collectica bailiffs

[plasticpen]

Re: collectica bailiffs

thanks for everybodys input.
I phoned the enforcement no today but was told that I had to refer everything to the bailiff.
The fact that I had phoned them and talked to somebody when i received the further steps notice was brushed aside,she did have the warmth of an iceberg and was sticking to procedure.
I do suffer from depression which is an ongoing thing,and I effectively am fathers carer,he knows nothing about this and it certainly wouldn't be good for his health if he did.

how do I go about going down the vulnerability route could father be part of this?
There is virtually nothing in the house that i own,do i have to prove ownership of goods in the house

Re: collectica bailiffs

If you have no possessions there, other than clothes, bedding, etc, do a stat dec & show it to baliffs/send copy to them (with proof of postage).

Bearing in mind the usual disregard bailiffs have for veracity, it might be useful to send another copy by Recorded or Special Delivery.

Btw, re the 'vunerable' issue, & being as diplomatic as possible, do you have any 'recognised' mental health issues? (you don't need to answer on here, but it could put you in the 'vunerable' category.

Mightn't his elderly papa be considered vulnerable?

Re: collectica bailiffs

It does make me wonder if whoever vets the tenders by bailiff companies conducts checks into their business practices. If they did, I am of the opinion, none of them would be awarded a contract. However, by letting HMCTS know, at every opportunity, exactly what is going on, only then will something be done about it.

Someone senior will go, "Tut, tut!" ?

Re: collectica bailiffs

Collectica were caught out by their own lies. I am waiting to see if HMCTS launch an investigation into other cases Collectica have handled on their behalf.

:flypig: :flypig: :flypig: :flypig::flypig: :flypig: :flypig::flypig: :flypig::flypig: :flypig: :flypig: :flypig: :flypig: :flypig: :flypig::flypig: :flypig: :flypig::flypig: :flypig: :flypig:

[bluebottle]

Re: collectica bailiffs

thank you for the help i will ring the court in the morning.
is it possible i could be classed as vulnerable,due to my now being unemployed.
I have read of a no of instances of collectica baiiliffs abusing their power,it amazes me that they are employed at all by a court service.

It does make me wonder if whoever vets the tenders by bailiff companies conducts checks into their business practices. If they did, I am of the opinion, none of them would be awarded a contract. However, by letting HMCTS know, at every opportunity, exactly what is going on, only then will something be done about it.

[charitynjw]

Re: collectica bailiffs

If you have no possessions there, other than clothes, bedding, etc, do a stat dec & show it to baliffs/send copy to them (with proof of postage).

Btw, re the 'vunerable' issue, & being as diplomatic as possible, do you have any 'recognised' mental health issues? (you don't need to answer on here, but it could put you in the 'vunerable' category.

[wales01man]

Re: collectica bailiffs

Dont think being unemployed classed as being vulnerable.Try to sort it with court and if they take it away from bailiffs pay it on time evertime,if its still with the bailiffs sfter you talk to court they will hit you with charges

[plasticpen]

Re: collectica bailiffs

thank you for the help i will ring the court in the morning.
is it possible i could be classed as vulnerable,due to my now being unemployed.
I have read of a no of instances of collectica baiiliffs abusing their power,it amazes me that they are employed at all by a court service.

[bluebottle]

Re: collectica bailiffs

If would seem the court have acted correctly in issuing a fine and when you defaulted providing you with a Further Steps Notice. You have stated that you contacted the court on receipt of the FSN and that you were told that "everything was ok" and you then continued with payments.

Clearly therefore there appears to have been a "misunderstanding " with the court and you MUST contact them on Monday because, in cases such as yours they can recall the warrant (which appears to have been issued in error).

From a huge amount of experience over many years ( not on a personal basis but business wise) it is the case that Magistrate Courts are very helpful indeed in allowing debtors to return to court for a Means Hearing in cases where the debtors individual circumstances have changed "since the fine was imposed". However, the time to request a Means Hearing is BEFORE the court take any of the "further steps" outlined in the Further Steps Notice.

Once a distress warrant is issued, it is most unusual for the court to "recall" the warrant. However, in your case it would seem that the court may have made an error by telling you that everything was OK when you contacted them on receipt of the FSN ad then issuing a Distress Warrant.

Please do post back once you have spoken with the court.

There has been a recent case, involving Collectica, where HMCTS recalled a warrant that had been correctly issued. The reason was because Collectica were caught lying to HMCTS about a debtor's claim that they were trying to engineer a situation whereby they could gain authority to force entry and bump up their fees. Collectica were caught out by their own lies. I am waiting to see if HMCTS launch an investigation into other cases Collectica have handled on their behalf. You are correct that HMCTS staff are, on the whole, very helpful. The HMCTS Senior Enforcement Manager for the area in which the case I have highlighted occurred was very helpful indeed.

[Milo]

Re: collectica bailiffs

If would seem the court have acted correctly in issuing a fine and when you defaulted providing you with a Further Steps Notice. You have stated that you contacted the court on receipt of the FSN and that you were told that "everything was ok" and you then continued with payments.

Clearly therefore there appears to have been a "misunderstanding " with the court and you MUST contact them on Monday because, in cases such as yours they can recall the warrant (which appears to have been issued in error).

From a huge amount of experience over many years ( not on a personal basis but business wise) it is the case that Magistrate Courts are very helpful indeed in allowing debtors to return to court for a Means Hearing in cases where the debtors individual circumstances have changed "since the fine was imposed". However, the time to request a Means Hearing is BEFORE the court take any of the "further steps" outlined in the Further Steps Notice.

Once a distress warrant is issued, it is most unusual for the court to "recall" the warrant. However, in your case it would seem that the court may have made an error by telling you that everything was OK when you contacted them on receipt of the FSN ad then issuing a Distress Warrant.

Please do post back once you have spoken with the court.