Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: A Baliffs Access Rights ( and removal of )

  • Share
  • Thread Tools
  • Display
  1. #1
    Lula's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    2
    Mentions
    0 Post(s)

    Default A Baliffs Access Rights ( and removal of )

    A debtor can remove the right of implied access by displaying a not at the entrance
    This was endorsed by Lord Justice Donaldson in the case of Lambert v Roberts ( 1981 ) 72 Cr App R 223 - and placing such a notice is akin to a closed door but it also prevents a baliff entering the garden or driveway
    , Knx v Anderton (1983) crim LR 115 or R v Leroy Roberts ( 2003) EWCA Crim 2753
    Vaughan v McKenzie ( 1969) 1 QB 557 If the debtor strikes a baliff over the head with a full milk bottle after making a forced entry , the debtor is not guilty of assuult because the baliff was there illegally , likewise
    R v Tucker at hove Trial Centre Crown Court , December 2012 the debtor gives the baliff a good slap .
    I have more stated cases if you are interested .

  2. #2
    FlamingParrot's Avatar

    Inactive



    Joined
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    9,940
    Mentions
    141 Post(s)

    Default Re: A Baliffs Access Rights ( and removal of )

    Ah the infamous NOROIA!

    How about Thornton v Rossendales?

    Furthermore, the Judge said that despite what the claimant had written in the notice regarding contractual terms and conditions, it was not a contract as there was no consideration from either party involved. The claimant could not simply rely on Rossendales accepting the terms of the notice purely because they carried on with the lawful act of levying distress.

    The Judge felt that the claimant was confusing the law of contract with the tort of trespass – which was a different element of law altogether. It was stated by Judge Pugh that it is a common misconception that trespassers can be automatically prosecuted when in fact they cannot. Instead, an aggrieved individual would have to demonstrate that there had been a loss as a result of damagescaused by the defendant’s alleged trespass.
    In his final summary, the Judge made it clear to the claimant that he had been ill-advised in making his claim to the county court to try to prevent the bailiff from carrying out what he was perfectly legally entitled to do.

    From the claimants’ response it was clear that he had been influenced by information on the internet when preparing his case.

    Not surprisingly, the court claim failed. Judge Pugh dismissed the penalty of £750 and ordered the claimant to pay Rossendale’s legal costs.
    :mmph:

  3. #3
    Milo's Avatar

    Inactive



    Joined
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    855
    Mentions
    72 Post(s)

    Default Re: A Baliffs Access Rights ( and removal of )

    Quote Originally Posted by Lula View Post
    A debtor can remove the right of implied access by displaying a not at the entrance

    This was endorsed by Lord Justice Donaldson in the case of Lambert v Roberts ( 1981 ) 72 Cr App R 223 - and placing such a notice is akin to a closed door but it also prevents a baliff entering the garden or driveway,
    Knox v Anderton (1983) crim LR 115 or R v Leroy Roberts ( 2003) EWCA Crim 2753 .
    In fact, if you read the judgment for yourself you will find that Lord Justice Donaldson did not even mention the word 'bailiff' in his judgment at all.

    The notice that you have copied the above information from is hopelessy inaccurate and is universally ignored for that reason.

    Furthermore the new regulations are very specific indeed where they state that a bailiff will NOT be deemed a trespasser.

  4. #4
    Kati's Avatar

    LB Team Member



    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    11,715
    Mentions
    1208 Post(s)

    Default Re: A Baliffs Access Rights ( and removal of )

    I'm afraid I have to agree ... a NOIRIA might work for bbc staff, but for a court appointed bailiff
    Debt is like any other trap, easy enough to get into, but hard enough to get out of.

    It doesn't matter where your journey begins, so long as you begin it...

    recte agens confido

    ~~~~~

    Any advice I provide is given without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

    I can be emailed if you need my help loading pictures/documents to your thread. My email address is [email protected]
    But please include a link to your thread so I know who you are.

    Specialist advice can be sought via our sister site JustBeagle

Similar Threads

  1. Removal of Implied Right of Access notices.....Bailiffs advised by CIVEA to IGNORE
    By Milo in forum Bailiff Help ( Enforcement Officers / Agents )
    Replies: 14
    : 25th August 2015, 23:02:PM
  2. Replies: 2
    : 19th September 2014, 23:37:PM
  3. TENANCY - Want to exercise my rights to "quiet enjoyment" and refuse landlord access
    By Laurieloo2 in forum Housing, Property and Neighbours
    Replies: 2
    : 21st April 2014, 19:08:PM
  4. Access rights / where to start
    By help-me in forum Family Law & Relationships
    Replies: 9
    : 8th July 2012, 02:21:AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Contact Us



© Celame (UK) Ltd 2017
LegalBeagles® are DPA Registered No. ZA158014
LegalBeagles® is the trading name of CELAME (UK) LIMITED ( 09220332 )
Registered Address: 25 Moorgate, London, England, EC2R 6AY
VAT registration number 206 9740 02
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.3 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Celame (UK) Ltd Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2017 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

To find out more about managing your money and getting free advice, visit the Money Advice Service,an independent service set up to help people manage their money.

TOP