Chandlers massive charges!

[beer guzzler]

You could always call his direct line if there's no response: 01793 464661

 

Number saved! Thank you

[hallowitch]

to much information will wheedle it down and post back later (could be about midnight watching born to kill and sorting something else )

[beer guzzler]

to much information will wheedle it down and post back later (could be about midnight watching born to kill and sorting something else )

 

Thanks Hallowitch but I already pushed send

[outlawla]

Are these any use?

 

Swindon Borough Council's Use of Bailiffs

and

Appendix 1 Bailiff Code of Conduct.pdf

[hallowitch]

Thanks Hallowitch but I already pushed send

 

 

that ok It would have said much the same with less words

 

£292.50 is a vast amount of money no matter how you look at it I wonder if the council state the amount they can charge for an attendance to remove fee in the contact or service level agreement they have with chandlers I cant believe its that amount

[beer guzzler]

that ok It would have said much the same with less words

 

£292.50 is a vast amount of money no matter how you look at it I wonder if the council state the amount they can charge for an attendance to remove fee in the contact or service level agreement they have with chandlers I cant believe its that amount

I too would be shocked if they had agreed to it!

[outlawla]

A warning:

 

Swindon Borough Council have appointed Capita to run its Revenues service and Capita appoint the bailiffs utilised.

 

 

 

....I wonder if the council state the amount they can charge for an attendance to remove fee in the contact or service level agreement they have with chandlers I cant believe its that amount

 

 

A Freedom of Information request made to Swindon council revealed in March 2013

that

"The Council has not agreed any fees with any of the Bailiff companies it uses for Council Tax."

[tomtubby]

It is complaints such as this that really do need to be brought to the attention of the Local Government Ombudsman. However, before getting to this stage it is important that you write to the council to ascertain WHY they are permitting their agents to charge what can only be described as the most excessive "attending to remove" fee that we have probably ever seen on the public forum .

 

This once again highlights the worrying case of Capita and accordingly, this type of complain really does need to be brought to the attention of the local Councillors.

 

An ATR fee may only be charged if a levy had previosuly been made. The PURPOSE of the visit according to the statutory regulations is to LEVY upon goods. Therefore, a question should be raised as to HOW AND WHY the bailiff was INTENDING to remove !!!

 

This is simply dreadful and should be made public.

Edited September 20, 2013 by tomtubby

[beer guzzler]

I have recieved this response from the council:

I have received your email. We will investigate the matters you have raised and respond in due course.

We will ask the bailiffs to withhold any proceedings whilst we investigate and in the meantime ask that you make payments direct to the Council for your outstanding Council Tax (whilst this is investigated). During this period we will advise the bailiff of any payment made direct to the Council.

Yours sincerely

Head of Revenues & Benefits

Swindon Borough Council

I will be replying with this:

Many thanks with your very prompt reply at this most stressfull of times.

 

I look forward to the outcome of your investigation. With the outcome of your investigation I would also ask that you explain why the council are allowing their Bailiffs to charge such excessive fees as a £292.50 "attending to remove fee".

 

Kind regards

[beer guzzler]

I also had another response fron Chandlers. After their first reponse I told them that no matter what they say it does not excuse their obligation to supply the information I requested, so they said this:

Thank you for your email,

The bailiff has now returned your account back into the office so we will now be able to assist.

The certificated bailiff Mr G***** attended the property for the first time on the 24/08/2013 with the intention to levy distress, as no response was received a letter was left and a fee of £24.50 was incurred on the account.

On the 02/09/2013 the Certificated Bailiff Mr N*** attended with the intention to levy distress for a 2nd visit, after receiving no response a letter was left and a fee of £18.00 was incurred.

All fees are applied to the account lawfully as per the schedule 3,5 Regulations 14/39/45 charges connected with distress, a copy of this is attached.

Each bailiff has their certificate renewed every two years, all of Chandlers Bailiffs were Certificated at Bromley County Court :Court House, College Road , Bromley , Kent BR1 3PX , Phone: 020 8290 9620

Regards

Chandlers Limited

[ploddertom]

Does this now mean they have dropped their stupid ATR charge which no doubt was an error that very rarely happens - in other words they have been caught out.

[beer guzzler]

Does this now mean they have dropped their stupid ATR charge which no doubt was an error that very rarely happens - in other words they have been caught out.

 

I have asked them to clarify it by sending this:

 

Thank you for your response.

 

After reading your email several times the only part that corresponds is the visit taking place on the 24th August.

 

I have no record of a visit on the 2nd September or letter that you say was delivered so therefore no record of the £18 fee. Although I do have records of Mr G***** calling on the 16th and 17th September at 18:20 and 20:00 respectivly.

 

I do also have a notice of distress dated 24th of august that has a levy fee for £57 and an attendance fee of £292.50. In your email you do not mention this.

 

Could you clarify these fees and and the further visits from your Bailiff.

 

In my email I also asked the date of Certification of any Bailiff that visited. Could you please supply this information?

 

Regards

 

Lets see what they say, but I have a feeling that as the council have probably informed them of the investigation and formal complaint I will probably not hear from them again.

[hallowitch]

I have asked them to clarify it by sending this:

 

Thank you for your response.

 

After reading your email several times the only part that corresponds is the visit taking place on the 24th August.

 

I have no record of a visit on the 2nd September or letter that you say was delivered so therefore no record of the £18 fee. Although I do have records of Mr G***** calling on the 16th and 17th September at 18:20 and 20:00 respectivly.

 

I do also have a notice of distress dated 24th of august that has a levy fee for £57 and an attendance fee of £292.50. In your email you do not mention this.

 

Could you clarify these fees and and the further visits from your Bailiff.

 

In my email I also asked the date of Certification of any Bailiff that visited. Could you please supply this information?

 

Regards

 

Lets see what they say, but I have a feeling that as the council have probably informed them of the investigation and formal complaint I will probably not hear from them again.

 

Good reply it will be interesting to see what they say about the levy and attendance fee as far as im concerned simply removing the fee is not good enough

[ploddertom]

Good reply it will be interesting to see what they say about the levy and attendance fee as far as im concerned simply removing the fee is not good enough

 

But it will no doubt be one of those rare errors that only crops up when the moon is pink & covered in marshmallow.

[beer guzzler]

Well it turns out the moon is quite often pink for chandlers and covered in marshmallow! This got me thinking, I don't want to sound like a repeat offender here but in the last 4 years me and the wife have both been made redundant twice and this in a round about way has led to previous dealings with chandlers. 3 times in fact all for smaller amounts couple of hundred quid here and there. So as I dont like throwing financial paperwork out I dug the old ones out! And hey, all 3 had letters of distress with levy fee and attendance fees on same visit!

[ploddertom]

Why not ask them to give you a breakdown for each account and see if they have listed any unlawful charges that you can claim back. We can help sort fact from fiction.

[beer guzzler]

Why not ask them to give you a breakdown for each account and see if they have listed any unlawful charges that you can claim back. We can help sort fact from fiction.

 

Well as there is definitley both charges on the same visit on all 3, I was gonna wait and see if my complaint is upheld, if so I will demand them back under same grounds with compensation!

[hallowitch]

Well as there is definitley both charges on the same visit on all 3, I was gonna wait and see if my complaint is upheld, if so I will demand them back under same grounds with compensation!

 

looks like you due some money back how much were the fees were charged and what goods did they levy

 

I would keep this to yourself for the time being and when they come back and tell it was one of them rare errors that occur I then hit them with this it certainly shows that this is common practice for chandlers bailiffs and has been for several years

[tomtubby]

Can I make a suggestion.

 

Send an email back to the council to advise them that given the seriousness of this complaint you would like the council to ensure that the complaint is registered as a Stage One Formal Complaint.

[beer guzzler]

Can I make a suggestion.

 

Send an email back to the council to advise them that given the seriousness of this complaint you would like the council to ensure that the complaint is registered as a Stage One Formal Complaint.

 

Thankyou, I shall do that now.

[beer guzzler]

looks like you due some money back how much were the fees were charged and what goods did they levy

 

I would keep this to yourself for the time being and when they come back and tell it was one of them rare errors that occur I then hit them with this it certainly shows that this is common practice for chandlers bailiffs and has been for several years

 

So here they are, as I said there was 3

1: Notice of distress

Due: 523.40

Levy fee: 42.00

Walking possession fee : 12.00

Attendance / removal costs: 24.50

Goods listed:

Flat screen hitachi TV

1 x DVD player

1 x wooden tv stand

1 x black leather corner sofa

1 x black leather armchair

 

2: notice of distress

Amount due: 307.05

Levy fee: 33.00

Walking possession fee: 12.00

Attendance / removal costs: 24.50

Goods listed: Green volvo V70 Reg **** ***

 

3: notice of distress

Amount due: 217.95

Levy fee: 31.00

Walking possession fee: 12.00

Attendance / removal costs: 24.50

Goods listed:

1 x silver microwave

1 x bosch dishwasher

1 x Creda washing machine

1 x Breville kettle

 

I think after what I have learnt here so far it would be quicker to point out what on this list is correct rather than what is wrong!

[tomtubby]

To be really honest I cannot find much wrong about either of the cases but there is ONE glaring point and this is that in NONE of these cases has the bailiff charged an "attending to remove" fee !!!!

 

What dates were the above three cases and which enforcement company was involved in each case?

[beer guzzler]

To be really honest I cannot find much wrong about either of the cases but there is ONE glaring point and this is that in NONE of these cases has the bailiff charged an "attending to remove" fee !!!!

 

What dates were the above three cases and which enforcement company was involved in each case?

 

OH. so what is the attendance / removal costs on each one of the three? is there a difference?

[beer guzzler]

Chandlers all 3.

[tomtubby]

Roughly what dates?