Bailiff enforcement:Debtor 'steals' vehicle from new owner after it had been sold by bailiff company.

[unclebulgaria67]

"Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object."

 

Think this is apt !

[Peterbard]

Bitter!

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]62760[/ATTACH]

 

Thaks no. Sugar lump ?

[Bailiff Advice]

These cases are not widely reported in media. It just happens that someone well known to this site is involved and it is felt necessary for there to be a response.

 

I suspect that the other thread was removed because CAG was being dragged into another online spat between various parties.

 

And of course we are forgetting that the case was not reported here at all until after the MK had posted his version of events. We most not forget as well that discussing legal cases is something that we have done on here for a long time. Take for instance the recent case of the Reverend Paul Nicolson.

 

Unfortunately, in light of information received yesterday (thanks to Fair Parking) it would seem that once again, this case is not all it seems!!!

 

FP does not wish to comment himself (as he is recovering from a road accident) but he is very angry indeed at suggestions that he had represented Mr Johnson and worse still, had invoiced him £1,700.

 

FP did not represent Mr Johnson at all and neither did he invoice him. Instead, he assisted the individual motor trader who 'apparently' purchased his car.

 

FP has also sent me a copy of the invoice that he sent to the motor trader in 2011. It is not for the amount of £1,700. It is for a figure significantly less. This begs the question as to how it is possible for Mr Johnson to be in receipt of an invoice from FP addressed to him for £1,700.

 

Yet again, this is yet another shabby case.

 

 

PS: This thread has gone way off topic and I cannot see any merit in making any further posts.

[unclebulgaria67]

I just question whether CAG is the place to correct inaccuracies on another internet forum. I am not sure those that started CAG wanted it to become a pitch for battles between various parties to take place.

 

Hence why i suggest that threads just contain basic information and not get into the personal stuff. If you are a member of the public, you just want to read facts about cases and what a Judge had decided. The other stuff is unlikely to interest them and might actually put them off coming to CAG for advice. If they have an enforcement problem, they might be worried that their case becomes the subject of the next forum battle.

 

If people are being libelled on another internet forum, that is up to them to take forward in the appropriate way.

[Peterbard]

This is a discussion thread(it is at the top). Advice is elsewhere. In addition, it is the facts, as you put it, that we are trying to ascertain.

[Bailiff Advice]

I just question whether CAG is the place to correct inaccuracies on another internet forum. I am not sure those that started CAG wanted it to become a pitch for battles between various parties to take place.

 

Hence why i suggest that threads just contain basic information.

 

In fact, what you have said above is what I was considering last night. A thread should be started providing simple guidance for anyone considering issuing legal claim. I will put something together.

[ploddertom]

Looking at things that go on on different Forums I would make the following observations.

 

On a well known FMOTL site you have to lose the name, use 3 letter processes and more. Unless I was barking it is one to forget. The Doggy site is very quiet these days and it can take several days to get a response - so if urgent not really of much use. The other one is referred to above, certainly would make me think twice because if your face don't fit you suffer a tirade of abuse - would therefore think they chase more away than they attract.