B&S Illegal Fees

[CleverClogs]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

Is there a chance they may have levied on a car outside that belongs to you? Any monies you pay over and above what you legally owe will be reclaimable.

Unless the bailiff was equipped with a shrinking or dimensional ray gun, or his van had been fitted with a dimensional vault capable of accommodating objects larger than its dimensions in this space-time continuum, it is difficult to understand how a Transit Luton van might be used to remove a motor-car.

Nor is it lawful to 'levy' on goods the alleged bailiff might have espied through a window.

It should, therefore, be abundantly obvious that the bugger has charged for work and 'services' which he simply has not done. I would be astounded if you did not consider such antics to be fraud.

[toffeecrisp141271]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

I do not think they levied but will email them and ask for a copy of the notice of seizure. When I get a reply I will post again.

[toffeecrisp141271]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

It has been a week since I asked them to produce a notice of seizure but I have had no reply. Today I sent them another email stating that if I do not get a copy within 48 hours I will be filing a Form 4 complaint against their bailiff and will be writing to head of revenues at the council. Will update this post if/when I get a reply/take further action.

[labman]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

I suspect you will get a negative response from the Head of Revenues, as they usually stick up for their enforcement agents. In my experience this has always been a good thing.

You may get conflicting advice on the way forward here just at the minute. Hopefully an agreed way to proceed will be in place soon to avoid this confusion.

I have always found that it's good to write to the Head of Revenues, let him defend the bailiffs, then go to the CEO pointing out the vicarious liability and the fact the Head of Revenues is leaving them open to litigation as he doesn't appear to know the law relating to his job. The council has always then taken the debt back and 'written off' bailiff charges, or amended them to the correct ones.

Others here will suggest a more formal, 'harsher' complaint route at this stage.

Whichever you take is likely to produce a satisfactory result. :beagle:

[toffeecrisp141271]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

Took B&S 2 hours to reply and tell me that it was sent to me by 2nd class post on 18/1/12 and if I do not recieve by 27/1/12 to let them know and they will send another. Never had such a quick response. Will see if it arrives and then post again.

[pepsie]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

Took B&S 2 hours to reply and tell me that it was sent to me by 2nd class post on 18/1/12 and if I do not recieve by 27/1/12 to let them know and they will send another. Never had such a quick response. Will see if it arrives and then post again.

Given the dispute has been ongoing for some time now and that they choose to use 2nd class mail and anticipate 9 working days to be a satisfactory period to provide a simple request....I think that just shows them to be what we all know they are.......arrogant and useless?

Pepsie

[labman]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

Keep the letter and envelope when (if) it does come, just to cover your back. Have a good look at the postmark as well, as I suspect they'll post it today if they have one.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if the NOS gets lost in the post.

[Guest]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

Go with a form 4 and let the bailiff produce it. keep the envelope for postmarks. Remember the interpretation act is on your side.

[toffeecrisp141271]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

Today I have a copy of the 'Notice Of Seizure Of Goods'. It is signed by the bailiff and dated 17/02/11. With this there is an 'Inventory Of Goods Seized'. On this inventory is listed two cars which belong to me and my wife. However, this inventory has NOT been signed.

On this basis, can they charge me:

£180 as a van/abortive removal fee
£74 as a levy fee.
£24.50 Redemption Fee (Head H)

Obviously the bailiif turned up could not enter my property filled out the inventory for the cars, went back to his office and lumbered me with these fees.

[pepsie]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

Today I have a copy of the 'Notice Of Seizure Of Goods'. It is signed by the bailiff and dated 17/02/11. With this there is an 'Inventory Of Goods Seized'. On this inventory is listed two cars which belong to me and my wife. However, this inventory has NOT been signed.

On this basis, can they charge me:

£180 as a van/abortive removal fee
£74 as a levy fee.
£24.50 Redemption Fee (Head H)

Obviously the bailiif turned up could not enter my property filled out the inventory for the cars, went back to his office and lumbered me with these fees.

The given date of the alleged levy was a Saturday...wiuld you have both been at home that day? would you have been available to the bailiff had he knocked at the door? as an aside I tend to think the Writ has since expired? and the Bailiff can be seen to have abandoned his /her levy by not acting on it?

pepsie

[toffeecrisp141271]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

I make that date a Thursday. I would have been at work, not sure about the missus.

Can you enhance on 'as an aside I tend to think the Writ has since expired? and the Bailiff can be seen to have abandoned his /her levy by not acting on it?'

Obviously he didn't come back and take the cars, we still have them. Like I say the inventory has not been signed by me or my wife.

[pepsie]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

I make that date a Thursday. I would have been at work, not sure about the missus.

Can you enhance on 'as an aside I tend to think the Writ has since expired? and the Bailiff can be seen to have abandoned his /her levy by not acting on it?'

Obviously he didn't come back and take the cars, we still have them. Like I say the inventory has not been signed by me or my wife.

My apologies for some reason I saw 17/2 to be 19/2 however if you were at work you will need to establish what time the alleged levy took place?

Any levy a bailiff makes has a sell by date.....if they levy on lets say a Monday and get no response they will perhaps return on the following Monday it is at this point they can enforce the levy and remove goods, if they decide not to do so but give it another visit a few days later then that is for them to decide.

However if he/she fails to return and enforce the levy to the debt then it can be seen he/she has decided not to make use of that levy to secure the debt and he/she has therefore abandoned the right to return at a date that suits them and try to reinstate that right.

Forget the comment re: Writ, I am just out of hospital and my brain has not yet recharged its cells lol

Pepsie

[Guest]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

You dont have to pay the fees if you dont want to. The bailiff cant MAKE you pay them because he has no costs order, and you have no statutory liability.

[toffeecrisp141271]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

Actually if both cars were there then we would have been in. The value of both cars would not cover the debt. The levy was never enforced.

What is my next move here? Do I form 4 the bailiff all fees? Surely I only owe the £24.50. They ARE making me pay the fees because they have instructed my employer to pay them as an attachment of earnings and I cannot stop this.

[CleverClogs]

Re: B&S Illegal Fees

46.—(1) A person aggrieved by the levy of, or an attempt to levy, a distress may appeal to a magistrates' court.(2) The appeal shall be instituted by making complaint to a justice of the peace, and requesting the issue of a summons directed to the authority which levied or attempted to levy the distress to appear before the court to answer to the matter by which the person is aggrieved.(3) If the court is satisfied that a levy was irregular, it may order the goods distrained to be discharged if they are in the possession of the authority; and it may by order award compensation in respect of any goods distrained and sold of an amount equal to the amount which, in the opinion of the court, would be awarded by way of special damages in respect of the goods if proceedings were brought in trespass or otherwise in connection with the irregularity under regulation 45(7).(4) If the court is satisfied that an attempted levy was irregular, it may by order require the authority to desist from levying in the manner giving rise to the irregularity.

If the likely auction value of the motor cars was not sufficient to clear the debt, then the levy would appear to have been improper or irregular.

It does seem most unusual for an attachment to earnings order to have been given to a firm of bailiffs, especially as they are known to "be creative" with their fees to the extent that the debt to the council might take much longer to clear, or might even never be cleared. Was this the result of a cock-up and, if so, by whom?