Local Government Ombudsman Report: Issued in the "public interest" ........Bailiff fees

[outlawla]

The formula seems to be;

 

Initial letter of christian name, followed by a full stop, followed by surname then @lgo.org.uk

 

For example:

 

a.seex@lgo.org.uk

 

 

So if you know who you want to contact you're in.

 

However, I think this is its general enquiries address: enquiries@lgo.org.uk

 

 

EDIT: A suggestion.

 

Anyone affected by the fees detailed in the report, maybe inform the LGO with a view to getting a refund.

Edited July 27, 2012 by outlawla

[hallowitch]

Does anyone know the email address for LGO?

 

 

http://www.lgo.org.uk/contactus/

[1Loretta]

Thank you

[Leagle Egal]

Interesting - but ..various local authorities, (LA), having taken over traffic problems from the police are consistently breaking the law, and illegally employing private bailiffs to harass and intimidate alleged offenders. Cardiff and Manchester are two that I know of.

It goes like this: you are alleged to have committed an offence such as parking or obstruction: you receive a fines notice: you write back and appeal. This appeal is ignored and the fine automatically doubles. After the short statutory period has expired, you papers together with possibly hundreds, if not thousands, of like matters are despatched to the Northampton Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) where they are automatically 'rubber stamped' and returned to your LA. The TEC, although it uses the heading of Northampton County Court, is NOT a Court, does not have any legally qualified personnel, and is simply a clerical administrative centre for processing the paperwork. Therefore there is NO right of appeal since there is no-one who could handle that appeal. Your paperwork is returned to the issuing authority who now add on an even larger sum to the "fine", and send the paperwork back to you with the threat of bailiff action.

Now, firstly, how did the LA obtain your address details? Illegally from the DVLA who are only permitted to supply this information to Police and the Security Services. Also, note that the DVLA is only able to supply the identity of the registered user of the vehicle, NOT the owner. They do not have that information, and the two are not necessarily the same.

Secondly, when the LA passes that information on to a third party, in this case the contracted bailiffs, they are breaching the Data Protection Act which prohibits them supplying this information to contracted (third party) bailiffs for any purpose other than the pursuit of council tax arrears.

So: at this point, you have been ajudged guilty of an offence which you perhaps did not commit: you have been refused the right of a Court Hearing or of Appeal: you have been at least triply penalised because you denied the charges against you, and the matter has been passed to bailiffs who will attend.

Note at this point, the bailiffs are acting unlawfully since they are unwarranted. The LA does not have the power to grant Warrant to the bailiffs, but relies upon the non-existent authority of the TEC. Hence the bailiffs are unwarranted and are guilty of various offences - personation since they are impersonating warranted bailiffs when they are not, threatening behaviour, extortion, demanding money with menaces and harassment.

Interestingly, although they add their 'charges' to every demand, before those 'charges' can have legal validity they must be Proven in a Court of Law, and are otherwise non- enforceable.

That's part of it! It has more ramifications, but I think that Dr. Jane Martin should carry the ball from here - it is, after all her job, and we do not have the Napoleonic Code operating in Britain.

Just remember: bailiffs do not have right of entry into your house without a warrant issue by a Court of Law, the TEC is not one. Furthermore, Bailiffs do not have the right to drill your locks, break your door down or do any of the forced entry things they pretend they can do. They can only enter if you let them - or leave your door open. They are not permitted to enter via a window either. The third party "bailiffs" employed by the LAs are nothing but a bunch of lying bullying extorters, and are seriously in need of being controlled - and in many cases - jailed.

Edited July 28, 2012 by Leagle Egal
grammatical error

[brassnecked]

Interesting - but ..various local authorities, (LA), having taken over traffic problems from the police are consistently breaking the law, and illegally employing private bailiffs to harass and intimidate alleged offenders. Cardiff and Manchester are two that I know of.

It goes like this: you are alleged to have committed an offence such as parking or obstruction: you receive a fines notice: you write back and appeal. This appeal is ignored and the fine automatically doubles. After the short statutory period has expired, you papers together with possibly hundreds, if not thousands, of like matters are despatched to the Northampton Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) where they are automatically 'rubber stamped' and returned to your LA. The TEC, although it uses the heading of Northampton County Court, is NOT a Court, does not have any legally qualified personnel, and is simply a clerical administrative centre for processing the paperwork. Therefore there is NO right of appeal since there is no-one who could handle that appeal. Your paperwork is returned to the issuing authority who now add on an even larger sum to the "fine", and send the paperwork back to you with the threat of bailiff action.

Now, firstly, how did the LA obtain your address details? Illegally from the DVLA who are only permitted to supply this information to Police and the Security Services. Also, note that the DVLA is only able to supply the identity of the registered user of the vehicle, NOT the owner. They do not have that information, and the two are not necessarily the same.

Secondly, when the LA passes that information on to a third party, in this case the contracted bailiffs, they are breaching the Data Protection Act which prohibits them supplying this information to contracted (third party) bailiffs for any purpose other than the pursuit of council tax arrears.

So: at this point, you have been ajudged guilty of an offence which you perhaps did not commit: you have been refused the right of a Court Hearing or of Appeal: you have been at least triply penalised because you denied the charges against you, and the matter has been passed to bailiffs who will attend.

Note at this point, the bailiffs are acting unlawfully since they are unwarranted. The LA does not have the power to grant Warrant to the bailiffs, but relies upon the non-existent authority of the TEC. Hence the bailiffs are unwarranted and are guilty of various offences - personation since they are impersonating warranted bailiffs when they are not, threatening behaviour, extortion, demanding money with menaces and harassment.

Interestingly, although they add their 'charges' to every demand, before those 'charges' can have legal validity they must be Proven in a Court of Law, and are otherwise non- enforceable.

That's part of it! It has more ramifications, but I think that Dr. Jane Martin should carry the ball from here - it is, after all her job, and we do not have the Napoleonic Code operating in Britain.

Just remember: bailiffs do not have right of entry into your house without a warrant issue by a Court of Law, the TEC is not one. Furthermore, Bailiffs do not have the right to drill your locks, break your door down or do any of the forced entry things they pretend they can do. They can only enter if you let them - or leave your door open. They are not permitted to enter via a window either. The third party "bailiffs" employed by the LAs are nothing but a bunch of lying bullying extorters, and are seriously in need of being controlled - and in many cases - jailed.

 

The whole area of "de-criminalised" enforcement needs a thorough examination, that is why Northampton TEC is regarded as a Star Chamber, or Kangaroo Court, as it isn't really a court as you point out.

 

In fact Enforcement in general is out of kilter, as if someone is unable to pay, as they have no income left after paying subsistence, how are they going to discharge a debt that is increasing exponentially with enforcement fees added, when they cannot afford the original debt, or repayments that a scummy bailiff who totally ignores vulnerability issues, demands say £140 per week on a debt of £1500, when the debtors income is £120 in benefits? They then keep visiting and add dodgy fees so the £1500 becomes £2500.

[old bill]

The only way bailiff crime is going to be effectively tackled is by police officers being given training in bailiff law or, better still, the establishment of specialist teams of police officers. trained in bailiff and civil enforcement law, who can attend bailiff incidents and leave front-line officers to deal with more urgent calls. The way bailiff incidents are dealt with by front-line police officers is in need of urgent revision with the burden of proof of compliance with the law being laid at the door of the bailiff and police officers forcibly removing bailiffs, who have gained forcible entry against the conditions of a warrant, and seizing and impounding their Citroen Berlingo vans, ANPR vans and tow trucks (if the company owns any). This would certainly curb the excesses and abuses of firms like JBW and Marstons, who are among, if not, the worst offenders for non-compliance with the law.

[brassnecked]

The only way bailiff crime is going to be effectively tackled is by police officers being given training in bailiff law or, better still, the establishment of specialist teams of police officers. trained in bailiff and civil enforcement law, who can attend bailiff incidents and leave front-line officers to deal with more urgent calls. The way bailiff incidents are dealt with by front-line police officers is in need of urgent revision with the burden of proof of compliance with the law being laid at the door of the bailiff and police officers forcibly removing bailiffs, who have gained forcible entry against the conditions of a warrant, and seizing and impounding their Citroen Berlingo vans, ANPR vans and tow trucks (if the company owns any). This would certainly curb the excesses and abuses of firms like JBW and Marstons, who are among, if not, the worst offenders for non-compliance with the law.

 

Agreed, if coppers were trained in bailiff law, there wouldn't be enough room in the cells for them to lock 'em all up to await questioning.

[old bill]

Once you'd nicked a few certificated scrotes and they had been weighed-off by the courts, word would soon get around that the police were cracking down.

 

If anyone wants a laugh as a JBW bailiff finds he can't seize someone's car, go to the link below. It also shows JBW bailiffs claiming to be court bailiffs, something that is totally illegal.

 

[brassnecked]

Can't the MET feel his collar for the offence? the evidence is all out there:lol:

[Leagle Egal]

The reason I became involved in this was someone getting bailiff charges of nearly £3000 over a disputed parking ticket. Since his vehicle is classed as PLG - private, light goods, - he is entitled to use a normal loading bay for the purposes of collecting or delivering things. There is no statutory definition relating to the size or the weight of package being delivered or collected. Therefore stopping for five minutes to buy a stamp and post a letter, unless otherwise proscribed, falls into the category of delivering. As it happened the traffic oik took no notice of the massive box the bloke was loading into the back of his vehicle and gave him a ticket - unlawfully - there and then.

After I was invited to intervene, they have backed off for more than four months, but have not agreed in writing that they were at fault, since if they did, I would proceed against them for the stress and strain they caused the poor victim. I now persistently park in a loading bay when I go to buy a newspaper, and am waiting............

[old bill]

Can't the MET feel his collar for the offence? the evidence is all out there:lol:

 

Problem is, BN, you've got to catch the buggers doing it at the time of doing it. There is nothing to stop the Met inviting the bailiffs to a police station for a "meaningful" chat about their actions and showing them the video of them doing it by way of illustration before giving them a warning and kicking their arses out of the station.

[sweetjane]

Well done LL!!! just caught up with this. x