombudsamn.

 

And you are more than welcome - let us know how you get on.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait the 14 days you gave them (plus two to allow for postage). They may take you right up to the wire on this, but it's a matter of showing that you ahve been fair, even if they ahve not.

 

Then, yes, start your claim. But also advise the local government ombudsman and your local councillor who will bring pressure to bear on the council.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and report the bailiffs company to the magistrates court.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I've had absolutely no response from the Baillif company and no response from the Council, 14 days runs out tomorrow.

 

Therefore, it looks like I'll be proceeding with Court Claim. Any advice on how to summarise the details in my (LBA) letter so that it fits in the MCOL website..

 

Also, should I know inform the council that I'll be raising the issue with the local council ombusman?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, after the post has arrived tomorrow (if there's no response in there) submit a complaint to the following:

 

1. Your local councillor

2. The local government ombudsman

3. The county court who certified the bailiff

4. The magistrates court who granted the liability oredre

5. Any trade associations the bailiff belongs to (pm me the company name and I will check for you)

 

Then sit back and wait for all of the above to do their job and get back to you.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...