Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

[calamity jane]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

Rossendales response to the programme


Campaign for Change blog



CJ

[enaid]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

Julie Green Jones Message
A programme broadcast on ITV examining the activities of the bailiff profession, featured one of Rossendales bailiffs, being secretly filmed by an undercover reporter (Monday 31st October, ITV 1).
On receipt of the evidence provided by the production company and our own internal investigation we took immediate action and terminated the bailiffs’ contract. Rossendales does not condone this type of behaviour; we are shocked and saddened that any bailiff let alone one of ours could have acted in this appalling manner.
We would like to reassure the general public that we take such allegations very seriously and we would like to sincerely apologise to anyone who has been affected by the actions of this bailiff.
Rossendales’ reputation is built on integrity and we pride ourselves on how we treat and train our staff, our diversity, and our open and transparent relationship with our clients. The programme has clearly highlighted inappropriate behaviour and wrong doing throughout the Industry, and we accept that this is fundamentally wrong. We must learn lessons from this and to this end we have enhanced and tightened our procedures.
The behaviour shown impacts on all those connected with Enforcement and Recovery; but we are especially saddened and frustrated because our Chairman and Managing Director have worked tirelessly over many years to stamp out bad practice. They have each been personally involved in assisting the Ministry of Justice to draft new legislation to help regulate our industry.
Rossendales is leading a Campaign for Change to encourage the coalition government to immediately bring in legislation to regulate the bailiff industry and to inform the general public why this country needs bailiffs. Please visit Rossendales Bailiffs Blog - Campaign for Change

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

Lol damage limitation action at its best eh - thats all that is. I.e. After bad publicity try turn it in your favour by making out you are now spearheading a campaign to change legislate the industry. Sorry but if they truely felt the need to have legislation control the industry then why had they not done so before now? Simple answer is they profit more from their being no legislation as it allows them to get away with many of their balliffs actions.

Anyone else see Julie Green Jones on the TV when she claimed to be shocked and saddened to hear it was one off her own employees behind this, whilst thinking her body language was more like an attempt at acting - Though not a very good attempt to pretend to act saddened and shocked i must add, especially with the rolling of her eyes, sighs and the grimacing lol

[Guest]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

Julie Green Jones Message
A programme broadcast on ITV examining the activities of the bailiff profession, featured one of Rossendales bailiffs, being secretly filmed by an undercover reporter (Monday 31st October, ITV 1).
On receipt of the evidence provided by the production company and our own internal investigation we took immediate action and terminated the bailiffs’ contract. Rossendales does not condone this type of behaviour; we are shocked and saddened that any bailiff let alone one of ours could have acted in this appalling manner.
We would like to reassure the general public that we take such allegations very seriously and we would like to sincerely apologise to anyone who has been affected by the actions of this bailiff.
Rossendales’ reputation is built on integrity and we pride ourselves on how we treat and train our staff, our diversity, and our open and transparent relationship with our clients. The programme has clearly highlighted inappropriate behaviour and wrong doing throughout the Industry, and we accept that this is fundamentally wrong. We must learn lessons from this and to this end we have enhanced and tightened our procedures.
The behaviour shown impacts on all those connected with Enforcement and Recovery; but we are especially saddened and frustrated because our Chairman and Managing Director have worked tirelessly over many years to stamp out bad practice. They have each been personally involved in assisting the Ministry of Justice to draft new legislation to help regulate our industry.
Rossendales is leading a Campaign for Change to encourage the coalition government to immediately bring in legislation to regulate the bailiff industry and to inform the general public why this country needs bailiffs. Please visit Rossendales Bailiffs Blog - Campaign for Change

HI
It’s not really so much bad practice though is it, isn’t it more like standard practice, saying that you have to let them in when you don’t, that they are going to call for a locksmith when they cannot legally do so, saying that they are sending for a van when they have no intention, dropping letters through the letter box without knocking in order to generate a fee. These are not isolated incidents these are the ways that these people operate, saying that they are not aware of it is frankly an insult to our intelligence.
Personally I worry when I hear that they are pushing for regulation, because no one seems to know what the details of those regulations are, we know that certification is an issue but that is on the cards anyway, what about forceful entry or legal restraint, is this going to be part of the new regulations as well. For example I see she mentions having to send a letter prior to first visit, what she neglects to mention is that under the TCE bill, the bailiff will then be able to force entry with or without consent.
Peter

[Bill-K]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

Might be wrong but I thought they did sack him.

Aye, they did, CJ - but I was really hoping she'd try and justify keeping him on !!!

[Bill-K]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

Personally I worry when I hear that they are pushing for regulation, because no one seems to know what the details of those regulations are, we know that certification is an issue but that is on the cards anyway, what about forceful entry or legal restraint, is this going to be part of the new regulations as well. For example I see she mentions having to send a letter prior to first visit, what she neglects to mention is that under the TCE bill, the bailiff will then be able to force entry with or without consent.
Peter

I have to admit that the new powers under the TCE bill look pretty scary. I only hope that these powers will be balanced by safeguards such as stringently-policed regulation, with severe punishment for flouting the guidelines, regulations and/or the law.

[Guest]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

I have to admit that the new powers under the TCE bill look pretty scary. I only hope that these powers will be balanced by safeguards such as stringently-policed regulation, with severe punishment for flouting the guidelines, regulations and/or the law.

Yes the inreased powers included in part 3 of the act were not enforced but they were nolt revoked either.
The rest of that part of the bill including certification have been enacted but no one seems to know what the recommendation will come up with, there is also the facility for physical restraint of debtors and the use of unorthorised assistance that could be enacted.
%This was the announcemnt made in 2009
"Ministers have made an announcement following the review of Parts 3 & 4 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.In written statements presented to both Houses of Parliament Ministers said that they had decided not to implement Part 4 of the Act but have decided to implement Part 3 save for those provisions which would have extended bailiffs' powers of entry. Three specific measures will be initiated shortly including the creation of an on-line bailiff certification register and the inclusion of CRB checks as part of the application process for certification.The third measure; minimum training requirements and competences for bailiffs, awaits further details. Ministers state that the intention is to implement "full independent regulation" by 2012 but with a General Election due to take place in 2010 it remains to be seen whether or not such regulation ever takes place".
Certain bailif companies have complained that the lack of the increased enforcement powers whilst welcomed by the CAB just encourage people to avoid paying their debts.
So we wait and see.
Peter

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

Lol damage limitation action at its best eh - thats all that is. I.e. After bad publicity try turn it in your favour by making out you are now spearheading a campaign to change legislate the industry. Sorry but if they truely felt the need to have legislation control the industry then why had they not done so before now? Simple answer is they profit more from their being no legislation as it allows them to get away with many of their balliffs actions.

Anyone else see Julie Green Jones on the TV when she claimed to be shocked and saddened to hear it was one off her own employees behind this, whilst thinking her body language was more like an attempt at acting - Though not a very good attempt to pretend to act saddened and shocked i must add, especially with the rolling of her eyes, sighs and the grimacing lol

After receiving an email from Julie Green Jones, i must admit that my view in regards to her acting has now changed. I now do believe that she was not acting and is passionate about getting new legislation in place making the process fairer for all whilst still protecting the debtors rights.

Obiviously i can not state what was in the email, but i will state no legal threat or anything like that were made. Therefore my change in opinion comes from the fact that she is sincere in her email to me and is also willing to dicuss and debate what legislation needs to be in place with legal beagles, for that i will, once i have julies permission, pass her email address to the site team, so that we can have an open debate on ideas for the new legislation that they are campaigning for.

[mr.ton]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

I really don't see what "change" they or the government can bring about quite frankly?
They wish to collect money owed & people either can't or wont repay - that's the top and bottom of it effectively.
The change i would like to see brought about is the banning of bailiffs full stop! - perhaps i can start a "campaign for change" on that?

[mr.ton]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

I also wish that people would stop making out Julie Green Jones to be some kind of figure of respectability in all of this.
At the end of the day she is just as bad as John Boast, even though she is not the one actually knocking on the doors.
I for one was not fooled by her crocodile tears.
If she feels as bad as what she does then she should get out of her rotten industry and go do something else with her life.

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

I really don't see what "change" they or the government can bring about quite frankly?
They wish to collect money owed & people either can't or wont repay - that's the top and bottom of it effectively.
The change i would like to see brought about is the banning of bailiffs full stop! - perhaps i can start a "campaign for change" on that?

Well i do not know the full details as to what they are proposing yet, i do know that julie is willing to have an open debate about what changes they propose inregards to the new legislation they are campaigning for.

So it is possible that the legislation makes it law that the bailiff accepts reasonable and affordable repayment offers based on a debtors income and expenditure, rather than seize the debtors property. Obivously those that refuse to pay, if proven that the bailiff is entitled to the money, would face the consquences for refusing to pay, which is no different to what happens now when their property is seized. The aim here is not to help those that simply refuse to pay their debts, but to help those that are willing to pay and to make sure everyone regardless of whether they will or won't pay are treated fairly and are not subject to a rogue bailiff's abuse of the system, which we saw on the TV show last week.

So basically the overall aim is to have a legislation which Julie is willing to have leagle beagles involved in debating, so that the system is both fairer for both debtors and bailiffs whilst at the same time, it is aimed at getting rid of the practices we have all heard of such as unlawfull fees or adding a fee claiming they visited when in fact they did not even knock on the door etc and same with unlawful levies on goods and property, such as on cars outside the house without evidence as to the car belonging to the debtor.

I think the fact that we here at legal beagles now have a chance to be involved in any such proposed legislation is a great way of making sure it is fair and that the debtor will not be prejudiced by any such new legislation. The fact Rossendales are willing to debate this here on legal beagles is to me a sign that they are sincere and they are wanting a fairer system but its also a sign that they are willing to listen to us and learn where the current flaws are and learn from past mistakes. In otherwords they want a system that is fair for both sides, and i feel we should take the oppurtunity to work with them in bringing such new legislation about by putting aside our differences and personal opinions about bailiffs and work with them to ensure the new legislation is fairer for both sides. Basically this is our chance to help debtors and those wrongly alleged to be debtors, by putting an end to such rogue bailiff activities that we have all heard horry stories off and saw on the TV show, by being involved in making any such new legislation fairer for both sides.

On a side note, i shall be emailing Julie tonight and asking for her permission to pass her email address to the Site Admin. Ultimately it is up to the site admin if they want allow rossendales to debate any proposed new legislation or not.

[mr.ton]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

No one in this country will be lectured about the morals of refusing to repay debt when the banks are being bailed out with taxpayers money and they refuse to repay what they owe.
If its good enough for them its good enough for the general public.
Fact is that Rossendales have been rumbled and are engaging in damage limitation.
It's simply not in their best interests (profit wise) for the system to be changed and debtors to be given more rights/protections from bailiffs etc..

[Guest]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

Hi
Frankly I think saying that you are not obliged to repay your legitimate debts is not helpful, it merely justifies the actions of these people.
Personally I am more concerned about the people, who cannot pay, and who are being unfairly treated by the Bailiffs.
We are a fair way down the path as far as negotiating any regulation particulars, I think most of the detail has already been agreed, we just don’t know what they are yet.
Many of us are particularly concerned about implementation of schedule 12 of the TCE bill in particular, this has been hanging I the air since 2007 and I think many have forgotten what it contains.
Perhaps I am being paranoid, but it worries me a little when I hear that they want regulation, makes me wonder what is in it for them.
I think everyone of us should be involved in what is said and done in this and we should watch them very closely.
Peter

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

No one in this country will be lectured about the morals of refusing to repay debt when the banks are being bailed out with taxpayers money and they refuse to repay what they owe.
If its good enough for them its good enough for the general public.
Fact is that Rossendales have been rumbled and are engaging in damage limitation.
It's simply not in their best interests (profit wise) for the system to be changed and debtors to be given more rights/protections from bailiffs etc..

I do understand where you are coming from, but i think everyone knows that their needs to be legislation in place when it comes to bailiffs and how they operate to prevent all the issues that many of us have read about on Legal Beagles and saw in the TV Show.

Now i am not making Julie out to be a respectable figure, its up to her to do that herself, i only made it clear that i do believe that she was being sincere in her email and the content of the email made it clear to me that my impression that i got when watching her on the TV show was wrong and probably an unfair and biased view, which i hold my hands up to and will apologise for.

Also i am not trying to lecture anyone either, but i do believe that in order to protect debtors rights then we certainly need to have a debate on any proposals and be actively involved in any such new legislation in order to make sure that debtors rights are not taken away in favour of more power to the bailiffs. As for banks and the bail out, well thats a completely different matter though i do see where you are coming from on that point.

The problem here though is that the system, as you call it, is just that a system, it is not legislated, their is no protection for debtors in that sense that protects them from such abuse of the system by rogue bailiffs. So the system itself needs to be legislate in order for debtors to have some protection, which means the system itself does not need to be changed, but it does need to be legislated to pevent rogue bailiffs from abusing it.

You say it is not in Rossendaes interest profit wise, but then i say it is not in their interest (profit wise) to bring in new legislation either, yet they are campaigning for it, so they now must see out that campaign since they went public with it - Though i agree the campaign was only brought about as part of a damage limitation excercise, though the point is they are now obilged to see it through.

So we can either take part to make sure any such new legislation is fair and protects debtors rights, or we can just sit back and watch and then deal with the aftermath of a new legislation that is more in favour of the bailiff and offers little protection to the debtor and then complain and moan about it afterwards. Which will result in a surge of threads on here and on other consumer sites from debtors only to find out they have no rights and can do nothing about the actions taken by a bailiff, and all because we could not be bothered to put aside our differences and personal opinions in order to work with rossendale's to ensure that such new legislation is fair and does protect debtors rights.

I for one know what i would prefer to do.

[mr.ton]

Re: Bailiffs expose - undercover investigation

"Frankly I think saying that you are not obliged to repay your legitimate debts is not helpful, it merely justifies the actions of these people"

Like i say - when the bankers & MP's are stealing money off the taxpayer then in my view it is fully justified to not repay your debts.
When they start showing morals then the public will as well.
Until then we will simply have more confrontations with bailiffs/riots in general etc.....