Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

[ABIDOXXX]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

Hi

Thanks for the reply.

I am asking for a set aside on the grounds i wasnt given the opportunity to defend the claim as it was sent to an address i dont live at in 2009.

iv only just been aware of it in December 2013 when they seized my vehicle.

Also because i was given a 28 days notice to carry out the work .The work was carried out before the 28 days had elapsed.
Also the bill was very unreasonable.

[wales01man]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

Have you started this action?

[ABIDOXXX]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

In answer to your question.They are......

High Court Enforcement
The Sheriffs Office

[ABIDOXXX]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

Yes iv filled out an N244 Application to set aside and requested enforcement action be stayed until the hearing.

[ABIDOXXX]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

To Alsation

The "OTHER" bills may be lawful are they bailiff charges?

No they are in regards to other bills from the claimant

[CleverClogs]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

No they are in regards to other bills from the claimant

What are those "other bills"?

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

Hi

Thanks for the reply.

I am asking for a set aside on the grounds i wasnt given the opportunity to defend the claim as it was sent to an address i dont live at in 2009.

iv only just been aware of it in December 2013 when they seized my vehicle.

Also because i was given a 28 days notice to carry out the work .The work was carried out before the 28 days had elapsed.
Also the bill was very unreasonable.

As has been explained to you previously, it is likely MCC carried out the work you mention to prevent further damage or risk to your property and neighbouring properties. Local authorities do not carry out such work out of sheer bloody-mindedness or for the fun of it. It sounds very much that it was a case of necessity because you had not carried out the work they had required you to carry out under a statutory notice.

I am afraid Ploddertom may well be right in that your van has, in all probably, been sold. It is my understanding that six days is the norm from seizure to sale.

[Inca]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

DollyDaydream (me) would like to know the answer....once the van has been seized by HCEO does that transfer ownership of it to them so they can sell it? (and yes,I'm being serious,I'd like to know,,thanks x)

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

DollyDaydream (me) would like to know the answer....once the van has been seized by HCEO does that transfer ownership of it to them so they can sell it? (and yes,I'm being serious,I'd like to know,,thanks x)

Ploddertom will correct me if I am wrong, Inca, but it is my understanding that once an HCEO formally seizes goods, the goods are then the property of the High Court and the HCEO is a custodian of those goods. The HCEO is, in essence, an officer of the High Court and acting under that court's jurisdiction.

Hope this helps.

[wales01man]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

No more car then?

[bizzybob]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

So when a HCEO does a global levy sight unseen as in I have taken possession of all goods on the premises etc etc, is OK for HCEO, but a global levy done similarly by a bailiff is not?

[suffering]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

surely the unanswerd question here is; they took a tool of his trade ie his van if this is needed to earn a wage then it is not allowed to be sold, right or wrong anyone?

[bluebottle]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

So when a HCEO does a global levy sight unseen as in I have taken possession of all goods on the premises etc etc, is OK for HCEO, but a global levy done similarly by a bailiff is not?

To the best of my knowledge and belief, BB, any enforcement officer, whether they be a bailiff or HCEO, who does a global levy without first ascertaining the ownership of goods upon which they intend to levy, does not enjoy automatic protection from being sued. If a bailiff or HCEO is stupid - or dishonest - enough to tell someone they can levy on and seize anything, then they cannot expect the High Court to grant them protection from legal action. It is my understanding the Masters at the High Court have gotten wise to HCEOs who foul-up and are refusing requests for protection. An HCEO who has acted dishonestly is unlikely to get any protection as the High Court cannot condone or be seen to be condoning criminal conduct by a court officer.

Personally, I have serious doubts as to the legality of global levies.

As to the OP's van, was it registered in his own personal name or the name of a company? If the latter, the OP is stuffed. Even a bailiff can seize a company's goods without too much problem as it is not exempt from seizure.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

the unanswerd question here is;

See post #2.

they took a tool of his trade ie his van if this is needed to earn a wage then it is not allowed to be sold, right or wrong anyone?

He would need to shew to a court that the motor vehicle was essential to his trade, vocation, calling or "profession" as a landlord and that he would be utterly unable to collect rents without it.

[bizzybob]

Re: Bailifs have taken my vehicle breaching RSC ORDER 7 2003

Bluebottle I saw a HCEO letter somewhere on a forum where although they had not spoken or even seen the debtor, or gained entry to an electronically gated domestic premises left a letter stating that all goods and chattels on the premises were now in the custody of the court, might have been the Sheriffs Office, or possibly Sherfarts.

I would have also thought it would not stand, but a HCEO is always eager to seek protection when they foul up. About time a HCEO is taken to the cleaners when they do the next Bridlington Chippy type mess.

In Op's case it looks like time is not on their side.