Help with Newlyn please

[stuuartdavis84]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

right i am not getting into argument as this is not what this site is for.
i know what i am saying is 100% right as i myself had a problem years ago and have since helped a number of people with the same advice.
please let me explain.......
the advice i was trying to give was if they can pay the payment direct to the council to bring the account up to date because
the council will they will not return a payment that brings the account up to date + debt with council will be over.

the point i was making about the debt company's fees is that once the debt with the council £280 in this case is paid they have NO legal right to continue with the enforcement warrant as the power of warrant was to recover the £280 for the council. but as that is paid the warrant is terminated.
yes the debt collector can decide to chase the fees but they wont because they know that the debt of the fees owed to them would only come under normal recovery and by that i mean they can not enforce the debt be paid ie seize goods, enter property's if access etc..
where as things like council tax, income tax, court fines can be issued with stronger enforcement..

and to take it all away from our debate another reason to take my advice is this:

for arguments sake lets say £100 is due to council now and £310 at present to the debt collection comany =£410
assuming they cant pay the £410 then they will then do an inventory of the items in the property + more fees then further failure to pay would add removal cost, auction fees etc so final fees could double again..

but my doing it with my advice
1: council is paid
2: no more fees can be added because the enforcement warrant is void so worst case the amount due is where you are at now with no risk of losing household items and also you would be able to offer say £31 a month to pay off the £310 becuase it then becomes just a normal debt like a bank over draft etc..

that above statements was for the people who didnt understand or want to knowledge my advice sometimes people work off "text book" knowledge and they are not as clued up as people with 1st hand knowledge of the situation but to the original post i am 100% that if you pay the council direct and clear the balance in one go you will not pay the fees outstanding with the bailiff..

[stuuartdavis84]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

not wrong or poor advice i'm afraid.. just because you don't share the same opinion or not have the previous knowledge i have on this subject please don't satrt telling people there wrong.. this advice will really help this person

[stuuartdavis84]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

not wrong or poor advice i'm afraid.. just because you don't share the same opinion or not have the previous knowledge i have on this subject please don't satrt telling people there wrong.. this advice will really help this person

[Amethyst]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

When you say years ago, presumably that was before April 2014 ?

[stuuartdavis84]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

mine personally yes but others in October last year and January 2015 both successfully paid there original debt without having to pay the bailiff fees

[Guest]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

Anything that happened pre-April 6th 2014 has little bearing on the current situation.

I would never advise to pay the council directly because, as Amethyst rightly says, every council approach this action in different ways. Some do indeed claim to take out bailiff fees and hand it over (although I've never seen proof that money actually is paid) Some keep it all and the bailiffs have to whistle.

It all boils down to the word "proceeds" and what is deemed to be proceeds. I believe proceeds to be the result of an act or action. Paying a creditor directly is not done so as the result of an act or action. This will no doubt be decided in a court of law one day but for now, there is no advantage to the debtor in paying the debt directly. Bailiffs will still chase their money. I would only pay directly if the council put in writing that enforcement had ceased.

The way to go, if you wish to attempt to avoid the fees is to sit it out and wait for the debt to be returned. Even this method is open to interpretation that fees die upon return to the council but FOI's are proving that once returned, the figure outstanding reverts back to the amount outstanding at the time the LO was issued.

In essence, I would not advise to pay the council directly at present.

[stuuartdavis84]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

sorry but that is absolute rubbish. you are at no disasvangte what so ever if you pay the council direct you are actually in a better position because like i've explained the enforcement side of things will not be able to be continued therefore if the debt collector does try to collect the fees its a whole differrent ball game with a lot less stress and worry for the person involved.
i think people on here forget that people writting these post are in desperate need of help and thats what my advice will do..
do you understand what i am saying now ?

[Guest]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

I understand fully what you are saying and you are 100% wrong. It is you who is talking rubbish and unable to understand what I am saying. Have you actually read the regulations?

Please try to understand that some councils deduct bailiff fees from money paid directly. This means that enforcement can and will continue., thus placing the debtors at a disadvantage.

Is it likely that you are right and everyone else is wrong? Or is it possible that you are wrong and everyone else is right? Think about it.

[stuuartdavis84]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

ok you believe what you want i have helped a number of people in these situations and successfully, have you ? my question is you are quick enough the shoot me down but have you had 1st hand experience in these situations ? or are you just "reading text book" information on the situation?
the only fees at present which would have been deducted is the £75 compliance fee which the bailiff would have taken from the repayments which were paid to them..
like i said earlier in these situations people are desperate and need to try everything possible to avoid these ridiculous bailiff fees..
lets say i am wrong (which i am not) what has the person in question got to lose by paying the council direct ? nothing !!

they owe the council debt + £75 + £235 in fees at present so they clear the council and the council pass amount on to the bailiff (which they wont) which leaves them in the exact same situation.. they haven't lost or gain anything but now lets say i am right (which i am)
the council would have there debt cleared and enforcement warrant is no longer vaild and the client can either refuse the fees which would then have to be collected through a normal debt recovery producer or the balifs will not pursue the outstanding fees as they no longer have the power of the warrant...
now please have a good think about what i am saying its common sense really

[Big Al]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

What I think L Bizzy is saying is that rather than pay the council direct and hope they don't pass any fees onto the bailiff, it can be better to wait until the bailiff withdraws then his fees will definitely be removed - then pay the council direct. This could take some time - the warrant is live for a year, so during that year, put something aside each month into a savings account, and when the warrant is returned, use what you've saved to pay the debt - you might even get a bit of interest from it.

So far, I know of 15 councils that don't pass on fees.

[Guest]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

Not sure if you've got Nottingham amongst that 15 Al but I'm pretty sure that they don't pass fees on either. Unfortunately, as you are aware, many other councils do pass on fees, or at least hold them and allow the bailiffs to continue enforcing for the balance.

The problem with paying the council directly is that you don't know whether it clears the debt-It is a gamble. Paying nothing and sitting it out is guaranteed to work and both methods involve identical bailiff action.

A debtor is in a much stronger bargaining position if he/she still holds all the money. Once the bulk has been paid (directly to the council), the debtor looses the bargaining tool and the council will just let the bailiffs hold the account for the duration of the warrants life. Not paying anything will see the warrant returned much sooner.

What has the debtor to lose by paying the council direct?
1. The bargaining tool of holding the money
2. The stress of arguing with the council that fees may not be taken out
3. The warrant remaining in force for much longer than if no payment at all was made.
4. The strong possibility that bailiff fees will not be avoided.

[wales01man]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

I find it hard to believe that Bailiffs enter into agreements that allow the Bailiffs fees if legally owed by a debtor are not payed.after all if A council calls back all debts passed to a Bailiff they would be sending letter/making visits for free .

[stuuartdavis84]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

Here here big Al and pleased someone has replied sensibly rather than agree or disagree with people's posts of advice..

I have known for balifis to withdraw before from a court fine but then a "arrest warrant" was issued. Can this be done for a council tax debt ?

Also maybe with the advice I was giving earlier, would a call to the council explaining that they would like to pay the balance direct to the council then discuss balifif fees with the balifif as the costs are ridiculous, just to try get a feeler of weather the council will keep the payment there selfs

[Big Al]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

Not sure if you've got Nottingham amongst that 15 Al but I'm pretty sure that they don't pass fees on either.

Yep, Nottingham City Council is on the list.

[Big Al]

Re: Help with Newlyn please

It's now 16 councils that don't pass on fees - thank you Croydon, a very interesting reply.