Bristol & Sutor Over Council Tax

[dx100uk]

"From:

My Name

My Address

.

To:

Acme Bailiff Co

Bailiff House

.

Ref: Account No: 123456

.

Dear Sir

.

With reference to the above account, Can you please provide me with a breakdown of the charges.

.

This includes:

a - the time & date of any Bailiff action that incurred a Fee.

b - the reason for the fee.

c - the name(s) of the Bailiff(s) that attended on each occasion a Fee was charged.

d - the name(s) of the Court(s) the Bailiff(s) was/were certificated .

e - the date of the Certification.

.

This is not a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act S7 1998 so does not incur a fee of £10. You are

obliged to provide this information.

.

I require this information within 14 days.

.

Yours faithfully

.

Ripped off customer"

[leeward30]

"From:

My Name

My Address

.

To:

Acme Bailiff Co

Bailiff House

.

Ref: Account No: 123456

.

Dear Sir

.

With reference to the above account, Can you please provide me with a breakdown of the charges.

.

This includes:

a - the time & date of any Bailiff action that incurred a Fee.

b - the reason for the fee.

c - the name(s) of the Bailiff(s) that attended on each occasion a Fee was charged.

d - the name(s) of the Court(s) the Bailiff(s) was/were certificated .

e - the date of the Certification.

.

This is not a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act S7 1998 so does not incur a fee of £10. You are

obliged to provide this information.

.

I require this information within 14 days.

.

Yours faithfully

.

Ripped off customer"

 

 

Thanks for your reply. I will an email to them.

 

Should I (cc) in the council as well and let B & S know I have?

 

Well the levy had no makes or models listed and they listed a hp sofa, so does that make it invalid?

[dx100uk]

no just email busted & stupid.

 

it is for the bailiff to ascertain if goods cover the debt & his fees & if they are on HP [ ie BELONG to the debtor or not].

 

I suspect, this would make the levy invalid yes,

[leeward30]

no just email busted & stupid.

 

it is for the bailiff to ascertain if goods cover the debt & his fees & if they are on HP [ ie BELONG to the debtor or not].

 

I suspect, this would make the levy invalid yes,

 

 

Ok I will email them and let you know the response. Thanks

[tomtubby]

With regards to the 'van attendance' fee please see my reply to a poster on another thread:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419353-JTR-Collections-and-Brighton-Council-Tax(1-Viewing)-nbsp

[leeward30]

With regards to the 'van attendance' fee please see my reply to a poster on another thread:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419353-JTR-Collections-and-Brighton-Council-Tax(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

I read what you put on another thread and I have requested my fees to be broken down for me in 14 days.

 

In an email I received saying there was van and a driver and because it was 7:30 am and a loud knock a few people witnessed it being one person and a vericle not even big enough to remove goods. In the letter they change what they said in the email, so my point is they first said it was for a van, driver and balliff and in the letter they say the balliff could of called on a contractor to remove goods and that would of been added to your fees.

 

 

 

Email

 

We note your comments regarding Van/Abortive removal fee,

 

however, the Van/Abortive Removal Fee is charged under schedule 5,

located on the back of the Notice of seizureicon of Goods left with the debtor at the time of the levy.

 

It is charged for an attendance with a vehicle, with a view to removing goods (where, following the levy, goods are not removed).

 

We are directed by the schedule to charge reasonable costs which is not the same as actual costs

and the amount charged is a reasonable cost for two of our staff (one bailifficon and one driver)

to attend your property with a view to the removal of goods.

 

As they are not actual costs, a breakdown can not be provided.

 

As a company we do however have set charges of van fees,

and our clients are aware of those charges.

 

The charge has been correctly and legally incurred in line with details above and will not be removed from the account.

 

Letter

 

You mention the vehicle the balliff attended in to remove goods was not suffcient, however there is no law to say what type of vehicle the balliff must attend in. Had the balliff chosen to remove goods he could have called for a contractor to assit him, the cost of which would of been added to your account. As your wife stated she would try and raise the funds (My wife said I am getting daughter ready for school and the balliff went away and said you hacve until Monday) the balliff agreed to not remove the goods and allow her time. You are liable to pay the outstanding fee and this will not be removed.

 

 

Correct me if I am wrong they are saying they can turn up in a small car charging £230 to remove goods, but then think duh this car is not big enough and then charge extra fees to get a van and a contractor to remove them. I am right in what they are trying to say?

[The Starving Taxpayer]

My advice would be to concentrate your efforts on reducing fees rather than wasting your time trying to get them quashed.

 

 

Look at if from a neutral point of view (which is what a County Court judge, Magistrate or case manager for the LGO would be)

 

 

1. You freely signed a WPA

2. You never once questioned this

3. You subsequently received a visit under Head C & have now begun to claim the bailiff lied to you. You never mentioned this before.

 

 

If it was that easy to get levies removed, everyone would claim the same.

 

 

I would concentrate on attacking the Head C charge. How can £230 be deemed reasonable costs when another vehicle would have been required?

 

 

Go through the complaints procedure & get it to the LGO. They will definitely get up to half of the Head C fee removed. In addition, it seems that B&S are charging Head A & Head B fees for the same visit. This is another £24.50 the LGO will get removed.

[tomtubby]

Starving Taxpapyer.

 

Good response above....there is little that I can add (apart from making sure that you address the letter as Stage One: Formal Complaint).

[leeward30]

Starving Taxpapyer.

 

Good response above....there is little that I can add (apart from making sure that you address the letter as Stage One: Formal Complaint).

 

I have done that and I am waiting for a reply.

 

Thanks for all your help though and I will post my response once I get it.

[leeward30]

My advice would be to concentrate your efforts on reducing fees rather than wasting your time trying to get them quashed.

 

 

Look at if from a neutral point of view (which is what a County Court judge, Magistrate or case manager for the LGO would be)

 

 

1. You freely signed a WPA

2. You never once questioned this

3. You subsequently received a visit under Head C & have now begun to claim the bailiff lied to you. You never mentioned this before.

 

 

If it was that easy to get levies removed, everyone would claim the same.

 

 

I would concentrate on attacking the Head C charge. How can £230 be deemed reasonable costs when another vehicle would have been required?

 

 

Go through the complaints procedure & get it to the LGO. They will definitely get up to half of the Head C fee removed. In addition, it seems that B&S are charging Head A & Head B fees for the same visit. This is another £24.50 the LGO will get removed.

 

 

I think the balliff alone coming to our house was scary enough when I knew nothing about them and I would not know if he acted correctly or not and only these forms and after speaking to certain people did they say about hp on a levy and other items.

 

The levy got made when my wife had her money stopped for 6 weeks because she resigned from her job and there is a crown court case going on and we had to sell stuff to live and could not keep up with payments on everything.

It seems unfair to me my wife got her money stopped and because we coulc not pay a bill we get an extra £230 on it for one man and a letter.

[The Starving Taxpayer]

Unfortunately, this is often the case-Bailiffs lie & trick their way through the levy process because of peoples ignorance. I know of people who have contacted B&S when in your situation & had payments reduced to £3.50 a week. If you do not contact them then surely you appreciate a visit is on the cards?

 

 

Life has a nasty habit of bringing us these situations when we can least afford them-Its happened to me on many occasions. If I thought you could get the levy removed, I would tell you. My advice is to go for getting the fees reduced. Others have claimed the levy is invalid & you may wish to go down that path, you now have more than one option.

[tomtubby]

On 6th April the entire bailiff regulations that have been in force for council tax and parking charge notices since 1992 and 1993 and for Magistrate Court fines will drastically change and there can be little doubt that debtors will be in for a dreadful shock. The fee scale will alter alarmingly and it is without doubt that there will be a huge increase in complaints to local authorities and enforcement companies.

 

Undoubtedly there will be legal challenges and as I understand it, these will be welcomed by many if for no other reason that to have a precedent in law.

 

It is sadly the case that at present the new regulations are fast resembling 'swiss cheese' given that there are so many holes that will provide 'wriggle room' for enforcement companies.

 

In 'the background' there are many discussions and meetings taking place with the Ministry of Justice and there is an awful lot to resolve.

 

Coming back to this particular thread, when making a complaint about the 'van attendance fee' you MUST address you complaint in the first instance to the local authority and mark the letter as Stage One Formal Complaint. If you are not satisfied with the outcome you can ask for the complaint to be reviewed by a different person as a Stage Two Complaint. If you are still not satisfied, then the LGO is the correct route.

 

Seeking 'redress' by issuing legal proceedings is not recommended (unless of course you are assisted by a solicitor) and furthermore, contrary to 'advise' on some websites courts can.....and do make orders that debtors be responsible to the other sides legal costs.

[leeward30]

The women at the council moved it to stage 2 without telling me, so I asked her to pass my review on to someone else becasue there was no notification it had been moved to stage 2 and I was not happy with the outcome of the compliant. I know it sounds silly, but it looks better for me if they are trying to get the complaint gone wihtout follwoing proper procedure.

 

I stated stage one and reminded her in an email and she said now we are on stage 2 and I sent back where is the email to show that.

 

No Reply

[brassnecked]

If they have done Stage 2 it is near the time to go to the LGO

[leeward30]

If they have done Stage 2 it is near the time to go to the LGO

 

I wil goto the LGO and are they allowed to move to stage 2 without even asking if you are happy with the outcome of stage 1 as I am waiting on B & S reply.

[leeward30]

On 6th April the entire bailiff regulations that have been in force for council tax and parking charge notices since 1992 and 1993 and for Magistrate Court fines will drastically change and there can be little doubt that debtors will be in for a dreadful shock. The fee scale will alter alarmingly and it is without doubt that there will be a huge increase in complaints to local authorities and enforcement companies.

 

Undoubtedly there will be legal challenges and as I understand it, these will be welcomed by many if for no other reason that to have a precedent in law.

 

It is sadly the case that at present the new regulations are fast resembling 'swiss cheese' given that there are so many holes that will provide 'wriggle room' for enforcement companies.

 

In 'the background' there are many discussions and meetings taking place with the Ministry of Justice and there is an awful lot to resolve.

 

Coming back to this particular thread, when making a complaint about the 'van attendance fee' you MUST address you complaint in the first instance to the local authority and mark the letter as Stage One Formal Complaint. If you are not satisfied with the outcome you can ask for the complaint to be reviewed by a different person as a Stage Two Complaint. If you are still not satisfied, then the LGO is the correct route.

 

Seeking 'redress' by issuing legal proceedings is not recommended (unless of course you are assisted by a solicitor) and furthermore, contrary to 'advise' on some websites courts can.....and do make orders that debtors be responsible to the other sides legal costs.

 

 

I got all my fees from B & S and the email was quite pleasant, not like the last one. I have a friend’s dad who was a local magistrate and only stopped when the court moved location and I had the pleasure of talking to him and he said pay direct with the council explain your situation and challenge the fees.

 

 

 

13/11/13 +46.00 +46.00 0.00 Levy Fee: 13/11/13

13/11/13 +12.00 +12.00 0.00 W/Poss Up To: 13/11/13

13/11/13 +24.50 +24.50 0.00 Redemption Fee (Head H): 13/11/13

28/02/14 +230.00 +230.00 0.00 Van/Abortive Removal Fees