Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

[springwater]

we've just had one of these pushed through our door today (actually there's 2, both fro council tax arrears on a buy to let property we own but is un-rentable).

they want £359 for the first one and £705.43 for the second one.

they have also done a walking possession on a vehicle outside which is not even mine and charged me extra to 'levy' it!!! (we were not in).

where do I stand with this now?

is it too late to call the council and start paying them? I cant afford to pay both bills right now!

please help!

I've done n244 and n245 forms on other debts but they are taking weeks to go through, i'm guessing I odnt have that kind of time on this one.



my wife (who's name the debt is in as the property is in her name) is 6 months pregnant and we could do without more of this stuff!

[IanM]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

Hi Springwater

You may want to read through a couple of recent threads on Council Tax issues, there may be something there that will help you.

As for your un-rentable property, i'll send you a PM.

IanM

[alham]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

Whoever owns the car should report it stolen. With you you can apply to court for stay of execution, then make an offer through the court for a repayment schedule.

[miliitant]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

error

[miliitant]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

i am confused on the above post

why report the car as stolen

the op has stated the car does not belong to them and the baliff has only done a levy, not taken it away

why apply to the court for a stay of execution, this is a magistrates issue as its council tax, not a county court and a parking ticket for example

what repayment options, the op has to deal with the council,not the court as the liability order has been granted. this is not a fine or ccj, its an addministration order

[alham]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

My apologies, you are right about the car of course - misread that the car was taken away!.

With regards the order, I assumed (I know. I know - assumption is the mother of all cockups) that springwater has been in touch with council already and that the bailiffs are pressing especially since N244 and N245 have been mentioned! Sorry for causing any confusion, this is the last thing anyone needs when back against the wall.

[miliitant]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

NO PROBLEM

i read a post and then re-read it before i comment

it is suprising what you miss first time round

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

With regards to the car, you need to inform Rossendales immediately that it is third party property and that any levy or Walking Possession Order they have attached to it is invalid. The charge they have made is fraudulent and illegal. They need to be told of this, in very clear terms, and that if any attempt is made to remove the vehicle, the police will be informed and the vehicle reported as stolen. It would also be a good idea to inform the Local Authority (LA) involved of Rossendales' actions and their vicarious liability for their actions. I would also try and set up a payment plan with the LA and don't take any BS about dealing with the bailiffs. You may get Rossendales shouting their mouths off, telling you you don't know what you are talking about and making further threats, but that is normal behaviour for certificated bailiffs. They cannot seem to get their heads around the fact that there are legal restrictions as to what they can and cannot do. Make sure you send the notifications to both Rossendales and the LA in writing and by Recorded Delivery Mail.

In the event that Rossendales do start behaving like the bunch of neanderthals they are, you may have to resort to restraining action through the courts against them and the LA. This is due to you OH's current condition. However, we will cross that bridge if and when we come to it. It is a very last resort measure when reasoning has failed.

[IanM]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

With regards to the car, you need to inform Rossendales immediately that it is third party property and that any levy or Walking Possession Order they have attached to it is invalid. The charge they have made is fraudulent and illegal. They need to be told of this, in very clear terms, and that if any attempt is made to remove the vehicle, the police will be informed and the vehicle reported as stolen. It would also be a good idea to inform the Local Authority (LA) involved of Rossendales' actions and their vicarious liability for their actions. I would also try and set up a payment plan with the LA and don't take any BS about dealing with the bailiffs. You may get Rossendales shouting their mouths off, telling you you don't know what you are talking about and making further threats, but that is normal behaviour for certificated bailiffs. They cannot seem to get their heads around the fact that there are legal restrictions as to what they can and cannot do. Make sure you send the notifications to both Rossendales and the LA in writing and by Recorded Delivery Mail.

In the event that Rossendales do start behaving like the bunch of neanderthals they are, you may have to resort to restraining action through the courts against them and the LA. This is due to you OH's current condition. However, we will cross that bridge if and when we come to it. It is a very last resort measure when reasoning has failed.

One more good piece of advice from Bluebottle.

According to a letter from the council dated 13th Dec 2010, "Bailiffs, allegedly, visited my house(3rd visit) on the 26th November 2010, on this occasion he levied on a car and left a letter requesting that you contact him."

I did not even own a car at this date, mine was scrapped in July 2010!

It looks like the Bailiffs were acting fraudulently and illegally again and the council seem to endorse the bailiffs behaviour.

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales Magistrates liabilty order/warrant of execution

It seems that not only are Rossendales a bunch of muppets, but so are the LA involved in this case. It needs to be drawn to both Rossendales' the LA's attention, in writing, that where any property is seized by a bailiff in contravention of a WoE or LO, including third party property, not only does the seizure amount to Theft, but any subsequent sale or attempted sale of the third party property renders the bailiff, bailiff company, LA and anyone else involved liable to prosecution under Section 22, Theft Act 1968. The actual wording of the Act is reproduced below -

22 Handling stolen goods

(1) A person handles stolen goods if (otherwise than in the course of the stealing) knowing or believing them to be stolen goods he dishonestly receives the goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so.
(2) A person guilty of handling stolen goods shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

I would be inclined to write to the CEO of Rossendales, the neanderthal, sorry, bailiff and the LA quoting the above. Handling Stolen Goods is a very serious offence and this is reflected in the penalty.