the bailiffs have been around...:(

projectjordan

hi all

this week the bailiff has been sent to my home to collect 2 outstanding council tax bills. as i was at work, my wife let him in, under the impression that he was from the council.

the 2 bills are £975 and £1213

as we do not have that sort of money spare, they have listed a number of items from the home such as tv, microwave and 3pc suite.

we have just phoned them to make a small payment of £25 on each account, they claim however that a minimum payment of £1000 across the 2 must be made before they will discuss a repayment plan.

is this usually the case?

any advise greatly appreciated

Ryan

unholyangel

I think your best bet would be to contact your local citizens advice.

It may be different in scotland, but from what i remember, they cant sell necessities. I remember reading a list from a template the sheriff officers (scotlands version of bailiffs i believe) and i'm pretty sure that there are certain things they cant take.

Found this site (although not an expert so you may be better asking over on the debt board): http://www.debtquestions.co.uk/prob_bailiffs.php#take

It states:
There are some exceptions to what the bailiff can take from your home:-

A bailiff acting on a County Court Judgment cannot seize clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment or other goods necessary to meet basic domestic needs.

Generally, no bailiff can seize tools, books, vehicles or other equipment necessary for personal use in employment or business. However, a bailiff acting for Poll Tax, Council Tax, VAT and Tax may be able to do so.

unholyangel

Just also found this on another site which sounds awfully similar to the list i've read before!

Bailiffs acting on behalf of the magistrates' court cannot seize the following goods:
clothing, beds and bedding tools of the trade
basic domestic needs of the family would normally include fridge, cookers, freezers, but may not include video recorders, second TV's, jewellery, washing machines, stereos or microwave cookers.

The fact they list second tv's as "may not include" gives the impression they cant seize your primary tv......anyone with any personal experience to say otherwise? I know a few of our regulars used to work for bailiffs so perhaps they can better advise

hallowitch

they have listed a number of items from the home such as tv, microwave and 3pc suite.

can you list exactly what the bailiff levied and fees charged

I assume they have left 2 notice of seizures/distress listing the same good

can you tell us the name of the bailiff firm (looking for Equita or ross&roberts)

have you confirmed with the council the amount of each liability order
the date each liability order was passed to the bailiff firm

Is your bailiff certificated to the firm he/she is employed by
www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/CertificatedBailiffs/ this list is not always 100%accurate you may have to phone the Ministry of Justice Public Register of bailiffs on 020 3334 6355

hallowitch

MRS AMBROSE v NOTTINHGAM CITY COUNCIL
This is another well known legal cases that has been relied upon many times when either issuing proceedings, or one that can be referred to when writing a letter of complaint. This case concerns a lady by the name of Mrs Ambrose who claimed that a levy (distress) was irregular as bailiffs had removed goods from the home that were necessary for “providing the basic domestic needs of the family”
Background:
Mrs Ambrose and her husband had an unpaid Council Tax bill for £851.00 owing to Nottingham City Council. In September 2003, Rossendale’s bailiffs attended at their home to levy distress on goods. Rossendale’s had entered the property, where they identified items that were listed on a Walking Possession. Next to those items listed, the bailiff wrote the words: “and all other goods on the premises unless exempt or specially exempt by statute.” The bailiff had not looked around the house; he had merely entered one room and was therefore unable to see which items were “exempt”
Regulation 45 of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 lists the following items as being exempt from seizure:
"Such tools, books, vehicles and other items of equipment as are necessary for use personally in employment, business or vocation"
"Such clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment and provisions as are necessary for satisfying basic domestic needs of the person and family".
As the Council Tax remained unpaid, the bailiff returned with a van to seize furniture that included a sofa, footstool and two dining chairs.
District Judge Cooper agreed that the seizure was irregular as the bailiff had removed furniture that was necessary for “satisfying the basic domestic needs of Mrs Ambrose and her family” This was because, amongst other items removed, the bailiffs had removed 2 dining chairs. They left behind the table and the remaining two chairs. As the family consisted of Mrs & Mrs Ambrose and one child, the bailiffs should have left seating for 3 people, not two.
Nottingham City Council had argued that there could not be any irregularity as Mrs Ambrose had signed the Walking Possession. This was rejected by Judge Cooper who agreed that Mrs Ambrose was faced with the prospect of having her goods removed unless she signed the Walking Possession.
As important as the above is, the Judge also agreed that the wording on the Walking Possession was deficient in that the reference to “all other goods on the premises unless exempt” did not specify what those other goods were, and which ones were exempt. The Judge agreed that the levy was also irregular for this reason.

Detailed Assessment Judgment of Throssell v Leeds City Council where the District Judge ruled as follows:
“Turning to the taxation it seems to me that notwithstanding the fact that there were three liability orders but one visit was made by one bailiff and the maximum that the Council’s reasonable charges can be is the result of applying the formula contained in Schedule 5 paragraph 2 (1) (b) of the Regulations”

they cannot charge so many fees if only one visit is made
as for your car how old is it? I.E. would the sale of it actually cover a large percentage of the bill anyway?
a vehicle should only be removed if the proceeds of sale provide that there would be a surplus available to the liability order after deductions for the bailiff fees, , removal storages and auctioneers fees.

lincroft1710

Bearing in mind your total debt is over £2,000, the goods they seize will only realise a small percentage of that when sold at auction. Seized items are often sold at auctions specifically for the purpose of selling such goods and the bidders are far from generous with their bids. You will still be left owing a lot of money.

Is there no one who can lend you some money to try to pay some of this off? Do you definitely owe the money or has there been an error by the council somewhere or any benefit entitlement ignored.

texranger

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Bearing in mind your total debt is nearly £2,000, the goods they seize will only realise a small percentage of that when sold at auction. Seized items are often sold at auctions specifically for the purpose of selling such goods and the bidders are far from generous with their bids. You will still be left owing a lot of money.

Is there no one who can lend you some money to try to pay some of this off? Do you definitely owe the money or has there been an error by the council somewhere or any benefit entitlement ignored.

reading the OP they owe the money now complaining that the bailiffs have been around and marked items to remove.
yet before bailiffs would call they would of have numerous letters about their debt and a chance to sort something out with the council.

visidigi

projectjordan wrote: »

hi all

this week the bailiff has been sent to my home to collect 2 outstanding council tax bills. as i was at work, my wife let him in, under the impression that he was from the council.

the 2 bills are £975 and £1213

as we do not have that sort of money spare, they have listed a number of items from the home such as tv, microwave and 3pc suite.

we have just phoned them to make a small payment of £25 on each account, they claim however that a minimum payment of £1000 across the 2 must be made before they will discuss a repayment plan.

is this usually the case?

any advise greatly appreciated

Ryan

£25 per account is not enough, the council will require a large payment otherwise your debt will only get worse the following year.

£25 per week would be £1,300 in a year - you owe £2,188

Can see why they are asking for the £1000 before payment plan.

lincroft1710

texranger wrote: »

reading the OP they owe the money now complaining that the bailiffs have been around and marked items to remove.
yes before bailiffs would call they would of have numerous letters about their debt and a chance to sort something out with the council.

I agree that it is probably too late, but OP may have stuck their head in the sand and councils do sometimes get it wrong.

texranger

lincroft1710 wrote: »

councils do sometimes get it wrong.

this is why they should of contacted the council and not bury their heads in the sand.

they would have had a CCJ issued against them before the bailiffs so this will now be on their credit file.

Arg

texranger wrote: »

this is why they should of contacted the council and not bury their heads in the sand.

Or maybe there should be more punishments for councils when they quite happily get things wrong.