Not my bill but bailiffs threatening to take my furniture

[batty_uk]

Hi. I had a visit from Marsdens some months ago who threatened to take all my furniture due to a debt my son owed. I explained he did not live at my address any longer but they did not believe me. I had to pay almost £700 as I had no receipts to prove the items were mine.

I even had been returning all his mail to sender for approx six months as I had no idea where he was staying.

 

Last week Marsdens returned to collect more money from my son. Again they have been told he does not live here but they sais they will return to take my items if bill is not paid!

What can I do?

[seanamarts]

This is certainly not right, at all. The bailiffs should not have threatened to take any items of yours. but this is a tactic that they use. Can ypou please give some more information on this.

can you tell us ,

What the debt was for,

How much it was for.

what the fees were,

and have you still the receipt that they gave you.

You are NOT responsible for your sons debts

by the way was it Martson

[seanamarts]

if it is marston then they clearly state they follow what is set out by the 'National standards for enforcement.' they also state in their own website, and i quote "

Protecting confidential information

 

Marston Group and its stakeholders are not permitted to provide personal details of any matters to anyone but the debtor, or the client, unless written authorisation has been provided."

 

 

I suggest that you get on to this company and place a complaint with them also have a read here so you know where you stand

Department for Constitutional Affairs - Enforcement - National Standards for Enforcement Agents

[tomtubby]

Hi. I had a visit from Marsdens some months ago who threatened to take all my furniture due to a debt my son owed. I explained he did not live at my address any longer but they did not believe me. I had to pay almost £700 as I had no receipts to prove the items were mine.

I even had been returning all his mail to sender for approx six months as I had no idea where he was staying.

 

Last week Marsdens returned to collect more money from my son. Again they have been told he does not live here but they sais they will return to take my items if bill is not paid!

What can I do?

 

 

I am sorry to ask so many questions but I can then respond. They may seem strange questions...but I know where I am going on this....trust me!!

 

What did this debt relate to? Was it an unpaid Magistrates Court Fine?

 

Had an initial letter been sent to your son by Marston and had this been returned to them?

 

Under the Data Protection Act 1998 the Enforcement Officer should NOT have discussed this account with you. Did he discuss it?

 

How long have you lived in the property?

 

How old is your son?

 

Have you checked to see that this officer was certificated?

 

If you can respond that would be helpful.

[batty_uk]

This is certainly not right, at all. The bailiffs should not have threatened to take any items of yours. but this is a tactic that they use. Can ypou please give some more information on this.

can you tell us ,

What the debt was for,

How much it was for.

what the fees were,

and have you still the receipt that they gave you.

You are NOT responsible for your sons debts

by the way was it Martson

 

 

thanks for the reply. Yes it is Marston nor Mardens.

The first one of almost £700 was for court fines.

This one is for a parking fine they want £126.06.

 

When they came the first time I had returned letters to them stating "not at this address" not that it did any good!

My son periodically comes to visit and unfortunately at that time he had split from his girlfriend and returned home slept on the settee for one night and purely by chance opened the door to the bailiffs. I got a call at work to say they had ordered a van to collect goods. They went through my house......it was obvious that only one bedroom was in use......there was not even any clothing belonging to my son at the house but when I arrived home the police were there and Marstons stated they had found my sons driving licence upstairs and therefore he lives here!

I guess you could describe him as no fixed abode as he tends to stay with different friends for short periods of time and uses my address for his mail. Other than returning his mail I dont know how to stop that!

[batty_uk]

I am sorry to ask so many questions but I can then respond. They may seem strange questions...but I know where I am going on this....trust me!!

 

What did this debt relate to? Was it an unpaid Magistrates Court Fine?

 

Had an initial letter been sent to your son by Marston and had this been returned to them?

 

Under the Data Protection Act 1998 the Enforcement Officer should NOT have discussed this account with you. Did he discuss it?

 

How long have you lived in the property?

 

How old is your son?

 

Have you checked to see that this officer was certificated?

 

If you can respond that would be helpful.

 

The initial one was a court fine. This one is for unpaid parking fine £126.06

Yes the letters have been returned to them.

I have lived here for over 10 years.

My son is 28 yrs old and no sign of growing up!

They did sort of discuss the court fine with me by saying it was from the court but would not say what it was for except to say they would acknowledge what it was if I asked specifically e.g. if I asked "was it for driving offences..no tax etc." they would say yes or no.

 

 

Did I check to see if they were certificated? erm no. Had no idea what to do.

[batty_uk]

they had a van on its way to collect and told me if I produced receipts within 6 days to prove i owned everything I could have it all back. None of my things are new...... most of it has been bought second hand....what chance did i have?

[seanamarts]

I am presuming here that all bills are in your name, the house is in your name, They had no rights what so ever to make you pay for your sons debts with threats that they will take your belongings for his debt. TT is an excellent source on information with regards to these matters she will guide you through this. Hopefully we can get these bailiffs off your back and maybe even get your money back.

[batty_uk]

I am presuming here that all bills are in your name, the house is in your name, They had no rights what so ever to make you pay for your sons debts with threats that they will take your belongings for his debt. TT is an excellent source on information with regards to these matters she will guide you through this. Hopefully we can get these bailiffs off your back and maybe even get your money back.

 

Hi, yes the mortgage is in my name and bills in my name including council tax etc etc.

Thanks for your replies, it has calmed me down quite a lot, I was beginning to feel that these people could just walk in whenever they want and wipe me out!

Oh one of them told me they could take what they wanted because I couldnt prove my son hadn't for instance bought the tv!

[batty_uk]

if it is marston then they clearly state they follow what is set out by the 'National standards for enforcement.' they also state in their own website, and i quote "

Protecting confidential information

 

Marston Group and its stakeholders are not permitted to provide personal details of any matters to anyone but the debtor, or the client, unless written authorisation has been provided."

 

 

I suggest that you get on to this company and place a complaint with them also have a read here so you know where you stand

Department for Constitutional Affairs - Enforcement - National Standards for Enforcement Agents

 

For some reason I cant access this link

[seanamarts]

type in your search bar

National Standards for Enforcement Agents

 

May 2002

 

 

it basically states;

 

• Unlawful force' should not be used to enter any premises
  
• If the Police are called to deal with a breach of the peace, their presence must be explained including that they are not there to help with the levy
  
• If the only person present is or appears to be under 18, the agent must depart, but may ask when the debtor will be home. If the only persons at home are children under the age of 12, the agent must simply leave.
  
• Bailiffs should avoid so far as is practicable avoid disclosing the purpose of their visit to anyone who is not the debtor. Relevant documents should be left in a sealed envelope addressed to her/him
  
• Visits should ideally only be made between 6am and 9pm (or any time that the debtor is conducting business). Visits should not take place on Sundays, Bank Holidays, Good Friday or Christmas Day, unless legislation or a Court permits this. Respect for other religions and cultures should be upheld, and visits avoided on appropriate festivals and holidays.
  
• Goods that are clearly those of a child should not be seized
  
• Bailiffs should take all reasonable steps to satisfy themselves that the value of goods seized is proportional to the debt and charges owing
  
• When goods are removed, receipts should be given to the debtor
  
• Debtors must be notified of fees on each visit and of the fees that will be incurred if further action takes place
  
• Copies of the NSEA should be available from the offices of the agencies, from the agents on request and if possible from the creditors themselves
  
• There are no sanctions for non-compliance with NSEA but agents are required to operate complaints and disciplinary procedures
  

[seanamarts]

for some reason the link isnt working but I do know its being dealt with

[batty_uk]

thanks

[seanamarts]

thanks

link is working now

[tomtubby]

Hi. I had a visit from Marsdens some months ago who threatened to take all my furniture due to a debt my son owed. I explained he did not live at my address any longer but they did not believe me. I had to pay almost £700 as I had no receipts to prove the items were mine.

I even had been returning all his mail to sender for approx six months as I had no idea where he was staying.

 

Last week Marsdens returned to collect more money from my son. Again they have been told he does not live here but they sais they will return to take my items if bill is not paid!

What can I do?

 

Sadly, bailiffs are being instructed by their companies to say to debtors that unless receipts can be produced that the bailiff can presume that all goods on the premises are owned by the debtor. This is particularly the case when a bailiff is trying to get payment from a son or daughter ( who cannot pay) and the pressure is then put on the parent.

 

If challenged, the bailiff company will almost always state the Appeal Court case of Observer v Gordon . Frankly, I believe that bailiff companies are abusing this case for their own financial gain, in particular when levying upon a vehicles close to a property.

 

Because of the frequency of this method of obtaining money I will try to explain the case ( regular posters may want to save this answer ) !!!

 

OBSERVER v GORDON.

 

Gordon's was a Piano business ran by Mr Gordon and his daughter. In the late 1980's, Mr Gordon ordered an advertisement in the Observer newspaper but failed to pay the bill of approx: £3,000 and the Observer passed the debt to a firm of High Court Enforcers who visited the business premises and removed a number of pianos which were quickly sold ( apparently at an undervalue). At today's prices, the pianos were worth in excess of £25,000 each!!

 

What the bailiff was unaware of.... was that apparently not all of the Piano's belonged to the business.... some were owned by customers. This was because, although Gordon's Pianos did sell pianos...they also repaired and stored pianos for customers.

 

One of the "owners" made an Interpleader application to the court. The case was lost and this lead to an application to the Appeal Court.

 

Crucially, the Judge noted that if the bailiffs had read the advertisement placed in the Observer they would have been made aware that all piano's in the shop were not owned by the business because the ad had stated that the business sold, repaired and stored pianos. The Judge did not blame the bailiffs for this.

 

The appeal court found that the bailiffs had "good reason to believe" that all goods on the premises were owned by Gordons' Piano's and that it was not for them to therefore make any further enquiries.

 

What is crucial in this case, is that it appeared that the bill had not been paid ( to the Observer) because Mr Gordon had died and by the time the case had come to court his daughter had also died.

 

Gordon's Pianos was therefore not represented in either court case.

 

..................................

[seanamarts]

so basically what you are saying TT is that, a bailiff can take what ever they want from whom ever they want regardless of who is on the warrant, as long as they have an address, its their golden ticket to a sweet factory.

 

So every one needs to go out irrespective of the fact that they may or may not be in debt, and get all their belongings put in their name via a legal process and be in receipt of some sort of documentation for proof of ownership, just in case a person that may have once lived at the address you are living at could have some sort of debt looming and it is their last known address, the bailiffs have free range to your belongings until you prove otherwise.

In other words if you cant prove that your belongings are yours then tough titty.

 

It all sounds a bit fantasied I know but seems to be the case here and a lot of other cases that I have seen on the forum.

I must say that I am concerned as I have debt letters here for people who once lived in this building, for debts as far back as 2005, most have stated that the debt is being passed on for bailiff action. I live in a building that has been converted from 8 bedsits into three flats, the bedsits were occupied by people who were drop outs/criminals, drug abusers and homelessness, most never used their own names and by the looks of it never paid their bills. I did start to send them back with 'no longer at this address' written on the envelopes but they still get sent here. Ive even called the DCA's and told them that they no longer live here, most say I have to send them proof I live here now, thats easily done but how do I prove that they DONT live here. My flat is the main flat of the building and if no one realises that this building has three flats, mine is the one that they address.

So if the bailiffs DO come round, which I have no doubts they will, eventually as some of these debts are quite large, Im basically boll@xed!!

 

sorry for the waffle

[tomtubby]

so basically what you are saying TT is that, a bailiff can take what ever they want from whom ever they want regardless of who is on the warrant, as long as they have an address, its their golden ticket to a sweet factory.

 

So every one needs to go out irrespective of the fact that they may or may not be in debt, and get all their belongings put in their name via a legal process and be in receipt of some sort of documentation for proof of ownership, just in case a person that may have once lived at the address you are living at could have some sort of debt looming and it is their last known address, the bailiffs have free range to your belongings until you prove otherwise.

In other words if you cant prove that your belongings are yours then tough titty.

 

It all sounds a bit fantasied I know but seems to be the case here and a lot of other cases that I have seen on the forum.

I must say that I am concerned as I have debt letters here for people who once lived in this building, for debts as far back as 2005, most have stated that the debt is being passed on for bailiff action. I live in a building that has been converted from 8 bedsits into three flats, the bedsits were occupied by people who were drop outs/criminals, drug abusers and homelessness, most never used their own names and by the looks of it never paid their bills. I did start to send them back with 'no longer at this address' written on the envelopes but they still get sent here. Ive even called the DCA's and told them that they no longer live here, most say I have to send them proof I live here now, thats easily done but how do I prove that they DONT live here. My flat is the main flat of the building and if no one realises that this building has three flats, mine is the one that they address.

So if the bailiffs DO come round, which I have no doubts they will, eventually as some of these debts are quite large, Im basically boll@xed!!

 

sorry for the waffle

 

I disagree.

 

The Gordon case is being dreadfully abused by bailiffs.

 

The points that has to be made is that the bailiff must have GOOD REASON to believe that all of the goods within a property are owned by the debtor. It is therefore not so much that he can "assume"....he must gave "good reason to believe". There is a vast difference.

 

In this particular thread, the Marston bailiff has attended at the property of a mother where her son once lived. He is in his mid twenties. In this case...how is it possible for the bailiff to have "good reason to believe" that all of the goods within the property would be owned by the son !!!!

 

The case of Gordon is wholly different in that the business was called Gordon's Pianos and the shop premises were full of Piano's !!

 

One important point concerns the levying upon vehicles close to a property. Just yesterday, we case an enquiry from a debtor who had been contacted by a bailiff regarding a Liability Order for £88 from 7 years ago. he had moved home 4 times within that time.

 

The bailiff obtained details of where the debtor works ( from enquiries at a previous address) and visited the premises and levied upon 14 cars in the staff car park!!!). When challenged....he stated Observer v Gordon ( predicably). Complete and utter nonsense. In the first place how could he possiblyclaim that he had "good reason to believe" that all of the vehicles could possibly be owned by the debtor. He can't.

 

What is more important is that he could be facing a formal complaint of "excessive seizure".

 

Since, the Gordon case in the 1980, the bailiff companies have online access to DVLA records so this argument of levying upon a vehicle outside of a property is wearing "very thin" !!!

[seanamarts]

;)Im glad you disagree on what I wrote because it will put a lot of minds at rest knowing, well hoping that their belongings are safe from these greedy un-knowledgeable bailiffs, because you do have to admit that they are 'legally' stealing peoples property, because if it was 'illegally' stealing them then the police could get involved, but because they have that little piece of paper they get from the courts they think that they are invincible to police actions. People like the OP of this thread, and no offence to her at all, who do not know the 'ins' and 'outs' of bailiff law really feel that they have no choice but to hand over the money, when in fact they do not even have to communicate with the bailiff with regards to some one else's debt regardless whether its their offspring or not.

But I hope you can see the points I made:)

[jimbo45]

Hi there

just tell them to "Other word for Urination - Off".

 

YOU DON'T HAVE TO LET THEM IN - THEY HAVE TO PROVE THE DEBT IS YOURS -- NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

 

If they take your car without cause then that's STEALING / EXTORTION.

At the very least sting them for compensation, time missed at work for dealing with the matter, harrassment, stress etc etc.

 

A 2 minute check to the DVLA will ascertain who the registered keeper of the vehicle is so they have NO excuse here just because someone who at one time lived at an address owned the debt.

 

Imagine a "Commune" of 50 people living together. - A Bailiff can't re-possess stuff from that address that doesn't belong to the debtor.

 

Even the Court paper will name the debtor - so if he's (or she's) not there THAT'S THE END OF IT.

 

If the Bailiff can seize other people's property - well what's to stop me or anyone else just seizing ANYBODY's property at random for someone else's a 3rd party debt.

 

I'd imagine a "Real Wild West soceity" would emerge very quickly -- Magnum 45 here I come.

 

RULE ONE - AS ALWAYS.

 

DO NOT EVER EVER LET THE VILE FILTHY **** IN. EVER EVER EVER.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Edited February 2, 2010 by jimbo45

[High Court Enforcer]

FYI, depending on the bailiff company, DVLA checks can take anywhere from 24hrs to 3 weeks.

[jimbo45]

FYI, depending on the bailiff company, DVLA checks can take anywhere from 24hrs to 3 weeks.

 

Well I'm not so sure about this

 

I managed to get a registered keepers number within a very short period of time - and I'm only a private citizen.

 

No "insider" knowlege or "Lodge Colleagues" were needed either.

 

In any case any "Sensible" Bailiff company (probably a contradiction in terms) could probably get info on a "debtors assets" long before they actually went round to do their grisly business.

 

Cheers

jimbo

[batty_uk]

ok so does this mean they can't come in without invitation for the parking offence money? And what about the money I paid them in July last year to stop them taking my goods can I claim it back or not?

Oh my!!! I jnow why I didnt study law!

[ploddertom]

Hi. I had a visit from Marsdens some months ago who threatened to take all my furniture due to a debt my son owed. I explained he did not live at my address any longer but they did not believe me. I had to pay almost £700 as I had no receipts to prove the items were mine.

I even had been returning all his mail to sender for approx six months as I had no idea where he was staying.

 

Last week Marsdens returned to collect more money from my son. Again they have been told he does not live here but they sais they will return to take my items if bill is not paid!

What can I do?

 

I think what you need to do is have a Statutory Declaration done to say all the goods in the house are yours, there is nothing of your son's there and he only uses your address as a mailing address. Cost of having this done is approx £10 at a solicitor or free at your local County Court.

 

Next you need to get on to Marstons in your own name - not your son's and ask for a statement of your account. Hopefully they will then write back and say no such account exists or similar wording. This then helps give you some proof that the money they extricated from your pocket last time was done unlawfully. Then give them 7 days to reimburse you then file a N1 to get your money back.

 

If your son is 28 then it is about time he faced up to his own responsibilities rather than let others carry the can for him. It is great playing help the son but if he knows you will keep paying then he will keep doing.

 

PT

[batty_uk]

Thankyou for your reply it is very helpful.

And believe me I agree he needs to take responsibility and would not have paid if I wasn't told I had no choice!

Thank you and everyone else who has responded to my post.