Claiming back Baillifs charges

[tiglet]

Personally, I would wait until the people mentioned ahve had a chance to do their stuff - it may take some of the hassle out of it for you.

 

However, if you wnat to go ahead and start that process while also informing the relevant people, that is up to you. If you give these people asy a week to investigate, it may just help you with your case if it does come to court.

 

It will also put the frighteners on the bailiff company and that may encourage them to hurry up an dsettle.

 

Basically, honey, either way is fine and it's completely your decision how you want to go about doing it.

 

Either way, good luck, and let me know.

[jackburton]

Ok, I've had a reply from them and it's not good..

 

Here is the response

 

1. Bailif Visist on the 22/03/2007

The bailiff visted your premises on the 22nd March at 13.05, however no oe answered the door, so he left letter informed you of the outstanding debt. This was recorded on our system on the 23rd March.

Your wife consequently contacted us on the 5th april.

 

Comments: Wife never contacted, it was me. Again, no record of the visit from our end and they have not supplied the name of the bailiff.

 

2. Charges.

 

In your letter you refer to the "false charges" however there were none.

 

Bailiff levied on the vehicle Vauxhall Zafira VK56 KCZ outside you property,which Mrs Stagg claimed to be her vehicle. Later she retracted and claimed that it is on finance as such belongs to a finance company, on the other hand when asked for a proof, she refused. Further on, the HPI check confirmed that this was not the case as there was no finance registered against the vehicle.

The Higher courts have ruled and given guidance to baillifss that "{(...) by law, it is fair to asusme by the bailiffs that the goods being seized belong to the customer, however if a customer claims the goods do not belond to him/her then you are required to ask for documentary proof. If none is produce then the goods still may be seized and the levy is valid (...). In this situation, I am satisfied that bailiffs did what was required to ensure the ownership of the vehicle.

 

Another name for the levy is Seizure of Goods and Inventory, which is made by the bailiff during the visit, the form states that: "unless the sum stated above together with any additional costs and charges arising from the distress are paid (...) the goods listed below will be removed and sold according to law. If you look at the Schedule of charges on your copy of the notice of seizure of goods and inventory, you will find explanation of all charges incurred. The goods do not have to be removed in order to charge the statutory levy fee.

 

Comments: We never received a schedule of charges.

The vehicle in question is not on finance, it is not legally mine and am leasing it under a 12 month lease deal. It is the property of the lease company (basically a hire car).

 

Also, they admit to not removing the car and also admit no walking possession order was signed. Is it not correct if they levy (seize) the goods but do not take them then it must be covered by a signed walking possession order??

 

Anyway, should I just proceed with the compliants to the local counceller, coucil ombudsman etc, county court etc..

 

Thanks

[tiglet]

Yup, just proceed with the complaints - you have attempted to resolve it with the bailiff company and tehy ahven't played ball, so time to up the ante.

[jackburton]

Thanks for your reply again.

 

Is it not correct if they levy (seize) the goods but do not take them then it must be covered by a signed walking possession order??

 

Is this a true fact or can they levy goods (what they call inventory) but not take them away WITHOUT a WPO.

 

Ta

[jackburton]

The goods do not have to be removed in order to charge the statutory levy fee

 

Basically, without a walking possession order signed, is this true?

[Guest SWALEFOYER]

Unless the twits acutually gain paeacful entry they cannot just simply note things down through your window etc. For it to be effective the wpa needs to be signed.

[jackburton]

Ok, still on at the council regarding this whole thing and have received a reply...

 

In particular, this paragraph is of interested.

 

****** (removed Bailiffs company) have acknowledged without any prompting that the walking possession agreement was not signed, so under the council tax regulations there is no basis of charge for it. The Notice of Seizure should either be given to the individual or if it refused, posted through the letter box or something similar. This is another point where an argument may follow as to 'who said what' and whether the Notice was left. A seizure without a walking possession agreement will have some life, perhaps for a few days, so it is not necessarily true that the bailiff was obliged to remove goods immediately. I agree with the gist of what you are saying but suggest it is not quite as black and white as you have been led to believe. Indeed, this whole area is a tangle of statute, case law, common law and good practice.

 

Is any of this valid?

[tiglet]

IMHO, no - it's to get you off their case. The law is perfectly clear and don't let them fudge the issue.

[jackburton]

Ok, thanks..

 

Council have now decided that they do not want to reply to me anymore..

 

I requested the fax number so I could forward the rental agreement and the letter they shoved through the door on their visit.

 

Shall I mention the interesting information regarding the Fraud Act.?

[The Watcher]

Push them - the same way that they have been pushing you !

[jackburton]

Ok, I've email the council regarding the Fraud Act 2006 and they don't seem to be too bothered.

 

Either I've got this whole thing totally wrong regarding the charges or they don't think that I'm serious.

 

Here's the response from the director of finance..

 

Dear Mr *****,

Thank you for your email this morning.

I have seen your earlier emails and have been discussing them with ***** as they came in. I have had nothing further to add to the replies *****has given.

I note that you have made representations to the Local Government Ombudsman and I am sure that the Council will hear from the Ombudsman shortly. The Council will, of course, assist the Ombudsman in his enquiry and once his decision has been published you may chose whatever further action you believe to be appropriate. I will not comment on the points you have raised in your e-mails as I am sure they are part of your submission to the Ombudsman and will be dealt with in the Council's response.

If you wish to send any documents by fax I suggest you use ***** and mark it for the attention of Mr *****.

Yours sincerely

******

[FunnyMan]

Hi Jack,

 

I have been following your thread with interest as the bailiffs 'tried' to overcharge me and when I reported this to the Council they were at first not helpful at all. I am going to take my case all the way.

 

One thing though you could do is to arm yourself with as much information as possible, for example I have sent off the following letter to my Council asking for the following information under the Freedom of Information Act.

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

I request the following information under the Freedom of Information Act (2000):

• Copies of all contracts between South Lakeland District Council and any bailiff companies employed or used by South Lakeland District Council from 2001 until present.
  
• The number of Court Orders obtained by South Lakeland District Council in pursuance of unpaid Council Tax in 2001.
  
• The number of Court Orders obtained by South Lakeland District Council in pursuance of unpaid Council Tax in 2002.
  
• The number of Court Orders obtained by South Lakeland District Council in pursuance of unpaid Council Tax in 2003.
  
• The number of Court Orders obtained by South Lakeland District Council in pursuance of unpaid Council Tax in 2004.
  
• The number of Court Orders obtained by South Lakeland District Council in pursuance of unpaid Council Tax in 2005.
  
• The number of Court Orders obtained by South Lakeland District Council in pursuance of unpaid Council Tax in 2006.
  
• The number of Court Orders handed to bailiffs in pursuance of unpaid Council Tax in all the years 2001 until present (each year to be recorded separately).
  
• The individual amounts owed for each Court Order obtained by South Lakeland District Council for non-payment of Council Tax in 2001.
  
• The individual amounts owed for each Court Order obtained by South Lakeland District Council for non-payment of Council Tax in 2002.
  
• The individual amounts owed for each Court Order obtained by South Lakeland District Council for non-payment of Council Tax in 2003.
  
• The individual amounts owed for each Court Order obtained by South Lakeland District Council for non-payment of Council Tax in 2004.
  
• The individual amounts owed for each Court Order obtained by South Lakeland District Council for non-payment of Council Tax in 2005.
  
• The individual amounts owed for each Court Order obtained by South Lakeland District Council for non-payment of Council Tax in 2006.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2001.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2002.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2003.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2004.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2005.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2006.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2001 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2002 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2003 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2004 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2005 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2006 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2001 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated and found the complaint partially or wholly justified.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2002 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated and found the complaint partially or wholly justified.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2003 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated and found the complaint partially or wholly justified.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2004 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated and found the complaint partially or wholly justified.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2005 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated and found the complaint partially or wholly justified.
  
• The number of complaints received about bailiffs employed/used by South Lakeland District Council to obtain payment of Council Tax under a Court Order in 2006 in which South Lakeland District Council investigated and found the complaint partially or wholly justified.
  
• Copies of all training manuals, documents, newssheets, or other instructional material used to train and update knowledge of South Lakeland District Council Officers in the Revenues and Council Tax departments with regard to the following:

a) The duties of a bailiff

b) The powers of a bailiff

c) Bailiff law

d) Procedure on handling complaints against a bailiff

• The number of Court Orders for Council Tax obtained by South Lakeland District Council that have been issued to a bailiff that have been ‘taken back’ by South Lakeland District Council at the request of South Lakeland District Council in 2001.
  
• The number of Court Orders for Council Tax obtained by South Lakeland District Council that have been issued to a bailiff that have been ‘taken back’ by South Lakeland District Council at the request of South Lakeland District Council in 2002.
  
• The number of Court Orders for Council Tax obtained by South Lakeland District Council that have been issued to a bailiff that have been ‘taken back’ by South Lakeland District Council at the request of South Lakeland District Council in 2003.
  
• The number of Court Orders for Council Tax obtained by South Lakeland District Council that have been issued to a bailiff that have been ‘taken back’ by South Lakeland District Council at the request of South Lakeland District Council in 2004.
  
• The number of Court Orders for Council Tax obtained by South Lakeland District Council that have been issued to a bailiff that have been ‘taken back’ by South Lakeland District Council at the request of South Lakeland District Council in 2005.
  
• The number of Court Orders for Council Tax obtained by South Lakeland District Council that have been issued to a bailiff that have been ‘taken back’ by South Lakeland District Council at the request of South Lakeland District Council in 2006.

I understand that under the Freedom of Information Act (2000) you have 40 days in which to supply the requested information and that a nominal charge may be made by the Council for the information. Should any information be ‘lost’, for example contracts between South Lakeland District Council and any/all bailiff companies employed by South Lakeland District Council, then may I suggest that the Council immediately obtains copies from the other party/ies involved.

Please acknowledge receipt of this request in writing by return of post.

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

.................................

 

 

Now when this information arrives (by the way had a letter acknowledgeing my request this morning and saying 'will respond within statutory time scales') I will be able to use it to strengthen my case against both the bailiff company and the Council.

 

It might be worth your while getting similar information from your Council, especially the contracts with the Bailiff company/ies. Remember that the Council have a 'duty of care' towards you. (Also when you have the information see if you have a really independant Councillor and contact her/him and also the press, they would love stories of incompetance by the Council - especially if the proof comes directly from the Council.)

 

When you put in a claim also remember to include interest as well!

 

Don't let the b*gg*rs off the hook, remember these are paid employees of the Council and if they are not doing their jobs correctly they deserve all they get, and as for the bailiffs yes they have committed a fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 if they have levied charges that are unlawful.

[jackburton]

Thanks Funnyman.

 

 

Can I email the request or is it better via royalmail?

 

Also, how much are they entitled to charge?

 

Finally, what kind of information would I be looking for in their response?

 

Thanks,

[FunnyMan]

Hi Jack,

 

I telephoned my council to find out the name of the officer responsible for Freedom of Information, spoke to them over the phone, got an email address and emailed her then I sent a letter copy.

 

Charges are debateable, but it is meant to be 'nominal' (describe nominal though!).

 

What you are after is the lack of training of council staff, bias from the council, and anything showing that the Council staff do not know what they are talking about. From then on anything that shows them as not doing a good job.

 

Stick at it at make them sweat for a change.

[Guest Herbie]

Funnyman

 

I am sorry to introduce a negative when we are trying to be positive here, but it was our office that made the discovery that there are just 1,482 Certificated Bailiffs working in the UK and Wales. We also have copies of the contracts with around 130 local authorities and their relevant exteranl bailiffs companies so we are pretty exprienced in knowing about Freedom of Information requests and I am afraid to say that judging from past experience, you are very likely to be asked to pay rather a large amount of money UP FRONT for them to provide such a large amount of information.

 

Remember also, the th LA will be looking for a reason NOT to provide the info.

 

In any event, do keep us posted on the response , as I have been known to be wrong somtimes.....

[FunnyMan]

Hi Herbie,

 

I bow to your experience, you are far more likely to know how these things work (or rather how the Council makes them work/work). In response to your points I would then suggest that people who follow my lead should be selective on what they ask for.

 

As allways our strength is as a 'community'. Anyway I have asked for the above, hopefully, when this arrives I will be able to set the president in the courts that can turn this whole situation around.

 

Herbie glad you are watching my posts by the way, always good to have a keen eye checking ones posts.

[Guest SWALEFOYER]

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=400643

 

follow this link and i will show you how to claim your charges back from a bailiff. also you could follow this link and see what the experts say about it.

 

Flash Page

[FunnyMan]

Just an update on fees for Freedom of Information Act requests (sorry for the delay - so much to do and only 24 hours in a day!).

 

I have copied the following from the source listed (so it should be OK).

........................................................................

http://www.foi.gov.uk/yourRights/index.htm

 

How to make a request

 

Any person can make a request under the Act - there are no restrictions on your age, nationality, or where you live.

All you have to do is write to (or email) the public authority that you think holds the information you want. You should make sure that you include:

• your name
  
• an address where you can be contacted
  
• a description of the information that you want

You don't have to mention the Freedom of Information Act, but there is no reason not to if you want to.

You should try to describe the information you want in as much detail as possible - for example "minutes of the meeting where the decision to do X was made", rather than "everything you have about X". This will help the public authority find the information you need.

Public authorities must comply with your request promptly, and should provide the information to you within 20 working days (around a month). If they need more time, they must write to you and tell you when they will be able to answer your request, and why they need more time.

What it costs

 

Most requests are free. You might be asked to pay a small amount for making photocopies or postage.

If the public authority thinks that it will cost them more than £450 (or £600 for a request to central government) to find the information and prepare it for release, then they can turn down your request. They might ask you to narrow down your request by being more specific in the information you're looking for.

..........................................................

 

Hope this helps.

[demon_x_slash]

~Answer to post that has subsequently been removed~

 

Why not just start your own thread about this subject, instead of spamming every thread in the bailiff section?

 

Old habits die hard

[The Watcher]

Just an update on fees for Freedom of Information Act requests

 

Move quick ! Freedom (or lack of) Information Act (restrictions) has just passed it's thrid reading !

 

BBC NEWS | Politics | Opponents fail to block info bill

[demon_x_slash]

I can't believe they're putting restrictions on the Freedom of Information Act. Sort of defeats the point, doesn't it? Joined-up Government, indeed...

[The Watcher]

I can't believe they're putting restrictions on the Freedom of Information Act. Sort of defeats the point, doesn't it? Joined-up Government, indeed...

 

This is mainly for MPs at the moment - but once the door is open (or rather closed !) .........

[Guest Herbie]

I had not realised that it had been passed. I think it is a disgrace, as the goalposts will be moved and before we know it, all FOI requests will be exempt. Mark my words !!!

[The Watcher]

I had not realised that it had been passed. I think it is a disgrace, as the goalposts will be moved and before we know it, all Freedom of Information Act requests will be exempt. Mark my words !!!

 

You are right - it's the thin end of the wedge.

 

People are already also moaning about the Human Rights Act too, and want to "exempt" or "remove" certain clauses.

 

OUR rights are a little inconvenient for some !

[jackburton]

Ok, initial response received from local government ombudsman. E.g we've got your letter and will allocate someone to it.

 

Likely take about 4 weeks.. And during this time they state that I cannot start any court proceedings, so it looks like they'll have my money for a bit longer..

 

Now preparing letters for Magistrates and County Court...