Notice of Seizure - valid?

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

all the same, I have provided my sources, may where know where your expertise stems from?

[legalese]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

From a lawyer and a friend who will give me this info, they say its all contract law.

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

ok ty

it may be useful for the OP and our admins if you were to maybe state the legislations you are quoting, which I'm sure your friends will be only to happy to provide. This way the OP can say well in section ABC sub catergory 123 this is said..

[legalese]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

They would come under the rules and regulations of a council dept not legislation

[pepsie]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

Legalese......the crap you have spouted on this forum since joining is of such low density it can been flushed away to the appropriate sewerage works with ease...and IMHO that is where it belongs.

pepsie

[legalese]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

Lets discuss instead of attacking me

[pepsie]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

stevep....

I will admit I cannot be much use to you with your request to define the validity of the Notice of Seizure, trust me when I say I have researched this for several days to no avail....it was suggested you may benefit from a fixed fee interview with a solicitor or a free consultation at a community law centre to get insight......another suggestion which I like the sound of ...approach your local college/uni law department and pose the question to them for research by their students, apparently these establishments receive many such requests and are usually only to happy to oblige!!!!!

Pepsie

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

Steven I'm sorry that this has hijacked your thread, please accept my apologies however, LB have pride in giving you the correct answers, and we are proud to protect our members come what may.

ATM it seems as though you are being given questionable advice, so until this is sorted, I will ask someone I know that can help with your enquiry to PM you.. I'm sure he wont mind hes a really kind man like that

Again, please accept my apologies from everyone that your thread has been hijacked, i know its a real mummy thing to say but on this occasion, it IS in your best interests..

P

CROSS POSTS, Pepsie, my apologies <3

[ploddertom]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

1) Having read through the documents BlueBottle posted (many thanks for those!), I found that the bailiff "shall hand to the debtor or leave at the premises where the distress is levied a copy of this regulation and Schedule 5 and a memorandum setting out the appropriate amount, and shall hand to the debtor a copy of any close or walking possession agreement entered into " as the copy of the regulation was not received (only a copy of schedule 5 was included), then there has been a breach of process. The fact that the figure entered as the LO is incorrect, should also render the notice invalid. I think you will find that these are only minor technicalities and would be overlooked at any complaint.

2) I understand that there are 3 types of Levy Close possession - where a bailiff remains on the property with the goods; Walking possession - where the bailiff impounds the goods but leaves them in your possession subject to a repayment agreement, for this to be lawful, you must have signed a walking possession form in agreement; Immediate removal. The closest to this is the Walking Possession, but as no repayment agreement was made, and no such agreement was presented or signed, no recognisable levy actually took place. I am not quite sure what you are trying to get at here but again only minor technicalities that would again be overlooked as the intention was there.

3) The debt is actually in the name of my wife (and it is her car). The bailiff arrived at home, he asked for her, I said she wasn't in and he just handed over the sealed envelope. He made no attempt to gain entry, the notice had obviously been pre-prepared, and the vehicle he was in certainly wasn't going to be of any use in removing a car. My assumption is that he came with no intention of collecting monies owed, and was simply there to inflate his fees. In fact, when I asked him how much was owed he quoted £373.10 which apart from being a DPA breach (not my debt) included the fees for levy and attendance for removal which at that time hadn't actually occurred, which backs up this view. See below

Was the debt for a current or previous address where your wife lived on her own. If so then yes they could only seize her goods. However if you lived together at the time this happened even though the debt may only be in one name then you still would be joint & severally liable and no DPA brach will have taken place.

The intention of the visit by the Bailiff is to attending with a view to remove goods to satisfy the debt. If the bailiff cannot elicit an answer or meet the debtor(s) then he is entitled to claim a 1st visit Fee of £24-50, however to do this he must clearly demonstrate he has:
a - attended the premises
b - tried to gain an answer or meet the occupants
He cannot get paid for purely posting a letter through a door. This is why many say they knocked if only done very quietly. most bailiffs now carry some form of equipment that allows "real time" recording of their actions and it should pay you toask for a screenshot of your account. The Bailiffs will no doubt say this comes under a SAR for a £10 fee - I disagree - however the Council should also be responsible for providing it.

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

PT! Just the person I was going to PM! :tinysmile_grin_t:

[pepsie]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

I don't think the OP is questioning the process to seizure of goods...he is questioning if the actual document as written has been done correctly.....it looks as if the bailiff has completed the notice to suit his mood at the time without paying attention to detail and in doing so I think the poster is asking if that invalidates it??

My grey cells are not working well at the moment and my blue rinse is fading so I will offer an apology in advance if I have read the post wrong.

Pepsie

[stevep]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

Thanks all, I got a feel for the advice from Legalese during my search prior to posting - I haven't seen any reference to cases/legislation, although he is obvioulsy disgruntled with "the system". I hope you can help him see the difference between opinion/fluster and the kind of legal advice which can be actioned with the authority of the law.

Pepsie, your post #41 is spot on. I am not questioning the actions which led to the seizure (I got past that), but I am questioning the validity of the levy and the notice left.

I look forward to receiving your advice

[pepsie]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

As said in post#37 I can find nothing to identify if the Notice to Seizure is invalidated due to the paperwork showing 'discrepancies', it could be PT has a point when he describes the same as 'technicalities', either way they should not go without explanation or challenge and if the bailiff company won't play fair to giving you explanation then the Council, being 100% liable for their appointed bailiffs, should be challenged to reply directly.

I appreciate your frustration of seeing this brushed under the carpet by all concerned and personally I would want a satisfactory answer to what you would expect to be a simple question...I am so sorry I cannot give you that answer, if all else fails give consideration to posing that question to the law lecturer at the nearest college/uni..you have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Pepsie

[hantsman]

Re: Notice of Seizure - valid?

Lets discuss instead of attacking me

I have become quite worried what you post regarding certain things, when I first read your posts when you joined I thought you may have been touting for business.

I'm not sure if your a Freeman of the land supporter but some of your advice to posters on here is pretty poor to say the least.