Bbc Bailiffs Whisleblower

rog2

file_wizzard wrote:

The danger here is that the Bill will be passed with little or no objection by the general public, and it will be yet another reduction in your civil liberty’s.

Write to your MP, I have !

Thanks - I feel so strongly that I will, indeed write to my MP, but what it really needs is for this to be brought into the arena of public debate - any ideas?

cattie1

totally agree rog_2 but no ideas i'm afraid!

rog2

aliyah wrote:

i was pleased to see Drakes bring scrutinised!

they chased me mercilessly over a Congestion Charge of £60 plus costs totalled £380!!

came home one day after only two letters from them and numerous telephone calls from me to Drakes to say the charge was a mistake (I am exempt) and that I was challenging it only to find they had clamped my sons Motability car.

I would imagine that you would be justified in insisting that these criminals are properly dealt with by the police and that you are fully compensated for the stress that they subjected you to.

rchddap1

My first instinct is to get Martin involved and see what they think.

iwanttosave_2

rchddap1 wrote:

My first instinct is to get Martin involved and see what they think.

I was thinking the same, getting a campain going that will force the government to reign them in.

rchddap1

Besides Martin & the crew may already know about this and have some opinions or something already on the boil (so to speak)

deary65

iwanttosave wrote:

I was thinking the same, getting a campain going that will force the government to reign them in.

You will be lucky!This is a bill giving them even more powers.


The Lord Chancellor's office have certainly worked overtime on this one!

It is 544 pages long (if you include the impact statement that accompanies it), in seven parts and the contents list alone runs into ten pages!



The debt enforcement section is particularly revealing as are some of the schedules and may be alarming to some debt-laden students.

Some might consider this a 'thugs charter' since an enforcement officer may not only use 'reasonable force', he is, when 'securing' goods on the highway(presumably this means towing away your motor car to sell in satisfaction of a debt) absolved of all civil and criminal liability providing he acts with 'reasonable care' (see draft clause 13(2) Schedule 11)'!

Some may take the view that this is a very draconian piece of proposed legislation and very disturbing reading indeed!
If want to read it.
http://www.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm68/6885/6885.pdf

iwanttosave_2

I started to read it from the other thread and then saw how long it was so gave up.

If you look at my first post on here, you will see what guidelines I mean.

Skint1

This is why when Bailiffs/Dcas post on here people should be wary of their advice. They spread misinformation with a little bit of truth to cloud any advice given on here. remember they are on commission and couldn't care less about you.

ZTD

deary65 wrote:

Some may take the view that this is a very draconian piece of proposed legislation and very disturbing reading indeed!
If want to read it.
http://www.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm68/6885/6885.pdf

Just from a quick skip through, I find clause 217 on page 312 quite amusing in an ironic sort of way.

The Americans went through a similar process, "reforming" their bankrupcy laws. In the month before the law came into effect, bankruptcies were at a record high, with people queuing for hours to go bankrupt.

With bankruptcies at an all-time high right now, we may just see just how high they *can* go.

It will make people more afraid of taking on debt, and may cause an unseemly contraction in the financial system. But the ability of governments to get things consistently wrong has been called the "law of unintended consequences" - and this is just another example.