Jump to content


Debtor given 12 months suspended prison sentence after threatening bailiffs with knives and a fake gun.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2749 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

The following is a short extract from a press release that featured on SCOOP yesterday regarding the trial of a debtor (Danny Williamson) who threatened bailiffs with knives and an imitation gun when they attended his property seeking payment of £1,100 for a fine relating to alleged traffic offences.

 

From the report, it would seem that the debtor had claimed that he had not known of the debt. Bailiffs stated that they would be taking control of his vehicle.

 

He was finally arrested at gunpoint by armed police.

 

Judge Ian Graham handed Mr Williamson a 12 month prison sentence at Basildon Crown Court yesterday suspended for 18 months, and ordered him to pay £520 in court costs.

 

Further details can be read here:

 

http://www.basildonstandard.co.uk/news/14875264.Grandad_grabs_a_fake_gun_to_scare_away_two_bailiffs/

 

 

http://www.scoop.it/t/lacef-news

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seemed to be remarkably unrepentant.

 

I find it hard to believe, on the facts as presented that he was unaware of the fine. Given the volume of statutory notices which would have been sent before the enforcement visit.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

The comments are interesting to say the least PT

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I am shocked at his comments. They certainly contradict what was said in court.

 

From the comments in court, the impression given was that the gun was a toy that his grandchildren play with. From his recent comments AFTER his trial, I would say that he is not being altogether honest:

 

“I got the gun because it is better than a knife. A knife can only cut you.

 

“They didn’t know the gun was an imitation, but that is the whole point. It looks realistic

 

PS: This 'imitation' gun was not one that you would buy in 'Toy's R Us' either. He paid £125 for it !!! I would hardy describe it as a toy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He is stated as being 55 years of age and has 3 grandchildren. Given his age, I would be very surprised indeed if any of the grandchildren are over the age of 10. His choice of toys for these young children is utterly breathtaking:

 

He went upstairs to fetch the £125 replica gun he bought for this three grandchildren to play with.
Link to post
Share on other sites

One can only assume that following yesterdays story of his time in Court followed by his contradictory story today that the powers that be have also read was has been printed. The question therefore has to be will they do anything about it? The chances are that as this is in a newspaper then the story may not be as we see it.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem that the fine relates to a speeding fine and he claims that he did not know about.

 

I say this because he has commented that he is attending the Magistrates Court next week to 'appeal' the offence. Clearly this is nothing more than an appointment for a Statutory Declaration. A very common and everyday application.

 

This is a very silly comment from him:

 

“If I’m found guilty next week they might lock me up".
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...