Bailiff has licence revoked, after terrifying 12 year old girl.

[Deleted User]

hallowitch wrote: »

no CT PCN Magistrate court fines

So not for civil debts?

What's the procedure for CCJs?

fatbelly

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

So not for civil debts?

What's the procedure for CCJs?

I think it's the same - that was sort of the point of the exercise.

You mentioned new powers. What did you have in mind? I'm seeing increased fees and a bit more paperwork but no more power, though I'm sure that's not the impression they will give at the doorstep.

skitler

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Was it the daughter's debt?

NO?

So what was he doing, discussing the matter with her?

Clear breach of DPA, I'd say.

q 1 no.


q 2 NO isn't a question, no matter how big you type it.


q 3 he didn't discuss the matter with her, he handed her a note/letter and told her some concequenses.


good job your not the judge then as dpa wasn't mentioned.


don't folk read and understand there own links.

skitler

halibut2209 wrote: »

And yet you cite "bullies" as a pet peeve in your sig. That's exactly what this person is

iyo, it dosent mention it in the link, as it would have been added to the charges and perhaps a longer ban.


it also isn't clear if the bailiff saw the girl crying at the point of the letter/note passing and concequences told.


some girls are just over emotional, some parents know how to milk a situation.

skitler

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

That doesn't excuse him terrifying a 12 year old girl, and breaching the DPA.

not proved


not proved


some folk eh!!

skitler

halibut2209 wrote: »

So it's fine to bully a non-involved 3rd party if someone else owes money? Gotcha.

and another:rotfl:



more folk eh!!

fed_up_and_stressed

halibut2209 wrote: »

So it's fine to bully a non-involved 3rd party if someone else owes money? Gotcha.

ermmmm thats not what I put.... you seem to have missed the point if mummy and daddy had paid their debts no one would have come round to frighten poor little bratlet. Chuckle.

skitler

Morglin wrote: »

Pretty disgusting behaviour by the bailiff, but then it does take a certain type to be a bailiff - bottom feeders, feasting off those that can least afford it.

what type is that then?




the irony here is, he is now the latter.

skitler

Russell the father of "tears are us", was also "upset"


but not one of you has shown any sympathy for him.


which in its self is a bit upsetting.

halibut2209

fed_up_and_stressed wrote: »

ermmmm thats not what I put.... you seem to have missed the point if mummy and daddy had paid their debts no one would have come round to frighten poor little bratlet. Chuckle.

So, exactly what I said then. You are saying it's fine for a Bailiff to bully a child if the parent owes money.