Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

[ploddertom]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

The size of the levy fee indicates that they were collecting for £800ish, not £200.

They are allowed to claim a levy for the amount on the LO and not what was outstanding. Think going back to the original post this was the figure the OP mentioned so the £49 is correct.

[ploddertom]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

Start at the beginning with the Council and lets get some dates & figures. You need to speak to someone at the Council and ask the following questions:
1 - how many Liability Orders they have against you
2 - the dates they were obtained
3 - the addresses they were for
4 - the period of time each covers
5 - how much each one was for
6 - how much is still outstanding
7 - the dates they were passed on for enforcement
8 - the dates & amounts of any payments

[ploddertom]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

You/your wife will still have to pay visit fees but if a further £400 odd in bailiff fees were removed, would this make more sense?

My understanding of it all is that Bailiffs claim to have made a visit & levied on 9 January - no one was in and no letters or Notice of Seizure left at that time. Next visit was on 12 February when they clamped the OP's car - who was not even the debtor, he paid in full including all charges. This some appeared to be for the full cost of the LO - not the balance + fees. I think there should be a substantial refund due as in my view all his wife was due to pay in fees is £42-50.

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

Its irrelevant-The levy is invalid in any case.

Are you basing your statement on 2(1) of Schedule 5?












and the sum due at any time for these purposes means so much of the amount in respect of which the liability order concerned was made as is outstanding at the time.

[wiccaqueen]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

They are allowed to claim a levy for the amount on the LO and not what was outstanding. Think going back to the original post this was the figure the OP mentioned so the £49 is correct.

I thought this meant the amount outstanding against the liability order at the time of the levy not the full amount of the liability order

2 - (1) In head B of the Table to paragraph 1, “the relevant amount” with respect to a levy
means-
(a) where the sum due at the time of the levy does not exceed £100, £24.50
(b) where the sum due at the time of the levy exceeds £100, 24.5 per cent on the first
£100 of the sum due, 4 per cent on the next £400, 2½ per cent on the next £1,500,

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

My understanding of it all is that Bailiffs claim to have made a visit & levied on 9 January - no one was in and no letters or Notice of Seizure left at that time. Next visit was on 12 February when they clamped the OP's car - who was not even the debtor, he paid in full including all charges. This some appeared to be for the full cost of the LO - not the balance + fees. I think there should be a substantial refund due as in my view all his wife was due to pay in fees is £42-50.

My understanding is the debt was for circa £800. The OP has paid circa £1200 including circa £400 in fees.

All bailiff fees paid should be refunded with the exception of visit fees (£24.50 definitely, £18 debatable but possibly not worth arguing about in the grand scheme of things)

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

I thought this meant the amount outstanding against the liability order at the time of the levy not the full amount of the liability order

2 - (1) In head B of the Table to paragraph 1, “the relevant amount” with respect to a levy
means-
(a) where the sum due at the time of the levy does not exceed £100, £24.50
(b) where the sum due at the time of the levy exceeds £100, 24.5 per cent on the first
£100 of the sum due, 4 per cent on the next £400, 2½ per cent on the next £1,500,

Have a look at my post, directly above yours. You missed the critical bit off:

"and the sum due at any time for these purposes means so much of the amount in respect of which the liability order concerned was made AS IS OUTSTANDING AT THE TIME.

[d1ngle]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

Thank you for this. Just for clarity:

Should I got straight to the Council for refund on bailiff fees?

Also I don't get why she would not be liable for one visit?

Are you also saying the amount owed is at the time of visit not when they got the order (probably as early as Nov as she had made three payments of 200 one per month to make the total reduced?

Also just to be clear she had been in constant communication both by phone and letters during Nov and Dec and they told her to pay the council direct (even sent giro slips to pay monthly).

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

Straight to the council-The bailiffs are working on behalf of them & have the authority (and morals) of a slug.

Congratulations-You've just learnt what a low life, corrupt organisation your council is.

Formal complaint direct to the council on the behaviour of their recovery agents and the councils failure to maintain control over them. Ask for every fee to be removed and let them fight to get some/any form of payment. As both myself & PT have stated, you are liable to visit fees (the January one is in dispute) but ask for the lot back & let them struggle to get anything added.

Head your letter "STAGE 1 FORMAL COMPLAINT"

A levy fee for £200 would be around £28.50-Although the bailiffs got the levy fee wrong, you are not bound to pay any levy fee in any case (include it in your complaint though as it is another example of malpractice)

[ploddertom]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

Just going back a couple of posts or so over the amount charged for the levy against what the Regulations say. I was always under the impression they charged a fee for a levy on the what the Liability Order was for - in this case £807. However as it had been part paid they are supposed to use due diligence in choosing goods up to the value of what is outstanding.

It appears that in this case the Council may not have informed the Bailiffs at this stage that a part payment had already been made, therefore the reason for charging the OP the total amount.

As we know the Bailiffs have behaved in their usual manner by:
Seizing goods not belonging to the debtor
Not having left the prescribed forms when visiting
Not appearing to have basic knowledge of the laws of distress
I would also be inclined to write to the Bailiff's certificating Court advising what has transpired. You never know when his Certificate is up for renewal it may bring a doubt to the Judge's mind.

[ploddertom]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

I'll certainly agree with TST that you dump it all back on the Council to sort out. They are the ones that started this merry mess by their choice of enforcement. Your wife should contact her local Councillor(s) and give her permission for you to speak to them

[d1ngle]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

I'll certainly agree with TST that you dump it all back on the Council to sort out. They are the ones that started this merry mess by their choice of enforcement. Your wife should contact her local Councillor(s) and give her permission for you to speak to them

Thank you all.

I have sent the letter on and also I will notify councillors and MP.

Thanks again and I'll let you know the response.

D

[d1ngle]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

Just an update. I had a letter back from the CEO of the COuncil about 10 days ago saying one of his team as investigating. I just called the council tax office for an update and the notes on the account say:

"the client defaulted by £1 on council tax in October and this lead to the Bailiff being appointed. Council awaiting further response from Phoenix collections on charges".

Looks like they're still awaiting response from the bailiff.

Shall I write another letter chasing or leave it?

[bizzybob]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

the client defaulted by £1 on council tax in October and this lead to the Bailiff being appointed. Council awaiting further response from Phoenix collections on charges".

this highlights the automated no check system as a Lo should not be sought for £1 but the coulcil will no doubt support their bailiff as arrears are arrears. Muppets.

[d1ngle]

Re: Bailiff gained entry, clamped wrong car and collected more than owed

Also coincidently I just had a letter from the COuncil asking for more time as they "haven't had satisfactory answers from the Bailiff and have requested further clarification".

Hopefully this means they are treating it seriously. Not holding out much hope though as the public sector has a mentality of "never admit fault".

I wrote to the MP and Councillors also. Unsure if they got involved.