Bailiffs have turned up at my parents

Mightyowl

1. Neither Commsave nor Court Enforcement Services have responded to my request for the High Court writ.

ManyWays

It’s proving really difficult to get any proper information on how CCJs for personal loans — particularly credit covered by the Consumer Credit Act — are being enforced through High Court writs.
I suspect that Credit Unions may be an exception to the general rule that a CCJ for a personal loan cannot be enforced in the High Court. If you talk to National Debtline on 0808 808 4000 they will be able to confirm if this is correct. 

fatbelly

Commsave is a credit union.

It is exempt from the Consumer Credit Act

Nevertheless, High Court bailiffs have no special powers - they just charge higher fees.

Parents need to continue to block them and keep to the line that neither you nor any of your possessions are at their address

Normally bailiffs would act on information given them so if they now have your address you can expect a visit.

It is technically possible for them to get a warrant to force entry to remove goods but I have never known this in practice. They would have to convince a judge exactly what was being hidden from them, where it is, and that it is worth enough to cover the debt

This case reinforces our view that Credit Union debts are pursued aggressively and people in financial difficulty should not use them

sheenas

Well I am confused as a CCJ with further enforcement would have been needed. If the case is that the service address was not your current residence, then you need to apply for the CCJ to be deleted on that basis. That will stop any enforcement happen, well until the plaintive re-applys. You would then be asked to complete a income & expenses form. So when the case is heard you can explain your circumstance and agree a payment plan. I would say again talk to Citizens advice as they can help you talking to the lender regarding a payment plan. General the bailiffs will not be as helpful as the lender

Exodi

The assertive suggestion they can seize the car is typical for a HCEO, it is primarily used as a negotiation tactic (as they can easily perform a check on the car to see if it's on finance or registered by your parents if they genuinely had suspicions).

The reason cars are good leverage are that they are high value, but also because people generally resort to producing the V5, which clearly states on the front that it is not proof of ownership. Very few people have a bill of sale as they demand, which allows them to aggressively suggests they can seize the car as they suspect it is the debtors. In reality they wouldn't, as they know the rightful owners would eventually be able to prove their ownership, meaning they'd waste towing costs.

Mightyowl said:
I haven’t lived at the address for 5 years 

He may have been using that tactic, but I clearly explained that I wasn’t in a financial position to pay the amount being demanded. Despite this, he continued to suggest I ask friends or family for the money. I responded by asking how I would be expected to repay them.

Respectfully, how many times a day do you think a HCEO is told by a debtor that they aren't "in a financial position to pay the amount being demanded"? I'd imagine it's virtually every single time, yet inevitably HCEO's are able to collect on these debts relatively successfully once they find the right pressure points - such as suggesting they'll take the parents car.

Presumably you have some income? HCEO's can come to a payment plan arrangement to settle the debt as a last resort, but it seems this hasn't been discussed?

I think you'll need to be proactive sorting this as if you aren't forthcoming with your address, it's only a matter of time till they track you and start trying to empty your current residence.

Mightyowl

Exodi said:

The assertive suggestion they can seize the car is typical for a HCEO, it is primarily used as a negotiation tactic (as they can easily perform a check on the car to see if it's on finance or registered by your parents if they genuinely had suspicions).

The reason cars are good leverage are that they are high value, but also because people generally resort to producing the V5, which clearly states on the front that it is not proof of ownership. Very few people have a bill of sale as they demand, which allows them to aggressively suggests they can seize the car as they suspect it is the debtors. In reality they wouldn't, as they know the rightful owners would eventually be able to prove their ownership, meaning they'd waste towing costs.

Mightyowl said:
I haven’t lived at the address for 5 years 

He may have been using that tactic, but I clearly explained that I wasn’t in a financial position to pay the amount being demanded. Despite this, he continued to suggest I ask friends or family for the money. I responded by asking how I would be expected to repay them.

Respectfully, how many times a day do you think a HCEO is told by a debtor that they aren't "in a financial position to pay the amount being demanded"? I'd imagine it's virtually every single time, yet inevitably HCEO's are able to collect on these debts relatively successfully once they find the right pressure points - such as suggesting they'll take the parents car.

Presumably you have some income? HCEO's can come to a payment plan arrangement to settle the debt as a last resort, but it seems this hasn't been discussed?

I think you'll need to be proactive sorting this as if you aren't forthcoming with your address, it's only a matter of time till they track you and start trying to empty your current residence.

I’m not currently in a financial position to offer much, as I had to leave my last job five years ago due to ill health — and I’m happy to provide any supporting documentation.

Three years ago, Commsave contacted the DWP and arranged for deductions to be taken from my ESA benefits. These continued for almost two years, until I moved over to Universal Credit, at which point the deductions stopped.

I’ve asked both Commsave and the enforcement agency for a review of the situation, but despite repeated requests, I’ve yet to receive any information from either party. I have also specifically requested a copy of the High Court writ they are attempting to enforce, but this has not been provided.

My parents have offered to help by making a contribution and setting up a standing order. I’ve already contacted the creditor to let them know.

The enforcement company has now added £900 to the debt, supposedly for a visit made yesterday. However, I’ve spoken with a solicitor who believes that fee is excessive — especially since they didn’t actually visit my property, but instead went to my parents’ address. On that basis, this charge should be removed.

Exodi

Mightyowl said:
The enforcement company has now added £900 to the debt, supposedly for a visit made yesterday. However, I’ve spoken with a solicitor who believes that fee is excessive — especially since they didn’t actually visit my property, but instead went to my parents’ address. On that basis, this charge should be removed.

Have you provided your address then? In this thread I couldn't see that you have given a straight answer on this detail - I understand you've repeatedly informed them that you don't live at your parents address.

From reading between the lines it appears your parents address is on the writ and you are not forthcoming with your current address, hence why they are continuing enforcement action on the address stated in the writ. I'm suprised at the solicitors advice, in that regard.

(Sorry in advance if I'm incorrect on these assumptions).

Mightyowl

sheenas said:

Well I am confused as a CCJ with further enforcement would have been needed. If the case is that the service address was not your current residence, then you need to apply for the CCJ to be deleted on that basis. That will stop any enforcement happen, well until the plaintive re-applys. You would then be asked to complete a income & expenses form. So when the case is heard you can explain your circumstance and agree a payment plan. I would say again talk to Citizens advice as they can help you talking to the lender regarding a payment plan. General the bailiffs will not be as helpful as the lender

I will certainly look into this, thank you 

Mightyowl

fatbelly said:

Commsave is a credit union.

It is exempt from the Consumer Credit Act

Nevertheless, High Court bailiffs have no special powers - they just charge higher fees.

Parents need to continue to block them and keep to the line that neither you nor any of your possessions are at their address

Normally bailiffs would act on information given them so if they now have your address you can expect a visit.

It is technically possible for them to get a warrant to force entry to remove goods but I have never known this in practice. They would have to convince a judge exactly what was being hidden from them, where it is, and that it is worth enough to cover the debt

This case reinforces our view that Credit Union debts are pursued aggressively and people in financial difficulty should not use them

I believe credit unions can be just as aggressive and irresponsible with lending as any high-street lender.

At the time, I was only working 25 hours a week, yet Commsave was deducting over 55% of my wages every single week. On top of that, they introduced a short-term loan scheme where members could borrow £150 a week with no proper checks — but repayment was taken straight from wages at the end of the week.

It felt exploitative, especially considering how easy it was to fall into a cycle of borrowing and repayment without fully understanding the long-term impact.

Mightyowl

Exodi said:

Mightyowl said:
The enforcement company has now added £900 to the debt, supposedly for a visit made yesterday. However, I’ve spoken with a solicitor who believes that fee is excessive — especially since they didn’t actually visit my property, but instead went to my parents’ address. On that basis, this charge should be removed.

Have you provided your address then? In this thread I couldn't see that you have given a straight answer on this detail - I understand you've repeatedly informed them that you don't live at your parents address.

From reading between the lines it appears your parents address is on the writ and you are not forthcoming with your current address, hence why they are continuing enforcement action on the address stated in the writ. I'm suprised at the solicitors advice, in that regard.

(Sorry in advance if I'm incorrect on these assumptions).

I did provide an address but the address I provided belongs to a friend. I do not reside there on a permanent basis, as I am currently without a fixed address and stay with various friends. I am classed as homeless at present.