This topic was closed on 09 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/07/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/07/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/06/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/06/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

Any more ideas

Update 1. Requested a subject access 2. On the letter from the baliffs the vehicle registration is incorrect 3. Never recieved any 1st or 2nd or 3rd Correspondence - only communication was bill of £181 Please help - Cheers

Reponse from the balififf company You have been charged for our representive attendance with van following a levy being taken against goods. Our representative has attended the address supplied on the 27.10.10 with a van with the intention of removing goods to satisfy the debt. Upon his attendance to the address supplied our rep has neither been able to gain a response from within the property no could they gain peaceful entry. Our rep has noted that a vehicle was parked which was sighted on his previous visit. He has subsequently levied upon the vehicle have reasonable belief that it belonged to the name debtor. Therefore the enforcement fee of 105 and levy fee of£34 has been raised and applied correctly to your file.as we are able to make charge for a bailiff attendance with a vehicle following a levy made upon your property Please be advised that the statement of account and screenshot you have requested are considered to be a subject access request under section 7 of the data protection Act 1998 and you shall need to forward a payment of £10.00 before we are able to act upon your request All our bailiffs are certificated at court and employed to work of newlyn PLC. They work under our instructions and upon work that we give them. We are unwilling to provide the bailiffs name and court details at this time as we believe this request to be vexatious and unnecessary, and his actions are based on instructions given by the office and form part of the our standard. We believe that by taking our bailiffs certificate details you would be looking to issue a form 4 complaint against him as an individual. If you have reason to believe that the bailiffs as an individual has acted incorrectly and not upon our instruction. Please advise

Response from the Council A detiailed review has been undertaken by the bailiff company and I can confirm the following action was taken by them. They instructed bailiff to call at your premises in order to discuss payment with you and a visit was made on the Thursday 28 January 2010. Acesss was not available and as such baliff placed a notice through your door to state he had called . A charge of 24.50 had been made for this visit. The letter requested you should contact the bailiff immediately to negotiate settlement to avoid further action. B - No contact was made and therefore a further visist was on Thursday 4th febraury 2010, again no contact was available and correspondence was left advising an additional 18.00 fees had now been incurred and that bailiff intended to return and remove goods if payment or contact was not made C- No reponse or payment was received so the bailiff was left with no alternative but to return on Saturday 27 feburary. He called with a van with the intention of removing goods if an arrangement or payment was not made as advised in the correspondence that was posted through your door on the 4th of feb. D-Again access was not available to remove goods from the premises and the bailiff noticed a Mercedes on the drive that had been there on his previous visits to the premises so a levy was made on this vehicle. Appropriate documents confirming his action were posted through your letterbox. When making visits to levy the bailiff will call with a van to remove goods from the premises if required and will make contact with removal vehicles etc as required. the cost raised by the bailiff have all been in accordance with the charging structure shown on rear of the notice sent to you on the 29th December Having reviewed the case I am satisfied the charges have been raised appropriately as three visits had been made to your property and not one as stated in your correspondence. With regard to the Evans v Ribble case this relates to a situation where a bailiff had attempted to levy on goods and make a charge for this but had not physically entered the property which of course is not appropriate. However a levy can be performed on items outside a property.

Thanks to everyone - sent a subject access letter to the bailffs and My local councillor who has forwarded to the chief execs - Anybody know what impact that will have. In the mean time - I am thinking a setuping a db with baliff to stop the charges increase - i welcome more ideas

Thanks - plodderton - No visit at all apart from letter from the council that the matter would be passed to the baliff in 14 days that was in December . This is the first i am hearing from the bailliff - i am surprised did not even receive any first letter

if send i a subject access - even do i have paid the CT online - will that stop any further action or charge untill mattered is sorted out

Hi - not insured for business use

Thanks ploddertom Yes the car is legally mine - fully paid for - although i use it because i am self employed - The car details are hand written on the notice of distress - on the notice it says - Council tax owed / 290 - bailiff charges - 181.50