Tweet
Hi there,
I'm new to this forum and need some 'factual' help please...
My daughter had an Attendance Notice to Control Goods put through MY door, (as she lives in my spare room at present) on 6 August.
She had been negotiating with Rundles via email regarding a PCN that had a missed payment on it by a couple of days and which was halfway through being paid off to the council.
She then received a Notice of Enforcement from Rundles with £75 outstanding plus the Compliance Fee of £75.
During the email negotiations she asked Rundles for a payment plan as she couldn't afford to pay it all in full as she is only in receipt of JSA at the moment (in fact, at the time, she wasn't getting any money at all, so had no income, as the JobCentre had signed her off in error, since then she has had to make a Rapid Reclaim which she is now waiting for).
Rundles insisted that she pay a short-term repayment of £50 per month over 3 months. She said she couldn't afford this and could they reduce it to £30 per month. They said no. She managed to find the £50 from family and paid what she thought was the FIRST instalment.
A few days later, she got a letter from Rundles saying that the payment plan had been set up and the FIRST instalment was due on 31 July, so she assumed she had already paid that first one and this was confirmation of the payment plan they agreed.
On 6 August, the Attendance Notice was put through the door with the outstanding amount of £335 (£100 remaining on the debt and Rundles £235 fee), asking her to phone the Enforcement Agent immediately otherwise they will return and complete action whether she was present or not.
She left a message and they called the next day threatening to come round and collect either money or goods.
She said she had neither the money or the goods to take, but he still said he'd be round.
She immediately phoned their office and explained that the letter said the FIRST payment was due on 31 July and that she believed it had already been paid.
They said that this was not the first instalment, but instead was just to set up the payment plan and that the NEXT instalment was now overdue, hence the visit. She argued that she had been mislead, but this didn't help matters.
She then got her relatives to pay the original debt balance of £100, i.e. not the bailiffs visit fee. She paid it on their online system, which now obviously showed an outstanding balance equivalent to the bailiffs visit fee of £235. She emailed Rundles immediately and told them this had been paid.
I am lead to believe from what I have read, that only some of the original debt would have some of that £100 payment apportioned to it, and some will go towards the Rundles fees... ? Which means that the original debt probably hasn't been fully paid...?
Having read up a bit about the situation and 'vulnerability', she emailed Rundles to explain that she suffers from depression and that this situation was exacerbating her condition, and also that she was only on JSA, all of which is used up with living and paying other bills and debts, so she has nothing to offer, including only living in a spare room in her mother's house with no assets, savings, means of credit, more generosity of family or cars to sell, etc.
She also mentioned that I was in a vulnerable state as well having suffered a brain haemorrhage some years ago and am now under the hospital consultant for further pressure in my head and that the threat of an impending bailiff banging my door down and potentially ransacking my house for saleable goods is really having a detrimental effect on my health too! Plus I am also on an extremely low income.
So, ignoring every other fact, Rundles responded by sending a letter giving her 30 days to produce evidence of this depression by sending doctors certificates, etc., which she is now doing.
So, my question is, having read all of the above - in REALITY where does she stand....? Any advice please?
Obviously, all doors and windows will remain locked, but if they do not accept this vulnerability condition, how will they go about getting the remaining £235, if at all, are they actually owed it being as they've done nothing but put a letter through the door, and as THEY are the creditors, how does this relate to sending the debt back to the creditors if they cannot gain access or seize anything...?
Plus, has the 7 days notice been applied considering the matter was already with Rundles anyway, if the letter was put through the door 6 days after they claim the payment should have been made....?
Many thanks in advance for your help!
I'm new to this forum and need some 'factual' help please...
My daughter had an Attendance Notice to Control Goods put through MY door, (as she lives in my spare room at present) on 6 August.
She had been negotiating with Rundles via email regarding a PCN that had a missed payment on it by a couple of days and which was halfway through being paid off to the council.
She then received a Notice of Enforcement from Rundles with £75 outstanding plus the Compliance Fee of £75.
During the email negotiations she asked Rundles for a payment plan as she couldn't afford to pay it all in full as she is only in receipt of JSA at the moment (in fact, at the time, she wasn't getting any money at all, so had no income, as the JobCentre had signed her off in error, since then she has had to make a Rapid Reclaim which she is now waiting for).
Rundles insisted that she pay a short-term repayment of £50 per month over 3 months. She said she couldn't afford this and could they reduce it to £30 per month. They said no. She managed to find the £50 from family and paid what she thought was the FIRST instalment.
A few days later, she got a letter from Rundles saying that the payment plan had been set up and the FIRST instalment was due on 31 July, so she assumed she had already paid that first one and this was confirmation of the payment plan they agreed.
On 6 August, the Attendance Notice was put through the door with the outstanding amount of £335 (£100 remaining on the debt and Rundles £235 fee), asking her to phone the Enforcement Agent immediately otherwise they will return and complete action whether she was present or not.
She left a message and they called the next day threatening to come round and collect either money or goods.
She said she had neither the money or the goods to take, but he still said he'd be round.
She immediately phoned their office and explained that the letter said the FIRST payment was due on 31 July and that she believed it had already been paid.
They said that this was not the first instalment, but instead was just to set up the payment plan and that the NEXT instalment was now overdue, hence the visit. She argued that she had been mislead, but this didn't help matters.
She then got her relatives to pay the original debt balance of £100, i.e. not the bailiffs visit fee. She paid it on their online system, which now obviously showed an outstanding balance equivalent to the bailiffs visit fee of £235. She emailed Rundles immediately and told them this had been paid.
I am lead to believe from what I have read, that only some of the original debt would have some of that £100 payment apportioned to it, and some will go towards the Rundles fees... ? Which means that the original debt probably hasn't been fully paid...?
Having read up a bit about the situation and 'vulnerability', she emailed Rundles to explain that she suffers from depression and that this situation was exacerbating her condition, and also that she was only on JSA, all of which is used up with living and paying other bills and debts, so she has nothing to offer, including only living in a spare room in her mother's house with no assets, savings, means of credit, more generosity of family or cars to sell, etc.
She also mentioned that I was in a vulnerable state as well having suffered a brain haemorrhage some years ago and am now under the hospital consultant for further pressure in my head and that the threat of an impending bailiff banging my door down and potentially ransacking my house for saleable goods is really having a detrimental effect on my health too! Plus I am also on an extremely low income.
So, ignoring every other fact, Rundles responded by sending a letter giving her 30 days to produce evidence of this depression by sending doctors certificates, etc., which she is now doing.
So, my question is, having read all of the above - in REALITY where does she stand....? Any advice please?
Obviously, all doors and windows will remain locked, but if they do not accept this vulnerability condition, how will they go about getting the remaining £235, if at all, are they actually owed it being as they've done nothing but put a letter through the door, and as THEY are the creditors, how does this relate to sending the debt back to the creditors if they cannot gain access or seize anything...?
Plus, has the 7 days notice been applied considering the matter was already with Rundles anyway, if the letter was put through the door 6 days after they claim the payment should have been made....?
Many thanks in advance for your help!
The Black rat (Rattus rattus) is a common (hence the accusation of being Pleb) long-tailed rodent of the genus Rattus (rats) in the subfamily Murinae (murine rodents). The species originated in tropical Asia and spread through the Near East in Roman times (another thing that we ought to thanks the Romans for, besides roads, aqueducts and public toilets) before reaching Europe by the 1st century and spreading with Europeans across the world.
Comment