Bailiff discussion thread

NOTE FROM SAPPHIRE

Okies as requested by Cel I am moving 'certain' posts from another thread for two reasons, the first is to allow Buster1967's thread to proceed in an orderly way and the second is in order to provide you lot a place to have a discussion. So please discuss away, come out of your corners cleanly, play nicely and ON NO ACCOUNT punch below the waist, and that means keep the insults friendly, I will be watching this thread closely, if I think that anyone is not playing nicely, you will be given the red card and told not to post for a while in order to allow you to calm down.

Hopefully you all know and understand the rules, if you don't then don't post capiche ?


Carry on .......

I'm afraid your legal adviser is wrong.

Section 76 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 is the legislation that provides for the issue of a Distress Warrant, and the document will show the amount you must pay.

There is currently no legislation that sets statutory fees for bailiffs collecting unpaid court fines.

So, why is the bailiff charging £200+ fees? - That is because they work under an Enforcement Services Contract with HMCTS, which enables them to deduct an agreed schedule of fees from the amount you are fined and pay the balance to the court.

That schedule currently agrees a fee of £215 for attending, and £85 for a letter. However, that contract is not legally enforceable on you, the defendant, because the parties of the contract are only HMCTS and the bailiff company.

If you pay a bailiff the schedule of fees, the bailiff company is paid twice and your money goes straight into the bailiffs pocket. Bailiffs will always try it on, and hope you are not aware of the scam. Bailiffs will try and pester you into paying the fees.

Court staff may also try it on and even mislead you that you are actually liable for the bailiffs fees - until they discover that you are better informed, or make a written formal complaint.

You may notice the bailiffs letter does not actually tell you that you have to pay the fees, it just a printed fee schedule on the document giving the ILLUSION you are liable for the fees.


Send this letter to the court service and it usually puts the matter quietly to bed.

This isn't a universally held view is it HC. The document you refer to (EX345) i am given to understand refers to; "ONLY to CIVILIAN ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS (who are employees of the Magistrates Court). The private sector companies such as Excel, Philips, Marston Group etc are in fact, APPROVED ENFORCEMENT AGENTS. "
(Whole post available here
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?330478-Freedom-of-Information-Act-Request.-Does-HMCS-officially-acknowledge-bailiffs-are-increasing-defendants-court-fines&p=3676767&highlight=happy+contrails#post3676 767 )

Is this incorrect?

D

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

LOL! Two threads with us all basically saying the same thing. Let's get on and help posters, or in my case go back into hiding for a couple of days.:beagle:

Can I come and join you ?

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

LOL! Two threads with us all basically saying the same thing. Let's get on and help posters, or in my case go back into hiding for a couple of days.:beagle:

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

Thank you Militant, lets all go forward and not look back.

[miliitant]

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

can we all please end this until bluebottle gets his FOI back

this is starting to degrade like another forum i care not to mention and why i left it

everybody has a voice and needs to be respected be it people agree with it or not

in the age of universal deceit
telling the truth is revolutionary

the first victim of democracy is the truth

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

Labman I'm not insulting anyone I am merely asking that everyone play nicely, as said earlier we are all here in a common cause, there's no need for anyone to fall out.
I will speak to Cel as well hun, both about you're pm and of course about the offending person, I've never advocated banning anyone but if someone does really overstep the mark then I will have great pleasure in kicking them out.

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

Sapphy,

With respect I suggest you speak to Celestine about her pm to me. It may be a revelation!

I have not come back here to be insulted and get into disagreements with site team, but at the end of the day I will always speak my mind, and only one person is causing this trouble.

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

Thank you Bluebottle I agree with you and lets hope that you find out lots of things that can help people move forward, now the rest of you can you please take a leaf out of Bluebottles book and lets move along nicely.

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

I'll be putting in an FOIA request to the MoJ - which I've already announced on this or another thread - to clarify this matter, Sapphy. I'm also seeing it as an opportunity to let the MoJ know exactly what their "contracted enforcement agent" is allowing to happen, i.e. violence and towards debtors, forced entry without proper authorisation, ignoring people advising them that a person does not live at an address (defective tracing or sheer incompetence), and see what they have to say. I am wondering, therefore, if any peeps who have had dealings with Marston Group want their particular experiences to be brought to the attention of the MoJ. I feel the time has come to bring this unsatisfactory state of affairs into the public forum. Let's see how keen Boy David and his cronies are to promote more privatisation of justice once it gets into the public domain what is really going on. The sooner fines enforcement is returned to HMCTS staff and police, the better.

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

My god you lot are unbelievable, I started this thread so that you can discuss 'matters' away from another posters thread, yes you're discussing but you are also going down the route of insulting each other and bringing up things that happen on other sites.
I am warning you all, play nicely or I shall close the thread, DO YOU ALL HEAR ME ?

Now go back into you're respective corners, think about it, shake hands and agree to disagree and remember the purpose of ALL OF THESE SITES is for Joe Public to fight back against injustice, not for people to come on and kick seven kinds of sh it out of each other.

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

HI

Yes HC this is the usual response when no proof of a legal argument can be provided, I call it the flying saucer excuse. It goes like this , they are there really they are but the proof is being covered up..

Wont wash I am afraid, although I do not profess to be an expert i this area( sparing my blushes again), i know many people who are involved in this stuff at a far higher level than you will ever be and I would have heard of it happening(yes it is true)

D

I've seen similar letters when government departments and agencies, local authorities and corporate organisations have been caught out. I call it S.O.B. (Standard Operational Bull***t)

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

What you really mean you have absolutely no idea where I have taken it. And you have clearly not reasearched the matter at all. You would have shown your findings.

You cant go on a legal forum advising people when you make wild guesses about things like this.

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

What level is that?

35000 feet, I believe you fly at 30,000.

Enough on this for now.

D

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

i know many people who are involved in this stuff at a far higher level than you will ever be and I would have heard of it happening(yes it is true)

D

What level is that?

Re: Bailiff discussion thread

HI

Yes HC this is the usual response when no proof of a legal argument can be provided, I call it the flying saucer excuse. It goes like this , they are there really they are but the proof is being covered up..

Wont wash I am afraid, although I do not profess to be an expert i this area( sparing my blushes again), i know many people who are involved in this stuff at a far higher level than you will ever be and I would have heard of it happening(yes it is true)

D