Council Tax Debt Paid but Bailiffs turned up!

RobertoMoir

dave0922 wrote: »

After all of this, in theory, we should be left well alone, but, after reading other simillar cases it would appear that these thick skulled idiots still think that they can come and claim their fees. What should we do if this happens? I will definatly call the police, but an they actually charged their visiting fees for a debt that does not even exist anymore?

They can only claim fees that were legitimately generated, not ones generated in error or as a result of bad behaviour on their part.

dave0922

***UPDATE***

Ok, all seems to have been sorted now thank goodness.
We went to the council offices first thing this morning to query what was going on. We were informed by one of the regular councix tax officers that ther were no records showing for payment of these arrears. He was very unhelpfull and did not seem to be interested in our claim that we had paid this debt.

Keeping my cool but being very insistant, I told him that I wanted to see the accounts manager and that I would not leave the room until we saw him/her. He dissapeared and about 10 minutes later the accounts manager stepped in.

We then repeated everything over again to her. She was very understainding and very helpfull in investigating what has happened to our money.
A conclusion was soon given as she looked deep into the archives of their poor computer records. Our payments had made there way to another account, each and every installment that we had made had been debited to another persons account because they had provided us with the wrong reference number!

She was extremely appologetic at this point.

We then went on to complain about the bailiff that visited my wife because of this error. She was mortified to hear how he had gained entry, how he treated my wife and what he had put down on his levy of goods for removal.
This moron had tried to levy for a kettle and a toaster as well as a dishwasher that was listed on our tenency aggreament as part of the property (which he said he could take anyway).

She immediatly left the interview room to call rossendales and take our account out of their hands and made a formal complaint about the bailiff in question.

The police now want to send a walking officer round to take a full statement and to gather details from the council too.

Now we are to await the details of an official investigation from the council regarding this bailiffs unlawaful actions.

I cannot help but still feel angry over what has happened and all in the name of nothing! My wife has been left to feel both scared and embarrassed that she let this moron in the house. And our little girl, bless her, keeps asking if that pirate will be coming back to steal our things.

I do not know how to get the anger of my chest as there doesnt seem to be anywhere or anyone that I can release it.

Anyway, thanks to all of you that helped out with your comments and suggestions.

Dave

chevalier

I am really glad that this has at least been partly sorted. However I would be formally (ie in writing) be asking for the council to ensure that all fees that the bailiff has run up are paid by them AND that you get some form of compensation from the council for their appallling error that started all of this.

You can only think how the other person who has had YOUR money paying off THEIR debt must have been feeling. Really laughing I bet (I bet they didn't query it!!!)

good luck with things now
chev

DVardysShadow

Dave, now this is sorted, you need to follow through with a WRITTEN complaint. This should cover

• the error in allocation of your payments
• the employment of bailiffs resulting from failure of the council to write and give you an opportunity to get the matter resolved
• the grossly offensive behaviour of the bailiff in your home and that the council cannot distance themselves from this, because the bailiff is their agent.

Beetlemama

Glad you got it sorted, it's almost always a legitimate error when I hear a customer who is bound and determined that they have paid. Check if you paid to the wrong account before the summons too, just in case, it might be that you shouldn't have received a summons, in which case you can claim back your costs, ours range from £45 to £78 depending on which year the summons was issued.

dalsicle

hallowitch wrote: »

yes you did



“Information preliminary to distress

45A.—(1) No distress shall be made under these regulations unless, no less than 14 days before a visit in connection with the distress is first made to the premises where it is to be levied, the authority have sent to the debtor written notice of the matters specified in paragraph (2) below.
(2) The matters are—
(a)the fact that a liability order has been made against the debtor;
(b)the amount in respect of which the liability order was made and, where this is a different amount, the amount which remains outstanding;
(c)a warning that unless the amount specified has been paid before the expiry of 14 days beginning on the date of the sending of the notice, distress may be levied;
(d)notice that if distress is levied further costs will be incurred by the debtor;
(e)the fees prescribed in Schedule 5 to these Regulations;
(f)the address and telephone number at which the debtor can communicate with the authority.”

Sorry to highjack the thread but where did this quote come from? We are going through a fight with our local council and they insist that they don't have to send 14 days notice to this address, only to the address the arrears relate to. I'm desperately searching for proof to print off to send with my response.

Back on topic, I'm so glad everything is sorted for you but I would not let it rest there if I were you, after all they were happy to put you through this trauma and expect you to accept a simple apology.

hallowitch

dalsicle wrote: »

Sorry to highjack the thread but where did this quote come from? We are going through a fight with our local council and they insist that they don't have to send 14 days notice to this address, only to the address the arrears relate to. I'm desperately searching for proof to print off to send with my response.

Back on topic, I'm so glad everything is sorted for you but I would not let it rest there if I were you, after all they were happy to put you through this trauma and expect you to accept a simple apology.

Its an amendment in 1998 to regulation 45 of The Council Tax( Administration and Enforcement Regulation) 1992

original
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1992/613/contents/made
amendment
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/295/regulation/7/made


As stated previously i am no expert however my interpretation of this

is if you have moved home then i would say this letter would have to be sent to your present address as this is the address where distress is to be levied

If you are having no joy with the revenues dep of your council make a formal complaint to the CEO go through the complaint procedure and take it to the ombudsman

I take it you have had a visit from the bailiffs

start a new thread
have the bailiffs levied goods
what goods have they levied
whats the outstanding balance on the liability order
if you moved during the liable year (after the liability order was granted)has this been adjusted

What bailiff firm are you dealing with

RobertoMoir

hallowitch wrote: »

As stated previously i am no expert however my interpretation of this

is if you have moved home then i would say this letter would have to be sent to your present address as this is the address where distress is to be levied

My interpretation is a little different. And it's that they have to send notice to the most current address they have on file. If someone has moved but not told them, then notice sent to the address on file would count even if the levy is carried out at a different address.

I'm basing that on both the wording of the act (it could be read 'your' way or 'my' way but note that it says that notice must be sent "to the debtor" and this is distinct from "the premises where it is to be levied" in that sentence) and on the standard for serving notice of c'tax arrears in the first place, which just requires them to pop a letter in the post to the current address for someone, not to ensure that the letter was received.

DVardysShadow

RobertoMoir wrote: »

My interpretation is a little different. And it's that they have to send notice to the most current address they have on file. If someone has moved but not told them, then notice sent to the address on file would count even if the levy is carried out at a different address.

I'm basing that on both the wording of the act (it could be read 'your' way or 'my' way but note that it says that notice must be sent "to the debtor" and this is distinct from "the premises where it is to be levied" in that sentence) and on the standard for serving notice of c'tax arrears in the first place, which just requires them to pop a letter in the post to the current address for someone, not to ensure that the letter was received.

I would say that the act is worded in such a way that it does not really envisage that the address of the debtor and the address where the levy is to be made are any different.

It defies either common sense or even decency to send a notice to any other address that the one where the levy is to be made. The notice is plainly intended to give the [alleged] debtor a chance to pay up and resolve the matter.

Now I could imagine that if the bailiff company were left to do the notice, they would send the notice elsewhere, to gain the advantage of surprise and to open the gateway to fees.

hallowitch

agree it could be read both ways

my argument would be that the premises where it is to be levied is my present address not my previous therefore a letter should have been sent to my present address

there was a thread on another forum a while back and this was his argument he did get all his bailiffs fees removed but in that case the debtor had informed the council of his change of address (and could prove it )