If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

[teaboy2]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

You said "A bailiff can not turn up on first visit and clamp a car or take any goods without first levying the car or goods and then returning at a later date after issuing the levy to collect payment or take goods."

Both these statements are factually incorrect

Thats right Andy - I did say that, because its correct. The key words in my statement being, "Without first levying the car" So in other words, they can not clamp the car without having levying it first. They also can not tow the car away when the same day as they clamp it, as the reason they clamp cars is to secure the siezed vehicle, so when they return on another day to impound goods (I.e. tow the car away) the car will still be there!!

There must be a delay between seizure and removal, especially vehicles, Culligan v Simkin & Marston Group Ltd [2008] - This means they can not remove the car or other goods the same day they clamped the car or seized goods.

You have clearly misread my statement as it is but one full statement making clear they can not, on a first visit clamp a car without a valid levy for it, and they can not take the car the same day they clamped/levied it. Also if they had a valid levy but failed to secure (Clamp) the car the levy is deemed as abandoned!! If the bailiff the op mentioned had wrote a levy out for the car, then he could quite lawfully clamp it. But in the OP's case, the bailiff did not have one, didn't even write one out and still proceeded to clamp the car without a levy only for the police to stop him, when informed that its unlawful to clamp a car that has not been levied and therefore has not lawfully been seized!

So what i said was in fact correct!! No levy, no legal entitlement to secure or remove goods!!

[Guest]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Thats right Andy - I did say that, because its correct. The key words in my statement being, "Without first levying the car" So in other words, they can not clamp the car without having levying it first. They also can not tow the car away when the same day as they clamp it, as the reason they clamp cars is to secure the siezed vehicle, so when they return on another day to impound goods (I.e. tow the car away) the car will still be there!!

There must be a delay between seizure and removal, especially vehicles, Culligan v Simkin & Marston Group Ltd [2008] - This means they can not remove the car or other goods the same day they clamped the car or seized goods.

You have clearly misread my statement as it is but one full statement making clear they can not, on a first visit clamp a car without a valid levy for it, and they can not take the car the same day they clamped/levied it. Also if they had a valid levy but failed to secure (Clamp) the car the levy is deemed as abandoned!! If the bailiff the op mentioned had wrote a levy out for the car, then he could quite lawfully clamp it. But in the OP's case, the bailiff did not have one, didn't even write one out and still proceeded to clamp the car without a levy only for the police to stop him, when informed that its unlawful to clamp a car that has not been levied and therefore has not lawfully been seized!

So what i said was in fact correct!! No levy, no legal entitlement to secure or remove goods!!

Nope You said : "A bailiff can not turn up on first visit and clamp a car or take any goods without first levying the car or goods and then returning

This was incorrect

[Guest]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Also the act of clamping the car is impounding the goods.

You haven't posted much on the Bailiff section Teaboy, I suggest you have a read up before you venture any more opinions.

[teaboy2]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Nope you said You said "A bailiff can not turn up on first visit and clamp a car or take any goods without first levying the car or goods and then returning

This was incorrect

How is it incorrect??

It doesn't matter if its the first, second, third or visit number 1000 - If they have no levy on any visit for the car, or did not levy (and clamped it) on a previous visit, then they can not clamp it or remove it, without first levying the car and clamping it and then returning at a later date to remove it.

You're misreading what i said and simply seeing the bit where i said "first visit" only and wrongly assuming that am saying they can not clamp or seize goods on the first visit, which is not what i stated. I never implied that they can not clamp or seize goods on a first visit, only that they can not do so without first levying the goods or car!

If you disagree then you effectively saying that a bailiff can sieze (clamp) a debtors car without having levied it first - Which would basically mean they could just pull up outside your house, clamp the car and then have it towed away without the debtor knowing anything about it and without the car actually being legally seized past into the possession of the courts etc. In other words, entitling the bailiff to commit theft of goods and vehicles!!

The act of clamping a car is not impounding it at all, it is securing it. Impounding it is when they tow it away to the car pound for it to be later sold at auction! Or where they have the debtor sign a walk in possession order!

I may not be around the bailiff section much, but i clearly have better grasp than you - So don't even think about trying to discredit my posts on this by pointing out that i am not around bailiff threads much. As that's a pretty pathetic attempt at supporting your own posts.

[labman]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

A bailiff can clamp a car if they have a valid clamping order. These are issued under the Courts Act 2003. The clamping order specifies the vehicle which can be clamped, and it cannot be clamped if it is clearly used for carrying disabled passengers.

After 24 hours the vehicle can be moved to a secure location, from where it can be moved and sold subject to further procedures (and time delays).

So as long as the clamping order is there, they can seize the vehicle. It's a 'hot potato' subject, especially once moved to a pound, but as things are, I've set out the law as I believe it to be.

[teaboy2]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Exactly Labman - That's what i have been saying all along, though in this case its for council tax and not a magistrates court fine so in this case they need to levy (Form 7) the car first just like they would need a Clamping Order for the car if it was a magistrates court fine. They can not clamp the car and then write up a levy! So all the bailiff had to do in the OP's case was write up a form 7 prior to trying to clamp the car!

[labman]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Clamping is a form of levying though (Culligan v Simkin & Marstons Group 2008 which confirmed clamping clamping is part of the act of levying). For most debts its use is very questionable, but it is sanctioned by the legislation and is a means of securing on the premises.

In terms of Magistrates' Court clamping orders, Schedule 5 Part 9 paragraphs 38 and 41 of the 2003 Act allowed the recovery of an unpaid penalty by 'fitting an immobilisation device.' Detail of the clamping orders is helpfully (not!!!!) in an entirely separate piece of legislation, the Fines Collection Regulations 2006 Part 4.

That is it at a simple level, and I really don't want to get any deeper, but basically, as long as the fines officer is happy the person can pay, and the value of the car exceeds the amount owed plus costs and sale, the vehicle can be clamped in any public place as well as on private land.

It is an horrendous area, and always causes arguments.

[teaboy2]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Clamping is a form of levying though (Culligan v Simkin & Marstons Group 2008 which confirmed clamping clamping is part of the act of levying). For most debts its use is very questionable, but it is sanctioned by the legislation and is a means of securing on the premises.

In terms of Magistrates' Court clamping orders, Schedule 5 Part 9 paragraphs 38 and 41 of the 2003 Act allowed the recovery of an unpaid penalty by 'fitting an immobilisation device.' Detail of the clamping orders is helpfully (not!!!!) in an entirely separate piece of legislation, the Fines Collection Regulations 2006 Part 4.

That is it at a simple level, and I really don't want to get any deeper, but basically, as long as the fines officer is happy the person can pay, and the value of the car exceeds the amount owed plus costs and sale, the vehicle can be clamped in any public place as well as on private land.

It is an horrendous area, and always causes arguments.

True but "clamping is only part of the act of levying" Form 7 (levying of car/goods) is the other part. You can't do one without the other.

[labman]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Form 7 is the paperwork which must be left as mentioned ages ago.

[Monkey Drunk]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Seeing as OP has failed to complete their story and advise us of the outcome, I guess you've all been locking horns for nothing!

The OP appears to think that just because a form 7 wasn't handed to them before the bailiff went to the clamp the car, it was an illegal act.

For or all we know, the relevant paperwork was eventually left but the story stops just after the police arrived!

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Specifically, if they are on your driveway blocking your car and have not written out a Form F7 and are not in the process of writing, should they leave if you ask them to? Thanks.

Just returning to the topic of this thread.....

If the Bailiff has an LO with your name and address on it they do not have to leave your premises when requested to do so.

Although it's preferable to fill in a Form 7 before clamping a vehicle, because a vehicle can be removed rather rapidly, it is common practice to clamp first and fill in the paperwork afterwards.

By placing a clamp on a vehicle the Bailiff has clearly marked the object of the Levy. Also as soon as the clamp is on the vehicle a notice must be applied to such vehicle warning the defaulter not to attempt to move it or remove the clamp, and list the legislation that allowed him/her to seize such vehicle. The warning notice also must state that the vehicle has been impouded on the premises on the strenghth of a Warrant/Order isuued by the Court.

Because of the nature of the impounded goods, depending on environmental factors the vehicle can be towed away after contact has been made with the defaulter and payment was not forthcoming.

The Bailiff can ask for police presence to make sure that a breach of the peace will not occurr, the Police are not there to assist the Bailiff, but as the Bailiff is there on behalf of a Court they are also there to prevent anyone to obstruct the Bailiff in performing his/her duties.

[labman]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Which unsurprisingly is what id put from legislation. It does no harm to go back to the basics sonetimes though.

[Guest]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Yes that is correct, the seizing of the goods , impounding, levying distress, all the same thing, and is usually done on the first visit.

Incidentally a clamping order is not required for the bailiff to legally impound the goods by using a clamp when enforcing an order to distrain.

Treaboy, I see you are modifying your view now , that is fine as long as you now understand.

[bluebottle]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Yes that is correct, the seizing of the goods , impounding, levying distress, all the same thing, and is usually done on the first visit.

Incidentally a clamping order is not required for the bailiff to legally impound the goods by using a clamp when enforcing an order to distrain.

Teaboy, I see you are modifying your view now , that is fine as long as you now understand.

In the case of court fines, a clamping order may be required in certain circumstances. That was alluded to me by HMCTS at HQ level a few weeks ago. It has also been confirmed by Labman in Post #52 by him quoting the relevant legislation.

Sir Vere has confirmed a lot of what Labman, myself and other posters have said. So why have you taken up thread space by picking arguments with us? If a bailiff has lawful authority/a right in law to be somewhere and to do something, fine. If they don't, then they shouldn't be there or doing what they are doing and should be asked to leave or be removed.

You may pop up under different personas, but your love of picking arguments for the sake of it is unmistakable.

[teaboy2]

Re: If a bailiff is asked to leave before they have levied, do they have to?

Yes that is correct, the seizing of the goods , impounding, levying distress, all the same thing, and is usually done on the first visit.

Incidentally a clamping order is not required for the bailiff to legally impound the goods by using a clamp when enforcing an order to distrain.

Treaboy, I see you are modifying your view now , that is fine as long as you now understand.

Am not modifying anything, i stated all along they cannot clamp without a levy (form 7) (key words in my very first post "Without a levy") on the car, clamping the car is only part of the act of levying goods, the main and important legal documentation part is the form 7 levy or signed form 8 walking possession, without which the car can not be clamped. If there is no form 7 or signed form 8 and the bailiff leaves the premises, then the levy is invalid/abandoned and the clamp can lawfully be removed by the car owner without any risk of facing criminal damage claims!!

See the second item on the list here -XXXXXX as it makes it clear, no form 7 invalidates a levy which therefore makes the clamping of a car by a bailiff unlawful!! Also see here too -

So no Andy am not modifying anything i said, i have merely only provided more detailed posts supporting my original statement. It is you that took what i originally stated and modified it to suit your own desire to be augmentative, which you have a well known history of being! It was you that said that i said they can not clamp and remove on first visit, when in fact i said they can not on first visit clamp or remove on without a valid levy (four key words that you choose to completely ignore)! there's a clear difference between what you implied i had said and what i had actually said, as you basically said i was saying the opposite to what i had actually stated.

I suggets you give up the chase Andy before you get in trouble with the site team... Again!