Issue with Marston Group

[wales01man]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

If the Brother was at the address did the bailiff know? Is this a bit dodgy by paying someones debt then claiming they were not liable>
its like a third party paying a F and F settlement to a DCA and then saying it was not my debt
Was the bailiff by chance recording this event? Some do

[bluebottle]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Thanks for your advice. Would you please suggest what should be added in the email to them?

P.S. I forgot to mention, they also said they were involving the police and auctioneers and said that they'd give us "10 minutes" before they remove the goods.

Every word the Marston bailiffs uttered, threats, their actions, including any aggressive behaviour, and any actual or attempted clamping of any motor vehicle not belonging to the debtor. If they were told the vehicle did not belong to the debtor and were shown proof of this and carried on regardless, this should be included in your complaint to HMCTS, also. The behaviour you have described in this thread is the sort of behaviour HMCTS have advised me they will not tolerate.

Hopefully, the HMCTS Area Enforcement Team will be in a position to resolve this matter, but please do bear in mind that the matter may be referred up to the HMCTS Regional Enforcement Team, which is at a higher level within HMCTS.

As for Greater Manchester Police (GMP), little has changed over the years where they are concerned. I can remember them acting like they have in your case when I was a copper some years ago.

[bluebottle]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Marstons are in the carp again, there is no way they should have accepted the money, but then they don't care who pays, just that someone does. It may be worth contacting the police for a crime number after you have taken the steps outlined by Bluebottle, but definitely swear a Statutory Declaration and send a copy to the court that sent the bailiff. Marstons may well claim you paid "voluntarily" so will say they will not pay the money back, that will be the rope that may well hang them, and they may offer the goodwill payment that BB mentioned, after HMCS beat them half to death with a stick.

I've fixed your post for you. :grin:

[Milo]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Makkie,

It is always a worry when people ask the same question on two different websites. It appears that you may have done the same and as you will see the advice given is significantly different. Contrary to what you are being told on another forum, you will not get a PM from me and neither am I am "Marston operative". In fact.....far from it.

The poster who is 'advising' you is known for making the most bizarre claims ( such as the Secretary of State or police settling claims for refunds of bailiff fees). This is a complete lie and a Freedom of Information request will confirm this.

Secondly, the poster is a resident of the Middle East and it is for this reason that he "believes" that he can mislead vulnerable debtors as he is exempt from prosecution.

As I said yesterday, if your brother has no knowledge of this court fine then he can file a simple Statutory Declaration and the conviction will be revoked. A new summons will then be issued to your brothers current address and he will be required to provide the address to the court.

There is no requirement at all to provide Marston Group with his correct address and he needs to only provide the court with this IF he is considering filing a Statutory Declaration.

Having now read the question that you posted on another forum it would seem that in fact your brother may well have known of the fine given that you have stated that he made some payment and then defaulted. This changes the position significantly.

If this is the case then before considering whether to make a complaint (as advised by Bluebottle) or to apply for a Chargeback or issue a a claim against the Government ( as advised on the other forum) it would be wise to find out from your brother the full facts behind this fine.

Please post back after you have spoken with your brother.

[wales01man]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

What is the truth here I think there may be more to this?

[Milo]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Whether on here or on CAG I am always carefully to ask questions before suggesting ways in which to resolve a problem and that is why you will not see me making suggestion of sending complaints to "Area Enforcement Teams" or HMCS (or anyone else for that matter) before knowing the full facts.

With many people now using "mobile devices" such as i-pads and mobile phones in which to post questions on forums they invariably only post limited information. If anyone is posting on two different forums ( as is the case with this poster) it is best to provide the SAME information on both forums.

It would seem from the other forum that the bailiff may well have had every right to attend Makkie's address and furthermore.....that her brother very likely knew about the court fine. This is apparent from Makkie's posts on the other forum where she states the following:

"Isn't it an issue that all his correspondence is being delivered at my address though"?

and equally serious that:


"I don't think he was aware of the court proceedings. (He did not keep up with his court fine (he was paying in instalments)"

[Makkie]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

You say that at the time of the visit by the bailiff that your brother was actually at the property ( although he does not normally live there). Did you brother speak with the bailiff and did he give them his correct address?

He spoke to them and they had barged in, they weren't willing to listen.

Did your brother know of the court fine?

Yes, the original debt not the additional charges but was not aware it was escalated to the bailiffs.

It he only knew about the fine today then he still has 20 days in which to file a "Statutory Declaration". This can be done enough though payment has been made and if accepted, the court will arrange a refund.

Would this be the additional fines that was received, or the orginal amount that was owed?

For clarity which of you actually paid the bailiff, and was the warrant to your address? Has your brother registered a motor vehicle using your address, or was he previously resident there?

The warrant was to my address, in which he use to live, he does not have a motor vehicle. I paid the bailiff even though it was not my debt, it was done under duress.

If the Brother was at the address did the bailiff know? Is this a bit dodgy by paying someones debt then claiming they were not liable>

How exactly would it be "dodgy"? If you were unaware of what bailiffs could do, and they had intimidated you too, I am sure you would have made the payment under duress too. The only person liable to pay for a debt is the person under debt. They had a recording device, I am not sure if this was only video and/or voice?

Hopefully, the HMCTS Area Enforcement Team will be in a position to resolve this matter, but please do bear in mind that the matter may be referred up to the HMCTS Regional Enforcement Team, which is at a higher level within HMCTS.

Would they also refund me? Under what circumstances would they refund me?

[wales01man]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

The recording will prove what you said and what the bailiff said im sure the pair of you knew if a fine was not paid there would be further action?
Someone will be able to tell us if on a summons or a fine confirmation it states what will happen if a fine is not paid on council tax it does.
Im not in any way siding with the Bailiff but you have to be 100% sure what you said and what your brother did or not do as for me paying under Durres I would have said its his debt bye bye Mr Bailiff

[Makkie]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Okay, so I have the following options:

1) Chargeback, if not successful;
2) HMCTS Criminal Enforcement Team
3) Complain to secretary of justice
4) Claim in small claims court

[bluebottle]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Okay, so I have the following options:

1) Chargeback, if not successful; Again, I would advise against this course of action where a criminal fine is involved.
2) HMCTS Criminal Enforcement Team This part of HMCTS oversees the enforcement of court fines and, obviously, if a private-sector contractor oversteps the mark or exceeds the authority the law provides, then it is HMCTS CET who, as the government body that contracted the private-sector contractor, will, ultimately, have to deal with any fallout resulting from any failure on the part of a private-sector contractor to comply with the law and the terms of their contract with HMCTS. Where a certificated bailiff who, for any reason, uses any form of leverage against a person who is not a debtor or a person named on a warrant, including the making of unwarranted demands and the use of threats to enforce such demands, not only is this against all natural justice, but it is also, potentially, a breach of the law.
3) Complain to secretary of justice. Don't waste your time. The current post-holder appears incapable of giving a straight answer to a straight question as my MP has found. If you watch the current post-holder when they are being interviewed by journalists on tv, they avoid the question and won't answer. Someone like that is, in my honest opinion, not only unfit to hold an office of state, but unfit to serve as an MP, also.
4) Claim in small claims court This case relates to a criminal matter and needs to be dealt with by the appropriate part of the justice system. The Small Claims court deals with civil claims, not a private-sector bailiff company enforcing for HMCTS and making, what certainly appears to be, a complete pig's ear of it by behaving like a U.S. bounty hunter.

BB
BB

[Makkie]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

BB
BB

Has anyone ever got a refund, after paying for someone elses debt under duress (and no other option but to pay since bailiffs would've took the items) using this option;

2) HMCTS Criminal Enforcement Team This part of HMCTS oversees the enforcement of court fines and, obviously, if a private-sector contractor oversteps the mark or exceeds the authority the law provides, then it is HMCTS CET who, as the government body that contracted the private-sector contractor, will, ultimately, have to deal with any fallout resulting from any failure on the part of a private-sector contractor to comply with the law and the terms of their contract with HMCTS. Where a certificated bailiff who, for any reason, uses any form of leverage against a person who is not a debtor or a person named on a warrant, including the making of unwarranted demands and the use of threats to enforce such demands, not only is this against all natural justice, but it is also, potentially, a breach of the law.

Thanks

[bluebottle]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Makkie,

Was anyone pushed, shoved or manhandled by the bailiffs in order that they could gain entry?

[Makkie]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Makkie,

Was anyone pushed, shoved or manhandled by the bailiffs in order that they could gain entry?

Only through the entrance, they shoved my brother to enter.

Also, what should I mention apart from how they acted to the enforcement team? That none of the belongings are my brother's and that he does not live in the household and that we called to company to inform them that he does not live in the household (mother just informed me she contacted the company awhile ago to inform them of him not living in the household).

[bluebottle]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

Only through the entrance, they shoved my brother to enter.

Also, what should I mention apart from how they acted to the enforcement team? That none of the belongings are my brother's and that he does not live in the household and that we called to company to inform them that he does not live in the household (mother just informed me she contacted the company awhile ago to inform them of him not living in the household).

As long as your brother was not attempting to shut a door on them, what they have done sounds very much to me like Battery which HMCTS aren't going to be happy about. Also, the fact the company was told your other brother did not reside at the address they performed at, on previous occasions, isn't going to go down well either. Were Marstons informed of this by mail or email?

When giving an account of something such as this, it is best to start with the initial letter from Marstons, then any subsequent letters, your mother telling Marstons your brother did not reside at the address and what happened after that, including what happened on the day Marstons' bailiffs behaved in the way they did. Everything should be in chronological order and everything needs to be included.

The best way to start would be -

"I wish to make a formal complaint in respect of the actions of your Approved Enforcement Agents Marston Group Limited.

The circumstances are:-

1. On [day], [date].......................

2. .............................................."

Number paragraphs as this will make it easier for whoever has to deal with it to follow the sequence of events. At the end, state the resolution you are seeking and contact details.

Follow Milo's advice, as given in an earlier post, but as it now appears a bailiff used physical force against an individual in order to gain entry, despite Marstons having been informed your brother did not reside at the address, this should really be referred to HMCTS. I am not entirely convinced a private-sector bailiff company should behave in this manner and then be permitted to resolve the matter on its terms.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Issue with Marston Group

However, do NOT make a "Form 4" complaint against the oaf, as bailiffs and bailiff companies have subverted the process by pretending that the only purpose for such a complaint is to deny a bailiff his livelihood.

Accordingly. they'll cheerfully pack the courtroom with a posse of barristers and then, when you lose, they'll hit you with a costs order for thousands of quid.