Thank you for your advice, this is a mess , and I will apply for set aside and stay, then attempt to sort this out , as I said to Marstons bully boy, I am not running away and I understand that he probably hears many excuses but I will not be railroaded into paying something that A. I don't owe and B. Is a farce. He has been told he will never gain peaceful entry to my family home and there is no way on this planet I can afford £1000 a month . They have not responded to my I and E , or any correspondence sent to either Marstons or the HCEO, I want to discuss the matter but they will not respond, they sent a standard letter ( twice within 3 days) simply stating the are legally obliged to execute the warrant , and one stating that they cannot send or show me the writ and that the address is unimportant as the can enforce at any address in found at .

And apologies , I explained how this came about as it's not your normal defendant versus company, I received a letter this morning with a copy of the judgement from Northampton court bulk from her solicitor with only a note attached saying " our client has indicated that seizure of goods is to proceed if the balance is not paid " . Reading the statement from her is infuriating as she has lied on several points, the very first being easily proved as a lie. I can only assume because I didn't respond it was given in default .

This I intend to do, , my initial actions are focusing on protecting my families things from HCEO . Why won't they show me the writ ? Why can the HCEO be so obtuse? I have served 22 years in the Army and told him we will not talk to me like a piece of S@&T and there is no way he can intimidate me, however I don't want the coward to come back when only my wife and kids are in and bully them . I will be countering this woman's claims and informing every department on the planet to expose what she has done .

As far as I know she was on income support she was able to secure a loan as she had a good credit rating , she owned her own house but only worked part time , from my understanding she had no savings and she feared that if the amount was noticed she may loose income support . Like an idiot I did not really ask or enquire as I thought I was helping her get by, it was deposited in her account after she applied ( tescos bank loan) then into mine .

I don't know , I just want this over and no more to do with her, I just can't see how she took out a loan in her name then get a CCJ against me .

I knew nothing of the CCJ until a few weeks after it was awarded, this was made aware to me by claimants solicitor via email , I tried contacting claimant bit was told she did not want to enter into dialogue. The money was a loan taken out by the claimant who was a single mum of two, she asked to keep the amount of £10k safe in a savings account , I agreed and it was transferred , she later told me it was done as she didn't want to jeopardise any benifits she was on, she requested I feed it back to her account at two hundred per month via bank transfer and cash amounts twice a month. I realise I was naive and stupid but I did as she asked, our relationship broke down and she demanded all money that wasn't transferred by bank transferred , at this point she had received over 8000 back but demanded 7500, I refused , she claimed that this put her in serious financial hardship, however at the same time she bought a new house , car and other items such as expensive days out and a 700 shed. I offered the remainder of what she deposited but I had no reply , next thing I know an email from her solicitor says they have a CCJ against me in the sum of 11500 Not being in this position before I have no idea what to do, surely at the very least I should be allowed to see the writ and defend myself !

He said as he has now levied the vehicle he can force entry to my garage if I put it in there, he also insisted that the amount be paid within 12 months at £1000 a month, I said at best I could stretch to £200 while I sort this farce out and he said that was unacceptable and refused

I phoned Marstons and was told they are doing a dvla check which will come back as her vehicle , my car is a non runner at the moment ( starter motor ) also is 14 years old and done nearly 200,000 miles . I was left a form 55 stating details of both cars only.

He hasn't seized any vehicles , one belongs to me and the other to my wife , I signed nothing and refused him entry, the amount is for £11500 and no I have no means to pay at all , my possessions wouldn't even cover a tenth of the amount. This said I have no idea where this figure was conjured up from. I have been denied seeing the writ and I do know from the solicitors there is no supporting paperwork to indicate I actually owe any money .

Hi all A private person applied to Northampton to get a CCJ against me for a fictitious amount, I knew nothing about it as the paperwork was all sent to a previous address, the first I knew of it was when a rather stubborn and single minded gentleman from Marstons turned up with a high court writ, I refused to let him in or fully confirm my details, he took details of two cars in the road outside my home and said they were now levied, and I would have to prove they didn't belong to me... I asked to see the writ or proof, he said he didn't have it, I asked what address was on the writ , he refused to answer only saying the address is not important. I phoned Marstons and requested to see the writ and asked them to send an I and E , the said that as they could not reproduce the seal they would not supply me with it, I must go to their office in Birmingham to see it ( some 280 miles away) Is it normal and standard not to be allowed to see the writ? He also said that if he returned and no cars were there he could break into my garage ( integral to my home) and take it . I am in the process of gathering evidence to prove the claimant lied in her application and no monies are in fact owed , she didn't support her claim with any kind of signed proof as there is none . Any advice on the concerns I have would be greatly appreciated

I have had alot of previous dealings HFO and not heard from them for over a year. At first i was worried as they were claiming they bought a debt and were aggressively collecting, the then told me it was for barclay card .. BINGO.. never had one, my attempts to tell them i never owned a barclay card fell on deaf and probably stupid ears, over the next 12 months call grew in frequency and ferocity. After alot of research and also two reports to surrey police (with crime numbers) i decided to play them at their own game. I in no way recomend this to any caggers, i knew i was in the right with confidence in the fact HFO only persued me for money with absolutely NO legal recourse. first i would answer their call like an old friend e.g "hello buddy , where have you been i have really missed you , you old tosser" second, reverse their questions (very annoying for them) eg.. hfo) can i speak to mr ******* me) hello is this mr ******** hfo) is mr ******** there me) is he there ? hfo) this isnt funny me) this is funny or answer ever question or sentance " yeeeeeeees" when they started shouting down the phone i would giggle, they shouted louder laughed more. answering on loud speaker then leaving the phone on the television with volume up. or my favourite, i am in the forces and shoot on a range every month i would answer them during firing and when they asked what the loud banging was i would tell them we were executing debt collection thugs, this was great when the range officer would shout in the background " load.. make ready... targets WILL fall when hit, in your own time go on" plus many , many more windups it turned from being harrassed to a daily laugh i looked forward to. in a weird way kinda missed them when they had had enough and stopped calling.

Sorry , I should have been clearer, I had moved house and recieved absolutely no warning of any problems, they claimed to be warrant officers and were not accompanied by the police, they told me THEY would make the arrest and detain me, and transport me to cells. All this of course mas an error and I owed nothing, besides that whatever powers the doorstep Taliban have does not give them the right to shout my business out loudly use threating and intimidating behaviour ( verbally and physically) or to traumatised sixyear old, who by the way still has nightmares about me and now his sister being taken away by nasty men. Sorry to rant on but these people are the **** of the earth, I am in the army and give the Taliban more respect than the lying cheating jumped up doormen who claim to being " just doing a job " ,

Hi All Last year i had two thugs arrive at my door with a warrant for my arrest (without bail) for council tax paid 4 years previously, i had to drag ID out of them which was simply a peice of letter headed paper. After they shouted what the warrant was for, then announced that they were bouncers at the weekenk and would "take me if they wanted" and told my 5 year old son they were taking Daddy to prison to be locked up, i had enough and phoned my father , a retired police officer. here is a few questions he asked them and their response; Q. do you posses a valid home office warrant card A. eeerm NO why Q. Under what section of PACE are you operating A. what the hell are you on about Q. Are you insured not only to physically restrain but to transport a prisoner A. i expect so Q. what rights have you informed your prisoner and what safeguards have you accounted for for the welfare of children or family illness. A. i dont see what its got to do with you. Q What laws give you the power to restrict civil liberty above that of citizens arrest A. the law does not concern us at this point my father lost patiants and elequantly instructed the bailiffs to F*$£ OFF and never return , there will be no arrest if any further attempts were made then he would inform the police and have them arrested, They left quickly without anymore fuss, i phoned the council the next day and they confirmed their error but no apology for the door step terrorists at my door, i have complained to the manager of the council tax collections office and to the baillifs, they both robustly defend their actions, i will however chase them down, i was told i had a good case to proscecute them but cannot afford to start proceedings, its very true to say justice is reserved for thos who can afford it. So after a lot of research, no one other than the police or hm costoms can force an arrest, BAILIFFS HAVE NO POWERS OF ARREST EVEN WHEN ACTING ON AN ARREST WARRANT.

You are right joncris, however there is an amendment, which i will post later as i don't have it now, that states a civilian may affect an arrest if they reasonably believe a criminal act is about to take place which may cause a danger to people or property. it would be ludicrous to say that a person has to stand back and allow an assault for instance before they can act. However we digress, the security guard involved in this thread did abuse his position and acted illegally , he committed an assault, when clearly the option to question, warn then inform the suspect was still possible, force is used as a last resort and only used in proportion to what is neccessary, as far as i am concerned he acted in a completely unprofessional way and is nothing short of a thug , it really does show this mans lack of intilect when all he is capable of is bullying, i hope he loses his licence and is proscecuted.

hi all Just a quick one, although shanty has been told to start his own thread i must agree with a small portion of what he says, also jonchris is wrong a civilian arrest can be affected if you have the belief that an inprisonable offence is about to take place ( infact it is an offence to to do nothing whether that be intervene or alert the authorities). Criminal Law Act 1967 (c.58) Its all in this Act

Hi tiler1 have a read of this; Reasonable Force The amount of force that will be justified will depend on the circumstances in which it is used. However, in principle almost any level of force may be justified if an individual honestly believed it was necessary to prevent a crime taking place. In deciding whether the amount of force used was reasonable a number of factors will be taken into account, including: The seriousness of the crime that an individual was acting to prevent – For example, it is unlikely that any force would be reasonable to prevent a thirteen year old schoolboy stealing a chocolate bar; Whether the crime could have been prevented in some other way – perhaps by alerting the police; The strength of the individual using force relative to the person committing the crime – If a karate black-belt or a body-builder who works as a bouncer uses force against a weaker person there is a high risk that it will be excessive. The Use of Force to protect Property When an individual takes action to prevent someone damaging or stealing his property, or the property of another person, he is entitled to use force. The amount of force that can be justified to protect property may well be lower than what can reasonably be used to protect human life. If this defence is raised two questions will have to be considered: Whether the force was used to protect property from an attack - or the threat of an attack - which would amount to a criminal or unlawful act; Whether, given the circumstances as the individual saw them, it would be objectively reasonable to use force in those circumstances it sounds like your case comes down to word against word as the 'cameras not working' offer no solid evidence. Shanty offers a good point but he must realise that if you are trained and certified to carry out security duties the body that regulates those persons i.e; the SIA ,have to be insured against personal and public liability, thats why certified SIA people must identify themselves. Also the law does state that reasonable force can be used to arrest someone who you believe is about to or is committing an offence, IF THERE IS NO OTHER WAY OF AFFECTING THE ARREST.

sorry, forgot... a good security guard should use neccessary force and not REASONABLE force, did he use force neccessary for the situation...if the term reasonable is used it can be ambiguous as you, me, a judge , joe bloggs all have different ideas on what reasonable is, whereas neccessary force can be shown i.e ''it was neccessary to grab his arm to stop him punching'' as apposed to ''it was reasonable to punch him in the head repeatedly untill he stop struggling '

the above includes uniformed and non uniformed guards, they must always identify themselves, stating their name ,job title (i.e security) and their suspicion. they also need to show identification to prove who they are and that proves they are what they claim.

Hi just to respond to the rights of security guards, i am in the military and my current role involves armed and unarmed security of mod and military establishments, our training is extensive as we need to know what we can do not only as soldiers but when dealing with criminals which are not carrying out acts likely to endanger life, our training incorporates what a good civilian security guard is allowed to do , firstly a security guard does not hold a home office warrant card and therefore cannot read you your rights, they cannot search you without your permission, they must call the police to do this, unless you are actually committing the offence they cannot use force to or violence of any kind to subdue you, if using citizens arrest they must detain you in veiw of others or at the scene and not to transport you in anyway to any private or hidden location. dialogue must first be established, he should have first chalenged you by stating his suspicions and asking you to accompany him while the issue is cleared up or police called, as an armed soldier with extensive public order and personal safety training i have to follow these rules (unless the crime endangers or has taken human life). Under the freedom of information act request this mans accreditation or certificate, and if which i doubt it is produced request from the organisation who issued it their rules and rights under which they train security guards, this will clearly show what he is and is not allowed to do. One day this thug will pick on the wrong person (like me) and using the right to defend myself he will find the only thing that beats him to hospital would be the headlights on the ambulance ....

Hi blue fairy don't know if you remember me but we exchanged a few messages reference HFO thugs, i have been contacted by someone on this forum by a person who is interested in the exploits of our friends and after confirming who they were i have been in telephone contact with them, they may have tried to contact you, surfice to say it is very much in your interest to talk to them, if you want the details of exactly what these people are doing against HFO please email me through here and i will fill you in , where you can decide from there.

Thanks informed searcher, glad it made sense as i was on my soap box and going off on one a bit. What does strike me as strange is that press and public are free to go in if there is space meaning its an open and public enquiry, not a closed session as such, there is also no information or content that is deemed 'secret' , so why is the session not recorded or broadcast. Or are we all jumping about and shouting about something that no one has thought to simply just ask for???

I am astounded that in this day and age having a meeting in a small room to avoid the public knowing what dirty backhanders are going on, no one has suggested that its ok to conduct this farce where they say, however media such as microphones, webcams, or like the house of commons permanent cameras should be used to ensure justice is done and the rogue banks are not lying , cheating and sliming their nasty little way out of paying back the monies that they have stolen , often, from those who can ill afford it, creating fees to intentionally put people overdrawn so they can apply another fee. Sorry Rant over

ok thanks for prompt response, interesting

Kraken1 could you please substantiate your last comment, when did it change , and where can this be found in law? many thanks

no need to apologies mate, we all know feeling can run high when this subject is involved, i will as you say 'keep at them' but i will also respect the site rules, if it takes me a few years i will get justice, and with the knowledge i did it right and didnt abuse the people or rescourses available to me.then i would have truely won