Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

There appears to another extra stupid bailiff making the rounds. I have just seen this on another forum:

I have just wandered out and back and there is a car in the pay and display bay (not applicable Sunday) nearest to Willesden Green Station with a disabled badge and a clamp on it. One the drivers window is a stickers telling everyone that is is clamped by a baliff from the firm Newlyn PLC for non-payment of parking penalty notice.

I thought I'd post this here because it opens a few questions. Clearly the owner is not parking local to his/her home if on a pay and display bay so how on earth would the baliff know to go there?

If the owner cannot move the car as a result of the clamping before parking controls restrat (or someone is clamped by a third party during control hours) does that make the clamper responsible for any resulting PCN.

What is a Parking Penalty Notice? Is it a private ticket?

A bit of an eye opener seeing it.

It's Newlyns, DF. No-one, at the moment, can seem to come anywhere near them for acts of sheer stupidity. Do you have a link to the article you are mentioning in your post, please?

[dementedfeline]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

There appears to another extra stupid bailiff making the rounds. I have just seen this on another forum:

I have just wandered out and back and there is a car in the pay and display bay (not applicable Sunday) nearest to Willesden Green Station with a disabled badge and a clamp on it. One the drivers window is a stickers telling everyone that is is clamped by a baliff from the firm Newlyn PLC for non-payment of parking penalty notice.

I thought I'd post this here because it opens a few questions. Clearly the owner is not parking local to his/her home if on a pay and display bay so how on earth would the baliff know to go there?

If the owner cannot move the car as a result of the clamping before parking controls restrat (or someone is clamped by a third party during control hours) does that make the clamper responsible for any resulting PCN.

What is a Parking Penalty Notice? Is it a private ticket?

A bit of an eye opener seeing it.

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

I believe Cloggy alluded to what you are saying in the second sentence of your post, either in this or another thread. However, its coming into force is dependent on Boy David and Boy George (or is it By George) not completely fecking up, surviving a vote of "No Confidence" and surviving a General Election in the meantime. A new government could, effectively, stop its coming into force or, even, repeal it altogether.

Regulatory procedure is already in place, the are two more sets of regulation due out anytime issued under the same section also.

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

Yes there is nothing stopping anyone taking a claim in the civil court of course against a party who has caused financial loss thorough tort or contractual breach.

A minor point it is not proposed legislation, the statute was enacted in 2007, this is a recent regulation issued under part three of the at, it has just yet to be enacted.

I believe Cloggy alluded to what you are saying in the second sentence of your post, either in this or another thread. However, its coming into force is dependent on Boy David and Boy George (or is it By George) not completely fecking up, surviving a vote of "No Confidence" and surviving a General Election in the meantime. A new government could, effectively, stop its coming into force or, even, repeal it altogether.

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

Thank you for the link to the proposed legislation, Andy. Much appreciated. One thing I have noticed, having read through it, and that is I cannot find any provision that confers any form of legal protection on a bailiff who has seized third party goods against being sued by the third party and neither is the creditor. So, even if a third party has to pay to get their goods back, that doesn't stop the bailiff or creditor being pursued for the costs the third party has incurred.

Yes there is nothing stopping anyone making a claim in the civil court of course against a party who has caused financial loss thorough tort or contractual breach.

A minor point it is not proposed legislation, the statute was enacted in 2007, this is a recent regulation issued under part three of the at, it has just yet to be enacted.

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

These are the regulations which come into force in April next year although no yet enacted they would I believe be persuasive in any action taken

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/made.


Exempt goods

)

a vehicle on which a valid disabled person’s badge is displayed because it is used for, or in relation to which there are reasonable grounds for believing that it is used for, the carriage of a disabled person;

Thank you for the link to the proposed legislation, Andy. Much appreciated. One thing I have noticed, having read through it, and that is I cannot find any provision that confers any form of legal protection on a bailiff who has seized third party goods against being sued by the third party and neither is the creditor. So, even if a third party has to pay to get their goods back, that doesn't stop the bailiff or creditor being pursued for the costs the third party has incurred.

[dementedfeline]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

bluebottle, I am in total awe of both your hats :hail::hail:

andy58, that's great, thank you for the link!


Thank you all so much.

df

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

These are the regulations which come into force in April next year although no yet enacted they would I believe be persuasive in any action taken

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/made.


Exempt goods

)

a vehicle on which a valid disabled person’s badge is displayed because it is used for, or in relation to which there are reasonable grounds for believing that it is used for, the carriage of a disabled person;

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

Just had a thought - reading bluebottle's "When bailiffs turn bad"

would not having a warrant with the correct address on it plus clamping a disabled tax disc car be equal to

"This is an offence under Section 2(1), Fraud Act 2006 (Fraud by False Misrepresentation) and the bailiff can be arrested and prosecuted. The bailiff’s employers could also be prosecuted under Section 12, Fraud Act 2006"

Can someone confirm that if bailiff does not have copy of warrant with the address they are attending on it, but only a previous address, they have no defence to their actions?

Also - although clamp went on, no form 7 was given and yet they charged van fee and levy fee (on day they clamped) - is this False Accounting (Section 17, Theft Act 1968) [Fee Irregularities]? bailiff also charged VAT yet email from head office does not show this so is for a lesser sum.

ta!

I think it is best I took off my retired policeman's hat and put on the hat I wore when working with disabled adults and children over a total of 35 years and now being disabled myself.

Where vehicles for use by or for the conveyance of disabled persons are concerned, they fall into three classes, viz. -

Class One

Manual Wheelchairs - wheelchairs that are pushed from behind by an attendant/carer. They are classed as Mobility Aids.

Class Two

Power-driven wheelchairs - wheelchairs that can be driven by the disabled person themselves or controlled from the rear by an attendant/carer;
Mobility Scooters - scooters that are controlled by the disabled person using levers or buttons;

No Class Two wheelchair or scooter may travel at a speed in excess of 4 mph (brisk walking pace) or be used on a public highway. They are classed as Mobility Aids.

Class Three

Power-driven wheelchairs and Mobility Scooters - controlled by the disabled person;

Class Three are capable of speeds in excess of 4 mph and MUST be used on a public highway if the speed setting is set at a speed in excess of 4mph. Additionally, if the wheelchair or scooter is being used on a public highway where the maximum permitted speed limit is 50 mph or more, the wheelchair or scooter MUST be fitted with an amber warning beacon. They are also classed as Invalid Carriages and require a Disabled tax Class VEL.

An Invalid Carriage is defined as "any vehicle adapted, intended or made for use by or for the conveyance of a disabled person".

Below, in the link, is what the DWP's predecessor, the DHSS, issued to disabled persons before the Motability scheme came into being. I often heard them referred to, rather unkindly, as Plastic Spastics and Spazmobiles. One good gust of wind and over they would go. Because every disabled person has different needs, the use of adapted or modified motor cars and vans as invalid carriages is more practical than issuing something that is, effectively, a three-wheeled ride-on lawnmower without cutting blades.

Now we come to the nitty-gritty. Can a bailiff lawfully seize a vehicle displaying a VEL showing "Disabled" Tax Class? Whether the vehicle is owned by Motability under a Contract Hire Agreement, or the disabled person themselves or a third party, the VEL Tax Disc showing "Disabled" Tax Class renders it an Invalid Carriage and a bailiff should leave well alone unless they want a Size 11 or 12 boot jammed up their backside or worse.

I will now put my retired policeman's hat on.

As to the criminal offences a bailiff can commit whilst acting as a bailiff, this will be determined by what the bailiff does and/or says to the debtor or a police officer in attendance who is savvy with the law of distress.

If a bailiff attempts to collect a debt for which a warrant of execution, distress warrant or liability order will need to be issued in order to collect the debt and no warrant or order is in existence, then the bailiff has no more power or right to levy on or seize goods than next-door's car has to take a dump on your lawn. If the bailiff lies to a debtor that they have a warrant or order, knowing no such warrant or order exists, in order to solicit funds or seizes or threatens to seize goods, they are acting without lawful authority - the warrant or order provides them with lawful authority and legal protection - and is amenable to the full might of the law.

In the circumstances you cite, DF, a bailiff attempting to levy on or seize a vehicle classed as an Invalid Carriage and, at the time of doing so, claims that they can levy on and/or seize a vehicle classed as an Invalid Carriage, knowing that they cannot lawfully levy on or seize an Invalid Carriage, they commit an offence, that of Fraud by False Misrepresentation (Section 2, Fraud Act 2006). However, they may, at the same time, be committing other offences, also.

If the bailiff has a warrant with the wrong address on it, the bailiff must return the warrant to whoever issued it and whoever issued it must re-issue it with the correct address. However, a number of bailiff companies are know to engage in a practice known as Data Cleansing, which involves the bailiff or bailiff company changing details on the warrant or order without reference to whoever issued the warrant or order. Such practice is illegal.

As for not leaving a Form 7 - Notice of Seizure, how can the bailiff prove they have a valid and lawful levy and have seized a vehicle lawfully? If the matter went before a judge for adjudication, the judge would ask to see both the debtor's copy and the bailiff's copy, if only to satisfy themselves that the procedure carried out had been done so lawfully.

[dementedfeline]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

Just had a thought - reading bluebottle's "When bailiffs turn bad"

would not having a warrant with the correct address on it plus clamping a disabled tax disc car be equal to

"This is an offence under Section 2(1), Fraud Act 2006 (Fraud by False Misrepresentation) and the bailiff can be arrested and prosecuted. The bailiff’s employers could also be prosecuted under Section 12, Fraud Act 2006"

Can someone confirm that if bailiff does not have copy of warrant with the address they are attending on it, but only a previous address, they have no defence to their actions?

Also - although clamp went on, no form 7 was given and yet they charged van fee and levy fee (supposedly on day before they clamped, again no form 7) - is this False Accounting (Section 17, Theft Act 1968) [Fee Irregularities]? bailiff also charged VAT yet email from head office does not show this so is for a lesser sum.

ta!

[dementedfeline]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

Sir Vere, thank you, but still can't find this 1980 Act - I checked both the pdf p63 and the hard copy p63. My brain obviously needs a reboot............

Sheila helped with the initial stages

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

Are you sure that's not on page 94?

That document is only a report from the Law Commission on the Distress for Rent Regulations and is not actually a statute.

Correct, but it's what the new guidelines are based upon.

Just to repea myself, unless a new instrument it's introduced (never too soon) the whole issue of distress is hicklety picklety

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

Look here>>>>>>> http://www.official-documents.gov.uk.../0138/0138.pdf

If you are so inclined you can read all 80+ pages of it, but page 63 would be a good reference point, you will notice that the legislators themselves will say that "the law is an ass".

Are you sure that's not on page 94?

That document is only a report from the Law Commission on the Distress for Rent Regulations and is not actually a statute.

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

bluebottle, thank you. I'm probably going to come across as extremely thick (again) but what I'm after is the source law/whatever that states

"The "Disabled" VEL renders the vehicle an Invalid Carriage"

and "an invalid carriage is exempt from seizure"

I understand the point made earlier that if the bailiff had actually been stupid enough to seize the car that he would have been in trouble trying to sell it, but am trying to find the source that specifically says they're not allowed to so that I can quote it.

With Motability vehicles it's cut and dried because the person doesn't own the car, Motability does. In this case, the car is privately owned but with the Disabled VED which is why I'm after something that specifically mentions this.

I know it's not "best practice" for the 'nice gentleman bailiff, who after all, has a living to earn' :mmph: to do so under the general "vulnerability" heading in the National Standards, but that's not LAW - and I would love to find something binding as opposed to guidelines.

Look here>>>>>>> http://www.official-documents.gov.uk.../0138/0138.pdf

If you are so inclined you can read all 80+ pages of it, but page 63 would be a good reference point, you will notice that the legislators themselves will say that "the law is an ass".


Statutory Regulations state that the following items are exempt and must not be taken.

• "Such tools, books, vehicles and other items of equipment as are necessary for use personally in employment, business or vocation"

• "Such clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment and provisions as are necessary for satisfying basic domestic needs of the person and family".

Because the above list is so vague, and not very specific, we have reviewed over 75 contracts between local authorities and their relevant bailiff companies to see what items are listed by the majority of councils as being exempt. These items are as follows:

• Goods of minimal or no resale value
• Food items, cooking utensils
• Items that would leave family unable to prepare a hot meal.
• Heating appliances
• Children’s items, toys, prams (but computers and bikes can be taken)
• Disability items to be used to care for the sick.
• Medical aids or medical equipment.
• Items purchased using money from Social Fund.
• Refrigerators.
• The main form of cooking: if you have a cooker and microwave, the bailiff could take the microwave. If you only have a microwave then this must not be seized.
• Washing machine, vacuum cleaner.
• Personal items: such as family photographs/pictures.
• Items of minimal value, and or broken items.
• Goods either rented, or hired.


Borrowed from a friend!

[dementedfeline]

Re: Bailiff without a valid warrant of execution

bluebottle, thank you. I'm probably going to come across as extremely thick (again) but what I'm after is the source law/whatever that states

"The "Disabled" VEL renders the vehicle an Invalid Carriage"

and "an invalid carriage is exempt from seizure"

I understand the point made earlier that if the bailiff had actually been stupid enough to seize the car that he would have been in trouble trying to sell it, but am trying to find the source that specifically says they're not allowed to so that I can quote it.

With Motability vehicles it's cut and dried because the person doesn't own the car, Motability does. In this case, the car is privately owned but with the Disabled VED which is why I'm after something that specifically mentions this.

I know it's not "best practice" for the 'nice gentleman bailiff, who after all, has a living to earn' :mmph: to do so under the general "vulnerability" heading in the National Standards, but that's not LAW - and I would love to find something binding as opposed to guidelines.