Dealing with Bailiffs Harassment

never-in-doubt

JAMJK wrote: »

Never - in - doubt.

I know for certain that no money is outstanding to the council, however I do not wish to leave the matter of fees unresolved with the bailiff. I would also like to know for certain if the bailiff is entitled to claim a fee for a levy carried out without entering the premises.

The ruling below has been posted on another forum were I raised the question. Is anyone in a position to confirm that this ruling would apply to any levy that has not been conducted from within the premises and wether there is a seperate ruling that does cover it.

I am sure that the bailiff who is trying to charge me, must be doing the same to others and I would like to establish if he could ever enforce such a charge.

If there is nothing owing to the council then you are not responsible for retrospective charges - pure and simple. That said, I am specifically referring to the assumption that you cleared the council debt prior to the bailiff attending? If you were not pre-notified of the bailiffs attendance (you would deny this anyway) then of course they cannot charge you.

You have to speak to the council and tell them to get rid of the bailiffs.

Regards to Evans v South Ribble - I think you are confusing this case with your own, the bailiff returned and took her cars - even though they had never entered the house.

They lost, didn't they? (the bailiffs)

Read the wiki entry here and a couple of other scenarios: http://www.consumerwiki.co.uk/index.php/Bailiffs:_Invalid_Walking_Possession%3F

Don't worry - just speak to the council in the morning

Another example:

DAVIDSON V ROACH (1991)

BRISTOL COUNTY COURT.

Background:
Mr Davidson obtained an injunction founded on an action for both trespass and wrongful interference against a company of bailiff by the name of Roach & Co. The grounds for this were that: the bailiff had apparently tried to levy on goods by posting two notices of distress through the door.

The bailiff however had never entered the property, had not identified any goods, or taken walking possession etc.
A month later, with payment still outstanding, the bailiffs returned and removed goods that included three cars, this time posting a notice of Distress through a window. Just before the hearing was due to take place, the firms of bailiffs: Roach & Company settled out of court apparently conceding that their actions had been invalid.

RobertoMoir

JAMJK wrote: »

I would like some help please.

Can a bailiff carry out a valid levy through a letter box.

No. As I remember it, to levy on an item the bailiff has to be in a position to legally take that item there and then. A levy is a seizure of goods, and you can't seize something you can't, er, physcially seize.

I think Evans vs. South Ribble supports my memory of the required process - IIRC the judgement effectively says that all the people who claim that a bailiff has to touch everything and make some silly "I seize this property in the name of 'er Maj innit" statement are wrong, but importantly for you that a bailiff can't just peek through closed windows and write stuff down either.

JAMJK wrote: »

Also a letter has been placed through my door saying the following.

"I will re attend your premises from 6am 14/9/09 and may remove your goods, which can be done in your absence as the law directs with regards to removal of assets to sell at public auction to clear the above debt under the Liability Order that we hold."

My wife is going frantic, the debt related to council tax, it has now been resolved and I am due a refund, however I have refused to pay any bailiffs fees, which they are now claiming. They claim that there is a debt outstanding under another reference. That debt appears to me just to be for fess, i have asked for a breakdown and they have refused

The bailiff's letter is the usual bluff stuff and nonsense they all always use.

Phone the council and complain about the illegal fees (the levy fee) charged by their agent, remind them that they are responsible for the actions of their agent, and note also that any attempt to return to your property to enforce an illegally taken levy would be trespass and you'll consider taking legal action against council and their agents on that basis.

If the council employee you speak to is too thick to understand this, phone your local councillor and repeat all the above to them and ask for their help (NOTE: not your MP or your mate "who knows someone at the council", your actual local councillor) because they are in a position to make very effective representations on your behalf.

never-in-doubt

RobertoMoir wrote: »

If the council employee you speak to is too thick to understand this, phone your local councillor and repeat all the above to them and ask for their help (NOTE: not your MP or your mate "who knows someone at the council", your actual local councillor) because they are in a position to make very effective representations on your behalf.

Now that is opinionated Mr Moir! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Classic quote of the week! Wrong use of the word "if" :rotfl:

RobertoMoir

heh... sometimes there's no point in mincing your words!

Bleddry

Just wondered where one would stand if ones dog took umbrage against intruding bailiff climbing through an open window or unlocked door, and savaged him?
Or if the homeowner was unaware of a bailiff entering their property, and thought it was a burglar, and so taking necessary action of a violent nature in order to protect their young brood, accidentally killed him - how would that be viewed?

fatbelly

Bleddry wrote: »

Just wondered where one would stand if ones dog took umbrage against intruding bailiff climbing through an open window or unlocked door, and savaged him?

Wasn't there some classic legal case involving a bailiff who tried to force entry and the householder knocked him senseless with a milk bottle? The householder was found to 'exercising her rights' under some ancient legislation.

Edit: just found a reference to it on this thread

never-in-doubt

fatbelly wrote: »

Edit: just found a reference to it on this thread

Thanks for this. I have PM'd the guy with the knowledge (lets-fight-bailiffs) to ask him to join MSE and offer input to this thread. He seems clued up on the legal elements which means more help for this thread when he joins MSE

We can never have enough know-it-alls when it comes to fighting bailiffs and we have a few people here already, the legal expert will round things off nicely. He has added some valid cases that will come in handy for research if required.

:beer: :beer:

RobertoMoir

fatbelly wrote: »

Wasn't there some classic legal case involving a bailiff who tried to force entry and the householder knocked him senseless with a milk bottle? The householder was found to 'exercising her rights' under some ancient legislation.

Edit: just found a reference to it on this thread

That particular case that Lawyers Online was referring to was found to be illegal entry, therefore trespass and that was what the homeowner's defence for braining the bailiff hinged upon. Not sure how things would have gone otherwise, but I do know two things

1) a bailiff would be mad to do an entry of this kind without a witness and/or police presence.

2) In answer to bleddry's question, the court would have to believe things really happened that way, not "I thought the bailiff was a burglar wink wink nudge nudge"

lets_fight_bailiffs

Bleddry wrote: »

Just wondered where one would stand if ones dog took umbrage against intruding bailiff climbing through an open window or unlocked door, and savaged him?
Or if the homeowner was unaware of a bailiff entering their property, and thought it was a burglar, and so taking necessary action of a violent nature in order to protect their young brood, accidentally killed him - how would that be viewed?

Hi guy's

as long as you have signs on all gates Beware of the dog enter at own risk then nobody can do a thing as you have already informed them of the danger.

LFB

never-in-doubt

lets_fight_bailiffs wrote: »

Hi guy's

as long as you have signs on all gates Beware of the dog enter at own risk then nobody can do a thing as you have already informed them of the danger.

LFB

Hiya

Thanks for joining up to MSE - you got my message then eh? You'll find this site is a little less 'open' to unenforceability and non payment of debt, and the likes. If people turn on you best to ignore them as they are rather naive when it comes to the law.

But, thanks again for joining - hope you can add as much input here as you did on CAG. Any chance you could replicate the post from CAG with the case referrals to the milk bottle incident etc....

Thanks mate and welcome to MSE :beer: