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?

Lol well done andy on proving to the world that you are incapable of accepted you misread what i put and instead revert to using subtraction, by simply taking what was part of 1 sentence to prove your point and conveniently missing out the rest of the same sentence that contains the most important information such as "Without first levying the car or goods".

You also conveniently completely ignore the rest of what i wrote in the same post. Below is the post in its entirety so the rest here can see what i really said, and that your simply manipulating what i said just because you can not admit you misread my post and got it wrong when you said i was incorrect!



Is there a full stop or comma after "A bailiff can not turn up on first visit and clamp a car or take any goods"? No there is not, nor was there in the original post. So the sentence did not cease there but continued to go on to state "without first levying the car or goods" - Therefore making it clear that a bailiff can not seize a car or goods and remove them without first having levied the car or the goods with a form 7 or a signed walking possession! It doesn't matter if it was the first visit or the 1000th visit, no levy or walking possession order that include the car or goods, then no legal right to clamp car and/or to remove goods.

By the way, we all here know who you are Andy, what your previous username was and we all know you have form for being augmentative.

So Andy i know what i said, i know what my statement clearly says, how you interpreted my statement is up to you. But don't try telling me i said something i never said, just because that's how you read it or interpreted it. As others here know what i said too and i doubt they agree with your interpretation and as such your refusing to accept you misread what i said, and your attempts to manipulate what i said to back up your argument only makes you look like an indiot! As i never said they can not clamp a car or remove goods, i said they can not do so "without first levying the car or goods". Keywords that you conveniently chose to ignore as you know that by confirming that i said those 3 words, you would be confirming that you were wrong to say i was incorrect and that i was right all along!

Anyway as far as am concerned, everyone can see what your trying to do and how you were wrong to say i was incorrect, and they can all see what i had in fact stated. So i have no need of desire to continue this argument with you, because as far as am concerned, and others will probably agree, you have lost the argument and were wrong to say i was incorrect. So i shall not be making any more posts regarding your interpretation and saying i was incorrect as to be quite honest, its pathetic and childish and should have ended yesterday and would have ended yesterday if you were capable of being a Man and accepting you were wrong!

Have you considered treatment teaboy ?

[teaboy2]

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

Your the one thats needs treatment, or better still reeducating in english language - After all your the one that can not read, and instead only quotes half a sentence to try and make it look like i said something totally opposite to what i had actually stated in the full sentence.

So come on Andy - Where did i state that "a bailiff on a first visit can not seize or remove goods." - That's right, i didn't say that did i Andy? As that is a quote of only halve the sentence where the other half included the key words "without first levying" and there was no comma or full stops separating those keywords from the half of the sentence you quoted where you conveniently left out those keywords from the same sentence - therefore making it clear they can seize and remove goods if they have levied them!

In fact, i find it amusing how instead of actually providing a constructive response to my last post, you instead revert to insulting me - But hey that's what people like you do, when you know you can't counter what i had put in my last post! There was another user on this forum that was exactly the same, surely you most remember him, after all, he is you!

[labman]

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

I refer you to post 61:

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...874#post387874

It would be good to achieve! :beagle:


As a point of fact, it is also the case that while not technically allowed, if the item being levied on is likely to be moved making it impossible to complete the levy, or putting the bailiff at risk, it is generally accepted practice to immobilise the vehicle first and then complete the paperwork. Clamping is considered as levying - See 'The Law of Seizure of Goods - Debtor's Rights and Remedies' p170 - 172 and 'Bailiffs - The Law and Your Rights' p70 - 71 both by John Kruse.

[Monkey Drunk]

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

* crawls in trying to avoid the handbags *

teaboy2

I've followed this thread from the beginning and I personally read your understanding of this bone of contention to be that the bailiff in question should have physically written the car down on a seizure notice before picking up his clamp and attempting to clamp the vehicle and that his failure to do so made said clamping illegal? Or did I read that wrong as well?

In addition, I think it goes without saying that bailiff cannot "remove" anything without first placing a levy on said item(s). However, the time frame between seizure and removal may differ from debtor to debtor depending on several factors such as previous enforcement history, threats by the debtor to affect said seizure and/or attempts to a de-clamp/seized vehicle through criminal damage. Even the area in which the warrant/LO happens to be in geographically may have some bearing on the time frames allotted to comply, especially in areas of renowned lawlessness.

[bizzybob]

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

If I was a bailiff I would want Jack Deth's long second watch, so i could write the notice, and clamp the car before anyone knew it.....

Mind you many bailiffs are probably trancers....

(think 80's B movies starring Tim Thomerson)

Addendum, I was under the impression that you can ask a bailiff to leave up until the time he starts the levy as in puts pen to paper, but then that is the nub and the bone of contention, if he has clamped first before writing the notice.

[Amethyst]

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

Right, personal insults are starting to be thrown about here, so quit it and stick to the topics else all your hard work will be wasted as I'll have to remove the insulting posts and that might lose a lot of useful information. If it carries on then I will close the thread. Thank you to those of you who have tried to keep the discussion on track.

[Guest]

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

Amongst other things I think there is confusion regarding completing the form 7 and the process of distraining goods. levying distress is a process in itself and involves seizing goods, the form 7 is a a method of informing the debtor what has been distrained and by whom. Filling in the form is not distraining goods. Both these actions will be taken on the first visit of course(providing the bailiff has access).

[TVJonesClassic]

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

If I was a bailiff I would want Jack Deth's long second watch, so i could write the notice, and clamp the car before anyone knew it.....

Mind you many bailiffs are probably trancers....

(think 80's B movies starring Tim Thomerson)

"Jack Deth is a kind of cop/bounty hunter in the bleak Los Angeles of the future. He's become obssessed with chasing Whistler - an evil criminal who uses powerful hypnotic powers to convert people into zombie like creatures known as trancers. Whistler has managed to escape through time travel and is loose in 1980s L.A. but Deth is on his trail."

Cannot understand how I haven't seen this movie. As I've spent every spare minute of the last week here or writing letters, I think I need a night off and this is what I want to see. Cheers bizzybob!

Edit to add: sorry Amethyst, derailing my own thread!

[bizzybob]

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

"Jack Deth is a kind of cop/bounty hunter in the bleak Los Angeles of the future. He's become obssessed with chasing Whistler - an evil criminal who uses powerful hypnotic powers to convert people into zombie like creatures known as trancers. Whistler has managed to escape through time travel and is loose in 1980s L.A. but Deth is on his trail."

Cannot understand how I haven't seen this movie. As I've spent every spare minute of the last week here or writing letters, I think I need a night off and this is what I want to see. Cheers bizzybob!

Edit to add: sorry Amethyst, derailing my own thread!

Sometimes we need a diversion to clear the mind, and then look at the issue afresh. I reckon many bailiffs have the right personality to become trancers....

[bluebottle]

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

* crawls in trying to avoid the hand grenades *

teaboy2

I've followed this thread from the beginning and I personally read your understanding of this bone of contention to be that the bailiff in question should have physically written the car down on a seizure notice before picking up his clamp and attempting to clamp the vehicle and that his failure to do so made said clamping illegal? Or did I read that wrong as well?

In addition, I think it goes without saying that bailiff cannot "remove" anything without first placing a levy on said item(s). However, the time frame between seizure and removal may differ from debtor to debtor depending on several factors such as previous enforcement history, threats by the debtor to affect said seizure and/or attempts to a de-clamp/seized vehicle through criminal damage. Even the area in which the warrant/LO happens to be in geographically may have some bearing on the time frames allotted to comply, especially in areas of renowned lawlessness.

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

On a serious note, a lot of it depends on how compliant the bailiff is with the conditions of the warrant/LO. Unfortunately, the reality is that there are bailiffs who think they are above the law or that compliance with the conditions attached to a warrant/LO is either optional or an inconvenience. Having seen coppers come unstuck by not complying with conditions attached to warrants, the same applies to any judicial order - civil or criminal - and that is if you comply, things will go your way and if you don't comply, don't be surprised if it comes back and smacks you in the face further down the line.

[Guest]

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

On a serious note, a lot of it depends on how compliant the bailiff is with the conditions of the warrant/LO. Unfortunately, the reality is that there are bailiffs who think they are above the law or that compliance with the conditions attached to a warrant/LO is either optional or an inconvenience. Having seen coppers come unstuck by not complying with conditions attached to warrants, the same applies to any judicial order - civil or criminal - and that is if you comply, things will go your way and if you don't comply, don't be surprised if it comes back and smacks you in the face further down the line.

I have seen you write this before, I am unsure what is meant. what conditions are you referring to here ?
The warrant will just contain the name and address of the debtor and the amount of the debt(or am I wrong).
The procedure for collecting the debt is contained within the various acts and in common law

[bluebottle]

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

I have seen you write this before, I am unsure what is meant. what conditions are you referring to here ?
The warrant will just contain the name and address of the debtor and the amount of the debt(or am I wrong).
The procedure for collecting the debt is contained within the various acts and in common law

By all means. The conditions are what the warrant or other order allows the person executing it to do and what it does not allow them to do. These conditions will be endorsed on the warrant or order and may be specific or may be expressed as a statutory provision or provisions which the person executing it knows or ought to know. The conditions applicable will, of course, depend on the reason or reasons for the warrant or order being issued, e.g. collect debt, evict someone.

The exception to this is in the case of Magistrates Court Distress Warrants. Although the letterhead warrants Marstons use for collecting unpaid court fines only require certain information to be on them for the purposes of enforcement (confirmed by HMCTS), the defendant has the right to view the court distress warrant itself at the court. This will have the conditions applicable to MC DWs endorsed on it.

[Guest]

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

By all means. The conditions are what the warrant or other order allows the person executing it to do and what it does not allow them to do. These conditions will be endorsed on the warrant or order and may be specific, as they are on a Magistrates Court Distress Warrant, or may be expressed as a statutory provision or provisions which the person executing it knows or ought to know. The conditions applicable will, of course, depend on the reason or reasons for the warrant or order being issued, e.g. collect debt, collect unpaid court fines, evict someone.

I see what you mean of course, but isn't this more about a warrant as issued to a police officer who uses it for a specific and individual purpose.
A Warrant/order issued to a bailiff is basically an authorization to collect a debt, that is the reason it is issued.

Perhaps it would make it clearer (to me anyway) if you could state some way which bailiffs fail to observe a condition given on their warrant/order.

[labman]

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

I have seen you write this before, I am unsure what is meant. what conditions are you referring to here ?
The warrant will just contain the name and address of the debtor and the amount of the debt(or am I wrong).
The procedure for collecting the debt is contained within the various acts and in common law

I've attached copies of two distress warrants from different companies - you can judge for yourselves.

[bluebottle]

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

I see what you mean of course, but isn't this more about a warrant as issued to a police officer who uses it for a specific and individual purpose.y any court It will apply to any warrant or order issued by a court instructing the executor to carry out a specific duty required by the warrant or order.
A Warrant/order issued to a bailiff is basically an authorization to collect a debt, that is the reason it is issued. Correct. But there will be conditions applicable to the execution of the warrant or order, e.g. what can be seized, what cannot be seized. These may be endorsed on the warrant or order or the executor may be required to know what they may or may not seize. In any case, the legislation under which the warrant or order has been issued and/or from which lawful authority is drawn should be endorsed on the warrant or order.
Perhaps it would make it clearer (to me anyway) if you could state some way which bailiffs fail to observe a condition given on their warrant/order. Seizing third party goods is the most common. An endorsement to the effect that the executor of a warrant is to seize the debtor's goods means exactly what it says.

@@@@