Found Marston bailiff in my front room RE: sons speeding fine!!

[trebormoinet]

What is the best way without costs to inform a debt collection agency my son does not live at my address and prevent further visits to my home address.

 

My son does not live with me and the only connection to my address is he used it once as a care of address to have his NI number sent.

 

Woke up to find the bailiff stood in my living demanding monies for an unpaid motoring fine, was totally unexpected so my doors were not locked....they are now... any ways, my son was at my home at the time of the visit but gave a false name.

 

Right or wrong I told the bailiff my son did not live at this address and had no property at this address and therefore he had no right to be in my property and used my body to direct him out of my living room, there was some resistance on his part but eventually I had moved him to my front door.

 

He then said he was calling police as i had assaulted him by touching him but after 10 mins apparently trying to get through he said he couldn't be bothered and left in a huff.

 

Would a simple email suffice or will I have to pay for a statutory declaration ?

[dx100uk]

who was in your living room?

a DCA is NOT A BAILIFF

 

 

dx

[Bazooka Boo]

Yes WHO was in your front room? What company?

[trebormoinet]

I think I probably got my terminology mixed up,he could have been a baliff, this was in relation to a court fine for speeding charges,the debt collector was on his own wearing body armour and camera strapped to his chest, he was alone and from Marstons with a warrent to take control of goods.

[dx100uk]

Re titled and moved to bailiff forum

 

I would expect your last sentence is the way to go

 

I'll let the experts comment further,......

[Bailiff Advice]

Before getting to the very late stage of a bailiff actually attending your address there should have been a summons followed by two letters from the court ( a Notice of Fine/Collection Order) followed by a final document called a Further Steps Notice. Before the visit from Marston's, your son should have received a Notice of Enforcement from Marston Group. Bailiff fees at this stage would have been limited to £75. Did your son get these letters and if so, did he make any payments or contact Marston Holdings or the court?

 

Unfortunately, it is cases such as yours that lead to enforcement company taking little notice when parents and partners claim that their son or partner does not live at the address. It may be that the enforcement agent believed that your son was somebody else. You were very fortunate.

 

What is the reason for you wanting a Statutory Declaration?

[trebormoinet]

Thank you for the info, my son did receive some letters at my home address but he just trashed them,he says he has never spoke to anyone, the fines are supposedly due to the new owner of his car he sold who apparently broke the speed limit before the driver details were changed at DVLA but after it was sold, so that something he needs to sort out.

 

It may be that the enforcement agent believed that your son was somebody else. You were very fortunate.

Would it have made any difference if he did not believe my son ? I presumed they were only after monies or goods rather than bodies ?

 

What is the reason for you wanting a Statutory Declaration?

Well I am not sure I do that is why I asked if a simple email would suffice, from what I have read a statutory declaration seems to hold more weight than just my say so though I do not understand why in the presence of a solicitor it should but it does so it seems.

[trebormoinet]

Re titled and moved to bailiff forum

 

I would expect your last sentence is the way to go

 

I'll let the experts comment further,......

Thank you.

[Bailiff Advice]

Thank you for the info, my son did receive some letters at my home address but he just trashed them,he says he has never spoke to anyone, the fines are supposedly due to the new owner of his car he sold who apparently broke the speed limit before the driver details were changed at DVLA but after it was sold, so that something he needs to sort out.

 

 

Would it have made any difference if he did not believe my son ? I presumed they were only after monies or goods rather than bodies ?

 

 

Well I am not sure I do that is why I asked if a simple email would suffice, from what I have read a statutory declaration seems to hold more weight than just my say so though I do not understand why in the presence of a solicitor it should but it does so it seems.

 

I really am sorry. I posted my above answer when I was on a train journey last night and I also made a second post following your reply but for some reason, it didn't appear on the thread.

 

In most cases, where a fine has been issued in error (so to speak), the individual can contact the magistrate court to make a Statutory Declaration. In this case, your son could have approached the court with evidence of the date that he sold his car and the fine would very likely have been cancelled. Unfortunately, the regulation state that such an application must be made within 21 days of becoming aware of the fine. Given that your son trashed the letters from the court, he would not be able to swear on oath that he has only known about the fine in the past 21 days.

 

If the bailiff knew that it was your son who was in the property, then he could have approached him for payment or indeed searched your home looking for items owned by him.

 

Does your son own another car? If so, it is at risk of being seized.

[trebormoinet]

I really am sorry. I posted my above answer when I was on a train journey last night and I also made a second post following your reply but for some reason, it didn't appear on the thread.

 

In most cases, where a fine has been issued in error (so to speak), the individual can contact the magistrate court to make a Statutory Declaration. In this case, your son could have approached the court with evidence of the date that he sold his car and the fine would very likely have been cancelled. Unfortunately, the regulation state that such an application must be made within 21 days of becoming aware of the fine. Given that your son trashed the letters from the court, he would not be able to swear on oath that he has only known about the fine in the past 21 days.

 

If the bailiff knew that it was your son who was in the property, then he could have approached him for payment or indeed searched your home looking for items owned by him.

 

Does your son own another car? If so, it is at risk of being seized.

 

No he does not own a car and has no assets, I have passed on your info and hopefully he will tackle it but you can lead a horse to water and all that...my fingers are crossed.

 

As far as I know he could ask the court to lower the fine if he supplied a breakdown of his finances which are non existent as he sofa surfs and does not claim any benefits, his only income is what he makes doing odd jobs.

 

In relation to my own predicament is it the bailiffs I inform or the courts he does not live at my address to prevent further visits, and would a email / phone call suffice or would I require something more such as a statutory declaration.

[Bailiff Advice]

 

In relation to my own predicament is it the bailiffs I inform or the courts he does not live at my address to prevent further visits, and would a email / phone call suffice or would I require something more such as a statutory declaration.

 

The problem that you will face is that despite stating that your son does not live at your address, he did happen to be at the property on the very day of the bailiff attendance.

 

Secondly, it is unfortunately the case, that there are various internet sites which have latched onto a money making scheme offering to draft Statutory Declarations for parents/girlfriends/partners etc to claim that all goods in the premises belong to the parent (girlfriend/partner etc). This is very unfortunate because, prior to 2014 (when the bailiff regulations were overhauled), most companies would be willing to consider these stat decs. That is no longer the position.

 

You may care to note that this subject was also brought up by the Local Government Ombudsman in a fairly recent decision:

 

A debtor had complained that he had sent a Statutory Declaration to the bailiff claiming that he did not own any goods on the premises and that accordingly, bailiff enforcement should have ceased (which it didn't).

 

The Ombudsman's view is that the enforcement agent has a duty to attend the property and search for goods on behalf of the creditor and that it is for the enforcement agent to determine whether goods belong to the debtor or not.

[trebormoinet]

The Ombudsman's view is that the enforcement agent has a duty to attend the property and search for goods on behalf of the creditor and that it is for the enforcement agent to determine whether goods belong to the debtor or not.

To think that courts can allow innocent parties be harassed unless a average joe believes otherwise is just plain wrong, thanks for the advice I guess it is a case of sit it out till the next visit and inform the deaf ears my son has no connection / goods at my address.

[Bailiff Advice]

To think that courts can allow innocent parties be harassed unless a average joe believes otherwise is just plain wrong, thanks for the advice I guess it is a case of sit it out till the next visit and inform the deaf ears my son has no connection / goods at my address.

 

The government take the collection of unpaid court fines very seriously (and in fact, there are two trials currently ongoing).

 

Unlike council tax debts, the courts are more than willing to take payment of the fine from benefits (at a rate of just a few pounds a week) or alternatively, will accept a payment arrangement (minimum payment of £5 per week). If a payment has defaulted, the courts provide a final chance to pay by issuing a Further Steps Notice.

 

If somebody fails to make payment after a Further Steps Notice is issued, then the government's opinion is that the person has no intention of paying. Accordingly, a warrant of control will be issued for the purpose of 'taking control of goods (hence the name of the regulations; The Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013). The enforcement agents role is to search for goods belonging to the debtor.

 

If a debtor is 18 years old and has never worked, then common sense alone would tell the bailiff that it would be impossible for that person to own the household items and asking the parents to provide evidence by way of receipts, will lead to a complaint to the enforcement company (which I have done on numerous occasions).

 

On the other hand, if the debtor is in his 30's or 40's the position is not so clear at all. For example (and I have had many such incidences), a son or daughter may move back to their parents home (perhaps after a relationship has broken down or a property has sold) and they have brought with them, large screen TV's, leather sofas and expensive white goods.