David Cameron has vowed to ABOLISH powers of bailiffs to enter homes !!!!

[tomtubby]

David Cameron: We’ll aid vulnerable | The Sun |News|Election 2010

 

 

David Cameron has vowed to help "vulnerable" groups and if elected, he has "vowed" to abolish powers of bailiffs and council tax inspectors to enter homes !!!

 

It is a SHAME that he had not made this statement a few weeks ago instead of leaving it until 3 days BEFORE the election !!

 

This could be a VOTE WINNER !!!!!!

[seanamarts]

he's got my vote..

[Bookworm]

And anyone actually believes him?

 

Hint: If it's not in the manfesto (and often even if it is! ), it's about as meaningful as me telling you I am the Queen of Sheba.

[seanamarts]

I think he would look a bit stupid if he gets in and then does nothing...

[Bookworm]

Like that's ever stopped any politician before...

[seanamarts]

Like that's ever stopped any politician before...

true very true

[Bookworm]

Listen: Bailiffs have existed since medieval times, and the power of seizing stuff has been around for just about ever. That is one thing I can pretty much guarantee will NEVER be repealed by any government, especially as they highly benefit from it.

[Rooster-UK]

it's about as meaningful as me telling you I am the Queen of Sheba.

 

I fully agree, Your Majesty.

[seanamarts]

Listen: Bailiffs have existed since medieval times, and the power of seizing stuff has been around for just about ever. That is one thing I can pretty much guarantee will NEVER be repealed by any government, especially as they highly benefit from it.

Maybe this country needs to get out of the dark ages and start living in the now and not in the past..

[Bookworm]

Maybe.... but not gonna happen. It would have to be replaced with a different way to enforce fines etc, and beware of whatever would replace it. Remember the last time they wanted to tweak the current law was with an aim to increase their powers, not reduce them. ;-)

[YANO BEMUSE]

The announcement is good news but let’s hope the Tory’s remember to repeal the power to force entry when on fine enforcement, that was an unexpected, eleventh hour amendment to the Domestic Violence, Crime & Victims Act 2004, and not just the highly controversial more widespread power that’s in the Tribunals, Courts & Enforcement Act 2007, which is due to be implemented in April 2012.

 

Let’s not forget that it was Labour Government Ministers that not only breached the historic principle that ‘an Englishman’s home is his castle’ but even had the audacity to claim that it never existed but was just a 400 year old misunderstanding about what Semayne’s Case really said.

 

In the House of Lords on 14 December 2006, Baroness Ashton (who is now the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of the European Union) said, ‘I’m sorry, but I cannot resist this. We keep hearing that “an Englishman’s home is his castle”, so we dug out what the judgment in Semayne’s case of 1604 actually said. I just had to put this in Hansard - that, “the house of anyone is not a castle or privilege but for himself, and shall not extend to protect any person who flies to his house or the goods of any other which are brought and conveyed into his house to prevent a lawful execution”.’

 

The fact is, the Minister was quoting from the pre-penultimate paragraph of the judgment, that explained one of the exceptions to the principle. The judgement is just two pages long and had she read from the top of page one she would have been in no doubt that ‘That the house of everyone is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence, as for his repose...’

 

The following year, another labour Minister, Vera Baird (who is now fighting for re-election), argued that Parliament couldn’t prevent bailiffs having the power to force entry to people’s homes without also having to allow them to continue to climb through upstairs windows. Too ridiculous to believe? She said it on 20 March 2007 and it's in Hansard.

 

Referring to the forced entry powers in the 2004 Act, Mrs Baird said, ‘The power to enforce a fine by entry using reasonable force has been in existence since 2004. It has been that long since the Englishman’s castle crumbled around his ears.’

 

I would hope than any sensible Government is a tad more honest and repeals these obnoxious laws.

[High Court Enforcer]

This really is a shame. I would have thought he'd be for it.

[Zamzara]

Yes you would wouldn't you? No one desires to give the vulnerable a good kicking like bailiffs and the tories.

[RaeUK]

Yes you would wouldn't you? No one desires to give the vulnerable a good kicking like bailiffs and the tories.

 

I completely disagree that the 'tories' desire to give the vulnerable a good kicking in the slightest.

Should the Conservatives be elected I will look with interest to see what their initial actions are with both the subject of this thread and the benefit system for disabled and long term sick.

Given the short life of David Camerons severelly disabled son, and his clear care and devotion, I am slightly optimistic...

For those who also pass through the hallowed corridors of the Benefits Forum, you will appreciate why this is an important facet both to myself and thousands of others.

 

Thanks for the link TT, if it's not been done already, I'll pop it in the Benefits Forum as well.

 

Best wishes

Rae

[pompeyfaith]

Given the short life of David Camerons severelly disabled son, and his clear care and devotion, I am slightly optimistic...

 

Well lets put it this way he will be frowned upon if not.

 

PF

[RaeUK]

Exactly PF, he should have empathy with our difficulties at the least...

Best wishes

Rae

[tomtubby]

The announcement is good news but let’s hope the Tory’s remember to repeal the power to force entry when on fine enforcement, that was an unexpected, eleventh hour amendment to the Domestic Violence, Crime & Victims Act 2004, and not just the highly controversial more widespread power that’s in the Tribunals, Courts & Enforcement Act 2007, which is due to be implemented in April 2012.

 

Let’s not forget that it was Labour Government Ministers that not only breached the historic principle that ‘an Englishman’s home is his castle’ but even had the audacity to claim that it never existed but was just a 400 year old misunderstanding about what Semayne’s Case really said.

 

In the House of Lords on 14 December 2006, Baroness Ashton (who is now the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of the European Union) said, ‘I’m sorry, but I cannot resist this. We keep hearing that “an Englishman’s home is his castle”, so we dug out what the judgment in Semayne’s case of 1604 actually said. I just had to put this in Hansard - that, “the house of anyone is not a castle or privilege but for himself, and shall not extend to protect any person who flies to his house or the goods of any other which are brought and conveyed into his house to prevent a lawful execution”.’

 

The fact is, the Minister was quoting from the pre-penultimate paragraph of the judgment, that explained one of the exceptions to the principle. The judgement is just two pages long and had she read from the top of page one she would have been in no doubt that ‘That the house of everyone is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence, as for his repose...’

 

The following year, another labour Minister, Vera Baird (who is now fighting for re-election), argued that Parliament couldn’t prevent bailiffs having the power to force entry to people’s homes without also having to allow them to continue to climb through upstairs windows. Too ridiculous to believe? She said it on 20 March 2007 and it's in Hansard.

 

Referring to the forced entry powers in the 2004 Act, Mrs Baird said, ‘The power to enforce a fine by entry using reasonable force has been in existence since 2004. It has been that long since the Englishman’s castle crumbled around his ears.’

 

I would hope than any sensible Government is a tad more honest and repeals these obnoxious laws.

 

 

YB

 

An excellent explanation.

 

It was such a surprise to discover that a clause had been sneakingly included at the 11th hour in the Domestic Violence Crimes & Victims Act (2004) and this has had a dreadful impact on debtors who are faced with a bailiff visit to enforce a MAGISTRATES COURT FINE.

 

Reading between the lines, from the press release I am ASSUMING that DC is referring to changing the law to stop bailiffs from FORCING ENTRY. If so, I will be delighted and if the Conservatives are elected (which I hope) then I will PERSONALLY be writing to Jack Straw's replacement to remind him of the pledge made by DC.

 

I have no issues with tough enforcement for CRIMINALS who REFUSE to pay a fine imposed by the Courts. HOWEVER, the problem is that since the Labour party have been in power there has been a huge range of fines imposed for "crimes" that frankly (in my opinion) should NOT be classed as CRIMINAL.

 

These range from using a TV without a valid licence, using a mobile phone when driving, throwing litter from a car and many more similar "petty offences". For each of these fines, the bailiff is CURRENTLY permitted by law, to force entry into the debtors home. The quicker that this is STOPPED the better.

[MARTIN3030]

[quote=Bookworm;"it's about as meaningful as me telling you I am the Queen of Sheba."

 

 

 

Are you trying to tell us you aint ?

[YANO BEMUSE]

YB

 

I have no issues with tough enforcement for CRIMINALS who REFUSE to pay a fine imposed by the Courts. HOWEVER, the problem is that since the Labour party have been in power there has been a huge range of fines imposed for "crimes" that frankly (in my opinion) should NOT be classed as CRIMINAL.

 

These range from using a TV without a valid licence, using a mobile phone when driving, throwing litter from a car and many more similar "petty offences". For each of these fines, the bailiff is CURRENTLY permitted by law, to force entry into the debtors home. The quicker that this is STOPPED the better.

 

I agree. That was something the Labour Ministers hoped nobody would notice when they said repeatedly that forced entry was necessary to enforce fines against people who had been convicted of a CRIME. But the fact is those so-called crimes aren't really what we think of when we label people criminals.

 

What's more, those 'crimes' might have been committed by one person in a house, perhaps a teenager, but everybody there would have to put up with bailiffs forcing or threatening to force their way in.

[tomtubby]

I agree. That was something the Labour Ministers hoped nobody would notice when they said repeatedly that forced entry was necessary to enforce fines against people who had been convicted of a CRIME. But the fact is those so-called crimes aren't really what we think of when we label people criminals.

 

What's more, those 'crimes' might have been committed by one person in a house, perhaps a teenager, but everybody there would have to put up with bailiffs forcing or threatening to force their way in.

 

If Conservatives are elected, JacK Straw's replacement as Justice Secretary will very likely be Dominic Grieve QC. From reading the following article from last year it is clear that he is NOT IN FAVOUR of the right of forced entry into properties by bailiffs:

 

On the 1st of January 1604 the Court of the Queen’s Bench heard Semayne’s case. From this case the common law principle of a citizen’s right to refuse entry to their property derived. It was this principle that has for centuries allowed us to deny access to our homes to Bailiffs. However as part of Labours apparent policy of assaulting our traditional freedoms the Tribunal and Courts enforcement act 2007 and the 2004 Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 removed this ancient common law right and handed over shocking new powers to Bailiffs.

 

These powers include the right to forcibly enter a house and astonishingly the power to use reasonable force to restrain householders. This is one of the grossest violations of our fundamental freedoms that I have ever witnessed. Once upon a time an “Englishman’s home was his castle” In 1760 William Pitt famously declared

 

“The Poorest may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the crown. It may be frail, its roof may shake, the wind may blow through it. The rain may enter. The storms may enter but the King of England may not enter. All his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement.”

 

However today non-uniformed individuals who haven’t a shred of authority from the state. May legally “Break open the Door”- Her Majesty’s Court Service Guidelines to Bailiffs and any home owner who resists can be legally assaulted.

 

Thankfully this terrible crime did not go completely unnoticed. Dominic Grieve Conservative Shadow Home Secretary remarked,

 

” We are about to give considerable powers to non-uniformed individuals…We are allowing them to enter private premises, which will not necessarily be the premises of the person whom they are seeking to carry out searches… I am a little surprised that we are apparently introducing such potentially draconian legislation without paying real regard to the consequences on the ground on a day-to-day basis”

[Zamzara]

These range from using a TV without a valid licence, using a mobile phone when driving, throwing litter from a car and many more similar "petty offences". For each of these fines, the bailiff is CURRENTLY permitted by law, to force entry into the debtors home. The quicker that this is STOPPED the better.

 

Also note that the current power of force is not restricted to forcing entry. It appears to extend to 'reasonable' force against the debtor as well, and this will be the same in schedule 12 of the TCE Act as well.

[merlin100]

The very reason I invested £500 in a 7ft high self-locking steel gate.

Now NO-ONE can simply walk up to my back door and gain "peaceful entry" without trying to climb over the gate first.

And if they want to climb the 6ft fencing all around my garden - believe me, carpet track nailed to the top of the fence bloody hurts when you put your hands on it!

[Zamzara]

I completely disagree that the 'tories' desire to give the vulnerable a good kicking in the slightest.

Should the Conservatives be elected I will look with interest to see what their initial actions are with both the subject of this thread and the benefit system for disabled and long term sick.

Given the short life of David Camerons severelly disabled son, and his clear care and devotion, I am slightly optimistic...

For those who also pass through the hallowed corridors of the Benefits Forum, you will appreciate why this is an important facet both to myself and thousands of others.

 

Thanks for the link TT, if it's not been done already, I'll pop it in the Benefits Forum as well.

 

Best wishes

Rae

 

I hope your'e right, but you have to remember that while Cameron will not openly call those he wants to crack down on as vulnerable, this has to be viewed in the context of his support by the Murdoch papers whose readers define anyone who cannot make it on their own in the world as a layabout and a scrounger.

 

Cameron ahs vowed to cut off all benefits (including presumably council tax benefit) to anyone who 'refuses' a job. What does refuse a job mean? In the system we have, people who are vulnerable do not have the opportunity to refuse jobs because employers do not offer people jobs: people have to sell themselves as the best candidate over all others, and for people who are not in the mainstream of society this is often just not possible, even if they want to work and could. This policy is inevitably going to be code for 'fail to find a job'. We've already seen ESA turn out to be far different from what it was advertised as, and under the Tories things can only be worse. (I'm voting Liberal Democrat by the way.)

[Zamzara]

Sorry that ended up more off topic than I intended. It should have gone here really.

 

Hopefully Cameron will at least stick to that specific pledge notwithstanding all the rest!

[tomtubby]

I posted the following in the Bailiff Section yesterday......

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/258280-david-cameron-has-vowed.html