Newlyn PLC

[ploddertom]

Re: Newlyn PLC

http://www.theguardian.com/money/201...-fees-councils

http://www.iharrow.com/bobsays/bob-s...iff-contracts/

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

Re: Newlyn PLC

It may already be contrary to section one (link) of the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889 and/or section one (link) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906

Section 7 (link) of the 1889 Act makes it plain that "person" includes any body of persons, etc.

I am amazed......I sincerely did not know that legislation against possible/actual corruption was in place....second revelation I had in the past few years....Believe it or not until 2001 I did not know what exactly a CCJ was, I knew it was not good for one's credit rating, but never knew it meant County Court Judgement.

Surprising how naive can somebody be when they always walked the straight and narrow road of honesty and fairness.

[wales01man]

Re: Newlyn PLC

Very easy to not know things until you meed to,good idea to read forums on all sorts of subjects.
Its an eye opener reading some of the rules regs and laws there are and the fact that some ignore them.LB
is an excellent source of info with added humour /

[labman]

Re: Newlyn PLC

I am amazed......I sincerely did not know that legislation against possible/actual corruption was in place....second revelation I had in the past few years....Believe it or not until 2001 I did not know what exactly a CCJ was, I knew it was not good for one's credit rating, but never knew it meant County Court Judgement.

Surprising how naive can somebody be when they always walked the straight and narrow road of honesty and fairness.

There's plenty - ask Bluebottle! The law existing and being able to use that law is two completely separate issues though. Theory and reality differ massively. :beagle:

[tam13sana]

Re: Newlyn PLC

How can these people be stopped? If a counsellor can not get contracts changed?

[labman]

Re: Newlyn PLC

How can these people be stopped? If a counsellor can not get contracts changed?

Councils have the right to terminate contracts if there is sufficient reason to do so. They only have a choice of four bailiff companies to use for Magistrate Court fines though, so it is limited.

I am not aware of a council having terminated a bailiff company's contract, there may have been a couple; they tend, if really pushed, to do something about individual bailiffs rather than contracts. The new guidelines should, in theory, make a difference, but being sceptical, I'll believe it when I see it.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Newlyn PLC

The "new guidelines" will, in reality, only make matters worse.

[labman]

Re: Newlyn PLC

The "new guidelines" will, in reality, only make matters worse.

In what way? Because people can easily read what is recommended should happen, but doesn't?

[bluebottle]

Re: Newlyn PLC

I have a lot of time for Mr Pickles. :beagle:

He certainly seems to have woken up and realised what is actually going on and is doing something about it. He gets a :okay: from me in that respect.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Newlyn PLC

He certainly seems to have woken up and realised what is actually going on and is doing something about it.

Apart from yawning and scratching his groin, what has he actually done?

[CleverClogs]

Re: Newlyn PLC

In what way? Because people can easily read what is recommended should happen, but doesn't?

No - because the new "guidelines" will be ignored just as readily as were previous "guidelines" and because bailiffs will continue to misrepresent their lawful powers in much the same way that they have done since the days of Robin Hood.

With costs being awarded against complainants, there is no effective redress against any bailiff who bends or breaks the rules.

[bluebottle]

Re: Newlyn PLC

Apart from yawning and scratching his groin, what has he actually done?

At least he has recognised there are some less than reputable operators about and that some LAs are taking kickbacks from bailiff companies and has issued guidelines. However, I have to agree that, apart from yawning and scratching his groin, he could go further and lay a Statutory Instrument before Parliament to clamp down on it. It should only take around 90 days to have an SI up and running, that is, when the politicians want to impress the voters.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Newlyn PLC

It should only take around 90 days to have an SI up and running, that is, when the politicians next want to bamboozle the voters.

I've fixed your post for you.

I still recall the Prime Moron declaring, upon being semi-elected, that he had no intention of enabling part 3 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act.

Consequently, I now trust him even less than I'd trust [name deleted by request of site admin].

[labman]

Re: Newlyn PLC

In what way? Because people can easily read what is recommended should happen, but doesn't?

No - because the new "guidelines" will be ignored

With costs being awarded against complainants, there is no effective redress against any bailiff who bends or breaks the rules.

That's what I said, and I pretty much agree with you. The vast majority of the time, sadly your statement is correct.

[bluebottle]

Re: Newlyn PLC

I've fixed your post for you.

I still recall the Prime Moron declaring, upon being semi-elected, that he had no intention of enabling part 3 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act.

Consequently, I now trust him even less than I'd trust [name deleted by request of site admin].

You're not talking about Cabbage Patch Doll by any chance, are you, Cloggy?