Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

[Sonicbunny]

Hi all,

I'm posting this in some haste and hope I can get some advice before tomorrow.

This afternoon my partner received a visit from a bailiff representing a County Council. She lived in their area two years ago, and he claimed that her housemate there had not paid his Council Tax, could not be traced, and that therefore she was liable for the whole £680. She didn't allow him entry. He left a note threatening to return and remove goods if she does not contact him within 24 hours. The note was marked 'Enforcement Notice.'

She has received no prior communication at all about this debt from either the Council concerned, or the firm of Bailiffs (Ross & Roberts.) This visit came completely out of the blue.

Her only personal possession of significant value is an extremely expensive sewing machine which she uses professionally, and she would suffer financial hardship if it were taken. However, we don't know how we can prove this to the bailiff if we have to.

Furthermore, she suffers from clinical depression and anxiety, and this situation has caused her significant stress already.

The bailiff has said he will return at 10am tomorrow. We'd very much appreciate any quick advice you can give on dealing with him, in the short term, and with the council.

Many thanks in advance.

[ploddertom]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

Are you saying she moved without informing the Council? Woul the £680 be half the debt and assume she paid her share?

[bluebottle]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

Hi Sonicbunny,

What you have described is typical of Ross & Roberts bailiffs.

The new regulations that came into force in April 2014 require that an enforcement company must allow seven clear days from the day the person named on the notice receives it before the bailiff may make a formal visit. If this is the first communication, the bailiff is treading on thin ice.

When your partner was living at their previous address, what was the arrangement -

a. joint tenancy;
b. single tenancy with housemate as lodger; or
c. was it a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO)?

[Sonicbunny]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

Are you saying she moved without informing the Council? Woul the £680 be half the debt and assume she paid her share?

Thanks for the reply. She believed she'd paid all of it, but under the rental agreement I believe they were both jointly and separately liable for the whole amount. As far as informing the council about her move, I'm pretty sure she would have, but I'll check as soon as she's back from work.

She is unable to pay now, but quite happy to pay the amount on a longer timescale, had any prior notice been given, and to pursue the housemate through the courts for the money. Our first priority right now is to get the matter out of the hands of the bailiffs before anything is taken and any further damage is caused to her mental or financial wellbeing.

I believe that the bailiff is in breach of the Taking Control Of Goods Regulations 2013 by not giving her seven clear days' notice, but if this is true, I am uncertain how I can use this fact to delay the action or get the debt returned to the Council.

[PAWS]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

:bump2:Hi Sonicbunny, as you may need a quick answer I am going to bump this one up for you.

[ploddertom]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

The Council are only obliged to send any notices to the last known address as is the Bailiff. This is why I asked if she had advised them of moving, if so then she can limit the amount owing, otherwise she is going to have to provide some form of proof of when she moved. As for her vulnerability issues then she needs to provide proof of same and sent to both Enforcement Co & Council - it is not enough just to say she has these problems.

[Milo]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

You say that she has an expensive sewing machine. The only time that this would become an issue was if she allowed the bailiff entry into the property. Given your partners evident 'vulnerability' this is not to be recommended at all.

This visit from Ross & Roberts has almost certainly involved an 'enforcement fee' of £235 and unless the enforcement agent is able to actually remove goods (such as motor vehicle) he cannot charge anything further.

The matter of the initial notice is not a subject for today as it is likely that previous enforcement steps had been taken against the other address and I would suspect that this account may well have an element of the old regulations. Enquiries about this can be taken in the next day or so.

What is important for today is that your partner must not allow a bailiff to have entry into the property. She needs to stress that she has 'vulnerability' problems and that she can provide evidence to the company within the next 7 days. If she wishes she can make a payment proposal but she must not tell the bailiff a figure that she cannot afford. Best advice....is to tell him that she will respond by letter.

If evidence is provided it is likely that the £235 'enforcement fee' will be removed. Yesterday we had 5 cases where such fees were removed when 'vulnerability' had been proved (Jacobs, Marston Group and Bristow & Sutor).

Please post back with any queries.

[Milo]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

Hi Sonicbunny,

What you have described is typical of Ross & Roberts bailiffs.

The new regulations that came into force in April 2014 require that an enforcement company must allow seven clear days from the day the person named on the notice receives it before the bailiff may make a formal visit. If this is the first communication, the bailiff is treading on thin ice.

HI BB.

I was just wondering what you meant when you said about what this being 'typical of Ross & Roberts bailiffs'

The reason I ask if that from what I am reading all that has happended in this case is that a letter has been left by the bailiff.

It may be that the poster had written something more and amended the post.

[Kati]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

Hi all,

I'm posting this in some haste and hope I can get some advice before tomorrow.

This afternoon my partner received a visit from a bailiff representing a County Council. She lived in their area two years ago, and he claimed that her housemate there had not paid his Council Tax, could not be traced, and that therefore she was liable for the whole £680. She didn't allow him entry. He left a note threatening to return and remove goods if she does not contact him within 24 hours. The note was marked 'Enforcement Notice.'

She has received no prior communication at all about this debt from either the Council concerned, or the firm of Bailiffs (Ross & Roberts.) This visit came completely out of the blue.

Her only personal possession of significant value is an extremely expensive sewing machine which she uses professionally, and she would suffer financial hardship if it were taken. However, we don't know how we can prove this to the bailiff if we have to.

Furthermore, she suffers from clinical depression and anxiety, and this situation has caused her significant stress already.

The bailiff has said he will return at 10am tomorrow. We'd very much appreciate any quick advice you can give on dealing with him, in the short term, and with the council.

Many thanks in advance.

HI BB.

I was just wondering what you meant when you said about what this being 'typical of Ross & Roberts bailiffs'

The reason I ask if that from what I am reading all that has happended in this case is that a letter has been left by the bailiff.

It may be that the poster had written something more and amended the post.

I think (although I can't be sure) that it is the sections I've highlighted that made BB say what he did ... due to the fact that the NOI was delivered yesterday, and the bailiff saying he will return today (not giving 7 clear days notice )
K x

[bluebottle]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

Hi Milo,

Forgive me, but I only came out of hospital yesterday, where I've been on some pretty powerful stuff. However, I digress.

SB had posted an additional post which I did not pick up until this morning which puts things in a different light. However, before April, I can remember Ross & Roberts bailiffs engaging in some pretty nasty and unethical practices.

I'm going to send you a PM about something I have found out about Ross & Roberts which you may or may not know about.

[Milo]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

Hi Milo,

Forgive me, but I only came out of hospital yesterday, where I've been on some pretty powerful stuff. However, I digress.

SB had posted an additional post which I did not pick up until this morning which puts things in a different light. However, before April, I can remember Ross & Roberts bailiffs engaging in some pretty nasty and unethical practices.

I'm going to send you a PM about something I have found out about Ross & Roberts which you may or may not know about.

BB .
I am sorry to hear about your hospital stay. I wish you a very speedy recovery.

As many on here will know I have been assisting with bailiff enquiries for many years and on forums since 2007. I had no hesitation at one time in saying that Ross & Roberts were a very fair company to deal with but unfortunatly, a lot of changes took place when they were purchased by Capita . The rest is history !!

I am just putting the finishing touches to a new thread which is an update on how the new regs are working and I should have this completed this evening.

What is very clear indeed is that since the new regulations took effect on 6th April complaints about bailiffs have dropped considerably and complaints about the amount of fees charged are at the lowest that they have ever been.

The Ministry of Justice are keeping track on every complaint that may have been made to the County Court about a bailiff and this is important so as to ensure that complaints that may have been made are only about the "fitness" of the bailiff.

In the 6 months since the new regs took effect the LGO have received 50 complaints and yet....an astonishing two thirds of them had to be rejected given that the debtors had not been through the local authorities complaints procedure first.

There are still problems and the '7 clear days' is certainly one that is of serious concern and so too is the matter of the 'forms' etc.

I grant you that quite a few Individual bailiffs are not happy because of the restrictions with ANPR and the fixed fee of £235 is something that bailiffs enforcing unpaid PCN's do not like. In the past it was commonplace to see them trying to charge ATR and removal fees on the same visit and 'aborted removal fees' were the norm.

There is a 'review' of the regulations in three weeks time and I will of course be attending.

PS: I look forward to receiving your PM.

[bluebottle]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

BB .
I am sorry to hear about your hospital stay. I wish you a very speedy recovery.
Thank you for that.
As many on here will know I have been assisting with bailiff enquiries for many years and on forums since 2007. I had no hesitation at one time in saying that Ross & Roberts were a very fair company to deal with but unfortunatly, a lot of changes took place when they were purchased by Capita . The rest is history !!
I am not going to disagree with you about that. Capita needs investigating in all the areas it has spread it tentacles and, if necessary, the whole organisation should be closed down in the public interest.
I am just putting the finishing touches to a new thread which is an update on how the new regs are working and I should have this completed this evening.

What is very clear indeed is that since the new regulations took effect on 6th April complaints about bailiffs have dropped considerably and complaints about the amount of fees charged are at the lowest that they have ever been.
That is good news.
The Ministry of Justice are keeping track on every complaint that may have been made to the County Court about a bailiff and this is important so as to ensure that complaints that may have been made are only about the "fitness" of the bailiff.
Again, this is good news, but I can't help wondering why they did do this before.
In the 6 months since the new regs took effect the LGO have received 50 complaints and yet....an astonishing two thirds of them had to be rejected given that the debtors had not been through the local authorities complaints procedure first.
Have they been going to a certain website about dealing with bailiffs or FMOTL websites. I recently was in court, as a McKenzie Friend, when someone, in another case, started quoting FMOTL. The outcome was that they were royally stuffed, simply because they did not understand the basics of English Law and how the civil and criminal legal systems in England and Wales work.
There are still problems and the '7 clear days' is certainly one that is of serious concern and so too is the matter of the 'forms' etc.
I've noticed that.
I grant you that quite a few Individual bailiffs are not happy because of the restrictions with ANPR and the fixed fee of £235 is something that bailiffs enforcing unpaid PCN's do not like. In the past it was commonplace to see them trying to charge ATR and removal fees on the same visit and 'aborted removal fees' were the norm.
You will always get those who are disgruntled when abuses and excesses are clamped down on. I can remember from when I was in the police and a time-keeping abuse was uncovered at an MoD establishment, the MoD promptly introduced changes to prevent further abuse. There were a lot of disgruntled employees when the changes came in.
There is a 'review' of the regulations in three weeks time and I will of course be attending.

PS: I look forward to receiving your PM.

Responses in red text.

[PAWS]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

How did it go today Sonicbunny?

[Milo]

Re: Urgent advice needed for my vulnerable partner

Thanks for the reply. She believed she'd paid all of it, but under the rental agreement I believe they were both jointly and separately liable for the whole amount. As far as informing the council about her move, I'm pretty sure she would have, but I'll check as soon as she's back from work.

She is unable to pay now, but quite happy to pay the amount on a longer timescale, had any prior notice been given, and to pursue the housemate through the courts for the money. Our first priority right now is to get the matter out of the hands of the bailiffs before anything is taken and any further damage is caused to her mental or financial wellbeing.

I believe that the bailiff is in breach of the Taking Control Of Goods Regulations 2013 by not giving her seven clear days' notice, but if this is true, I am uncertain how I can use this fact to delay the action or get the debt returned to the Council.

Any update regarding this matter?