Bailiff SAR Good News

Hi All,

Good news!

As many will know I have been challenging my council / bailiffs over illegal charges made 3 years ago.

Today I received a healthy cheque from the bailiff company for the return of all levy charges (they never levied anything!) as they cannot find the paperwork (not surprising as no levies were ever made).

As the LO's amounted to nearly £2000 and they claimed levies on all four accounts

The only outstanding thing is the card processing fees which they charged, but have removed on the written SAR and I have no proof (can't get bank statements as don't want to go near the bank I was with then!)

Just goes to show it's worth fighting back. I've still got the correspondence from the time, so will go through that to try to identify further discrepancies, but for all out there FIGHT BACK! It's worth it.

Now on to Kensington Mortgages!

Thank you everyone for your help in giving me the knowledge and confidence to do this.

Caspar

[Mrs James]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Excellent news Caspar, I'm so pleased for you and well done.

[ben13]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

well done Caspar!!!

[di30]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Fantastic Casper, so happy to hear this, well done!

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Casper,

Fantastic and I look forward to reading your battle with Kensington Mortgages.

Onwards and Upwards :beagle:

[debtisbad]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Well done!

[The Debt Star]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Cheering news Caspé. well done.

[pallaz1851]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Great News Caspar, and I love the message to FIGHT BACK!!!

" You will always have bad times, but they will wake you up to the good times you never paid attention to"

[leclerc]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Hi All,

Good news!

As many will know I have been challenging my council / bailiffs over illegal charges made 3 years ago.

Today I received a healthy cheque from the bailiff company for the return of all levy charges (they never made any!) as they cannot find the paperwork.
Caspar, this bit does not make sense to me and also is something that doesn't sit right with me, regardless of who the company is. Are you stating a bailiff has paid money out to you that it does not owe you?

As the LO's amounted to nearly £2000 and they claim levies on all four accounts

The only outstanding thing is the card processing fees which they charged, but have removed on the written SAR and I have no proof (can't get bank statements as don't want to go near the bank I was with then!)
You are not acknowledging debt by requesting statements to be sent to a branch where you can collect it should you choose not to tell them your new address(plus you can always lie to the bank anyway).

Just goes to show it's worth fighting back. I've still got the correspondence from the time, so will go through that to try to identify further discrepancies, but for all out there FIGHT BACK! It's worth it.

Now on to Kensington Mortgages!

Thank you everyone for your help in giving me the knowledge and confidence to do this.

Caspar

Are there copies of the letters sent and received with the cheque?
Apologies but certain things do not make sense so whilst there is a part of me going well done, the other part of me is saying you should never keep money that is not already owed to you from a company. If they didn't charge you the money yet paid you it, then as I would say to anyone who received money they were not due, give it back.

[Caspar]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Thanks Leclerc - I noticed it didn't make good sense yesterday, but didn't edit it. Basically there were 4 LO's (2 CT, 2NNDR). The bailiffs claim to have levied on all 4 LO's and had charged me fees for these. However, they can't find any paperwork to support their levies (because there never was anything really levied) so have had to refund the money.

I wish I could prove they never made the visits, but I can't. They say they don't have to provide screenshots etc... and to be fair, re-reading the DPA it does not say they do.

As regards the bank charges I have over 25K of debt with Lloyds TSB who have been very quiet for a couple of years, so I'm reluctant to draw attention to any of my accounts with them for the sake of £30-40.

I hope this makes sense. If not, say and I'll post the letter up they sent me.

caspar

[leclerc]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Thanks Leclerc - I noticed it didn't make good sense yesterday, but didn't edit it. Basically there were 4 LO's (2 CT, 2NNDR). The bailiffs claim to have levied on all 4 LO's and had charged me fees for these. However, they can't find any paperwork to support their levies (because there never was anything really levied) so have had to refund the money.
Did they actually charge you £2000.00 for the levies or have they simply refunded money they didn't charge you or give you money that you paid them?(apologies if this doesn't make sense either).
I wish I could prove they never made the visits, but I can't. They say they don't have to provide screenshots etc... and to be fair, re-reading the DPA it does not say they do.

As regards the bank charges I have over 25K of debt with Lloyds TSB who have been very quiet for a couple of years, so I'm reluctant to draw attention to any of my accounts with them for the sake of £30-40.

I hope this makes sense. If not, say and I'll post the letter up they sent me.

caspar

See above. Still trying to work out this £2k bit....

[Caspar]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

Right - understood. Sorry - it's like knocking on wood with me sometimes!

The LO's amounted to nearly £2000. They claim they levied four times on goods and each time charged for those levies (sadly not £2000 worth, but still a decent chunk!) It was those charges I was was refunded.

Hopefully all crystal clear now - I wish it had been £2000, that really would have put a smile on my face. Their levy fees were highly illegal though (even if they had actually levied) relying on my ignorance of the legal charges. Being kind you could say they couldn't work out percentages, but I think it's more likely downright invention of charges.

Can I pick your brains here for a minute please?

I asked in VIP last night a question that I didn't really get a full reply to.

1.Given the bailiffs have not got the paperwork to substantiate their charges, so have refunded them (no interest) and

2. The Visit fees on all four accounts were incorrect (undercharged not overcharged) - I can find nothing in the regs that allow for a deduction in fees, can I claim their visit fees are unlawful and ask for them back (we don't believe they visited anyway as we never had any paperwork). If I can, would I go to the bailiffs or the council or as they're vicariously liable would it not matter?

thanks,

caspar

[Amy]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

You did get a full reply. I'm not sure what else you want me to write.

How did you get the levy fees back?

[Caspar]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

You did get a full reply. I'm not sure what else you want me to write.

How did you get the levy fees back?

Amy - I wasn't having a go at you, I apologise if it came across that way.

I got the levy fees back as the bailiffs said they could not substantiate them with paperwork. This is how they put it in the letter, "Once a case is closed on our system for six months (eg paid) it is automatically, electronically archived and all hard copy documents are also archived at the same time. We note you have reasonably requested details in relation any goods distraint upon. It is somewhat unusual to receive a SAR nearly three years after the last case for a debtor has been paid and regrettably we are unable to locate within our archive file copies of the documents relating to the distraint to provide the details you have requested. We therefore feel, without prejudice, that it is appropriate to refund to you £xxx.xx in respect of the levy fees charged to your accounts and we enclose a cheque in respect of the same herein."

You suggested in your answer in the VIP thread, for which I'm grateful,
"Since you have managed to get the bailiffs to refund you the levy fees and presumably you did this also without any proof since it's impossible to prove a negative, why wouldn't they refund the visit fees that they didn't make?

I would employ the same tactics as you did before."

As I said I have no proof the visits didn't take place, though no paperwork was left. They claim they did take place on the SAR. The fees charged for the visits were however to the best of my knowledge incorrect (they undercharged), so I asked, "However they have UNDERCHARGED. They charged £22.50 and £16.50 for each of the four liability orders. We don't believe they EVER visited us as we never had any paperwork, though obvously cannot prove that now.

Do I have any case for saying these fees are illegal and reclaiming them? I can't see anything in the regs that says they can give a discount."

I don't see how I can employ, "the same tactics as I did before" when the issue is entirely different. This is about fees set down in law being incorrectly charged. That is the bit of the question that was not answered in full.

I'm sorry if this came across wrong, it was not intended to, but the question remains if anyone can please answer it, as the fees were incorrect (albeit to my benefit) can I reclaim them as illegally charged? If so, would it be from the bailiffs, the council or could it be either under vicarious liability?

I hope this clarifies things.

[Amy]

Re: Bailiff SAR Good News

What I don't understand is the bailiffs capitulation over the levy fees. They said they had no records to prove they did levy and since it is impossible to prove a negative, you could not prove they didn't levy - yet they paid in any case.

So what records do they have to prove they visited your address on the dates they say they did? Presumably if they do not have any proof, then they will repay you like they did for the levy fees. This is what I meant by employing the same tactics because clearly whatever you said to them worked.

All fees charged by a bailiff for work they have not carried out, is fraud. So the answer is yes, reclaim them.

Or are you asking whether you can reclaim the visit fees based solely on the fact that you believe the fees to be incorrect?

For the record, I do not believe they are incorrect, I think they are correct as at 2007.