Council Tax Arrears now paid in full but bailiff still calling

[alexteh]

I got into some arrears with my council tax last year - a grand total of £75! I paid it direct to the council at the beginning of this month and have phoned the council to confirm they received it and that it had fully cleared last years arrears (which it has). The bailiff who has been chasing it (it's the same one who posted the walking posession order through the door asking me to sign and return) "visited" again today - my wife was in and in the time it took her to come downstairs after he knocked, he'd managed to leave a note through the door and had gone.

 

My question is, as the debt is now paid in full and he's after over £200 in "bailiff fees" can I just tell him to get stuffed or do I have to pay the thieving, lying, lowlife ******?

[bungy]

The legislation provides that "fees and charges" are dischargede first so in fact what you have done is to pay part of the fees and charges and the Council Tax itself is still outstanding.

 

However, the point is - are the charges legal? If the bailiff has not gained access to your property and has not levied on anything then all he can charge is for the first two visits (£24.50 for the first one and £18 for the second). He cannot levy or take walking possession by posting something through the letterbox. If he is trying to charge you £200 without having levied he is acting illegally and I suggest you make a complaint against his certificate.

[alexteh]

I paid the money direct to the council by internet banking and not to the bailiff. I've confirmed with the council that there is now NO outstanding balance owed to them so the payment has definitely been allocated against the council tax debt and not bailiff fees.

 

I will speak to the council again today.

[alexteh]

Useless gits at the council had mis-allocated the payment even though they'd told me last week it had been allocated correctly. Anyway it's now all sorted and I kind of educated the council lady about what bailiffs were and were not allowed to do. She seemed very interested and asked that any future letters sent to the bailiff be copied to her as they had "had problems with them before". She will be contacting the bailiff today to let them know that as far as the council is concerned that the debt is satisfied in full.

 

Do I need to write to the bailiff again disputing the charges? I will (begrudgingly) pay the 1st and 2nd visit fees if I have to but anything else (all £200-odd) I feel is unjustified as they never had a walking possession order so can't legitimately claim for a van or locksmith etc.

[bungy]

I am sure that the Council will have applied your money to clear their debt and will not have passed any money on to the bailiff. Therefore, from their point of view the debt is paid in full. Nevertheless, the money is supposed to be used to discharge the fees first. This means that the bailiff is still entitled to pursue LEGITIMATE fees which in this case I do not see can amount to more than a first and second visit.

 

If I were you, I would now be complaining to the court where the bailiff is certificated (assuming that he / she is certificated) regarding the apparent attempt to charge around £160 in illegal fees.

[The Watcher]

I am sure that the Council will have applied your money to clear their debt and will not have passed any money on to the bailiff. Therefore, from their point of view the debt is paid in full. Nevertheless, the money is supposed to be used to discharge the fees first. This means that the bailiff is still entitled to pursue LEGITIMATE fees which in this case I do not see can amount to more than a first and second visit.

 

If I were you, I would now be complaining to the court where the bailiff is certificated (assuming that he / she is certificated) regarding the apparent attempt to charge around £160 in illegal fees.

 

Personally - as the "bailiff" has broken the law by posting a WPO through your door and asked you to sign and return it - would make them wait for any fees - and then challenge them in Court !

 

Keep the letter from the "bailiff"!

 

I bet you never hear from them again.

 

This is why I suggest everyone deals ONLY with the Council - it's the fastest way for them to get their money and you won't be ripped-off in the process.

[shywazz]

HOLD FIRE, i too had a DCA chasing me for a small water bill that had been over looked after moving, the amount was less than £45.00 after 2 years i was contacted by this DCA and the bill had rose to just under £400

most likely there charges over the 2 years been added.

 

I made contact with the water company concerned, paid the figure that was owed to them direct, less than a week later i had written confirmation that the bill was now settled in full, i made NO contact with the DCA but within 3 wks a letter arrived stating the bill had been paid in full, and no further contact would be made.

I say hold fire, as the DCA that are dealing with your debt, will write to you, once the council have notified them that the debt is cleared. There can add charges etc but there never even asked me about them. so just wait to see there letter when it arrives.

[alexteh]

I was thinking of sending the following letter to the bailiff company (copying the council). What do you folks think?

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

 

Further to my letter of 19 June 2007 (also copied to the Council), I am writing to advise you that, as you failed to reply to my request for an itemised list of your charges, the outstanding payment of £xx.xx was made directly to the council on 29 June 2007.

 

 

Despite this previous letter, you have again sent the bailiff to my property in order to attempt to bully and intimidate me into paying what I believe are your illegal and fraudulent charges. The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1993 (2nd Amendment) states that:

Regulation 8 substitutes a new Schedule of the charges which may be made for matters connected with distress for unpaid council tax. The principal changes to the charges for distress are—

(a) the prescription of a charge which varies according to whether a visit where no goods are taken is the first (£15) or second (£12.50). The former provision allowed a charge related to the costs and fees actually incurred, subject to a prescribed maximum;

(b) an increase from £12.50 to £15 in respect of the maximum charge for distress levied for sums due which at the time of the levy do not exceed £100, and on the first £100 of sums due which exceed that amount;

© a reduction from 45 pence per day to 10 pence per day for taking walking possession of goods;

(d) an increase from £4.50 per day to £10 per day for taking close possession of goods.

 

 

Despite your bailiff’s seeming belief to the contrary, posting a “Walking Possession Order” through the door asking us to sign and return it is NOT legal. We have NEVER signed a walking possession order, nor have we ever allowed the bailiff to gain entry to our property.

 

 

The only possible charges that can therefore be claimed are for a first and second visit (£15 and £12.50 respectively).

 

 

Without the Walking Possession Order, despite what the bailiff claims in his note of this week, the bailiff has no right to enter our property, nor to remove goods and therefore would have no reason to attend with a van and/or locksmith and any fees that he may have added for these items are therefore fraudulent.

 

 

In order to bring this matter to a close, what I require from yourselves is a full itemised description of all charges you have added to this account including a detailed description of precisely what they were for, how the figure was determined and under exactly which legislation you believe they are justified.

 

 

Should you fail to comply with the above, I feel that I have no alternative but to lodge a formal complaint with xxx County Court who are responsible for certificating your bailiff, Mr. X. Smith who I note will be up for a recertification on xx October 2007.

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

[demon_x_slash]

I would check those fees stated - I think you may have an old copy of those regulations. The fees went up in April to £24.50 first visit and £18 second visit - I think someone also mentioned them above.

[alexteh]

Yep you're right. I'll amend the letter to reflect the costs.

[chris600uk]

doesn't this bit of the The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 mean that paying the council direct and in full ends the bailliffs right to try and levy?

Distress

45.—(1) Where a liability order has been made, the authority which applied for the order may levy the appropriate amount by distress and sale of the goods of the debtor against whom the order was made.

 

(2) The appropriate amount for the purposes of paragraph (1) is the aggregate of—

(a) an amount equal to any outstanding sum which is or forms part of the amount in respect of which the liability order was made, and

(b) a sum determined in accordance with Schedule 5 in respect of charges connected with the distress.

(3) If, before any goods are seized, the appropriate amount (including charges arising up to the time of the payment or tender) is paid or tendered to the authority, the authority shall accept the amount and the levy shall not be proceeded with.

 

Or am I about to be corrected:idea:

 

Regards,

 

Chris