Bailiff Letter

never-in-doubt

RobertoMoir wrote: »

At this point, their levy is about as much use to the bailiff company or the council as a roof rack on a helicopter.

Classic - nice one roberto (beats my chocolate fireguard one) :rotfl::rotfl:

What exactly do you do for a living now? You ought to go into partnership with Herbie.... :D

Insomniac666

RobertoMoir wrote: »

Ok, sorry, its a long thread and we should be clear.

Problems that render their levy invalid:
Illegal fees

1. WP fee for an unsigned WP
2. "Securing Debt" fee. Can the head of revenues show you/us where that is allowed at this (or in fact any) stage of the recovery process?
3. Charges for 1st and 2nd visit fees. 1st and 2nd visit letters not received.
4. It appears they've levied and charged a van fee for the same visit. Big no-no.
5. (didn't you say the WP fee was over £100? Way too much)

Procedural defects

1. Fraudulently charged you for a WP on the debt despite you not signing a WP.
2. Levied against goods you do not own (controlling interest in your car still held by finance company). They can't remove goods you do not own for your debt, and I do not believe they are permitted to "re-levy" for a debt.
3. Claimed to have visited you before but have not (1st & 2nd visits).
4. Levy and removal on same visit (van fee for levy visit). Not only is this an illegal fee, but its probably bad practice as most councils will want to recover debt via more efficient mechanisms than removal of goods.

At this point, their levy is about as much use to the bailiff company or the council as a roof rack on a helicopter. Any further enforcement action taken off the back of a clearly invalid levy would be at minimum a trespass against you and therefore there is nothing the bailiffs can legally do right now except hope that you're not taking advice from a forum full of people who know how to help people make official complaints about county court certified bailiffs;).

The bailiffs are agents of the council. The council are responsible for the actions of their agents. The head of revenues / recovery / finance / whatever your local council is calling it today is responsible to their superiors for action taken by his department.

In your position I would expect / demand that the council recall the debt and allow you to pay by arrangement. I would expect as a matter of course that all the fees added by the bailiffs will be struck off, as they've clearly been adding illegal fees so they can no longer be trusted that any of their actions have been taken as they claim and therefore that any of their fees were ever legally added.

You will have to repay the fees the council themselves have incurred, which will be the cost of going to court to obtain a liability order against you. I suggest you accept that gracefully as there's naff all you can do about it in the short term, though I do recall there being a question about whether or not you were liable council tax in the first place as the house was empty?

It would be quite amusing if you turned out never to owe the money in the first place in the end! If that might be the case, I'd mention that to the council too - a legitimate dispute over the debt only strengthens the need for them to take it off the bailiffs.

Ask the council for the name of the certificated bailiff concerned, too, and tell them you are considering a complaint to the certifying court due to their behaviour.

as I'm in work at the moment, I can't wait in a holding call to the council but they do have a revenues generic email so I'm about to but a very long wordy email, stealing pretty much what you said with some artistic freedom to make out i'm the clever person... I'll keep you all informed what the reply is!! :T

Insomniac666

FOR THE ATTENTION OF HEAD OF COUNCIL TAX ARREARS

I am writing in respect to the outstanding arrears of council tax and subsequent bailiff action.

I am requesting that you put any further bailiff action on hold while their incompetence I have listed below is resolved, in order to minimise the seriousness of the official complaint I *will* be making about their behaviour, and of course to minimise the costs of any claims I will be forced to make against the council for the actions of their agents should they take goods that don't belong to them (theft) in pursuit of an invalid levy (trespass, rendering any further action the bailiffs could possibly take invalid).

The problems which have been identified which I feel render their levy invalid are as follows:

Illegal fees

1. WP fee for an unsigned WP
2. "Securing Debt" fee. Can the head of revenues show you/us where that is allowed at this (or in fact any) stage of the recovery process?
3. Charges for 1st and 2nd visit fees. 1st and 2nd visit letters not received.
4. It appears they've levied and charged a van fee for the same visit or charged me over £100 for the Walking Possesion Order which I feel is an extremely high and unfair amount (it is unclear which category it falls into as the WPO is not well written)

Procedural defects

1. Fraudulently charged me for a WP on the debt despite I have not signed a WP.
2. Levied against goods I do not own (controlling interest in my car still held by finance company). They can't remove goods I do not own for my debt, and I do not believe they are permitted to "re-levy" for a debt.
3. Claimed to have visited me before but have not (1st & 2nd visits).
4. Levy and removal on same visit (van fee for levy visit). Not only is this an illegal fee, but its probably bad practice as most councils will want to recover debt via more efficient mechanisms than removal of goods. However as I said above due to the scrawl on the WPO posted to me it is not clear which category they refer too.

I therefore expect / demand that the council recall the debt and allow me to pay by arrangement. I would expect as a matter of course that all the fees added by the bailiffs will be struck off, as they've clearly been adding illegal fees so they can no longer be trusted that any of their actions have been taken as they claim and therefore that any of their fees were ever legally added.

I will repay the fees the council themselves have incurred, which will be the cost of going to court to obtain a liability order against myself.

I also add that we were in contact with the council tax department querying these arrears as the property had been vacated and also arrears of council tax had previously been paid. We did not receive any firther correspondence until Bailiff action.

Please can you supply me name of the certificated bailiff concerned, too, and tell them you are considering a complaint to the certifying court due to their behaviour

Insomniac666

How does that read?

should I mention that when I offered to make a payment to the bailiff's it was refused as "being not enough"? and should I include that the fees now stand at over £200? the initial bill was £284

RobertoMoir

I think you should say you'll be happy to discuss the matter with them, but you're looking for the withdrawal of the bailiff as a minimal starting point and that you're reserving your right to make formal complaints about everyone concerned.

Insomniac666

RobertoMoir wrote: »

I think you should say you'll be happy to discuss the matter with them, but you're looking for the withdrawal of the bailiff as a minimal starting point and that you're reserving your right to make formal complaints about everyone concerned.

I'll stick that at the end....!!

RobertoMoir

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Classic - nice one roberto (beats my chocolate fireguard one) :rotfl::rotfl:

What exactly do you do for a living now? You ought to go into partnership with Herbie.... :D

I'm currently deputy head of IT for a college in the next town over. Computer were much more my thing than bailiffing ever was, so Herbie is still the boss around here I think :-)

Insomniac666

RobertoMoir wrote: »

I'm currently deputy head of IT for a college in the next town over. Computer were much more my thing than bailiffing ever was, so Herbie is still the boss around here I think :-)

I'm a fledgling training IT analyst in the world of old Mainframe JCL! perhaps i can get IT advice aswell as debt!!!

RobertoMoir

Mainframe JCL? IBM? I haven't touched that since MVS/ESA days! Before I became a bailiff, for a start, and those memories appear in sepia tones with the hovis advert music playing over them as it is!

Insomniac666

RobertoMoir wrote: »

Mainframe JCL? IBM? I haven't touched that since MVS/ESA days! Before I became a bailiff, for a start, and those memories appear in sepia tones with the hovis advert music playing over them as it is!

it's horrible and hardwork! just doing basic formula!!!

perhaps I should have stayed in the pensions adminstration business!

I've sent that email now telling them to contact me by email, so i can keep track and also I can post replies here!!