Help marstons charged £403

[bizzybob]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

Unfortunately the repugnant practice is an integral part of UK fiscal policy and extends far beyond the pockets of the bailiff, local government and even the chancellor of the exchequer all take there cut from everyone else s misery.

See the LADA report for instance, where it was shown that councils award tenders to bailiff companies on a basis of fee kickbacks.

The big "C" word Corruption in other words

[gravytrain]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

Unfortunately the repugnant practice is an integral part of UK fiscal policy and extends far beyond the pockets of the bailiff, local government and to even the chancellor of the exchequer all take a cut from the debtors misery.

See the LADER report for instance, where it was shown that councils award tenders to bailiff companies on a basis of fee kickbacks.

[bizzybob]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

It is disgusting, primitive, barbaric and quite likely not to be effective, as the miscreant might not live at the address "visited" and. indeed, might never have lived there.


Wrong.

I take the view that seizing and selling a person's goods to settle a debt should have died when the Marshalsea (link) was closed.

Yes distress and seizure of goods should have died years ago, but it didn't and now debtors are trapped in a virtual Marshalsea in their own homes, prisoners of the bailiffs increasing, and often unjustifiable demands that are no less repugnant than the interest on a Wonga loan. They are trapped by the possibility of never being debt free within their lifetime.

Re: Help marstons charged £403

But the point still remains......why is a bailiff allowed to "kick the door in"? It is bizarre. This would seem like a draconian measure if the purpose of the forced entry was to search for the defaulter ( or should I say "alleged" fine defaulter.

It is disgusting, primitive, barbaric and quite likely not to be effective, as the miscreant might not live at the address "visited" and. indeed, might never have lived there.

The most that is allowed by law is for the bailiff to carry out a levy upon goods. The law is very clear on this particular point. ... A levy is all that can be achieved. The bailiff cannot remove the goods.

Wrong.

I take the view that seizing and selling a person's goods to settle a debt should have died when the Marshalsea (link) was closed.

[gravytrain]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

But the point still remains......why is a bailiff allowed to "kick the door in"? It is bizarre. This would seem like a draconian measure if the purpose of the forced entry was to search for the defaulter ( or should I say "alledged" fine defaulter. The most that is allowed by law is for the bailiff to carry out a levy upon goods. The law is very clear on this particular point.

A levy is all that can be achieved. The bailiff cannot remove the goods.

I was under the impression that "levying distress" was as defined in distress for rent rules where a walking possession order is issued and goods can be removed if the arrangement to pay is not followed or cannot be negotiated, and enforced via the magistrates court act 1980, in the same way as re-entry after a legal peaceful levy has been made on a civil debt, is this not correct ?

[Milo]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

Harriet Harman also known in our house as "that bloody woman" was one of the main orchestrators of this particular three card trick.

I remember her defending the TCE forced entry regulations, which the earlier DCVCA skulduggery laid the groundwork for, by saying," if it was her money she would have no compunction about kicking the door in".

But the point still remains......why is a bailiff allowed to "kick the door in"? It is bizarre. This would seem like a draconian measure if the purpose of the forced entry was to search for the defaulter ( or should I say "alledged" fine defaulter. The most that is allowed by law is for the bailiff to carry out a levy upon goods. The law is very clear on this particular point.

A levy is all that can be achieved. The bailiff cannot remove the goods.

Re: Help marstons charged £403

[MissFM]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

Tch tch - and yet another priest today....

Re: Help marstons charged £403

In view of the Hunhe affair, what other scandals are hidden in the Westminster Bubble, that they want to castrate the press to keep buried?

Well, there was that children's home on Jersey, Haut de la Garenne and similar abuse allegedly happened at two homes on Guernsey...

Didn't "Sir" Edward Heath enjoy sailing to the Channel Islands?

Re: Help marstons charged £403

She was also the person who defended kiddie fiddlers when she was a Legal Officer with the National Council for Civil Liberties (now Liberty).

link 1, link 2

Says a lot, don't you think? She's a raving loony, if you ask me.

IFYPFY. msl:

[bizzybob]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

She was also the person who defended kiddie fiddlers when she was a Legal Officer with the National Council for Civil Liberties (now Liberty). Says a lot, don't you think? Misguided, if you ask me.

In view of the Hunhe affair, what other scandals are hidden in the Westminster Bubble, that they want to castrate the press to keep buried?

[bluebottle]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

Harriet Harmon also known in our house as "that bloody woman" was one of the main orchestrators of this particular three card trick.

I remember her defending the TCE forced entry regulations, which the earlier DCVCA skulduggery laid the groundwork for, by saying," if it was her money she would have no compunction about kicking the door in".

She was also the person who defended kiddie fiddlers when she was a Legal Officer with the National Council for Civil Liberties (now Liberty). Says a lot, don't you think? Misguided, if you ask me.

[gravytrain]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

Harriet Harman also known in our house as "that bloody woman" was one of the main orchestrators of this particular three card trick.

I remember her defending the TCE forced entry regulations, which the earlier DCVCA skulduggery laid the groundwork for, by saying," if it was her money she would have no compunction about kicking the door in".

[bizzybob]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

From a letter sent to MP's in 2007

"When the Domestic Violence, Crime & Victims Act was going through Parliament, the Government did not make clear the magnitude of the change it was making to English law. The power of forced entry was a last minute amendment to a Bill that had nothing to do with bailiffs and the Minister responsible told MPs that it was to close a loophole in the law. As there was no consultation, the advice agencies and bailiff associations didn’t know what was happening and so couldn’t point out that the change was breaching two fundamental principles of English law.

Government has created so many new fines and penalties that it has warped our sense of what is ‘criminal’. When Ministers defend the need to force entry to homes on the basis that the defaulter has been found guilty of a crime, many will in fact have had only fixed penalty notices"

The effect of this will fall disproportionately to marginal offenders, TV licence, littering, as per fag ash on pavement and overzealous CEO.

[bluebottle]

Re: Help marstons charged £403

From a letter sent to MP's in 2007

"When the Domestic Violence, Crime & Victims Act was going through Parliament, the Government did not make clear the magnitude of the change it was making to English law. The power of forced entry was a last minute amendment to a Bill that had nothing to do with bailiffs and the Minister responsible told MPs that it was to close a loophole in the law. As there was no consultation, the advice agencies and bailiff associations didn’t know what was happening and so couldn’t point out that the change was breaching two fundamental principles of English law.

Government has created so many new fines and penalties that it has warped our sense of what is ‘criminal’. When Ministers defend the need to force entry to homes on the basis that the defaulter has been found guilty of a crime, many will in fact have had only fixed penalty notices"

From what you have said, it does sound somewhat perverse as to what the previous government sneaked in. My gut-feeling says that there is a hidden agenda going on somewhere. It would not surprise me if there was.