TB Law
-
Posts
201 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by TB Law
-
The ICO is the Information Commissions Office the UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights in the public interest, promoting openness by public bodies and data privacy for individuals. ANPR clamping and distrain without levy does not seem to fall under the ICOs remit. Unless, but of course, you may know different and can elighten. The DVLA can sell to anyone with an appropriate subscription account information about vehicles and keepers.
-
Excellent! A levy is valid because a bailiff stuck a document though the door?
-
The levy is not valid because its made in your absence and the document has 7 items or less. The Judgment in Ambrose vs. Nottingham City Council ruled that "global levies" are irregular and therefore, not binding on debtors regardless of whether or not a Walking Possession Agreement has been signed.
-
Dont hold your breath on that. ICO arent concerned with ANPR clamping or distrain without levy.
-
Thanks brassnecked for the explanation. The 10% can be challenged as abuse of process because case law favours debtors following the Judge in Steel Linings v Bibby if the fees for distraint were comparable to the original debt.
-
If you don't have the means there is not much anyone can do about it. Assuming the levy is valid the bailiff can enter your property but the goods you describe may not meet the costs of distress let alone reduce the tax arrears so any distrain on those goods could be vexatious or an abuse of process.
-
The source of fact I asked about is post #26 about 10% on sale of goods. Due diligence is a term I hear from Scots lawyers and they dont have bailiffs. What creates the criminal liability in #31? NSEA, do any forum members know if this is legally binding or voluntary and what regulations ratifies it?
-
The problem with contract law its only applicable to the parties, which the debtors is not so its difficult to advocate using the terms of a non pertinent contract.
-
I don’t think the argument would stand if presented like that when there is a citation to the contrary @ploddertom. I wasn't aware bailiffs needed permission of the council or creditor to enter a property for collecting council tax, sure that isn't mags court fines? A bailiff is liable if he does not seize goods to the value of the debt? do you know the source for that?
-
Can a bailiff clamp for an unpaid PCN ?
TB Law replied to ploddertom's topic in Local Authority Parking and Traffic Offences
It is in the "custody of the law". There is a citation but I cant remember it. -
Can a bailiff clamp for an unpaid PCN ?
TB Law replied to ploddertom's topic in Local Authority Parking and Traffic Offences
Interesting comment because ANPR clamping is seizure without a valid levy. -
Can a bailiff clamp for an unpaid PCN ?
TB Law replied to ploddertom's topic in Local Authority Parking and Traffic Offences
If the levy on the vehicle was invalid then you can remove the clamp immune from criminal damage act because you had "lawful excuse" but you must return the remainder of the clamp otherwise you might be liable under the 1967 theft act. -
Can you point to the source? or a citation?
-
This is council tax there are no regs for a council or a court to give "permission" to break in to any domestic property, a bailiff with a valid levy and a valid bailiffs certificate can enter by force under the Distress for Rent Act 1737 and several Amendment Acts. Nulla Bono? Nulla Bona means there are no realisable goods to distrain to cover the debt.
-
If the levy is valid the bailiff can enter with a locksmith under Mcleod -v- Butterwick [1996] so you need to see if the levy is not valid but goods cant be removed in your absence Kazanchi v Faircharm [1998]. Make sure you have 'beware of dog' sign otherwise you may be liable for dog bites.
-
Those numbers would amount to excessive levy under the interpretation of the court in Steel Linings Limited, Mark Harvey v Bibby & Co [1993] EWCA because goods worth £46300 were taken for arrears of £7400 and the court agreed this was "clearly disproportionate".
-
OP. when your TE7/9's are done compare the value of your car against the original PCN, you might have a claim for excessive levy by bringing a claim under Steel Linings Limited, Mark Harvey v Bibby & Co [1993] EWCA.
-
No, the OP doesnt say the bailiff entered the property but he said "they did a walking possession on goods" that can only mean the levy was made outside the property and it fails the test of Evans v South Ribble. @sequenci
-
The levy on your goods is invalid because the bailiff did not make it inside your home, you signed a document and returned it to the bailiffs office. The Evans case dissallowed what are called 'doorstep levies' or levies that are made away from the debtors property.
-
Unless the bailiff has a valid levy over it then the vehicle owner can remove the clamp with bolt cutters, they arent liable for criminal damage act because there is 'lawful reason'.
-
Then its not valid : Evans v South Ribble Borough Council [1992] QB 757
-
Leatherseat, just write to the mags court saying the enforcement contractor has mistaken you do their defaulter and they will end enforcment action against you.
-
Skidmore v booth is an old case but there is little burden of proof required to satisfy a claim unter this precedent, you just need to table your losses and give a list of events caused by the bailiff that you believe caused those losses.
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS