Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

[CleverClogs]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

It would seem like the council arnt actually dealing with this themselves but an outsource group, I received this email today:...

Liberata is the trading name of Liberata UK Limited (Registered in England and Wales - No 1238274)

According to their website - link - they work for the Ministry of Justice, City of London Corporation, Bromley Council, North Somerset, Pendle - and probably many others known for their cock-ups and clangers. Liberata's "cunning plan" is something they call - link- CapacityGRID (sic) whereby admin staff in one borough can be virtually 'farmed out' to another.

As it is obvious that they have no idea about the nature of the problem and as you'll not be able to pin anyone down in the council staff, you'd do better complaining to your councillors and/or MP.

[goggers]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

It does go some way to explaining why people keep hitting a brick wall whenever they try to sort things out with the council, these outsource groups in my view are as bad as the bailiffs themselves. Another case of the council passing the buck and playing ignorant, this way they get there money and turn a blind eye.

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

It does go some way to explaining why people keep hitting a brick wall whenever they try to sort things out with the council, these outsource groups in my view are as bad as the bailiffs themselves. Another case of the council passing the buck and playing ignorant, this way they get there money and turn a blind eye.

Unfortunately, this sort of policy is called "The Boomerang Policy", because it comes back and smacks them in the face. Do you have to deal with Liberata? No you don't. Can Liberata make you deal with them and not North Somerset Council? No they can't. Can the elected representatives be held to account for Liberata's actions? Yes they can.

[labman]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

Three things:

1. What paperwork has been left to date by the bailiffs?

2. When you go to the council, try to go with your councillor or MP and point out the fact the council are vicariously liable for the conduct of their appointed enforcement agents. They cannot therefore just wash their hands of Rossendales' behaviour or charges.

3. Have a read of this:

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...ax_Arrears.pdf

It's reasonably new and may prove quite illuminating for you.

[goggers]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

Oh that pdf is most informative, nice post thank you. I received a letter today of breakdown of charges from Rossendales, it states on it 2 visits in march to my old property thats it, both charges are in accordance with the law but obviously i had no idea the bailiffs where even looking for me. The only letter I have recieved from the bailiffs themselves states an amount of £600 headed Bailiff Removal and balance due in full, no charges, no levy, nothing else at all apart from contact details.

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

Three things:

1. What paperwork has been left to date by the bailiffs?

2. When you go to the council, try to go with your councillor or MP and point out the fact the council are vicariously liable for the conduct of their appointed enforcement agents. They cannot therefore just wash their hands of Rossendales' behaviour or charges.

3. Have a read of this:

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...ax_Arrears.pdf

It's reasonably new and may prove quite illuminating for you.

You're right, LM. It is quite enlightening. Let's hope that local authorities heed what is in it. Curtailing the activities of companies like Capita and Liberata in local government, would, in my view, go a long way to curbing some of the more unacceptable practices we have witnessed on the LB forums. Then again, you have firms like Jacobs, JBW and Newlyns who are so cocksure of themselves, they land local authorities with litigation through their malpractices.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

You're right, LM. It is quite enlightening. Let's hope that local authorities heed what is in it. Curtailing the activities of companies like Capita and Liberata in local government, would, in my view, go a long way to curbing some of the more unacceptable practices we have witnessed on the LB forums. Then again, you have firms like Jacobs, JBW and Newlyns who are so cocksure of themselves, they land local authorities with litigation through their malpractices.

Or they'll land the local authority in trouble with the LGO, especially if the response from the LA is to pass on complaints to the bailiff company or to tell the debtor that they must deal with the bailiff themselves.

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

Or they'll land the local authority in trouble with the LGO, especially if the response from the LA is to pass on complaints to the bailiff company or to tell the debtor that they must deal with the bailiff themselves.

That as well, Cloggy. Thanks.

[goggers]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

Just a quick update.
I managed to actually speak to the "enforcement" people at the council who denied been outsource company, have no idea why as the email they sent clearly states who they are. The "debate" on the phone got quite heated as they just did not listen to a word I had to say and even though I had submitted the various documents the person had no access to them, when I asked to speak to someone that did they told me no documents had been received. When I mentioned that I had been to the local town hall and the documents had been scanned and a confirmation letter had been given to me to say just that she became very rude and told me I had to deal with Rossendales directly and that they are not going to look at this anymore. The reason all this came about is because according to them I owe £370 not £600, when I questioned why I had been delivered a £600 letter by the bailiff and that they should have a copy of this she denied having it, my next words where well I have the letter in my hand right now would you like me to send you a copy I was told no, I then asked for her to confirm that Rossendales has then actually tried to commit fraud in obtaining this money from me at which point they hung up.

Looking at my options now, I think a letter to the local MP is in order as previously mentioned earlier.

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

Probably the main reason why no investigation has ever been made into their antics is that it could be most embarrassing to the establishment. That was certainly part of the reason that the extent of 'phone hacking and alleged illegal payments to police officers was not properly investigated until the investigation was effectively forced on Scotland Yard.

Another reason would be the likely size of the investigation. Each bailiff is individually certificated, so each would have to be investigated and, unless one or more were willing to give evidence against the bailiff company, it would only be the bailiff who might suffer any ill effects as the result of their over-charging. Even if some bailiffs did present cogent and compelling evidence that they had been directed to overcharge, that would not prove that the directors of the company knew of that practice or had ordered it to be done.

A number of certificated bailiffs are former police officers who have left the police force not by choice. Once an officer leaves the police force, there is an unwritten rule that if a former officer sees a serving officer requiring assistance, they go to that officer's assistance. Likewise, if a serving officer realises a former officer is in trouble of whatever description, they will do what they can to assist the former officer. Does that explain why so few, if any, certificated bailiffs who transgress end up in front of the magistrates court and why serving police officers apparently appear to assist certificated bailiffs to flout the law?

As regards overcharging, if the bailiff or bailiff company, when challenged, reduces any overcharged fees to bring them into line with what is permitted by legislation, then that is a purely consumer protection matter. However, if the bailiff or bailiff company insists the overcharged fees are correct and/or in accordance with legislation when they are not and continues to assert this to be so, then that would be a criminal matter.

Where an offence of Fraud has been committed, Section 12, Fraud Act 2006 contains a provision that enables a company and its management to be prosecuted and punished for offences committed by or in the name of the company. There are two scenarios - Consent, where there is direction from management to commit such offences, and Connivance, where management do not direct employees to commit offences, but know or suspect offences are being committed and turn a blind eye to it or fail to do anything to stop it.

[goggers]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

As regards overcharging, if the bailiff or bailiff company, when challenged, reduces any overcharged fees to bring them into line with what is permitted by legislation, then that is a purely consumer protection matter. However, if the bailiff or bailiff company insists the overcharged fees are correct and/or in accordance with legislation when they are not and continues to assert this to be so, then that would be a criminal matter.

So basically what your saying is that bailiffs will try and add unlawful fee's, then once challenged remove the fee's and move on to the next person in the hopes they will pay up. Couldn't it be said that if they do indeed have a license to trade they should already know the legislation before they proceed with charges, I fail to see "ignorance" as an acceptable excuse, they know exactly what they are doing. Working in the pub trade and holding a license you must strictly follow any changes in legislation or loose your license, there is no grey area, you only get one chance. So in reality these bailiffs are nothing more than thugs trying to extract money out people which they are not entitled to and then getting away with it if challenged or the person does indeed pay up if they are none the wiser.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

Oh that pdf is most informative, nice post thank you. I received a letter today of breakdown of charges from Rossendales, it states on it 2 visits in march to my old property thats it, both charges are in accordance with the law but obviously i had no idea the bailiffs where even looking for me. The only letter I have recieved from the bailiffs themselves states an amount of £600 headed Bailiff Removal and balance due in full, no charges, no levy, nothing else at all apart from contact details.

If all they are claiming to have done was to visit twice (and what proof do they have of that?) then all they may lawfully add in fees is £42.50.

Thus, the total debt owed would be £412.50, not £600!

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

So basically what your saying is that bailiffs will try and add unlawful fee's, then once challenged remove the fee's and move on to the next person in the hopes they will pay up. Couldn't it be said that if they do indeed have a license to trade they should already know the legislation before they proceed with charges, I fail to see "ignorance" as an acceptable excuse, they know exactly what they are doing. Working in the pub trade and holding a license you must strictly follow any changes in legislation or loose your license, there is no grey area, you only get one chance. So in reality these bailiffs are nothing more than thugs trying to extract money out people which they are not entitled to and then getting away with it if challenged or the person does indeed pay up if they are none the wiser.

You're talking to an ex-copper, Goggers. They say the law is an ass and it is an ass. With the licensed trade, you are dealing with goods that are subject to excise duty, falling under the remit of HMRC, the premises are subject to licensing by a local authority and supervision is carried out by the police. Before President Blair cocked things up, HMCE dealt with the duty on the beers, wines and spirits and the police dealt with licensing and supervision. Much simpler. And, yes, step out of line and you were in the proverbial.

With bailiff companies, they will often charge more than relevant legislation permits. If, when challenged, they reduce the fees to what legislation dictates, that is overcharging. If they assert the fees are correct and continue to assert they are correct when the relevant legislation says otherwise, then, that is Fraud by Misrepresentation, as they are then misrepresenting the veracity and correctness of the fees. If, on the other hand, they charge or attempt to charge fees not permitted by relevant legislation, regardless of whether they remove the fees or not, that is Fraud by False Misrepresentation ab initio (from the outset).

Alarmingly, certificated bailiffs have to hold a certificate from the county court in order to levy distress on a debtor, but a bailiff company does not. If the bailiff company collects consumer debt, then they are required to hold an OFT Category F Debt Collection Licence. FOIA requests have revealed that many public debt collection contracts stipulate that a bailiff company must hold an OFT Debt Collection Licence as a condition of tender/contract.

What you say in the closing sentence of your post is, sadly, very true. Until the law is changed or, better, the civil enforcement industry is closed down and/or stricter regulations put in place to hold creditors to account, possibly, to the extent of them losing their right to enforce the debt owed, plus educating the police as to the dark arts practised by the civil enforcement industry, the situation will continue as it is at present.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

I managed to actually speak to the "enforcement" people at the council who denied been outsource company, have no idea why as the email they sent clearly states who they are.

That is because Liberata is a company that virtually farms out staff across its network. The person who sent the email may work for your council or may work for another council but, at the time of sending the email, was working for Liberata on behalf of your council.

It may keep the wages bill down, but it's hardly likely to improve efficiency of communications.

The "debate" on the phone got quite heated

That was probably what she intended. They are allowed to raise their voices to you, a mere member of the public, but you must never raise your voice to them as that is considered to be "abusive".

as they just did not listen to a word I had to say

Why should she, when she had a script to follow?

I believe that I might have asked to speak with her manager, her supervisor or, at least, someone of superior rank who should be less evidently lissencephalic. (glossary)

and even though I had submitted the various documents the person had no access to them, when I asked to speak to someone that did they told me no documents had been received.

It is part of the standard wind-up procedure to deny everything.

When I mentioned that I had been to the local town hall and the documents had been scanned and a confirmation letter had been given to me to say just that she became very rude

She would not like having been caught uttering an untruth.

and told me I had to deal with Rossendales directly

Standard twaddle and utterly untrue. Any council may recall an account from the bailiffs or halt enforcement action, as I wrote earlier.

and that they are not going to look at this any more.

Oh, really? Make an official, written complaint and see if they are daft enough to put their refusal in writing.

The reason all this came about is because according to them I owe £370 not £600, when I questioned why I had been delivered a £600 letter by the bailiff and that they should have a copy of this she denied having it, my next words where well I have the letter in my hand right now would you like me to send you a copy I was told no, I then asked for her to confirm that Rossendales has then actually tried to commit fraud in obtaining this money from me at which point they hung up.

Her excuse would be that you had become abusive and had accused her of fraud.

Looking at my options now, I think a letter to the local MP is in order as previously mentioned earlier.

Yes, that should help

[labman]

Re: Rossendales Bailiff and Council tax advice needed

If you have to phone again, may I suggest you record the call. It is standard advice on consumer forums, and better still try to avoid phone calls and keep things in writing for the avoidance of doubt.