Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

[starukkiwi]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

I e-mailed Jacobs at 8.30am and said I still had not recieved the key and could they let me know the address to send the invoice to for a replacement key; about 35mins later, i heard something fall through the letter box and there was the car key - no knock, no apology - so I assume a rather shame-faced bailiff had to sneak up the path, and he must have sneaked because normally our dog will bark if he hears someone at the door. Still no response from Jacobs re the discrepancy between what they say and what the bailiff says.

[ploddertom]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

For how long have you been denied use of the vehicle?

[starukkiwi]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

For how long have you been denied use of the vehicle?

from Thursday 22 November to this morning 30 November 2012 - 8 days

I know that this is a definite Tort of Trespass - I could so with some advice on the wording of the letter. I haven't received an e-mail back BTW explaining the discrepancy between what Jacobs say the fees are and the Bailiff - of and we are disputing the Van fees because we did not receive a Notice of Seizure Notice. Also, is it still worth asking for a SAR re the photos?

[ploddertom]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

from Thursday 22 November to this morning 30 November 2012 - 8 days

I know that this is a definite Tort of Trespass - I could so with some advice on the wording of the letter. I haven't received an e-mail back BTW explaining the discrepancy between what Jacobs say the fees are and the Bailiff - that's an easy one, it will turn out to be a "rare" Admin error that would have been picked up anyway - of and we are disputing the Van fees - I wouldn't worry about that anyway as it was charged at the same time as his "levy", which means you were never given the time to pay, in other words cannot be charged at the same time, possibly another Admin error - because we did not receive a Notice of Seizure Notice. Also, is it still worth asking for a SAR re the photos? No

I would be tempted to ask for £50 per day as recompense, no doubt they will refuse to pay but you then have the option of commencing Court action against them + you get 2 bites of the cherry because the Council can also be held responsible for this.

[starukkiwi]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

I have sent an e-mail backed up with a letter and copied in the council

[starukkiwi]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

A short update; we have today, recieved letters from both Jacobs and the council saying that the bailff acted lawfully; the Jacobs letter is full (As ever) of inaccuracies and just plain lies; however, it is worth reading for the admission of clamping the vehicle. I will scan and upload the Jacobs letter where it explains he clamped the vehicle to get money out of us and that he returned the key after the "local Authority requested the key be collected from the local police station and returned to you" I am going to write a letter of complaint to Trafford Borough Council; unfortunately, I cannot locate the name of the CEO as the last one left in August due to ill-health. I am wondering who else I can write to - I did write to the Head of Finance and the reply has come from the "Assistant Recovery Team Manager".

[ploddertom]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

Theresa Grant is the new CEO, Matthew Colledge is the Leader of the Council with Alex Williams as Deputy leader.

The format of emails appears to be firstname.secondname@trafford.gov.uk

[starukkiwi]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

Cheers for that Plodderton

[lgwarren]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

starukkiwi
I am also having an issue with Jacobs clamping my car. Can you give me an idea of the area where you live because we may have a common "bailiff". I am in Hertfordshire and the bailiffs first initials was Z. Not sure what I am allowed to say here. If it is the same guy our chat may be useful to us both.

(Sorry should have read the thread properly

However, with regard to the e-mail above, it looks very similar to one I received when the started back tracking on the fees they were charging. It looks like it was from a senior partner in the firm to me. They are total billshutters. They make it all up and then tidy up if they have a problem. When you have the balls or the intelligence to front them they show the total disregard they have for the regulations.

[starukkiwi]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

starukkiwi
I am also having an issue with Jacobs clamping my car. Can you give me an idea of the area where you live because we may have a common "bailiff". I am in Hertfordshire and the bailiffs first initials was Z. Not sure what I am allowed to say here. If it is the same guy our chat may be useful to us both.

(Sorry should have read the thread properly

However, with regard to the e-mail above, it looks very similar to one I received when the started back tracking on the fees they were charging. It looks like it was from a senior partner in the firm to me. They are total billshutters. They make it all up and then tidy up if they have a problem. When you have the balls or the intelligence to front them they show the total disregard they have for the regulations.

Hi, unfortunately, I live in Trafford although it is the same company so probably the same tactics - I am rewriting to them all today as i have not recieved a reply.

[bluebottle]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

A short update; we have today, recieved letters from both Jacobs and the council saying that the bailff acted lawfully; the Jacobs letter is full (As ever) of inaccuracies and just plain lies; however, it is worth reading for the admission of clamping the vehicle. I will scan and upload the Jacobs letter where it explains he clamped the vehicle to get money out of us and that he returned the key after the "local Authority requested the key be collected from the local police station and returned to you" I am going to write a letter of complaint to Trafford Borough Council; unfortunately, I cannot locate the name of the CEO as the last one left in August due to ill-health. I am wondering who else I can write to - I did write to the Head of Finance and the reply has come from the "Assistant Recovery Team Manager".

The numpty bailiff has admitted to clamping your car in order to obtain money from you. This now raises the question as to whether he had a right in law to do so. In my experience, trying to prove a right in law, in such a case, is very difficult. The bailiff, in your case, has an uphill struggle in front of him as the local authority told him to collect the car key from the police station and return it to you. This raises questions as to whether the clamping was lawful in the first place. A local government officer or a certificated bailiff will not be familiar with the law as it applies to obtaining money by use of menaces (threats). And an offender can, on conviction, expect a substantial custodial sentence. The average sentence, for a first-time offender of previous good character, is 3-4 years' imprisonment. For more seasoned offenders, the average is 5-6 years. The maximum penalty prescribed by law is 14 years.

I would write to the bailiff, requesting that he proves he had a right in law to clamp your car as a means of obtaining money from you. The way to phrase this is as follows -

"I require that you provide evidence of case and statute law that you had a right in law to attach a wheelclamp to my car, vehicle registration mark [VRM], between [date] and [date] as a means of obtaining money from me, which you have admitted, that the demand for money was lawful and that using the wheelclamp as a means of doing so was a proper and lawful means of enforcing the demand you made."

It is likely you will get a multi-page essay full of b*ll****, waffle and/or excuses. The fact is, if the bailiff cannot prove he acted lawfully, he is buggered and could lose his certificate at the very least. It is also for the local authority to prove their contracted enforcement agent acted lawfully. Ask them to provide you with evidence of case and statute law proving this.

I would send the letter to the council to its CEO and mark it Formal Complaint.

[starukkiwi]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

I have now posted a letter of complaint to the CEO and enclosed copies of the letter stating he had clamped the car, the letter from Jacobs and teh one from the council stating he had done nothing wrong It willl have arrived today. I have also sent a letter and copied in the CEO again to ask the question you kindly supplied.
Now I expect we will get a waffle reply; but what do we do then apart from report it to the Ombudsman, the Bailiff's County Court and the Bailiff's Association?.

[bluebottle]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

Don't even report it to the Bailiff's Association. The LGO deals with maladministration on the part of local authorities. If Jacobs and their bailiff cannot prove they acted lawfully, in the circumstances, I feel the County Court that issued the bailiff's certificate is the proper place to refer the matter, as the bailiff's conduct brings into question their fitness to hold a bailiff certificate.

My gut-feeling is that Jacobs will be unable to prove they and their bailiff acted lawfully. They are likely to come out with some fantastic excuses, but, at the end of the day, it is their bailiff who admitted that he clamped your car in order to get money out of you. And the fact is, unless he can prove he had a right in law to do so, he is in serious trouble. Losing his certificate is going to be the least of his worries. The worst-case scenario he could face is a trip to custody and an appearance before the magistrates.

Let us know what sort of response you receive from Jacobs and their bailiff.

[ploddertom]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

Just remember that CIVEA is a trade body for bailiffs paid for by their members - in my view not independent and not likely to find against their members.

[starukkiwi]

Re: Jacobs Bailiffs - clamped vehicle but will not take possesion of it

Just remember that CIVEA is a trade body for bailiffs paid for by their members - in my view not independent and not likely to find against their members.

Rather like the IPCC or LGO really - i sent the letters and e-mailed as per Bluebottle's advice; but I would have liked to be a fly onthe wall when they opened that e-mail this morning! (Icopied in the CEO of Trafford Council as well, even though I had already written a full letter of complaint, which would have been received last Wednesday - not had the SLA response yet!)