anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

[PlanB]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

I have today 10 April notified Horshan council, recovery team that I am registered disabled and suffer ill health and poor mobility, and that i have a carer. I live on a small pension. I consider myself vulnerable and the council agreed to notify you. . . .

When I spoke with the Bailiff on his mobile yesterday 07725247394 I felt intimidated and bullied. He was not interested in the fact that I am registered disabled and have poor mobility and health issues. He stated several times that he would return again and suggested he came round directly, to which I answered that i did not want that. He added that he intended to remove items by any means he chose even in my absence. My appeals to him to reconsider setting up an agreement to continue with the payment arrangement at £50 cpm by direct debit. The answer was a firm "No" i said that I believed that this could be done and that it was possible for him to recommend this arrangement to his company. He refused and was adamant that he had a job to do and he would return.

The council advised the following: To contact Rossendales to inform them of the my contact to council recovery team, who noted that I felt vulnerable and also know that I am registered disabled. Here is a copy of that email: Contents as per the above post plus:

"Your bailiff was intimidating and unrelenting. I was , in fact terrified and left my home unattended all day. I consider that I am vulnerable and I need you to be aware of the bailiffs aggressive verbal approach, which I took as bullying. This is the basis of my complaint I am making regarding his tactics. I am now terrified to meet this man and his assistant." This forms the basis of my complaint to Rossendales.

That's a good email to Rossendales. Let's hope the bailiff is called in to see his boss for a little chat !

I'm pleased to see that the Horsham council will also contact Rossendales on your behalf. I get the feeling that the person you spoke to there was sympathetic to your plight.

Do you have a friend who could come round to keep you company so you don't feel so alone and frightened by this dreadful bailiff until you hear back from Rossendales?

See what others on here have to say but it may be wise to email Rossendales office with details of the offer which you put to the bailiff on his mobile (to re-start the previously agreed repayment arrangement) in case he denies you did that. If they were happy to accept it once they may well be happy to accept it again

[anne lucas]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

10 th April i do not have any friends I can ask to keep me company. I am a very private person trying to take life as it comes. i was subject to harassment by 2 neighbours back in 2009. Landlords and mediation service failed to resolve this situation. Therefor, I trust no-one local to my home and do not have any established friends. Thank you for the advice I do appreciate all your efforts. anne

[PlanB]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

i do not have any friends I can ask to keep me company. I am a very private person trying to take life as it comes.

Therefor, I trust no-one local to my home and do not have any established friends. Thank you for the advice I do appreciate all your efforts. anne

You do now :grouphug:

[CleverClogs]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

On 13 December 2012 I was visited by a lady bailiff who identified and listed the items to be levied against the debt i.e. 2 x bedroom cabinets, living room carpet, microwave, (I no longer have this item as it no longer worked) and a small freezer.

As those items would barely realise enough at sale to meet their removal and sale expenses, it is immediately obvious that distress was levied solely for the purpose of claiming a fee. The correct procedure would be to return the warrant to the council on the grounds that the debtor's goods and chattels were of insufficient value - a return of nulla bona.

The five items listed also fail to meet the test in Ambrose v Nottingham City Council [2004] (link) which also involved Rossendales; as the freezer may be exempt from levy as a device for food storage, it would seem that, nine years later, they are still up to the same tricks.

The latest visit to my home accrued the additional costs of £42.50. These costs were not itemised.

That's hardly astounding, as that "fee" is simply wrong!

The purported "visit fee" of £42.50 would be correct for the first two visits where distress is not levied, but no fees may be charged for subsequent visits.

He added that he intended to remove items by any means he chose even in my absence

That could be illegal. (Khazanchi & another v Faircharm Investments Ltd & another, Court of Appeal - Civil Division, March 17, 1998, [1998] 1 WLR 1603,[1998] 2 All ER 901,[1998] EWCA Civ 471) - link

He should, at the very least, make an appointment rather than turning up whenever he might please.

He ... was adamant that he had a job to do

So did the guards at Sobibur. Their subsequent assertions that they were "only obeying orders" did not save them from the gallows and it should not excuse that oaf from censure.

[anne lucas]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

Evening of 10 April. Thank you for the advice. I am waiting a response from Rossendales to my email earlier today. Anne

[PlanB]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

Evening of 10 April. Thank you for the advice. I am waiting a response from Rossendales to my email earlier today. Anne

I hope this means that the evil bailiff didn't come back to your home today as threatened

[ploddertom]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

If I may make a suggestion for you. Have you considered asking either Council or local CAB if they have a Welfare Rights Adviser who may be able to help make sure you get everything you are entitled to.

[anne lucas]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

Thank you. will do. Anne

[anne lucas]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

Hi. Just to let you know, I received a call from Rossendales this a.m. The caller said that she was calling in respect to my email. She at no time mentioned the contents of the email. However, she repeated a number of times that the bailiff had the enforcement details and would visit me again to levy. I advised that he could not do that and that the notice that was left for me was not a legal document as the costs etc. were not itemised. She repeated the bailiff could not be recalled etc. I suggested that they refer the order back to the courts as I am vulnerable and that Horsham Council are aware. I asked that Rossendales confirm all that she had explained to me in writing. Their "get out clause" is quite clearly to ignore everything I had to say in both email and their phone call earlier today. I was out again all day today and I intend to do the same tomorrow as I am not yet strong enough to face the bailiff's aggressive attitude. Last year when he called at the house he placed his foot in the door jam and pushed his way in, sitting at my desk and refusing to move. I did tell my daughter today, so I feel a little better. Many thanks. Anne

[PlanB]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

I did tell my daughter today, so I feel a little better. Anne

I'm glad you've told your daughter. A problem shared is a problem halved :hug:

Plan B x

[anne lucas]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

12 April Dear All, thank you for all the advice given. To keep you posted, I have today received 2 letters from Rossendales.

1. Letter dated 11 April 2013 from the Bailiff Manager. No signature.

This letter advices that the account is still with the Van Bailiff who will be attending my property with a view to collecting payments in full. Please contact the bailiff direct to discuss any issues regarding your account and to arrange payment of the outstanding amount. Please contact the bailiff immediately on 07725247394

2. Letter dated 11 Aprril 2013. from Rossendales complaints manager, with p.p. signature. NO information regarding the complaint manager details.

This letter acknowledges receipt of my complaint. A full investigation will now be made into the issues you have raised.
Our aim is to provide a full reply within 10 working days. If we are unable to do this, we will let you know and also give an indication of a likely response time.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to investigate your concerns and we thank you for your patience in this matter. Yours Faithfully p.p. initials Complaints Manager.
There is an additional note stating that all payments must be made to Rossendales.

Anne, With Thanks

[PlanB]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

I have today received 2 letters from Rossendales.

1. Letter dated 11 April 2013 from the Bailiff Manager.

This letter advices that the account is still with the Van Bailiff who will be attending my property with a view to collecting payments in full. Please contact the bailiff direct to discuss any issues regarding your account and to arrange payment of the outstanding amount. Please contact the bailiff immediately on 07725247394

2. Letter dated 11 Aprril 2013. from Rossendales complaints manager, with p.p. signature. NO information regarding the complaint manager details.

This letter acknowledges receipt of my complaint. A full investigation will now be made into the issues you have raised.

Is there a way that you can contact/email the Bailiff Manager (author of the 1st letter) to advise him that your complaint is now being investigated by the Complaints Manager (author of the 2nd letter) including a copy of that complaint acknowledgement (2nd letter) and ask him to put the bailiff 'on hold' while the investigation takes place?

Thank you for providing us with the evil bailiff's mobile phone number. I am so tempted . . . hone:

[CleverClogs]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

Thank you for providing us with the evil bailiff's mobile phone number. I am so tempted . . . hone:

To do what?

[bluebottle]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

Rossendales' conduct is now bordering on harassment for which you can obtain a "without notice" injunction from your local County Court. You would need to restrain both Horsham Council and Rossendales. You will need to make it clear to Horsham Council that you are doing this to protect your health and safety as they have failed to observe and comply with National Standards and their statutory duties under health and safety legislation. It is unfortunate that a local authority has to be restraine, but, in some cases, it is necessary to make them face up to the reality of a situation that it is better for a debtor to pay money at a rate they can afford and that trying to recover it in one lump sum could be seen as oppressive and unjustifiable conduct. Such behaviour doesn't go down well with the public, especially where an elderly person is involved.

[anne lucas]

Re: anne lucas west sussex 8 April 2013

Dear Bluebottle, very many thanks for your most welcome advice. I will make enquiries at my local County Court regarding "Without Notice" injunction; and contact the Council once again before I proceed on the grounds you have laid out above. You are an Angel. Anne Monday p.m.