Bailiff (HCEO) visit

[ploddertom]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

i honestly thought that if a baillif entered a residential propery for a business dept, and if he climbed over a gate to do it, it was breaking and entering, i was under the belief that he had to gain a peaceful entry in to any property. The rights of Bailiffs or HCEO's to climb over walls, gates, fences or walk across a garden or yard providing no damage is caused is given in Long v Clarke [1894] 1 QB 119 if the wall or fence is already broken or unfinished he may climb through this Whalley v Williamson (1836) 7 C&P 294.

Can the OP make a claim for the emotional distress this caused his wife and children, as from what i heard they were cowering upstairs - unfortunately not

PT
PT

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

ever felt totally useless.. wish i could DO something for them

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

Sorry PP but i don't agree as in this case the op is not the debtor the company is and the op is nothing more than an employee of the debtor. The bailiff had no buisness going to the op's residence to sieze business assets when we all know the buisiness assets are likely to be on business property not private residence. Not only that the goods levied clearly were not business assets even the car, as quick check with DVLA would have shown, because if it was a business asset then the owners name registered with DVLA would have been the companies name.

If they had proof there was buisness assets on the residential property of a seperate legal entity - Then yes i would agree with you, but in this case they clearly did not! Though in order to access a third parties property to levy goods owed by the debtor, they would probably need pemission of the court to do so!

The cases you referred to involved the actual debtor and actual debtors property being accessed by bailiff climbing over fence etc. Where in this case the OP is not the debtor so whilst climbing over the actual debtors fence was deemed acceptable because it was the actual debtors property, in this case the bailiff entered onto property by climbing a perimeter fence to access property that is not that of the actual debtors but the property of an person who owes no debt themselves, that is therefore trespass and not acceptable.

[labman]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

I am with Ploddertom here. The bailiff has committed no offence at all in doing what he did.

It is one of those cases where the only way to get a truly definitive answer would be to test it in a court of law, but there is plenty of legal precedence which suggests strongly that the bailiff was within his rights to do as he did.

Ultimately it is up to the OP to decide what they wish to do, but I fear involving the police would probably get them absolutely nowhere as they would not have a clue about the law anyway. Involving a legal professional would, in my opinion, be a complete waste of time. :beagle:

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

So basically a bailiff can enter the gardens off all the employees and levy their cars and garden furniture. Sorry but that means a bailiff can enter the garden of a neighbours of a debtors and levy the neighbours property just incase it belongs to the debtor! I don't think so!

A registered company is a single legal entity just like a person is a single legal entity! The bailiff had no business going to the Property of a seperate legal entity who is not the debtor. To say they can is like saying a bailiff can come to my house climb the gates levy the garden furniture for a debt owed by a seperate legal entity 50 miles away, such as the retailer who i bought the goods from. Causing me public embarrassment and emotional distress!

This is no different to the horror stories of bailiffs going to the wrong houses and levying their property e.g cars. Do we say thats ok when we see those stories on LB? errr No we don't, and this case is no different as the company is a competely different legal entity and its the company that owes the debt since the OP is not a gaurantor!

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

i honestly thought that if a baillif entered a residential propery for a business dept, and if he climbed over a gate to do it, it was breaking and entering, i was under the belief that he had to gain a peaceful entry in to any property.

Can the OP make a claim for the emotional distress this caused his wife and children, as from what i heard they were cowering upstairs

Breaking and Entering is what Burglary used to be called under the Larcency Act. When it was repealed by the Theft Act 1968, Section 9 introduced a qualification that the offender has to enter a building or part of a building as a trespasser, that is, they have no right to be there, in order for them to commit an offence.

The question is, "Has the HCEO committed any offences by his actions in this case?"

It is not an offence at law to be a complete and utter plonker, which is what this HCEO certainly appears to be. The levy is invalid because he has levied on property not belonging to the debtor, which, in this case, is a limited company. That is an administrative matter. However, if he attempts to remove the items or removes the items, that is when he commits an offence, the offence of Theft. I've applied the Ghosh Test to this and the HCEO hasn't got a leg to stand on if he takes or tries to take the items referred to in the OP's initial post. No doubt if he did, he would go scuttling off to a Court Master at the High Court for protection. That law needs amending. But that is a completely separate issue.

What the OP needs to do is provide the HCEO with evidence that the items levied on are personal and not company property to stop the HCEO proceeding any further. However, I feel it would be better for the OP to take pre-emptive action to prevent the HCEO and the OC taking this any further. In this respect, he will need the services of a legal professional.

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

So basically a bailiff can enter the gardens off all the employees and levy their cars and garden furniture. Sorry but that means a bailiff can enter the garden of a neighbours of a debtors and levy the neighbours property just incase it belongs to the debtor! I don't think so!

A registered company is a single legal entity just like a person is a single legal entity! The bailiff had no business going to the Property of a seperate legal entity who is not the debtor. To say they can is like saying a bailiff can come to my house climb the gates levy the garden furniture for a debt owed by a seperate legal entity 50 miles away, such as the retailer who i bought the goods from. Causing me public embarrassment and emotional distress!

This is no different to the horror stories of bailiffs going to the wrong houses and levying their property e.g cars. Do we say thats ok when we see those stories on LB? errr No we don't, and this case is no different as the company is a competely different legal entity and its the company that owes the debt since the OP is not a gaurantor!

It raises an intersting point(to me anyway)

Is a bailiff legally entitled to make peaceful(ie uninvited but un forced) entry to a third party property to levy goods that belong to the debtor.

I remember reading something in the distraint for rent act that says a bailiff cannot commit trespass when enforcing a warrent. Would this apply.

Peter

[labman]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

It's very rare you and I disagree Teaboy, but I do on this occasion.

It simply isn't as straight forward as saying a registered company is a separate entity, it is a case of where the property of that company is being kept.

I also disagree about the garden furniture etc... There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that this bailiff was a wazzock of the utmost degree (as many are!!! lol). I don't believe anyone contributing to this thread thinks otherwise. As you will have read from one of my first posts on this thread, in this case, I think the only possibly explicable levy was that of the car, but a DVLA check should have shown it up. You and I know that isn't how they work, and ultimately, their unlawfulness actually helps us, as it is their undoing. The levies on the lawnmower and whatever else were the actions of a desperate idiot.

However, the fact that this levy was incorrect does not escape from the fact that HCEO's do have the right, if they suspect there is business property on the premises, to climb over fences and gates to gain access. The most important thing here though is whether any damage was caused, however minimal. This changes peaceable entry into forced entry. As Lord Esher said, sic 'a bailiff may', "do that which, if any other person did it, would be a trespass."

The two main cases quoted for using this power are Long v Clarke and Whalley v Williamson as previously mentioned. I note your response to those.

The main thing the HCEO would have to prove is his reasonable belief that there were items belonging to the business in the private domestic dwelling or outbuildings thereof.

It is not so much the argument of to whom the property belongs, but more a case of given the bailiff has the right, where the property of the business is located. If there is a reasonable belief the dwelling is holding property of the business which could be levied upon, the HCEO can enter. If nothing is found, the HCEO must face the consequences of his actions. Thus, although the power exists, it should be exercised with extreme caution.

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

I still say it is wrong for them to climb the fence of a non debtors property and levy goods in their garden and drive. Its clear under common law that only the postman and a person asking directions may visit a person property without license. Yes a bailiff has license from the court to do so, but only if the warrant or distress order (or what ever they call them) has that personal name and address on it. Clearly in this case the warrant or distress order would have been addressed to the business main trading address, where the goods are likely to have been billed too by the claiment.

Actually after saying that it is possible the address on the warrant was the registered to the registered business address - Which may well have been the OP's home address.

Labman i don't disagree with you, i just question the legality of a bailiff being able to access property of a third party who is not the debtor, and when they address and name on the warrant is not the third parties address or name, purely on the believe that goods belonging to the debtor maybe there, without any actual proof that they are.

You do realise that when a shop sells goods to a thrid party, where such goods have not been paid for by the shop to the manufactuer or distributor that supplies the shop the goods on credit, that the goods are still the property of the manufacturer or distributor despite the customer paying the shop for the goods. As such what your saying is the baliff could visit the shop customers address, climb their fence and levy the goods if left outside, despite the shop customer paying for them and the warrant/distress order not having their name or address on it and therefore not connected to them or their address in anyway, and therefore the bailiff entered the proterty of the third party (shopper) without permission from the court to do so and without license from the third party for the bailiff to visit their property which is tort of trespass. Now does the above ever happen? No it doesnt all we hear about is how a bailiff goes to the wrong address and levies goods that do not belong or are in no way connected to the actual debtor!

Yes there is lack of legislation on bailiffs and no doubt such legislation is needed to prevent the above from happening and to prevent bailiffs hiding behind the courts when infact they have committed tort of trespass to make invalid levies on goods purely on their own believe that the goods MAYBE the actual debtors goods without any proof to back up such believe (who are bailiffs to judge whos property belongs to who?)! At the cost of public embaressment and emotional distress to innocent third parties that are not actual debtors.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

It raises an intersting point(to me anyway)

Is a bailiff legally entitled to make peaceful(ie uninvited but un forced) entry to a third party property to levy goods that belong to the debtor.

I remember reading something in the distraint for rent act that says a bailiff cannot commit trespass when enforcing a warrent. Would this apply.

Peter

Sorry peter post crossed, but yes i agree you here. Would that be section 19 of the 1797 act?

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

Ok heres a question - Whats to stop a bailiff from coming to my property climbing my fence and levying goods in my garden, purely on the BELIEVE ALONE that such goods in my garden MAY belong to the OP's company? Because according to what is being said here the bailiff is entitled to do so! I find that very hard to believe to be honest, especailly when my name and my properties address is not on the warrant or distress order!

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

I hope Ozler will forgive me but i feel this is important.

He has told me the baillif showed the paperwork for the levy to his neighbours and told them the amount of the debt too..

sorry in tears here, that is so out of line! The guy basically breaks in to a residential house, terrifies a woman and her kids, tells the neighbours hes a baillif and hes levying againts X amount and shows them the proof, and theres nothing they can do about it?

Sorry Ozzler for disclosing this but its so very very WRONG!

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

It maywell be a breach of the data protection act too Puffrose!

[labman]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

@ Teaboy: Technically nothing. However, if the bailiff does so, and discovers he is wrong, then he faces the consequences of his actions with you suing him. Again there are legal precedents for this happening. This is why the bailiffs are ill advised to use the power ever of forced entry, but especially where entry of any sort peaceable or otherwise is so in question. An HCEO can do it in this situation, but doing so is not the action of an intelligent person. Does this say something about bailiffs?

I hope Ozler will forgive me but i feel this is important. He has told me the baillif showed the paperwork for the levy to his neighbours and told them the amount of the debt too.. sorry in tears here, that is so out of line! The guy basically breaks in to a residential house, terrifies a woman and her kids, tells the neighbours hes a baillif and hes levying againts X amount and shows them the proof, and theres nothing they can do about it? Sorry Ozzler for disclosing this but its so very very WRONG!

This is a separate issue altogether. Showing confidential information to the next door neighbour is inexcusable and would constitute a serious breach of the DPA. The problem sadly, is likely to be that of proof. I hope Ozzler doesn't mind you sharing it, as it is a very significant, and distressing issue for them.

Apologies if it appears earlier in the thread, but I assume the warrant was in the name of the company and not the individual?

[teaboy2]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

@ Teaboy: Technically nothing. However, if the bailiff does so, and discovers he is wrong, then he faces the consequences of his actions with you suing him. Again there are legal precedents for this happening. This is why the bailiffs are I'll advised to use the power ever of forced entry, but especially where entry of any sort peaceable or otherwise is so in question. An HCEO can do it in this situation, but doing so is not the action of an intelligent person. Does this say something about bailiffs?

I agree, but still they would need permission to enter that property from the court even if its peaceful entry. As clearly the warrant or distress order would need to have that properties address on it and the owner of that properties name on it. Otherwise the warrant is not valid for that property or person and as such the bailiff would not have permission of the court to enter that property either peacefully of forceably. Thats the point am trying to make! E.g. how can a warrant containing the address of and name of a completely different legal entity be used to enter another legal entities property and levy their goods on the other entities property. it can't be. Just like if a bailiff looking for my nighbour can not use the warrant to enter my own garden or property (peacefully or forcably) under that warrant let along levy goods on my property under the delusion that they may be my nighbour goods when their is no evidence that would support such believe.

Heres another way of looking at it - What legislation grants the bailiff the right to enter property of an legal entity, whether peacefully of forceably, when said property and legal entity is not the subject of the warrant or distress order?

[labman]

Re: Bailiff (HCEO) visit

The relevant legislation people need to be looking at is Schedule 7 of the Courts Act 2003.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...0030039_en.pdf


and this:

Sheriffs Act 1887

Let's see if we can get a definitive interpretation of this. :beagle: