Bailiff Letter

RobertoMoir

Insomniac666 wrote: »

can they levy on items they can see through the window?

Not and have it count as a valid levy, no. My understanding is that in order to levy on an item, the bailiff must be able to take it (a levy is a seizure of an item, after all). I don't mean that they need to be able to pick it up or something, specialist help can be used to remove seized goods, I mean to say that they cannot levy on something unless they have legal access to seize it.

RobertoMoir

RAS wrote: »

By the way, I understand the the items on which they levy have to be capable of meeting the debt when auctioned. So a welcome mat is not going to suffice.

Not sure its a legal requirement (I think it isn't, but it's been a long time since I had to remember all the ins and outs as you know), but its definitely good practice to levy only if you can levy on sufficient goods that you might reasonably expect to meet the debt.

This raises an interesting point. Strictly speaking, if they've levied on the welcome mat and a couple of pot plants, the OP could tell them that they're welcome to come by and seize the goods they have levied upon... they can't "re-levy", and they'd have to return the debt to the council after that.

Not that I suggest that as a strategy because it might be more trouble than its worth getting them to accept they can't re-levy... but its an interesting little diversion. And a good idea if they turn up and threaten to remove stuff. IF they've already levied that is.

Insomniac666

RobertoMoir wrote: »

Not and have it count as a valid levy, no. My understanding is that in order to levy on an item, the bailiff must be able to take it (a levy is a seizure of an item, after all). I don't mean that they need to be able to pick it up or something, specialist help can be used to remove seized goods, I mean to say that they cannot levy on something unless they have legal access to seize it.

Well it's the car they put the levy against, so now it's just a case of trying to get this payment down as low as possible... I wonder if i should wait until Friday and just say I can only pay £130? I could pay more, but I'll be re-budgeting for the rest of the month... what happened to sympathetic people!

i'm just concerned over the cost of the 3rd visit when they put the levy against the car.. I mean is £125 - Statutory Attendance fee and £55 fee for securing debt right after charging £39 on secret visits (i say secret as we didn't know they'd been)

Charco_2

I dont think that is right, is it?

They cant levy on a car that is on finance... it's not technically yours if it's on HP!

They can't levy on any belongings in your house if they haven't been in your house, and they haven't been in your house if you haven't let them in (by opening a door to let them in or leaving a door or window open through which they could gain access!)

Up until this point i thought they could only charge £42.50 for their services - regadless of how many times they say they've been to your house!

Sort this out with your council, and only pay the council directly. Even if they say it's in the hands of the bailiffs now, they'll still cash any cheques you send them, just mark it clearly for your account. Any money you send to the bailiffs you may as well throw in the gutter. They'll take cut after after cut. Dealwith the orginal debt to the council and then pay up the legal £42.50 charge.

(I hope i'm not misleading you here - it sounds to me as though the bailiffs are certainly mis-leadin you though!)

Insomniac666

I'll find out who my local councillor is now and i think a phone call might be made, hopefully they'll get involved and be nice, seeing i'm looking to pay this debt off.... I mean the arrears are on a house I lost through repossesion, long story but it's charges that we had to pay whilst it was vacant (buyers fell through)

Insomniac666

Insomniac666 wrote: »

I'll find out who my local councillor is now and i think a phone call might be made, hopefully they'll get involved and be nice, seeing i'm looking to pay this debt off.... I mean the arrears are on a house I lost through repossesion, long story but it's charges that we had to pay whilst it was vacant (buyers fell through)

Well my local councillor is an ex-policeman, I think he was an Inspector if i remember right... (recently moved back area I grew up in..) so hopefully he'll be a bit brassy with dodgy bailiffs?

Charco_2

Properties exempt from council tax

Some property is exempt from council tax altogether. It may be exempt for only a short period, for example, six months, or indefinitely.

Properties which may be exempt include:

• property which is empty. This means it has to be unoccupied. The property also has to be substantially unfurnished. The exemption applies for a maximum of six months and the property has to be vacant for the whole of this period (although up to six weeks of occupation during the period is allowed)

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/life/tax/council_tax.htm#Propertiesexemptfromcounciltax

not sure this is much use to you now, but could be worth looking in to it retrospectively... perhaps the irony of being harrassed like this for a debt that needn't have been might be too much though!

Personally, i'd try everything, especially if you can prove you were out of the property and paying council tax elsewhere, perhaps!!!!

Insomniac666

well we were paying C.tax on the property we moved into, a firm offered to purchase our property on verge of repossesion, then stalled us for a few weeks then offered £20k lower price than first offered, it all went wrong then after we had to decline because it meant negative equity and the company we had secured loan with refused to play ball and we lost the house, then found out we owed the ctax...

RAS

Whre you living in the house?

RobertoMoir

Insomniac666 wrote: »

Well it's the car they put the levy against, so now it's just a case of trying to get this payment down as low as possible... I wonder if i should wait until Friday and just say I can only pay £130? I could pay more, but I'll be re-budgeting for the rest of the month... what happened to sympathetic people!

i'm just concerned over the cost of the 3rd visit when they put the levy against the car.. I mean is £125 - Statutory Attendance fee and £55 fee for securing debt right after charging £39 on secret visits (i say secret as we didn't know they'd been)

OK.

As Charco says, if the car is on finance, they probably can't touch it. Impossible to say for sure, but you can find this out - as you know, with certain kinds of finance arrangements, you do not actually own the object being purchased until you've paid off a certain amount of the debt related to it. If the debt being paid off has not yet passed this "tipping point" then the object concerned (e.g. your car) isn't yours. And the bailiffs can't take something that you don't own.

HAVE YOU ACTUALLY HAD THE "NOTICE OF DISTRESS", the bit of paper with the list of seized goods on it? Sorry to keep asking, but this is kinda important.

The "Securing debt" fee is a bunch of rubbish regardless of the status of anything else here, which I think is grounds to follow the route of getting the council to take the debt back due to the fact their agents are committing fraud by adding made up fees to your case, and to raise a formal complaint about the bailiff handling the case to whichever court certified them. We've then got the first and second visit fees, which they'll probably argue that they did do, no really they did honest...

Now if they'd otherwise behaved impeccably, I'd be prepared to at least listen to their argument myself, I'm sure you can imagine lots of couples lie about getting these letters, or honestly misplace them, or one partner picks them up, panics and never tells the other, etc.... Not suggesting any of that has happened here, just saying that I'm sure you can see why it's a bit of a toss up for this stuff.

However: For this case I'd suggest to the council that the bailff's adding of made up and fraudulent fees to your case besides that essentially proves that the bailiff's word clearly cannot be trusted on the matter of the letters. You've already proved their dishonesty at this point, you don't have to take their word on anything.