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

[Guest]

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

I think i see what your problem is, you think that the levying and impounding are different functions separated by some periods of time, they are not, the impounding of goods is part of the levying for distress.

When this is done and if the goods are left in the possession of the debtor under a walking possession agreement the bailiff can return and remove the levy or clamp once the debt is paid.

This is really quite fundamental stuff teaboy.

[TVJonesClassic]

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

;

I try to be realistic, if you want to go to your local bobby and complain about the bailiff blocking your drive whilst he levied your goods pleas feel free. :Let me know how you get on.

I take your point. A police officer was there and did nothing. (I wasn't aware at that time that blocking a drive was illegal.) But you don't answer my question to you, and it seems that these asides without any useful legal input are what derails threads and leaves the original question lost somewhere three pages back. Here's my sad face:

Edit to add: not criticising you teaboy2, for trying to clarify things, because of the misunderstanding I caused.

[labman]

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

TVJC,

Do you mind me asking if you have been reading other sites / forums for information/advice about this. Some of your misconceptions would be very in line with information given on another site where you can just read it and it looks very credible.

For a council tax debt the bailiff is perfectly entitled to be on your land in order to immobilise and levy on your vehicle (see legislation earlier in the thread on my posts). As for blocking your drive, in terms of law, a bailiff has to abide by it as far as everyone else unless the warrant permits him to do otherwise, which in this case it doesn't. However, (there's always a but isn't there!), if you were to try to pursue this I doubt you'd get anywhere. The police always side with the bailiffs or say it's a civil matter. Wrong? Definitely. Realistic? Definitely, sadly. Even if it got to court (it wouldn't), the court would ask 'Was it reasonable for the bailiff to block the driveway in order to levy the goods?' Given the chances of someone getting in and driving off while they're attempting to put a clamp on, or otherwise immobilise the vehicle, I believe the court would say it was a reasonable action in the circumstances.

Sadly, I think you're pretty much stuffed following that line of argument. I will tell you now that other sites will tell you you can turn this into a cash cow and make a small fortune from the situation. Sadly that information is, I believe, totally misleading and I have yet to see any evidence at all of people successfully making a claim of any sort from this sort of action. :beagle:

[TVJonesClassic]

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

labman, I haven't joined any other forums but I have looked around other places. Finding out exactly what is what seems to be a minefield. The site that looks very credible, would that be one for people who are looking for help in, er, dealing with bailiffs?

[Guest]

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

Yes you will find lots of legal precedent on there mostly 19 and 18th century and none which applies to the current legislative framework but nevertheless they keep telling people to use it, much to the bemusement of the judiciary.

[Monkey Drunk]

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

The site that looks very credible, would that be one for people who are looking for help in, er, dealing with bailiffs?

Yes. The owner of the site appears to be a software developer by trade and the entire site is geared towards getting you to run the solution widget.

The widget in turn is designed to change your way of thinking from how do I solve my bailiff issue to how can I profit from the legal action taken against me.

Before you know it, you're paying the site owner to draft you various letters pursuing damages against the police, local authorities and government agencies with £ signs before your eyes.

All a complete waste of time and money I'm afraid.

[bluebottle]

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

Whether or not a bailiff can legitimately block a person's driveway depends very much on the circumstances.

Very simply -

1. The bailiff must have a right in law to be where they are;
2. The bailiff must have lawful authority to be where they are;
3. The bailiff must not obstruct the pavement, which forms part of a public highway, in a manner that is hazardous to pedestrians or other road users;
4. The bailiff must not block egress from a driveway by parking in front of it on a public highway, especially if it is a shared or communal driveway;
5. The bailiff must not block any driveway which must be kept clear of obstruction in order to comply with any statutory enactment.

If the bailiff proposes to block a driveway, can satisfy 1 and/or 2 and can block a driveway without coming into conflict with 3, 4 or 5, then they may do so. However, even if the bailiff can do all this, there are always going to be other statutory provisions that can come into play that are capable of making the bailiff's life awkward or stuff him.

[bizzybob]

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

"there are always going to be other statutory provisions that can come into play that are capable of making the bailiff's life awkward or stuff him."

Especially if he is blocking a shared drive with a tow truck removing next door's car levied in error..........

[TVJonesClassic]

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

OK, there may be some criticism of the site where this information came from, but there are a lot of references there, and not all medieval either. Does anyone have any comments on this one, which I checked against this other site, not related to any spin pro- or anti-bailiffs:

http://swarb.co.uk/davis-v-lisle-ca-1936/

It seems that access to a door through a gate and up a drive is an implied right. But the householder can remove that right verbally, and the other person then becomes a trespasser and loses their rights to carry out their duties.

Edit to add: or are bailiffs magically exempt, as with the obstruction and clamping laws?

[bluebottle]

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

"there are always going to be other statutory provisions that can come into play that are capable of making the bailiff's life awkward or stuff him."

Especially if he is blocking a shared drive with a tow truck removing next door's car levied in error..........

Unfortunately, it would be the tow truck driver who would get it in the neck.

As the driver of the vehicle, it is their responsibility to ensure they are not causing unnecessary or wilful obstruction of the free passage along the public highway with their vehicle.

The only leeway they are likely to get is if they were acting under the directions of a warranted/sworn police officer and, then, I suspect, only if the vehicle they are removing is subject to a criminal investigation and is being removed for forensic examination or safe-keeping, or has been involved in an accident and is being removed to a secure pound for inspection or to a repair facility, or is disabled/broken down and is being removed in order to remove an obstruction being caused by the disabled/broken down vehicle. These are the only circumstances I know of when a recovery vehicle driver can legitimately obstruct a highway.

[labman]

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

labman, I haven't joined any other forums but I have looked around other places. Finding out exactly what is what seems to be a minefield. The site that looks very credible, would that be one for people who are looking for help in, er, dealing with bailiffs?

To deal with the question first - yes! It is linked to a forum which runs the widgets mentioned above. I can assure you that however credible the site looks it is best ignored. You could very easily end up in a far worse position than you are now, though they, of course, would deny that. Nobody can stop you going to them, but I would suggest that if you do, you ask for some solid proof of successes. Lots of people have asked repeatedly and got none. The owner has also recently made a serious allegation about this site which is totally untrue.

As I say, my advice would be to avoid that site. The case law cited is mostly irrelevant as it is so old. This has been confirmed by judges - most has been superceded by other case law or legislation which makes it irrelevant.

If you want realistic advice I would suggest you stay here, and I'm not just saying that as it's the site I have chosen. For bailiff advice you will have access to seriously good people and excellent knowledge. As you saw last night, opinions occasionally differ, but that is not the norm, and you will honestly get good advice here - you'll be told it as it is, for good or bad, and offered the best help possible to resolve whatever problems you throw our way.

Here endeth the sales pitch!

[Guest]

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

OK, there may be some criticism of the site where this information came from, but there are a lot of references there, and not all medieval either. Does anyone have any comments on this one, which I checked against this other site, not related to any spin pro- or anti-bailiffs:

http://swarb.co.uk/davis-v-lisle-ca-1936/

It seems that access to a door through a gate and up a drive is an implied right. But the householder can remove that right verbally, and the other person then becomes a trespasser and loses their rights to carry out their duties.

Edit to add: or are bailiffs magically exempt, as with the obstruction and clamping laws?

Yes there is a lot about removing implied right of access on the forum in question, the problem is that bailiffs do not depend on implied right of access, their right of access is given them through the distress for rent rules or the magistrates court act.

[labman]

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

Yes there is a lot about removing implied right of access on the forum in question, the problem is that bailiffs do not depend on implied right of access, their right of access is given them through the distress for rent rules or the magistrates court act.

Ah yes, the infamous 'Deploy the NOROIROA (Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access). Here's what CIVEA, the main bailiff organisation said about those:

http://www.civea.co.uk/news-24.htm

You won't miss it, it's headed, 'TAKE NO NOTICE!'

[TVJonesClassic]

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

the problem is that bailiffs do not depend on implied right of access, their right of access is given them through the distress for rent rules or the magistrates court act.

The Distress for Rent Rules 1988 don't appear to have anything to say on this matter http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1988/2050/made

and is that the Magistrates Court Act 1980, or one of the 56 other acts with these words in the title? :tinysmile_aha_t:!

[TVJonesClassic]

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

So Civea say "bailiffs executing a court warrant have an express right of access which cannot be withdrawn by the debtor", but does anyone have any law on this?