Problems with rossendales

[Mrs worried]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Right I'm so angry right now. RMBC has just rang to say all costs are legitimate & if I wanted she could ask the levy to be removed as a gesture of good will. She also said the levy was done on roof trusses & bricks outside my home not on my car. I said how did they think they can get roof trusses in a white transit van. It's just not possible. Getting the manager to ring me as there is nothing they can do to help as charges are legitimate. So I'm sat awaiting call from manager.

[Mrs worried]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Also not sure now on which advice I should be following to help sort this mess out.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Right I'm so angry right now. RMBC has just rang to say all costs are legitimate & if I wanted she could ask the levy to be removed as a gesture of good will. She also said the levy was done on roof trusses & bricks outside my home not on my car. I said how did they think they can get roof trusses in a white transit van. It's just not possible. Getting the manager to ring me as there is nothing they can do to help as charges are legitimate. So I'm sat awaiting call from manager.

I would be inclined to doubt the legitimacy of the momzer who told you that.

The note/letter/paperwork left by the bailiff should have clearly indicated the good(s) on which he had allegedly levied distress - how else might one know which goods might not be removed or sold by oneself? If he had not stated on which goods he had levied distress, then the levy is invalid and the levy fee should not be charged.

When you took that call, did you note and write down the name of the alleged person who called? Did you note and write down the number they had used? Did you return the call using that same number after they had ended the call?

The reason why I ask those questions is simply that the call might not have been from RMBC at all, but from Rossendales - bailiffs are known to have a personal and idiosyncratic concept of veracity to the point where one cannot be quite sure that they have ceased to dissemble after rigor mortis has set in.

Assuming that you do not reside in a portacabin in a builder's yard, why were there roof trusses or piles of bricks outside your home on which a levy could allegedly have been made? To whom did those building materials belong? Unless they belonged solely to you, the levy is (once more) quite invalid and no levy fee should be payable.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Problems with rossendales

roof trusses & bricks ... not on my car.

I'm pleased to see that.

Mock Tudor motor-cars are so passé.

[labman]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Please send this to the Head of Revenues at the council, along with a cheque or postal order made out to the council for £42.50. Ensure you get at least proof of postage, and you may wish to consider sending it recorded delivery in order to obtain proof of receipt if you can afford to.

If you have any further problems after this, please post back up.


Dear Sir,

Your Ref: abcd1234

I am writing with regards to the above account. The debt itself has been settled, but there remains an ongoing dispute with regard to the fees charged by your appointed enforcement agents, Rossendales.

I am happy to pay the charges outstanding for the first and second visits, totalling £42.50. With regard to any further charges, may I remind you that if a levy is carried out it is a legal requirement that a Notice of Seizure be left with the debtor. No such notice was left with me, so the levy is thus invalid. If you feel your appointed agents did leave such a notice, I put you to strict proof thereto.

I therefore enclose payment of £42.50 for the lawful charges incurred with regard to this account. This is offered in Full and Final Settlement.

May I remind you that the council has vicarious liability for the conduct of its appointed agents, and I would ask you to provide written confirmation from you that this debt is now settled in full, and all action in relation to it has ceased. I would be grateful if you could also send me a statement of account showing the zero balance.

Yours faithfully,

[bizzybob]

Re: Problems with rossendales

labman's letter should sort 'em, don't think they would want to go down the county court route to claim their fees as the liability order has died, they would have to swear as to the accuracy and legitimacy of the fees. A defence would be where they have wrongly applied fees that cannot be substantiated or are at variance with those stipulated. Don't think they would feel that lucky somehow.

[Mrs worried]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Well, just had a call back from alleged rmbc. It was from a blocked no. I know its them though as its the original woman I spoke to in first place from when I rang them. Here's what the manager says:-
£59 is a legitimate fee for original bill of £1100.
I said a levy was never left or seen & she just pfft saying one would of been left.
She said £130 van fee is legitimate also & no receipt from van hire company as this is a standard fee.
i asked if she intended baliffs to shoe horn trusses in a van & she said if they didn't fit they would go back for bigger van.
She again offered to remove the £59 levy fee as gesture of good will but levy still stands. I said no.
She also said baliffs could charge a waiting fee if rmbc instructed them to do so. Even of waiting for baliff charges.
I have asked for full breakdown & copy of levy. I'm so mad at moment. I know I've already paid some fees from when I was paying baliffs directly including 80p fee to pay by debit card. Also we were havin building work done where roof trusses & bricks were being used to build a garage

[bizzybob]

Re: Problems with rossendales

They are determined to tough it out, but their fees may well be invalid.

[labman]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Well, just had a call back from alleged rmbc. It was from a blocked no. I know its them though as its the original woman I spoke to in first place from when I rang them. Here's what the manager says:-
£59 is a legitimate fee for original bill of £1100.
I said a levy was never left or seen & she just pfft saying one would of been left.
She said £130 van fee is legitimate also & no receipt from van hire company as this is a standard fee.
i asked if she intended baliffs to shoe horn trusses in a van & she said if they didn't fit they would go back for bigger van.
She again offered to remove the £59 levy fee as gesture of good will but levy still stands. I said no.
She also said baliffs could charge a waiting fee if rmbc instructed them to do so. Even of waiting for baliff charges.
I have asked for full breakdown & copy of levy. I'm so mad at moment. I know I've already paid some fees from when I was paying baliffs directly including 80p fee to pay by debit card. Also we were havin building work done where roof trusses & bricks were being used to build a garage

Just send the letter to the CEO of the council and see what happens.

[Mrs worried]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Thanks will do that straight away

[ploddertom]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Well, just had a call back from alleged rmbc. It was from a blocked no. I know its them though as its the original woman I spoke to in first place from when I rang them. Here's what the manager says:-
£59 is a legitimate fee for original bill of £1100.
I said a levy was never left or seen & she just pfft saying one would of been left.
She said £130 van fee is legitimate also & no receipt from van hire company as this is a standard fee.
i asked if she intended baliffs to shoe horn trusses in a van & she said if they didn't fit they would go back for bigger van.
She again offered to remove the £59 levy fee as gesture of good will but levy still stands. I said no.
She also said baliffs could charge a waiting fee if rmbc instructed them to do so. Even of waiting for baliff charges.
I have asked for full breakdown & copy of levy. I'm so mad at moment. I know I've already paid some fees from when I was paying baliffs directly including 80p fee to pay by debit card. Also we were havin building work done where roof trusses & bricks were being used to build a garage

A Notice of Seizure must be left when any goods are levied/seized, this is a legal requirement. The Notice must also detail the fees applied. As for Waiting time ask them which Rule/Regulation allows them to charge this, if they need to argue then point them to Day v Davies (1938) 1 All ER 686 which will tell them they can only charge for fees allowed by the Regulations - this outlaws the card fee as well. At the time of the "alleged levy" had you actually paid for the goods or were they purchased by the builder prior to him submitting his invoice?

[CleverClogs]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Well, just had a call back from alleged rmbc. It was from a blocked no. I know its them though as its the original woman I spoke to in first place from when I rang them. Here's what the manager says:-

Predictably, she's wrong; unusually, so was I. I have since seen the latest scale of charges allowed by law, which I have attached to this post.

£59 is a legitimate fee for original bill of £1100.

Wrong!

24.5% on the first £100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . £ 24.50
4.0% on the next £400 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . £ 16.00
2.5% on the remaining £600 . . . . . . . . . . . . . £ 15.00
----------------------------------------------------------
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .£ 59.50

That assumes the levy was valid, which I doubt it was.

If the levy was not valid - for reasons I shall suggest later or for any other reason - then neither the levy fee nor the "van fee" (sic) can lawfully be charged.

I said a levy was never left or seen & she just pfft saying one would of been left.

Well, we've already seen that she cannot do simple arithmetic. Perhaps the cold weather is preventing her brain cell(s) from working properly?

She said £130 van fee is legitimate also & no receipt from van hire company as this is a standard fee.
i asked if she intended baliffs to shoe horn trusses in a van & she said if they didn't fit they would go back for bigger van.

She seems to be making bad excuses for the inexcusable.

It didn't help, though, that you did not ask her some other questions which, with the benefit of time to think, I believe she might have had difficulty answering:

1. How could the bailiff know that you owned the building materials?
2. How might the builder know that the materials had allegedly been levied upon?
3. How would the bailiff remove the materials once they had been incorporated in the structure of the garage?
4. Would the sale at auction of second-hand roof trusses and a pile of bricks have realised enough to pay a significant portion of the debt after deduction of bailiff and sale costs?

The truthful answers would be:

1. He would make the assumption that the builder would not leave materials for which he had not yet been paid and would cross his fingers.
2. Unless the materials had been covered with warning notices (of which even the most semi-retarded bailiff would take photographs) the builder could not reasonably be expected to know about the alleged levy.
3. The bailiff could not remove the materials once they had been used without causing damage to the structure wherein they were incorporated, nor would the bailiff be entitled to any materials such as roofing felt, nails or mortar used with the materials and on which no levy had even allegedly been made. (link msl
4. No. I doubt they would even pay for the bailiff fees and sale expenses.

For reasons 2, 3 and 4 - if not for reason 1 - I believe the levy was invalid.

She again offered to remove the £59 levy fee as gesture of good will but levy still stands. I said no.

Their gestures to date have been less a matter of good will and more like those associated with Harvey Smith or English archers on campaign in France.

She also said baliffs could charge a waiting fee if rmbc instructed them to do so. Even of waiting for baliff charges.

Stercus bovi!

See attached file.

I have asked for full breakdown & copy of levy. I'm so mad at moment. I know I've already paid some fees from when I was paying baliffs directly including 80p fee to pay by debit card.

Card payment fees are not listed in the regulations and hence are not allowed to be charged.

Also we were havin building work done where roof trusses & bricks were being used to build a garage

Do you or does your builder own those materials?

[Mrs worried]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Well I guess as the builder purchased them they are his & not mine. I was just paying the builder to do the job.
Shall I send the letter as above to rmbc? With first & second fee visit or shall I hang fire till I receive a list of all costs breakdown. Even when I said I intend to take this matter further to the ombudsman she just said fine cos you are liable for the legitimate costs

[labman]

Re: Problems with rossendales

Well I guess as the builder purchased them they are his & not mine. I was just paying the builder to do the job.
Shall I send the letter as above to rmbc? With first & second fee visit or shall I hang fire till I receive a list of all costs breakdown. Even when I said I intend to take this matter further to the ombudsman she just said fine cos you are liable for the legitimate costs

I'd send the letter now, along with the £42.50 to the CEO of the council.

Of course you're liable for legitimate costs - she didn't really need to tell you that. You are NOT liable for costs which are not legitimate. If there has been a procedural error or they have claimed a charge which is not legitimate, then you should not pay it. As no notice was put through your door, they've made a procedural error, so any levy was not legitimate. If you can argue that at that point in time the materials did not belong to you, so much the better.