Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

[Milo]

I have had 2 emails and 3 PM's today regarding a Form 4 complaint last week and from the "gossip" that I am hearing, the person making the complaint had goodness knows how many separate complaints listed on the Form 4 which was also littered with references to endless case law (much of which is featured on another "advice forum").

From rumours that are "doing the rounds" it would appear that this Form 4 Complaint has all the "hallmarks" of one of the "Form 4 packs" thatare being sold to unsuspecting debtors for a fee of £99.

It would seem that the court rejected every single part of the complaint. I have heard conflicting rumors about costs and about which company the bailiff worked for but I will not be posting anything just yet until I receive something concrete.

People need to be very careful indeed when making a Form 4 Complaint and should be wary of websites that sell "Form 4 Packs" and offer to complete affidavits. The particualr website in question is NOT run by lawyers. It is frankly a disgrace.

[leclerc]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

"gossip" and "doing the rounds".

With all due respect, I read the title of the thread and go, that sounds interesting and then read 2 emails(not posted on here) and 3 Private Messages(not posted on the forum) and then you say it's "gossip".(please do not PM me with them cos this thread was not PM'd to me).

Can this post be moved to the lamp post where it can stay, as it's just "gossip" and "doing the rounds"?


Apologies Milo, but I thought this might be an thread worth reading and then I read the post and being extremely tired thought this(name of the band is the hint ):

[ploddertom]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

I heard of this a few days ago and I suspect that at least one of the participants will definitely not be Happy. Someone got their fingers burned very badly.

[bizzybob]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Has someone gone down in flames, leaving an unhappy trail?

[ploddertom]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

My source seems to suggest this happened in the North West, possibly Manchester.

[bluebottle]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Form 4 complaints are for very serious complaints against bailiffs. In all other cases, sending a letter to the Circuit or District Judge at the bailiff's certificating court, together with supporting evidence, is the best course of action, as the judge can then decide whether they require a Form 4 to be submitted or whether the matter can sit on file until the bailiff's certificate falls due for renewal and they can ask the bailiff to explain themselves at the renewal hearing. However, in one case, during 2012, a Ross & Roberts' bailiff found out, the hard way, that the courts can revoke a bailiff's certificate without a Form 4 complaint or a hearing. The court involved used its powers under the Civil Procedures Rules. Avoid sites offering Form 4 packs like the Plague.

[Milo]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Form 4 Complaints are serious matters and the PURPOSE of the complaint is to request that the District Judge consider removing the bailiffs certificate from the individual bailiff on the basis that the bailiff is "not a fit an proper person to hold a certificate" ( this precise wording is outlined in the relevant statutory regulations).

Sadly, there is one particular website known to many people on here that actively encourage visitors to their website to file Form 4 Complaints and they even go so far as to state on their website that they have sold over 1,300 "Form 4 Packs" ( £99 each). The site even provide a "service" where they will provide a "affidavit" for the debtor to use to support the Form 4 Complaint.

The site is OWNED by a lady who had previously posted on this forum and her site was "taken over" by a gentleman who is very well known to this particular forum ( and indeed another forum as well...CAG). The owner still posts on her forum.

The site are well known for providing unsuspecting debtors with template letters drafted by them which they encourage debtors to send to the police, the Ministry of Justice, the Parliamentary Ombudsman etc and such letters are littered with references to bailiff companies committing fraud etc etc. They are noteworthy as well for their constant references to endless case law ( much of which is centuries old or irrelevant).

The same site frequently encourage debtors to use bolt cutters to remove clamps and have even gone to the extraordinary lengths to state on their site that if a bailiff were to ignore these stupid "Removal of Implied Right of Access Notices" that it is legal to use an "axe on the bailiff". This is of course WRONG information.

There was indeed yet another Form 4 Complaint last week in Manchester County Court and the complainant had every part of her complaint thrown out by the Judge. It would seem that she received a remarkable "personal service" form the other website in that the gentleman who runs the forum was actually in court with her.

It is noteworthy that the gentleman has not posted on his forum since the court hearing. I will leave others to make their own minds up as to why.

PS: This post of mine is NOT a "Flame War" but sadly, is true

[labman]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

I am not actively posting for personal reasons at the moment, but was alerted to this, and would state it should not go to the Lamp Post (thanks Leclerc! ) - I understand where he is coming from, but in this particular case, it will be VERY meaningful for anyone who is at risk of being exposed to the tactics used by the person referred to by Ploddertom who will not be Happy.

I, too, understand Manchester and hope this may prove significant in the future.

Apologies for the evasive style of posting, but if anyone is contemplating following advice from this person, this thread will make them think twice.

Thanks Milo for posting - I hope to be starting to get back into action sometime next week.

[bluebottle]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Form 4 Complaints are serious matters and the PURPOSE of the complaint is to request that the District Judge consider removing the bailiffs certificate from the individual bailiff on the basis that the bailiff is "not a fit an proper person to hold a certificate" ( this precise wording is outlined in the relevant statutory regulations).

Sadly, there is one particular website known to many people on here that actively encourage visitors to their website to file Form 4 Complaints and they even go so far as to state on their website that they have sold over 1,300 "Form 4 Packs" ( £99 each). The site even provide a "service" where they will provide a "affidavit" for the debtor to use to support the Form 4 Complaint.

The site is OWNED by a lady who had previously posted on this forum and her site was "taken over" by a gentleman who is very well known to this particular forum ( and indeed another forum as well...CAG). The owner still posts on her forum.

The site are well known for providing unsuspecting debtors with template letters drafted by them which they encourage debtors to send to the police, the Ministry of Justice, the Parliamentary Ombudsman etc and such letters are littered with references to bailiff companies committing fraud etc etc. They are noteworthy as well for their constant references to endless case law ( much of which is centuries old or irrelevant).

The same site frequently encourage debtors to use bolt cutters to remove clamps and have even gone to the extraordinary lengths to state on their site that if a bailiff were to ignore these stupid "Removal of Implied Right of Access Notices" that it is legal to use an "axe on the bailiff". This is of course WRONG information.

There was indeed yet another Form 4 Complaint last week in Manchester County Court and the complainant had every part of her complaint thrown out by the Judge. It would seem that she received a remarkable "personal service" form the other website in that the gentleman who runs the forum was actually in court with her.

It is noteworthy that the gentleman has not posted on his forum since the court hearing. I will leave others to make their own minds up as to why.

PS: This post of mine is NOT a "Flame War" but sadly, is true

Sigh. No prizes for guessing which site Milo is referring to.

[bluebottle]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Form 4 Complaints are serious matters and the PURPOSE of the complaint is to request that the District Judge consider removing the bailiffs certificate from the individual bailiff on the basis that the bailiff is "not a fit an proper person to hold a certificate" ( this precise wording is outlined in the relevant statutory regulations).

Sadly, there is one particular website known to many people on here that actively encourage visitors to their website to file Form 4 Complaints and they even go so far as to state on their website that they have sold over 1,300 "Form 4 Packs" ( £99 each). The site even provide a "service" where they will provide a "affidavit" for the debtor to use to support the Form 4 Complaint. Muppets.

The site is OWNED by a lady who had previously posted on this forum and her site was "taken over" by a gentleman who is very well known to this particular forum ( and indeed another forum as well...CAG). The owner still posts on her forum.

The site are well known for providing unsuspecting debtors with template letters drafted by them which they encourage debtors to send to the police, the Ministry of Justice, the Parliamentary Ombudsman etc and such letters are littered with references to bailiff companies committing fraud etc etc. They are noteworthy as well for their constant references to endless case law ( much of which is centuries old or irrelevant). They're not Freeman On The Land nutters, are they?

The same site frequently encourage debtors to use bolt cutters to remove clamps and have even gone to the extraordinary lengths to state on their site that if a bailiff were to ignore these stupid "Removal of Implied Right of Access Notices" that it is legal to use an "axe on the bailiff". This is of course WRONG information. If a bailiff has illegally clamped a vehicle and refuses to remove the clamp, knowing he has no lawful authority to immobilise the vehicle, after two requests to remove and a warning that it will be removed forcibly if not removed within a set period of time, it can be removed, but does involve speaking to the police first. As for using an axe on a bailiff, very tempting but totally illegal and very messy.

There was indeed yet another Form 4 Complaint last week in Manchester County Court and the complainant had every part of her complaint thrown out by the Judge. It would seem that she received a remarkable "personal service" form the other website in that the gentleman who runs the forum was actually in court with her. Acting as a Mackenzie Friend? I am surprised the judge allowed it. You have to prove you have a basic grasp of what the case is about and applicable law before a judge will okay it.

It is noteworthy that the gentleman has not posted on his forum since the court hearing. I will leave others to make their own minds up as to why. I don't think I would if I had totally ******-up and landed a complainant/claimant with a costs order.

PS: This post of mine is NOT a "Flame War" but sadly, is true

@@@@

[Milo]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Bluebottle, in response to your highlighted answers:


They're not Freeman On The Land nutters, are they?

One of the regulars on the site has openly indicated on the well known Freeman on the Land debt forum that he is a FoTL supporter.

If a bailiff has illegally clamped a vehicle and refuses to remove the clamp, knowing he has no lawful authority to immobilise the vehicle, after two requests to remove and a warning that it will be removed forcibly if not removed within a set period of time, it can be removed, but does involve speaking to the police first. As for using an axe on a bailiff, very tempting but totally illegal

The website in question actively encourage debtors to remove wheel clamps on the mistaken belief of "levy abandonment". In a attempt to get debtors to believe that he is right in his "theory" he will display on the site endless case law which would lead unsuspecting debtors into "believing" that he is right. Sadly of course they are not to know that the case law mentioned does not in any way confirm levy abandonment. In other words they are being conned ( and no doubt this is so as to ensure that they pay a fee of £99).

In order to win a case on "levy abandonment" the debtor needs to be able to PROVE that the bailiff INTENDED to abandon the goods. There is an excellent Judgment in the case of Anthony Culligan v Marston Group in which the bailiff did not leave a Notice of Seizure and left the vehicle clamped very early in the morning without knocking at the door. The court did NOT find levy abandonment at all and in fact......District Judge Avent made the point VERY clear indeed that after applying a clamp the bailiff should leave a "reasonable period" of time to allow the debtor to make arrangements for payments.

As for using an axe on a bailiff....this is the quickest way of getting arrested and I would suspect..... getting a custodial sentence as well.

Acting as a Mackenzie Friend? I am surprised the judge allowed it. You have to prove you have a basic grasp of what the case is about and applicable law before a judge will okay it.

I will be ordering a copy of the transcript but this can take quite a few weeks. As I have stated earlier, there are lots of rumors about this case going around the bailiff industry and it is being discussed heavily on a local authority forum. What I do know is that he (HC) was NOT acting as a Mackenzie Friend. Instead, he tried to "claim" that he was a friend of the complainant........but he was "royally rumbled" after the Judge asked him to confirm who he was.


I don't think I would if I had totally ******-up and landed a complainant/claimant with a costs order.

If this case had of involved Newlyn, Excel, Collectica or Phoenix, they would have asked the court for substantial costs. Most of the other companies do NOT ask for costs and that was the case with this particular complaint.

[bluebottle]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Collectica have recently been caught lying to HMCTS, so I am waiting to see if there is an investigation into other cases they have handled on behalf of HMCTS and whether their contract is reviewed. It would also be interesting to see if any Form 4 complaints they have defended are now reviewed.

I would imagine HC looked a total tit when the judge rumbled who he was. Any idea which part of HC's anatomy the judge aimed his copy of Stone's at?

[Milo]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Collectica have recently been caught lying to HMCTS, so I am waiting to see if there is an investigation into other cases they have handled on behalf of HMCTS and whether their contract is reviewed. It would also be interesting to see if any Form 4 complaints they have defended are now reviewed.

I would imagine HC looked a total tit when the judge rumbled who he was. Any idea which part of HC's anatomy the judge aimed his copy of Stone's at?

If you read my post carefully you will note that I clearly stated that he had been "royally rumbled" after the Judge asked him to confirm his name . I did NOT say that the Judge rumbled him.

[charitynjw]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Hi Milo

Any news of a transcript?

[bluebottle]

Re: Form 4 Complaints and the dangers of taking "legal" advice

Sorry, Milo. It's just that the thought of HC completely fecking-up and having a judge lob a copy of Stone's at him was just too much of a temptation. Any idea of what the judge's view was of HC's behaviour in court?