Urgent HCEO help needed

[Potterfan23]

Hello

Yesterday a HCEO arrived at my door. He was not registered with the relevant body but a reread yes of a HCEO that is.

I have been working abroad and the first thing I knew about this debt was the enforcement notice- which was charged at £90 despite both the creditor and HCE company being VAT registered.
Upon receiving the paperwork I called the HCE company to make a payment arrangement as per the request on the letter. I was told this would only be possible if. hCEo visited and did a financial assessment in person. I advised the telephone worker that I did not want a visit as this would entail further costs but they said without this no arrangement could be made as they’d been instructed by their client to collect full payment. I raised concerns that this wasn’t ethical and that they were trying to gain as much financial gain as they could from me by doing this. I immediately called the client and explained the situation. The company said they were happy to accept my repayment offer but it would need to be collected through the agent- they followed this up to me in writing via email.
I called the HCE company back , who had also received the email
Notification and again was told they could not accept this without a visit!!
Fast forward two days and the notice period had expired and an unregistered HCE company rep appears at my doorstep. Everybody was at work and he came face to face with an autistic family member who was very distressed as his carer had nipped to the shop and he was home alone. He was not let into the property and the HCE agent left a letter.
Despite being the first and only visit, the HCE rep added on both the first and second visit fees plus VAT .. which doubled the original balance! I then spoke to him on the telephone and he advised that I had until the end of this month to pay or he was coming to take goods. Again refusing to accept the payment plan already confirmed by the client!

I am obviously shocked at how he’s added all these fees and can not afford to pay the original debt, even less so now it’s doubled!
I cannot understand what part of the law allows them to add all these fees and why, despite the client giving written confirmation of acceptance of the payment plan they still came out? I’m also confused as to why they’ve added VaT to the enforcement fee when I understand the law does not permit them to do this!

Understandably I’m very worried that he’s going to return and add more fees! He’s also discussed getting a warrant to enter my property - which will cause no end of distress to my autistic family member.

Please can somebody advise how best to move forward with this and I’d possible answer the following:

1) can an agent not registered as a HCEO enforce this writ or act on behalf of someone who is?
2) Can the VAT be added in this instance?
3) Are the HCEO right to combine visit 1 and 2 fees after just one visit?
4) Are the HCEO able to get a warrant to gain entry to my property.
5) I went bankrupt 3 years ago and literally only own the clothes and shoes I have! Everything else belongs to my partner and my house is rented part furnished - how best do I prove this so that if they gain entry they don’t take goods that don’t belong to
Me?
6) Is there a way to challenge any of this through the courts and how would I do this?

Thanks so much for all your help and advice - the clock is ticking and I’m at a loss as to where I stand and what to do next .

[zeke]

Hello

Yesterday a HCEO arrived at my door. He was not registered with the relevant body but a reread yes of a HCEO that is.

I have been working abroad and the first thing I knew about this debt was the enforcement notice- which was charged at £90 despite both the creditor and HCE company being VAT registered.
Upon receiving the paperwork I called the HCE company to make a payment arrangement as per the request on the letter. I was told this would only be possible if. hCEo visited and did a financial assessment in person.

The true reason for making a visit is so he can charge enforcement stage fees.

You can apply to the court if you need more time to pay, and that wipes all the bailiffs fees if the application is granted.

I advised the telephone worker

STOP calling the bailiff company. They will wind you up.

that I did not want a visit as this would entail further costs but they said without this no arrangement could be made as they’d been instructed by their client to collect full payment. I raised concerns that this wasn’t ethical and that they were trying to gain as much financial gain as they could from me by doing this. I immediately called the client and explained the situation. The company said they were happy to accept my repayment offer but it would need to be collected through the agent- they followed this up to me in writing via email.
I called the HCE company back , who had also received the email
Notification and again was told they could not accept this without a visit!!

Fast forward two days and the notice period had expired and an unregistered HCE company rep appears at my doorstep.

An HCEO and an Enforcement agent are two different things. Search here for the enforcement agents name and see if he has a certificate. https://certificatedbailiffs.justice.gov.uk/

Everybody was at work and he came face to face with an autistic family member who was very distressed as his carer had nipped to the shop and he was home alone. He was not let into the property and the HCE agent left a letter.
Despite being the first and only visit, the HCE rep added on both the first and second visit fees plus VAT .. which doubled the original balance! I then spoke to him on the telephone and he advised that I had until the end of this month to pay or he was coming to take goods. Again refusing to accept the payment plan already confirmed by the client!

Apply to the court for a stay and a variation. I'll explain more on that in a moment.

I am obviously shocked at how he’s added all these fees and can not afford to pay the original debt, even less so now it’s doubled!
I cannot understand what part of the law allows them to add all these fees and why, despite the client giving written confirmation of acceptance of the payment plan they still came out? I’m also confused as to why they’ve added VaT to the enforcement fee when I understand the law does not permit them to do this!

There are cases involving bailiffs charging VAT on fees when the creditor reclaims the VAT as input tax. You apply for a Detailed assessment. More on that in a moment.

Understandably I’m very worried that he’s going to return and add more fees! He’s also discussed getting a warrant to enter my property -

The document saying about "Regulation 15" warrant of entry is a form of fraud. A regulation 15 warrant of entry only applied to premises the debtor keeps goods which is neither the address the debtor lives or works. Provision 15 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. It is the practice of HCE Group to make "Regulation 15" threats.

which will cause no end of distress to my autistic family member.

Please can somebody advise how best to move forward with this and I’d possible answer the following:

1) can an agent not registered as an HCEO enforce this writ or act on behalf of someone who is?

He cannot charge VAT on fees because HMRC Internal Manual VBNB41720 which states:

Judgment debtors pay the cost of sheriffs’ enforcement fees, the supplies are always to the creditors. VAT invoices for the services must be addressed and sent to the creditors. Any documents issued to debtors should make it clear that they are not VAT invoices


There are other HMRC documents what assert the same, and they must be exhibited in a detailed assessment application.

2) Can the VAT be added in this instance?

No, the creditor reclaims the VAT as input tax. Otherwise, the bailiff is bring paid the VAT twice.

3) Are the HCEO right to combine visit 1 and 2 fees after just one visit?

If the money is taken on the first visit, then no. otherwise, if the debt is unrecovered after the first attendance, the bailiff can apply the 2nd enforcement stage fee.

4) Are the HCEO able to get a warrant to gain entry to my property?

No, its a domestic property, and there is no provision to break entry to recover a High Court Writ. The document should be handed in online to Action Fraud. Paragraph 15 does not apply to domestic property. Only commercial premises.

5) I went bankrupt 3 years ago and literally only own the clothes and shoes I have! Everything else belongs to my partner and my house is rented part furnished - how best do I prove this so that if they gain entry they don’t take goods that don’t belong to
Me?

Bailiffs aren't interested in furniture and nick-nacks, they are worthless to them. At worst, the just unplug the TV from the wall or open drawers and indiscriminately toss the contents out to cause annoyance.

6) Is there a way to challenge any of this through the courts and how would I do this?

Its called a detailed assessment hearing, where you ask the court whether the fees are true and accurate. If you need more time to pay, apply for a stay and a variation, but you cannot get your solicitors' fees paid for any stay application in the High Court.

Always do a detailed assessment together with your stay application, that way, the enforcement power is stayed, and your solicitors' costs are paid by the bailiff company.

Thanks so much for all your help and advice - the clock is ticking and I’m at a loss as to where I stand and what to do next.

If you want me to give a definitive answer whether you qualify for a detailed assessment, please provide the following, and I'll do the arithmetic for you.



1. Judgment debt amount - of you are unsure, get a screenshot of a search result from https://www.trustonline.org.uk You cannot rely on bailiff documents being accurate.

2. DATE of judgment, that will be on the https://www.trustonline.org.uk screenshot.

3. Amount demanded by the bailiff, and the DATE - it will be on that "Regulation 15" threat document.

4. Any money already taken by the bailiff and on what date (you will need to show evidence of the flow of money)

5. Screenshot of the creditors' VAT registration status taken from https://vat-search.co.uk/



DO NOT upload screenshots to a forum post. You will need to exhibit them with your witness statement, so keep them safe.

If you can give the above facts then I'll tell you how much you have been overcharged, and you can start the process of applying for a stay of execution and a detailed assessment.

[Potterfan23]

Hello

Yesterday a HCEO arrived at my door. He was not registered with the relevant body but a reread yes of a HCEO that is.

I have been working abroad and the first thing I knew about this debt was the enforcement notice- which was charged at £90 despite both the creditor and HCE company being VAT registered.
Upon receiving the paperwork I called the HCE company to make a payment arrangement as per the request on the letter. I was told this would only be possible if. hCEo visited and did a financial assessment in person.

The true reason for making a visit is so he can charge enforcement stage fees.

You can apply to the court if you need more time to pay, and that wipes all the bailiffs fees if the application is granted.

I advised the telephone worker

STOP calling the bailiff company. They will wind you up.

that I did not want a visit as this would entail further costs but they said without this no arrangement could be made as they’d been instructed by their client to collect full payment. I raised concerns that this wasn’t ethical and that they were trying to gain as much financial gain as they could from me by doing this. I immediately called the client and explained the situation. The company said they were happy to accept my repayment offer but it would need to be collected through the agent- they followed this up to me in writing via email.
I called the HCE company back , who had also received the email
Notification and again was told they could not accept this without a visit!!

Fast forward two days and the notice period had expired and an unregistered HCE company rep appears at my doorstep.

An HCEO and an Enforcement agent are two different things. Search here for the enforcement agents name and see if he has a certificate. https://certificatedbailiffs.justice.gov.uk/

Everybody was at work and he came face to face with an autistic family member who was very distressed as his carer had nipped to the shop and he was home alone. He was not let into the property and the HCE agent left a letter.
Despite being the first and only visit, the HCE rep added on both the first and second visit fees plus VAT .. which doubled the original balance! I then spoke to him on the telephone and he advised that I had until the end of this month to pay or he was coming to take goods. Again refusing to accept the payment plan already confirmed by the client!

Apply to the court for a stay and a variation. I'll explain more on that in a moment.

I am obviously shocked at how he’s added all these fees and can not afford to pay the original debt, even less so now it’s doubled!
I cannot understand what part of the law allows them to add all these fees and why, despite the client giving written confirmation of acceptance of the payment plan they still came out? I’m also confused as to why they’ve added VaT to the enforcement fee when I understand the law does not permit them to do this!

There are cases involving bailiffs charging VAT on fees when the creditor reclaims the VAT as input tax. You apply for a Detailed assessment. More on that in a moment.

Understandably I’m very worried that he’s going to return and add more fees! He’s also discussed getting a warrant to enter my property -

The document saying about "Regulation 15" warrant of entry is a form of fraud. A regulation 15 warrant of entry only applied to premises the debtor keeps goods which is neither the address the debtor lives or works. Provision 15 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. It is the practice of HCE Group to make "Regulation 15" threats.

which will cause no end of distress to my autistic family member.

Please can somebody advise how best to move forward with this and I’d possible answer the following:

1) can an agent not registered as an HCEO enforce this writ or act on behalf of someone who is?

He cannot charge VAT on fees because HMRC Internal Manual VBNB41720 which states:

Judgment debtors pay the cost of sheriffs’ enforcement fees, the supplies are always to the creditors. VAT invoices for the services must be addressed and sent to the creditors. Any documents issued to debtors should make it clear that they are not VAT invoices


There are other HMRC documents what assert the same, and they must be exhibited in a detailed assessment application.

2) Can the VAT be added in this instance?

No, the creditor reclaims the VAT as input tax. Otherwise, the bailiff is bring paid the VAT twice.

3) Are the HCEO right to combine visit 1 and 2 fees after just one visit?

If the money is taken on the first visit, then no. otherwise, if the debt is unrecovered after the first attendance, the bailiff can apply the 2nd enforcement stage fee.

4) Are the HCEO able to get a warrant to gain entry to my property?

No, its a domestic property, and there is no provision to break entry to recover a High Court Writ. The document should be handed in online to Action Fraud. Paragraph 15 does not apply to domestic property. Only commercial premises.

5) I went bankrupt 3 years ago and literally only own the clothes and shoes I have! Everything else belongs to my partner and my house is rented part furnished - how best do I prove this so that if they gain entry they don’t take goods that don’t belong to
Me?

Bailiffs aren't interested in furniture and nick-nacks, they are worthless to them. At worst, the just unplug the TV from the wall or open drawers and indiscriminately toss the contents out to cause annoyance.

6) Is there a way to challenge any of this through the courts and how would I do this?

Its called a detailed assessment hearing, where you ask the court whether the fees are true and accurate. If you need more time to pay, apply for a stay and a variation, but you cannot get your solicitors' fees paid for any stay application in the High Court.

Always do a detailed assessment together with your stay application, that way, the enforcement power is stayed, and your solicitors' costs are paid by the bailiff company.

Thanks so much for all your help and advice - the clock is ticking and I’m at a loss as to where I stand and what to do next.

If you want me to give a definitive answer whether you qualify for a detailed assessment, please provide the following, and I'll do the arithmetic for you.



1. Judgment debt amount - of you are unsure, get a screenshot of a search result from https://www.trustonline.org.uk You cannot rely on bailiff documents being accurate.

This is £913.39 with court fees but doesn’t include the£90 enforcement fee they initially added.

2. DATE of judgment, that will be on the https://www.trustonline.org.uk screenshot.

24/05/2019

3. Amount demanded by the bailiff, and the DATE - it will be on that "Regulation 15" threat document.

Amount on enforcement notice was £1126.54
Amount on threat document after 1st visit - £2091.11

4. Any money already taken by the bailiff and on what date (you will need to show evidence of the flow of money)

No money taken

5. Screenshot of the creditors' VAT registration status taken from https://vat-search.co.uk/
They are VAT registered !


DO NOT upload screenshots to a forum post. You will need to exhibit them with your witness statement, so keep them safe.

If you can give the above facts then I'll tell you how much you have been overcharged, and you can start the process of applying for a stay of execution and a detailed assessment.

[zeke]

You didn't give the date of the threat or demand document, so I've used today's date for the detailed assessment calculation.

Also, the figure £913.29 must be the Judgment debt and it's not known whether it includes the execution fee £117.25. Figures given by bailiffs cannot be relied on as authority when drafting a detailed assessment statement.

Judgment Debt: £913.39
Judgment date: 24/05/2019
Date money demanded by EA: 23/08/2019
Amount demanded by the EA: £2091.11
Number of days from Judgment date to date of demand: 91 days
Statutory Interest due on the Judgment Debt: £18.2178
Judgment Debt with Statutory Interest: £931.6078
Execution Fee: £117.25
'Command Sum' (judgement debt + Interest + Execution Fee): £1048.8578
Date of issue on the Notice of Enforcement: (Notice of Enforcement not provided)
Table 2 fees: £763.6643
The debt remained unpaid after the first attendance. The fees are:
Compliance Stage Fee: £75
First Enforcement Stage Fee: £190
First Enforcement Stage Fee 7.5% exceeding £1000: £3.6643
Second Enforcement Stage Fee: £495
Table 2 fees: £763.6643
Creditor is VAT registered. Creditor reclaims VAT on fees as input tax
Total sum recoverable under the enforcement power: £1812.5221
Amount demanded by EA: £2091.11
Date money demanded by EA: 23/08/2019
Excess money demanded by EA: £278.5879

Evidence attached to this statement:
i. Screenshot of Judgment £913.39 from https://www.trustonline.org.uk
ii. Screenshot of Creditor VAT registration from https://vat-search.co.uk
iii. Copy of HMRC Internal Manual VBNB41720. Creditor reclaims VAT on fees as input tax
iv. Copy of HMRC letter of 1 July 2015 confirming creditor reclaims VAT on fees as input tax
v. . Evidence of money demanded £2091.11 on 23/08/2019

[Potterfan23]

Thanks that’s really helpful.
So do I complete an N244 or N245 form?

[zeke]

I don't recommend applying for a detailed assessment in person. You will be eaten alive.

As your costs are paid by the bailiff company, you may as well have a solicitor do it, and while there, do the application to stay and variation. You don't need to go to court.

If you want to start work, you need to gather the following:

1. Screenshot of judgment amount and date from https://www.trustonline.org.uk
2. Screenshot of the creditor VAT registration status from https://vat-search.co.uk
3. Completed N245.
4. Evidence of the amount demanded and the date of the demand.

Then complete an online form.: https://www.nationalbailiffadvice.uk/Te ... sment.html

[Potterfan23]

If we lose, do you know how much we will be looking at in costs?
How do we source a solicitor?
We have until next Friday to sort something out. How much do we pay upfront?
Thanks

[zeke]

There are no costs for the other party. Therefore nothing to pay if your detailed assessment application is refused.

A detailed assessment is made without telling the other parties, (an ex-parte application) ditto applying for a variation, so they do not attend, therefore they do not have any costs.

I've never known a detailed assessment application to be refused. It is determined by a costs judge at the High Court. I don't refer detailed assessments unless the evidence proves the bailiff has taken or demanded more money than the law allows.

The upfront fee is the court fee, otherwise if you qualify for 100% court fee remission, (apply online, get a remission reference), the only upfront cost is payble to the solicitor, typically £150. You get all that back when the bailiff company has paid the costs order to the solicitor. Thats usually about 3 weeks, but the order states they must pay within 14 days.

Contact me, I can give you a solicitor. I will need to see the paperwork, the four items to be exhibited, as mentioned in my previous post before I can draft your application documents and pass them to a solicitor to represent you.

The stay and variation order is given (served) on the bailiff company in real time.

[Potterfan23]

What is the best way to contact you ?

[John The Baptist]

Hi - I've been looking at this thread and the one elsewhere.

There is a lot of misleading information that is no doubt confusing you.

The explanatory memorandum mentioned on the CAG thread is not law. I've tried to explain this numerous times to the poster "Bailiff Advice" over the years but she still can't grasp it. That said, the explanatory memorandum almost certainly states the way that enforcement should be conducted. That said, in reality, the regulations contradict the memorandum which leads to the regulations being followed and the memorandum being ignored.

The bad news for you is that in order to enter into a repayment plan, a HCEO MUST visit your property, thus triggering the first enforcement stage. This is because when a writ is issued, it commands the HCEO to seize goods. The first enforcement stage is in place to allow for an EA to visit your property and list your goods on a CGA (Thus seizing them). I think it is wrong that this action must be carried out in order to repay a debt but regrettably, it is the law.

Another point to consider is that it would be extremely unlikely that a bailiff visited alone if he was not registered. Those days are long gone and it would be very risky for a bailiff company to do so.

VAT is applicable in HCEO matters.

Combining the first and second enforcement fee is debatable because legislation is so unclear. The fact that he has been unable to seize goods means that he will certainly be able to apply it on his next visit. Even if you were to win a DA, they would simply return and then trigger stage 2.

The bailiff is not able to obtain a warrant to enter your property, contrary to the drivel spouted by the idiots who have commented on your CAG thread who seem to take some pleasure in telling debtors that there is nothing they can do, other than pay what the bailiff is demanding.

If you want to pay the debt, I would take the stage 1 fee on the chin and concentrate on getting stage 2 removed - Or better still getting enforcement removed altogether - In the first instance, I would complain to the creditor,

1)mention the vulnerable person and that the bailiff should have withdrawn from the property.
2)Mention the threats of getting a warrant to force entry. Quote Section 20 of the Taking Control of Goods National Standards which states a bailiff may not: Falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when legally it cannot be taken by that agent. Remind the creditor that they too must seek to follow the National Standards. State that you are happy for the bailiff to visit. However, upon inspection, he will discover that there are insufficient goods to seize and in these instances, the correct position would be to return the debt to the creditor.

Bear in mind that the bailiff will do everything he possibly can to allocate goods to yourself so remove anything of value, regardless of ownership. If you or your partner own a car, you will have problems so keep that well away.

You are not taking any risk by carrying out this course of action because the fees are already added to your account. Once the bailiff has visited and failed to seize goods, he may not return UNLESS he has evidence that further goods have been taken into the property.

Another alternative is to simply refuse the bailiff entry and wait for the writ to expire. As I mentioned previously, this is risky when vehicles are owned.

No need whatsoever to go down the DA route, which will cost you money and could expose you to costs as well.

[zeke]

You will find that a stay and a variation is always cheaper than paying a compliance stage fee and a first enforcement stage fee. In many cases there is no court fee to pay.

A DA (detailed assessment hearing) does not normally cost anything to the debtor depending on the arrangement with the solicitor.

There has never been a costs order against a DA applicant because the hearing is ex-parte.

I disagree with JTB"s position on 'taking it on the chin' because trying to negotiate fees with bailiffs is futile. The safest route is stop the enforcement power.

When taking advice from Consumer Action Group, you need to take into account that it follows their own agenda. This one. https://marstonholdings.co.uk/team-member/marc-gander/

[John The Baptist]

On the CAG thread, the OP states that he was aware of the proceedings but was working away so could not attend court.

A DA will cost and there are risks of costs being awarded - Just as you told the OP that he would be awarded costs if he won.

He did not fail to negotiate fees. He incorrectly interpreted the law and thought he could set up the arrangement without the need for ES1. He was wrong and incurred a visit which has now opened the can of worms of ES2. You will 99% not get ES1 removed. If you get ES2 removed, they will simply re-visit and add it anyway. The OP has to take responsibility for his mistake and indeed, take it on the chin. He had the opportunity to set up an arrangement and failed to do so.

As the OP doesn't appear to have any assets, it might well be worth him inviting the EA around to inspect for himself. The property is part furnished so the probability is that there is little to seize. Obviously, the bailiff will attempt to find something of value and request receipts for goods claimed to be owned by his partner but if they're worthless at auction anyway, it doesn't matter.

[zeke]

As the OP doesn't appear to have any assets, it might well be worth him inviting the EA around to inspect for himself. The property is part furnished so the probability is that there is little to seize.

If you had first-hand experience of dealing with bailiffs, you would know that advice is usually fatal.

In the last year alone, I have prepared claims involving victims who have been tricked into giving bank details to stop the bailiffs ransacking the property.

One of them was a 92-year-old widow who on camera ended up holding up her bank card to get the bailiffs to stop trashing her bungalow. We got her money back using chargeback, but the damage to her kitchen and conservatory is yet to be redressed.

Another victim was a woman who, not even a debtor, had been a victim of domestic violence and had to run away from the house with her young son. When a neighbour entered the property, he found the bailiff stealing money from a kitchen drawer and putting it in his own pockets, had ripped up the carpet and removed floorboards on the upstairs landing and dropped a wall-mounted TV trying to lift it from the wall.

The only way of getting rid of a bailiff from the house is waiting till his phone battery is flat, or someone blows the tyres on his van outside. I don't condone those methods, but it is effective.

[John The Baptist]

Nigel - The days are long gone when I believe any of your fancy filled fairy tales about defeating bailiffs in court.

Let's look at the facts shall we?

My record on this forum is 100% success. Your record on the other hand is quite frankly appalling, with no end of known cases that you were involved ending up with costs orders of several thousand pounds against your "client". Yes, you have had some successes but usually that is when a solicitor has become involved, shredded the drivel that you have written and started from scratch.

You have some kind of warped delusion that you possess some kind of legal knowledge. Along with Dodgeball, the pair of you are the most idiotic advisers on bailiff issues. You thought that notice had to be physically handed to a debtor back in 2014 ffs. You told one of your stupid clients that a bailiff committed fraud by not producing a warrant. You then proceeded to plan a trap to get the bailiff arrested and if the police didn't arrest him, you were going to get the police arrested, along with the entire executive committee of Marstons.

The OP has no assets, has been registered bankrupt (just like you are because of your crazy ventures into litigation). How can a bailiff possibly force him into handing over money when firstly he doesn't have it and secondly, the bailiff has no goods to seize? Forget about your cock and bull stories about 92 year old women and bailiffs stealing money - These things only exist in your fantasy world.

You were visited by a bailiff yourself originally weren't you? You told everyone you were an airline pilot based near Gatwick and that you won thousands upon thousands in damages. More lunacy.

You have clearly had a very privileged upbringing. Regrettably, you clearly struggle academically, hence your vision of all bailiffs walking around like they are members of the Mafia. Every thread on here, you pipe up and tell the OP that the bailiff is in the wrong and that there are grounds for litigation, with you drafting all the paperwork. I've seen your drafts - They look like the handiwork of a 12 year old and last time I heard, you weren't even capable of putting together a witness statement in chronological order. Carry on living in your fantasy world but don't ever try to suggest that you have more knowledge than others - You are the last person on this forum who I would recommend people to listen to.

[zeke]

I've never had bailiffs. Me receiving a bailiff is wishful thinking. Anyone would know I am the last person on the planet a bailiff would ever want to face on the street.

I don't know where you get the entire executive commiter of marston's from or having police officers arrested. I only refer cases to solicitors specialising in their branch of law.

I don't profess to know more about bailiff law than others. Those better qualified don't post on forums. I am the only one that provides a dedicated bailiff forum, the alternative is the CAG board.

I'm not sure what you mean by priveledged upbringing. I was brought up in a single parent family. Just because I have access to property doesn't equate to being privileged. It's a well managed estate.

Documents are no longer hand-drafted. They are now largely computer generated, and i don't believe you have seen any examples of client documents.

You only held the legal helpline for 2 weeks. I've had it since 2012 so I will have seen a wider range of clients than you would have seen from your 2 weeks frontline experience.

You might be very critical of me doing this job but there are people out there very grateful, only yesterday, I succeeded in releasing two different vehicles, an interpleader claim without court proceedings and a clamped car not compliant with p14(6) of schedule 12. All without litigation. Plus a successful detailed assessment at the High Court.

As for bankruptcy, I didn't lose a penny. That is down to a well managed estate. I do precisely that for my clients. They don't lose a penny. I would otherwise not have brought the action without protection and it suceeded in exposing Peter as the culprit.

Those critical of me are from bailiff quarters on the receiving end (PFG) or jealous individuals (Shiela, Peter) because i created a successful legal helpline so they resort to harassment by proxy. Look at them now? A jobless sitting duck.

I've not had a costs order against a client since Reiss in 2014 and even that wasn't paid. Only last week, PFG lost an EAC2 hearing costs application after a valiant attempt with the judge.

Mark, I cannot see why you criticise me when you can see that I bring redress to victims of wrongful enforcement. You already know the alternatives do not work,

[John The Baptist]

I've never had bailiffs. Me receiving a bailiff is wishful thinking. Anyone would know I am the last person on the planet a bailiff would ever want to face on the street.

The world and his wife know that it is you who posted as "Happy Contrails" on CAG all of those years ago, claiming to be a pilot who had received a visit from bailiffs.

I don't know where you get the entire executive commitee of Marston's from or having police officers arrested. I only refer cases to solicitors specialising in their branch of law

It's on tape (You recorded the call to the client and then posted it in the members section - It's still there on the "Femmelibre" thread). You also drafted a ridiculous letter to Michael Grove, Secretary of State for Justice, claiming that the bailiff committed offences under the Administration of Justice Act, Magistrates Courts Act and that Marston Group were committing offences under the Companies Act. Furthermore, there's a complaint to the CC of Herts Police. All because of your misconception that a bailiff was carrying a "counterfeit" warrant as you described it. Complete and utter madness in all of its splendor. Can you imagine the disaster if that "client" was stupid enough to issue proceedings?

I don't profess to know more about bailiff law than others

Yes you did - You claimed that I had no experience of bailiffs, implying that only you (by virtue of your telephone line) is qualified to comment. For the record, I am also far more qualified than you to pass opinions.

Documents are no longer hand-drafted. They are now largely computer generated, and i don't believe you have seen any examples of client documents

Yes I remember this idea - It isn't something I was comfortable with as each matter is case specific but not having seen them, I can't comment. However, it will still be your crazy arguments that will be behind the drafts and as demonstrated by the "Femmelibre" case, sadly, you have little or no grasp of legislation whatsoever. You may well have imprinted the whole of Schedule 12 in your brain but it isn't any use if you don't understand it.

You only held the legal helpline for 2 weeks. I've had it since 2012 so I will have seen a wider range of clients than you would have seen from your 2 weeks frontline experience

Manning your phone line is irrelevant.

As for bankruptcy, I didn't lose a penny. That is down to a well managed estate. I do precisely that for my clients. They don't lose a penny. I would otherwise not have brought the action without protection and it suceeded in exposing Peter as the culprit.

You lost money because you paid someone's LiP fees for some strange reason best known to yourself. 2 court cases and you failed miserably in both - Hardly a glowing testimony for potential clients is it? All hail the saving grace though. You packed your bags and fled to the Philippines so you didn't have to pay £26k costs. I know several who have been left with costs orders which they have paid, going all the way back to "Rudy" who told us that a charge had been secured against his house but was paying his costs back in installments. All for a parking fine.

I've not had a costs order against a client since Reiss in 2014 and even that wasn't paid. Only last week, PFG lost an EAC2 hearing costs application after a valiant attempt with the judge.

I know of costs orders post 2014. You promised us info on this EAC2 hearing but we're still waiting. Costs for EAC2 hearings should be quite easily avoided anyway provided there is reason to bring the complaint in the first place.

Mark, I cannot see why you criticise me when you can see that I bring redress to victims of wrongful enforcement. You already know that official advice doesn't work,

I criticise your constant encouraging of debtors to instigate proceedings, your constant carrot dangling by telling them they'll get big money in costs and your constant failure to either understand the issue or failure to understand the law. Look at this forum - How many times have you posted on a thread and stated that the bailiff has done nothing wrong? Never I'd say. How many times have you posted on a thread and suggested another course of action rather than litigation? Very rarely. In this thread, you failed to identify that the OP had misunderstood the law by thinking that ES1 was an option. You then suggested a DA which would be futile because even if ES2 should not have been introduced, it most definitely will on the next visit. The OP has no assets and all he needs to do is show the bailiff this - You then came up with a cock and bull story about it not being a good idea because the bailiff could steal money from under the floorboards or something. The debt is unenforceable - Why go down the legal route when there is no point?

[zeke]

Happy contrails is what shiela wanted it to be. Recently she wrote a statement in someone else's name attesting it which was filed at court and the judge spotted it was the work of a jealous individual and not relevant to the proceedings in hand.

Have you seen a Marston bailiff with a counterfeit warrant recently? That demonstrates how this board can bring change.

The Philippines is nothing to do with a costs order, its a software engineering assignment, nothing to do with bailiffs. When an ISP chose to be combative than cooperative, I made them flush their money down the pan, I didn't lose a penny. They can't pursue Peter by subrogating the action because he has no equity and living on benefits.

You criticise for a lost case a long time ago which I had little involvement. You have no idea of the number of successful outcomes each week. Just because they are not posted on the internet doesn't mean they don't exist. I stopped reporting them because it rattles certain individuals.

A DA is a dated statement. If the ES2 is charged afterwards then it's still a fail for the EA. That's why they are made without notice. Many DAs are for taking all the money on the first attendance negating an ES2. A DA applicant has never had costs made against them. The applicant is never at court because a barrister represents them.

[John The Baptist]

There is no such thing as a counterfeit warrant. This is just another of your misconceptions. There has never been a requirement for a bailiff to carry a warrant with them. Are you saying that bailiffs produce warrants when they visit debtors these days? What about council tax debts? What if the debtor manages to get hold of the "warrant" and rip it up? Does that invalidate enforcement thereafter?

I have no problem with you not reporting cases - I myself am aware of several successes that have not been reported and I'm sure there are others as well. However, that does not mean that I am prepared to take in any old fairy tale that you post. Both you and Sheila are guilty of this and it's noteworthy that you are the only people with financial incentives when giving advice. That says more about the pair of you than I ever could and I take everything the pair of you claim with a pinch of salt.

You still don't grasp the OP's situation do you? Do you even understand ES1 & ES2? Say you got it removed, do you think this puts an end to the matter? The debt is still owed and the writ is still live. Do you think the bailiffs cannot add fees after your DA? If ES2 is not permitted after the first visit, it certainly will be if and when they visit for a second time. So, the OP can either go down your route:

Pay for a DA, pay you and a solicitor (or as you claim barrister) up front and hope he wins. Then he must pay the debt in full or incur the ES2 charge that he's gone through all the hassle of getting removed when the bailiff returns.

Or do as I say:

Invite the bailiff round & tell him to fill his boots because there's nothing that belongs to him and he can't afford to PIF. Then the debt returns to the creditor, minus compliance & ES1 plus VAT.

And you say I have no experience in dealing with bailiffs?

[zeke]

You still don't grasp the OP's situation do you? Do you even understand ES1 & ES2? Say you got it removed, do you think this puts an end to the matter? The debt is still owed and the writ is still live. Do you think the bailiffs cannot add fees after your DA? If ES2 is not permitted after the first visit, it certainly will be if and when they visit for a second time. So, the OP can either go down your route:

If you had any experience of DA then you would know this comment is pointless

ES2 is not owed when the money is taken in full on the first attendance.

When a DA is brought after the first attendance and before the money is taken, the DA application applies for the enforcement power to be suspended until the costs judge has decided the fees, and that prevents an ES2 being charged.

In any case, a DA statement gives the arithmetic for both ES1 and ES2 scenarios and the bailiff demanded a higher sum in either scenario, its a fail for the bailiff.

In all DA's involving money not taken in full at the ES1, a change of circumstances is made which suspends enforcement pending a variation which knocks out all the fees (unless the variation is breached).

Pay for a DA, pay you and a solicitor (or as you claim barrister) up front and hope he wins. Then he must pay the debt in full or incur the ES2 charge that he's gone through all the hassle of getting removed when the bailiff returns.

A DA suspends the enforcement power, and the debtor can vary the judgment in the meantime.

They don't pay me anything. The DA statements and N244's are computer-generated, the solicitor adds a chronology and the barrister represents the client. The solicitor and the barrister are paid by the bailiff company. The client doesn't pay anything. Not even the court fee.

It is not worth having a solicitor represent otherwise the volume of work cannot be processed.

Or do as I say:

Invite the bailiff round & tell him to fill his boots because there's nothing that belongs to him and he can't afford to PIF. Then the debt returns to the creditor, minus compliance & ES1 plus VAT.

And you say I have no experience in dealing with bailiffs?

I have a better suggestion, a DA. The debtor pays nothing, the bailiff's fees are dead, no bailiff on his back and he get more time to pay, or if grounds exist, the debtor can apply to set aside the judgment.

Go with your advice and the client runs the risk of his house being trrashed, a potential standoff with police lasting hours, and threatened with "cuffs" until they give the money get the bailiff out of the house.

Mark, you above anyone else anyone should know that keeping bailiffs out of a house is a cardinal rule in dealing with bailiffs. The consequences can expose victims to substantial loss and months of litigation getting their money back and getting damages.

[zeke]

There is no such thing as a counterfeit warrant. This is just another of your misconceptions. There has never been a requirement for a bailiff to carry a warrant with them. Are you saying that bailiffs produce warrants when they visit debtors these days? What about council tax debts? What if the debtor manages to get hold of the "warrant" and rip it up? Does that invalidate enforcement thereafter?

Paragraph 26 says the bailiff must show evidence of his authority to enter premises. That is the warrant or writ giving the "relevant premises" (p.14) or a "specified premises" (p.15). It doesn't say it has to be on paper.