Dealing with Bailiffs this morning

sourcrates

Mee wrote: »

I find this shocking. If they behave this way what is to stop scammers doing the same...?!

I feel i must stress not all Bailiff firms act in this way, however similar reports are rampant on the internet, but it seems to be the same old names cropping up all the time.

Clearly bailiff reform has not gone far enough yet.

Stirfry

I have reported the incident to the Police but they keep telling me it is a Civil matter even though I believe the Bailiff's acted illegally. It seems that the Police come down on the Bailiff's side every time. I am trying to get a copy of the original warrant's from Marston's (wish me luck). If I get a copy I may be able to go back to the Police.

The Bank have been very supportive and they have put the money back on my Husbands account. They have sent an enquiry to Marston with sixty days to respond. But for me its more about the Bailiff's behaviour and I have now got the local MP involved.

badmemory

Is trespass a civil matter? Is intimidation a civil matter? If it is there is something very wrong with the laws of this land!

Kidder81

Yes trespass is a civil matter. Intimidation is not in itself an offence but may fall under other offences e.g. s39 assault.

Marktheshark

cancel the card payment as it was made under duress and threat.

Stirfry

Marktheshark wrote: »

cancel the card payment as it was made under duress and threat.

My Husband has contacted the Bank and they have temporarily refunded the payment. Marston have 60 days to come up with proof of legitimate payment. Unfortunately I fear that if the search warrant is in Order they will uphold the payment. Although my Husband said the payment was made under duress, and that it felt like someone was holding a gun to his head.

Stirfry

Kidder81 wrote: »

Yes trespass is a civil matter. Intimidation is not in itself an offence but may fall under other offences e.g. s39 assault.

Hi Kidder, could you kindly be more specific with regards to (s39 assault).

Stirfry

We have found out that in order to get a warrant from the court Marston's only needed to show potential links to our address. I have now requested a subject access request from Marston's and that can take up to sixty days. Apparently Subject Access Request should give full disclosure of every aspect of the case including what was presented to the Court by Marston's for them to issue a Warrant at our address. I also copied the CEO and our local MP in the e-mail.

I find it disgusting that Courts rubber stamp Warrant's on the flimsiest excuse.

Herbie21

Stirfry wrote: »

We have found out that in order to get a warrant from the court Marston's only needed to show potential links to our address.

I find it disgusting that Courts rubber stamp Warrant's on the flimsiest excuse.

Could you respond to let us know who provided the above information to you (because it isn't true).

Marston Holdings (or any other company) do not request a warrant. The warrant is issued by HMCTS and passed to Marston's to enforce.

The enforcement company are not 'permitted' to 'go behind' a warrant. Their role is to enforce the warrant.

On the position of 'tracing' debtors, the following website from HMCTS is of interest. This site outlines the steps that HMCTS have taken regarding 'historic debts' and you will see that the emphasis is on 'new intelligence and tracing tools':

With the benefit of new intelligence and tracing tools, outstanding debts up to 10 years old are being pursued by a dedicated team in the HMCTS National Compliance and Enforcement Service.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hm-courts-tribunals-service-advice-to-debtors-on-unpaid-historic-fines

Bailiff Advice Online

Herbie21

Stirfry wrote: »

Hi all, I had a knock at the door and was expecting a delivery so answered it. Two thugs from Marston were on my doorstep,

The money outstanding was for unpaid fines for my estranged Son who has not lived with me for 22 years and never at the address.

They had no warrant and said they could not show me info on i-pad as I was not Dean.

The subject of an enforcement agent providing a copy of the warrant of control when enforcing criminal court fines is one that was addressed in December 2014 by HMCTS when responding to a query from a debtor (regarding an allegation that a warrant had supposedly been 'fake).

He received a lengthly response from them which he posted on a forum in November. Given the importance of the subject, I started a thread on the Consumer Action Group forum. For ease of reference, I broke down HMCTS's reply into the following separate headings:

When is a distress warrant/warrant of control 'generated'?

"It is not necessary to generate a distress warrant at the time of its issue; the relevant details can be produced (and provided to the debtor) subsequent to its issue (or indeed subsequent to its execution) but such relevant details should be recorded at the time of issue"

Who issues the distress warrant/warrant of control?

"Designated Fines Officers have the power to issue Distress Warrants/Warrants of Control under schedule 5 of the Courts Act 2003, a court hearing is not required for this sanction to be issued".

Is the bailiff/enforcement agent required to have the warrant in his possession?

"It is not necessary for the CEO or the AEA to have the distress warrant in his possession when levying the distress. The legislation simply requires a written statement to be shown to the debtor on demand. In addition, the CrimPR requires arrangements to be made for the debtor to see the warrant if he so requests".

Does the distress warrant/warrant of control need to be a paper document?

"The references in the above CrimPR to a “warrant” are not necessarily to a paper document, but can include an electronic version".

Does a warrant need to be produced?

"It is not necessary for a formal “warrant” to be produced; what is of importance is that specific information must be recorded, by some means, at the time the warrant is issued. In particular, the legal basis on which the warrant is issued (for example, a record of the decision authorising the issue of a warrant (made by the court or the fines officer) and when that decision was made). In addition, the information required by CrimPR 52.7(1) should be recorded".

Recording the date and time that the warrant was received.

"The reference to the CEO or AEA recording on the warrant the date and time at which it is received (rule 52.7(2) can be satisfied by electronic means. Assuming the request to execute is sent to the CEO or AEA electronically there will be an automatic electronic record of when it was received".

Requesting to see the distress warrant/warrant of control.

"As regards the position where the debtor asks to see the warrant, what rule 52.8(2) of the CrimPR envisages is that the debtor will be taken to the relevant office and shown the relevant details on the computer screen. Alternatively, a copy of the electronic data held can be printed and provided to the debtor or the details replicated in some other documentary form (whether it be entitled a “warrant” or not).

"What is of importance, is, as stated above, that the requisite information is already held. That information can then be subsequently shown to the debtor/replicated when a request is made by the debtor".

Bailiff Advice Online