Are Rossendales Bailiffs acting illegally?

[hallowitch]

was the levy fee and van fee added the same day as this is a no no

 

 

have you read this

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?262730-Has-a-bailiff-quot-levied-quot-upon-a-car-that-is-NOT-owned-by-you-...-LOCAL-GOVERNMENT-OMBUDSMAN-S-Report-!!!!

[Arrogant Duck]

was the levy fee and van fee added the same day as this is a no no

 

Levy fee, Van Attendance Fee & Waiting Charge were all for the same date.

[Arrogant Duck]

This is a draft of the letter I am planning on replying with... Any advice on amendments would be welcome (reference numbers, dates, etc. have been edited for anonymity reasons)

 

 

 

 

Scummingdales

Wavell House

Helmshore

Rossendale

Lancashire

BB4 4NB

 

 

Client Ref: *******

Account Numbers: 1234567 & 7654321

 

 

Dear Bureaucratic ******,

 

In reference to your letter dated ## October 2010.

 

I have some major discrepancies with the breakdown of the above accounts.

 

Firstly, I challenge the fact that your bailiff, Mr. Bailiff#1 was chasing two separate accounts, yet two sets of visit fees had been added. As Bailiff’s fees are set by statute in The Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) Regulations 1992, if a bailiff is collecting on more than one liability order, they can only charge one set of visit charges.

 

Therefore, both liability orders should be added together and the levy should be worked out on the total amount.

 

This brings me to my next disagreement. On the 29th February 2009, your breakdown advises that your bailiff, Mr. Bailiff#2 attended my property and completed a levy on goods therein. Mr. Bailiff#2 DID NOT ENTER MY PROPERTY VIA PEACEFUL ENTRY OR OTHERWISE AND I DID NOT RECEIVE OR SIGN A WALKING POSSESSION AGREEMENT OR RECEIVE A FORM 7. Neither did I receive any correspondence which would make me aware of any charges which had been added on this occasion. Therefore, the levy fee of £29.00, van attendance fee of £160.00 and “waiting time” fee of £80.00 are all invalid AND deceptive under the Fraud Act 2006 and should be removed from my account at once.

 

I called Mr. Bailiff#2 and was advised to pay £X by the end of the week, which I did. However, if I was aware of these charges I am now challenging I would never have entered into any verbal agreement with your bailiff and would have certainly voiced my complaint sooner.

It was only after I paid £Y on 1st September 2009 that I had discovered earlier correspondence of my account(s) advising that the balance was a combined amount of £X+Y

 

In reference to charges added to account 7654321 and extra charges added. Your letter states that your bailiff, Mr. Bailiff#3 attended and levied on a vehicle at my property, incurring fees of £29.00 for the levy itself and additional attendance fee of £160.00. I would like to strenuously object to these charges as I DO NOT OWN A VEHICLE AND NEVER HAVE. I would assume that a professional debt collection company like yourselves would have the facilities to investigate information like this on a same or next day basis with the DVLA. The set of fees for this visit should be removed from my account at once as they unashamedly contravene with the Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) Regulations 1992.

Once again, I would have challenged these set of charges immediately but as I did not receive notice of distress from your bailiff I couldn’t. Perhaps, this is because he had a habit of leaving confidential letters in a communal foyer.

It doesn’t surprise me that your bailiff is denying such breaches of the Data Protection Act, but I can provide proof of another debtors credit card details being left on a note addressed to me if you wish?

 

Bearing in mind that the following charges breach the Fraud Act 2006, I look forward to receiving a letter from you confirming that my account is now settled in addition to a cheque for my overpayment:

 

Charges to be removed:

1 x First Visit Fee dd/mm/yy: £24.50

1 x Second Visit Fee dd/mm/yy: £18.00

2 x Levy Fees dated dd/mm/yy & dd/mm/yy: £58.00

2 x Van Attendance Fees dated dd/mm/yy & dd/mm/yy: £320.00

1 x Waiting Time: £80.00

Sub-total: £500.50

 

I have worked out my overpayment charge to be the amount of £A. This based on:

Accounts 1234567 & 7654321 combined: £Z

Minus charges to be removed: £500.50

Minus payments already made: £X+Y

Equals: -£A

 

 

I would also like my telephone number removed from your records as I refuse to correspond to Rossendales in any way aside from via letter.

 

Should I fail to receive both written confirmation that my account is now settled in addition to a cheque for £A I will have no choice but to begin legal action against Rossendales and will also be filing a Form 4 against Mr. Bailiff #1, Mr. Bailiff#2 & Mr. Bailiff#3 for adding fraudulent charges against a liability order.

 

Please note that a similar letter has also been sent to Hounslow Council, and will also be sent to my Local Government Ombudsman as well as the Association of Civil Enforcement Agencies and the Certificated Bailiffs Association should you not comply with the actions in the paragraph above within 30 days.

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

 

 

Arrogant Duck

 

 

*Please also note that I am not signing this letter as I do not want my signature to be forged upon any of your documents.

Edited October 18, 2010 by Arrogant Duck

[outlawla]

I would assume that a professional debt collection company like yourselves would have the facilities to investigate information like this on a same or next day basis with the DVLA.

 

Here's an email I received from the DVLA in December 2009, it might confirm your assumption:

 

Good Afternoon Mr Outlawla

 

I can confirm that Rossendales Bailiffs do get information via an approved Conditional Access they can make enquiries either manually which can take up to 10 days to have the information returned to them.

 

Rossendales can also get information electronically from the DVLA if the enquiry is made before 4.30pm, the application would be processed over night and the inforamation is returned early the next day, if the file misses the 4.30pm cut off time then the request would be processed the following day.

 

Regards

 

Xxxxxx

 

Xxxxxx Xxxxxx

V R E/Complaints

D4

Tel xxxxxx

Fax xxxxxx

xxxxxx@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

Edited October 18, 2010 by outlawla

[hallowitch]

30 days is far to long give them 14 days

[Arrogant Duck]

30 days is far to long give them 14 days

 

I was mulling over the amount of time I should give them for a while, but I landed on 30 days because it gives them ample notice seeing as my next step is to file a Form 4.

[Arrogant Duck]

I've made amendments to the letter prior to sending it...

 

 

Scummingdales

Wavell House

Helmshore

Rossendale

Lancashire

BB4 4NB

 

 

Client Ref: *******

Account Numbers: 1234567 & 7654321

 

 

Dear Bureaucratic ******,

 

In reference to your letter dated ## October 2010.

 

I have some major discrepancies with the breakdown of the above accounts.

 

Firstly, I challenge the fact that your bailiff, Mr. Bailiff#1 was chasing two separate accounts, yet two sets of visit fees had been added. As Bailiff’s fees are set by statute in The Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) Regulations 1992, if a bailiff is collecting on more than one liability order, they can only charge one set of visit charges.

 

Therefore, both liability orders should be added together and the levy should be worked out on the total amount.

 

This brings me to my next disagreement. On the 29th February 2009, your breakdown advises that your bailiff, Mr. Bailiff#2 attended my property and completed a levy on goods therein. Mr. Bailiff#2 DID NOT ENTER MY PROPERTY VIA PEACEFUL ENTRY OR OTHERWISE AND I DID NOT RECEIVE OR SIGN A WALKING POSSESSION AGREEMENT OR RECEIVE A FORM 7. Neither did I receive any correspondence which would make me aware of any charges which had been added on this occasion. Therefore, the levy fee of £29.00, van attendance fee of £160.00 and “waiting time” fee of £80.00 are all invalid AND deceptive under the Fraud Act 2006 and should be removed from my account at once.

 

I called Mr. Bailiff#2 and was advised to pay £X by the end of the week, which I did. However, if I was aware of these charges I am now challenging I would never have entered into any verbal agreement with your bailiff and would have certainly voiced my complaint sooner.

It was only after I paid £Y on 1st September 2009 that I had discovered earlier correspondence of my account(s) advising that the balance was a combined amount of £X+Y>Z I wrote letters on two occasions asking for breakdowns, but had not received anything until I wrote another letter on 30 September 2010, which in turn you responded to. I have only noticed that I sent both my earlier letters to your previous address in Rawtenstall. Perhaps this is why you claim to have not received them.

 

In reference to charges added to account 7654321 and extra charges added. Your letter states that your bailiff, Mr. Bailiff#3 attended and levied on a vehicle at my property, incurring fees of £29.00 for the levy itself and additional attendance fee of £160.00. I would like to strenuously object to these charges as I DO NOT OWN A VEHICLE AND NEVER HAVE. I would assume that a professional debt collection company like yourselves would have the facilities to investigate information like this on a same or next day basis with the DVLA. The set of fees for this visit should be removed from my account at once as they unashamedly contravene with the Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) Regulations 1992.

Once again, I would have challenged these set of charges immediately but as I did not receive notice of distress from your bailiff I couldn’t. Perhaps, this is because he had a habit of leaving confidential letters in a communal foyer.

It doesn’t surprise me that your bailiff is denying such breaches of the Data Protection Act, but I can provide proof of another debtors credit card details being left on a note addressed to me if you wish?

 

I am also aware that there is no legislation for a transaction fee under the Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) regulations 1992. As this is another non-prescribed fee I expect these to be removed from my account also.

 

Bearing in mind that the following charges breach the Fraud Act 2006, I look forward to receiving a letter from you confirming that my account is now settled in addition to a cheque for my overpayment:

 

Charges to be removed:

1 x First Visit Fee dd/mm/yy: £24.50

1 x Second Visit Fee dd/mm/yy: £18.00

2 x Levy Fees dated dd/mm/yy & dd/mm/yy: £58.00

2 x Van Attendance Fees dated dd/mm/yy & dd/mm/yy: £320.00

1 x Waiting Time: £80.00

2 x Transaction Fee: £1.60

Sub-total: £502.10

 

I have worked out my overpayment charge to be the amount of £A. This based on:

Accounts 1234567 & 7654321 combined: £ZZ

Minus charges to be removed: £502.10

Minus payments already made: £X+Y

Equals: -£A

 

 

I would also like my telephone number removed from your records as I refuse to correspond to Rossendales in any way aside from via letter.

 

Should I fail to receive both written confirmation that my account is now settled in addition to a cheque for £A I will have no choice but to begin legal action against Rossendales and will also be filing a Form 4 against Mr. Bailiff #1, Mr. Bailiff#2 & Mr. Bailiff#3 for adding fraudulent charges against a liability order.

 

Please note that a similar letter has also been sent to Hounslow Council, and will also be sent to my Local Government Ombudsman as well as the Association of Civil Enforcement Agencies and the Certificated Bailiffs Association should you not comply with the actions in the paragraph above within 14 days.

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

 

 

Arrogant Duck

 

 

*Please also note that I am not signing this letter as I do not want my signature to be forged upon any of your documents.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

I also e-mailed my council with an attachment of the letter above and stated that if I did not receive the information I require within 14 days, I will be starting legal action against Rossendales and will be naming my council as co-defendants.

[fork-it]

Thats rather a long letter, I would have condensed that to three lines. Just pay the council tax, plus the £24.50 statutory bailiffs fee minus the £10 sar fee. If they dont accept then pay the council direct and let the bailiff sue you for his fee.

[Arrogant Duck]

Thats rather a long letter, I would have condensed that to three lines. Just pay the council tax, plus the £24.50 statutory bailiffs fee minus the £10 sar fee. If they dont accept then pay the council direct and let the bailiff sue you for his fee.

 

That isn't a very helpful suggestion considering I'm in financial hardship, have been blatantly overcharged a significant sum and am being constantly bothered by phone calls & knocks at the door!

[fork-it]

Then I apologise, I admit its not helpful.

 

Give me your command and it shall be done. (providing its legal1)

[Arrogant Duck]

Does anybody have a good template which would help when I write to the LGO, ACEA & CBA?

[fork-it]

I wouldnt waste time and energy complaining to ACEA and CBA, they only pay lip service to run complainants down in the hope you will "get over it" and move on. I dont think theres a template as such for this.

 

You have a right to ask the LGO to intervene, but first, you need to write to the council telling what you want them to do, and say why.

 

Your letter must be very brief and factual, quote the amount on the liability order and make an offer to repay it at a rate you can afford, even if thats only £5 a week. I wouldnt take too much notice of all those bailiffs fees, just make a written complaint the bailiff made a false representation as the amount of fees he claimed from you. The law only provides £24.50 visitation fee. Disregard 2nd vists unless the bailiff has proven it was made and his list of other fees and terms.

 

Ask the council to accept your offer to pay and take the account back into town hall administration. If the council is unable or unwilling to do this then ask they clearly mark the top of their reasons letter with the words FINAL RESOLUTION and you will ask the Local Government Ombudsman to Intervene. Only then you can escalate your complaint to the LGO. You also have a right to ask the LGO to award you compensation for the council's bailiff attempting to defraud you with his fees.

 

When writing to the council and LGO, always enlose a copy of the bailiffs list of fees. Its very good evidence he is trying to cheat you of money by pretending he is entitled to charge you them.

[Arrogant Duck]

Been two weeks since I wrote to Rossenfrauds and still no reply. Funny that, considering when I asked for a breakdown of my account they replied within a few days. Looks like they're burying their heads in the sand because I'm challenging their excessive, fraudulent fees. ****!

[ploddertom]

I assume you sent it by email and hard copy via Royal Mail Signed For service.

 

PT

[Arrogant Duck]

I assume you sent it by email and hard copy via Royal Mail Signed For service.

 

PT

 

 

I sent it registered.

[ploddertom]

In that case sent them a reminder by email.

 

PT

[Arrogant Duck]

I'm thinking about sending the letter again, only this time addressed to the CEO.

[ploddertom]

You are of course sending copies of everything to the Council to be kept on your file in case you have a disagreement with their Contractors, for whom they are absolutely liable.

 

PT

[Arrogant Duck]

The last e-mail I sent the council had the heading "Formal Complaint" and I attached the letter I sent to Rossendales. No reply from Council either.

[Arrogant Duck]

I finally got a reply, they are asking that I need to prove that the vehicle they levied upon isn't mine, rather than the other way around. This company are a joke!

[ploddertom]

Have you read this

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?262730-Has-a-bailiff-quot-levied-quot-upon-a-car-that-is-NOT-owned-by-you-...-LOCAL-GOVERNMENT-OMBUDSMAN-S-Report-!!!!

 

PT

[ploddertom]

I finally got a reply, they are asking that I need to prove that the vehicle they levied upon isn't mine, rather than the other way around. This company are a joke!

 

Sounds to me as if they are being deliberately obstructive & evasive. Time now to get on to the Council and remind them they are 100% liable for the actions of their Contractors, inform them if they don't sort this out within 7 days you will have no option but to file the following at the local Magistrates Court where the Council will be named as Defendant.

 

"Mr Jo Blogs

1, High Street

Anytown

Post Code.

 

The Chief Clerk

xxxx Magistrates Court

 

Date:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Council Ref: xxxxxx

 

I am writing to request that you issue a Summons against xxxxxxx Council by virtue of Regulation 46 Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regs 1992 as a matter of urgency.

 

 

I am aggrieved by the levy carried out by Mr Smith of ABC Certificated Bailiffs on (enter date) for the following reason:

 

* The Bailiff visited my premises and he has provided a Notice of Seizure of Goods & Inventory advising me that he has levied against a vehicle that was outside/on the drive of my home.

* This vehicle is not owned by me. I do not know the owner of the vehicle and it would appear that the Bailiff has assumed that this is my car because it was parked close to my home.

* The Bailiff in seizing this vehicle, has charged me a levy fee of £50 together with an enforcement fee of £150 and I am advised that unless I pay the amount of the Laibility Order of £xxx together with the charges associated with this levy, that the Bailiff will be attending at my property to remove this vehicle to satisfy my Council Tax arrears and in addition I will also be liable for further charges for "attending to remove" and I could also be in position of being personally liable to the owner of the vehicle.

* I have written to the Bailiff Company and the local authority concerning this levy but my complaints have been ignored.

 

I trust that this information will be sufficient and please do not hesitate to contact me if you require any further information.

Yours faithfully"

 

PT

[Arrogant Duck]

Have you read this

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?262730-Has-a-bailiff-quot-levied-quot-upon-a-car-that-is-NOT-owned-by-you-...-LOCAL-GOVERNMENT-OMBUDSMAN-S-Report-!!!!

 

PT

 

 

Yeah, read it, but have been advised to exhaust all other avenues before complaining to the LGO.

[seanamarts]

If your letters are being ignored send another reminder, give it ten days then get straight on to the Ombudsman

[Arrogant Duck]

Just received another letter from these bunch of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

 

They claim the onus is on me to prove that both the car they levied on does not belong to me as well as proving that a bailiff did not enter my property to conduct a levy on good therein. Surely this is unprecedented garbage!

 

They also state in writing that they are unaware of any part of the Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) Regulations 1992 or subsequent amendment thereof which states that when a bailiff attends a property in respect of multiple Liability Orders that only one set of fees should be charged (even though visits took place on the same date, time, etc.)

 

In addition to the above, they are also unwilling to waive the two admin fees they added because I paid by debit card, stating that as I agreed to this at the time of the transaction.

 

I really have had enough now... Time to take this bunch of charlatans to court!!

Edited November 30, 2010 by IdaInFife
the swear filter is there for a reason