What's The Issue With Self Service?
News1 min ago
Bailifs
My son got arrested xmas eve and has got to go magistrates on 10 Jan.
He will at least get court costs and maybe a fine. He is technichaly NFA (No fixed abode) but the custody sergant insisted that he gave an address for bail purposes and he gave mine. My concern is that he wont pay the court costs and that the next step will be bailiffs to recover costs.
Where do I stand in the event that bailiffs turn up at my address?
Ive seen tv programmes where they turn up because that's the address on the court order to recover debt and the people living there have to provide proof that the goods in the house are theirs and not the debtors. I have no receipts for anything as everything I own has been given to me or bought second hand.
Thanks for any advice guys.
He will at least get court costs and maybe a fine. He is technichaly NFA (No fixed abode) but the custody sergant insisted that he gave an address for bail purposes and he gave mine. My concern is that he wont pay the court costs and that the next step will be bailiffs to recover costs.
Where do I stand in the event that bailiffs turn up at my address?
Ive seen tv programmes where they turn up because that's the address on the court order to recover debt and the people living there have to provide proof that the goods in the house are theirs and not the debtors. I have no receipts for anything as everything I own has been given to me or bought second hand.
Thanks for any advice guys.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by nailit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
“Just seems a bit strange that the police wouldn't release him until he gave them an address.”
Not strange in the slightest. One of the reasons for denying bail is the fear of absconding (i.e. not turning up for the next hearing). A person with NFA will obviously be harder to trace than one with an address.
Drunk and disorderly can only be dealt with by way of a fine. It is very rare for somebody charged with a non-imprisonable offence to be denied bail. When he next appears in court he should state that he is of No Fixed Abode. Unless he intends to plead Not Guilty he will be sentenced there and then. It is up to the fine enforcement office to get any monies owed from him. This could include action by bailiffs. Simply make sure there are no traces of him living with you and bailiffs will not seize your goods.
Not strange in the slightest. One of the reasons for denying bail is the fear of absconding (i.e. not turning up for the next hearing). A person with NFA will obviously be harder to trace than one with an address.
Drunk and disorderly can only be dealt with by way of a fine. It is very rare for somebody charged with a non-imprisonable offence to be denied bail. When he next appears in court he should state that he is of No Fixed Abode. Unless he intends to plead Not Guilty he will be sentenced there and then. It is up to the fine enforcement office to get any monies owed from him. This could include action by bailiffs. Simply make sure there are no traces of him living with you and bailiffs will not seize your goods.
If the Courts cannot prove your son lives with you, such as him receiving Benefitsor mail based at your address, then there is nothing they can to. Ignore advice given on watching your home. No one is going to 'watch your house' , how ridiculous is that? for a couple of hundred pounds worth of fines? He will be given a choice to pay off his fines weekly which he must take, even if he doesn't do it, that, with no evidence of his 'abode' at your home, will ensure you are not involved should there be a recovery process.
Let’s for arguments sake, say that his son does live at his home – what right do the bailiffs have to take stuff (from the house) where the father cannot show proof of ownership?
If bailiffs are allowed to do this, I don’t see why they cannot call at my house and take anything I cannot prove belongs to me, and use that to pay any court fines/fees.
If bailiffs are allowed to do this, I don’t see why they cannot call at my house and take anything I cannot prove belongs to me, and use that to pay any court fines/fees.
rockyroad is incorrect - it is up to YOU to prove that the goods don't belong you - taken from the government website:
You’ll have to prove that someone else’s goods don’t belong to you.
https:/
Do you have anything of value in your home? Bailiffs can't take essentials and they won't take goods that are of little or no value - it's not worth their time and the goods won't recoup the cost of the removal, let alone cover the debt.
If you own a vehicle make sure you can prove ownership of that - the registration document does not prove ownership, you need the receipt.
You’ll have to prove that someone else’s goods don’t belong to you.
https:/
Do you have anything of value in your home? Bailiffs can't take essentials and they won't take goods that are of little or no value - it's not worth their time and the goods won't recoup the cost of the removal, let alone cover the debt.
If you own a vehicle make sure you can prove ownership of that - the registration document does not prove ownership, you need the receipt.
“If bailiffs are allowed to do this, I don’t see why they cannot call at my house and take anything I cannot prove belongs to me,…”
I doubt they’d do that, hymie, for the simple reason that (presumably) you have no connection with nailit’s son and the bailiffs would have no reason to have your address in connection with him. But your advice is spot on. Bailiffs cannot force entry to a domestic address (unless they have a writ of possession) and can only enter if invited or through an unlocked door. However, once they are in you cannot compel them to leave.
I doubt they’d do that, hymie, for the simple reason that (presumably) you have no connection with nailit’s son and the bailiffs would have no reason to have your address in connection with him. But your advice is spot on. Bailiffs cannot force entry to a domestic address (unless they have a writ of possession) and can only enter if invited or through an unlocked door. However, once they are in you cannot compel them to leave.
New Judge – you say that since I have no connection with nailit’s son, the bailiffs would have no reason to have my address in connection with him. Why would they need this reason, surely all they need is nailit’s son not being able to prove my property did not belong to him (and me not being able to prove it belonged to me).
The only difference in my scenario is that the bailiffs are taking property that belongs to me (rather than nailit), to pay nailit’s son’s debt.
In both scenarios someone else is paying nailit’s son’s debt – why should it be nailit, just because his son is living at his address?
The only difference in my scenario is that the bailiffs are taking property that belongs to me (rather than nailit), to pay nailit’s son’s debt.
In both scenarios someone else is paying nailit’s son’s debt – why should it be nailit, just because his son is living at his address?
The difference is that bailiffs do not just pick an address to visit from thin air. So they would not have your address, would not visit you and would not call upon you to prove ownership of goods. However, I understand your point that a third party’s property might be seized to pay a debt they do not owe.
The answer is that it is the law under which bailiffs operate. In order to secure payment (or seize goods to the value, though they much prefer the former) they have to have some leverage. When they have information that a person is living or has lived at an address they have good reason to believe that the debtor has some connection there. So they visit, establish what the situation is and try to secure the debt. It may seem unjust but that's the way it is.
The answer is that it is the law under which bailiffs operate. In order to secure payment (or seize goods to the value, though they much prefer the former) they have to have some leverage. When they have information that a person is living or has lived at an address they have good reason to believe that the debtor has some connection there. So they visit, establish what the situation is and try to secure the debt. It may seem unjust but that's the way it is.
If you want to show he is not a permanent fixture then make sure that his name is not on the utilities or .... council tax
I have quite a few tenants who have to fight off the advances of bailiffs - which for them as there is a natural break, surprisingly straightforward. I imagine you dont share the same name
The first step for them is to call and leave a letter
follow the instructions in the letter -
the council tax demand showing you are the only person in the house I find most useful
I have quite a few tenants who have to fight off the advances of bailiffs - which for them as there is a natural break, surprisingly straightforward. I imagine you dont share the same name
The first step for them is to call and leave a letter
follow the instructions in the letter -
the council tax demand showing you are the only person in the house I find most useful
Thank you for further replies guys, very much appreciated.
As hc stated (and NJ confirmed) //You’ll have to prove that someone else’s goods don’t belong to you.// (the debtor)
Despite other posters saying differently, this is what I feared...I have no proof of ownership for anything should the worst come to the worst.
As hc stated (and NJ confirmed) //You’ll have to prove that someone else’s goods don’t belong to you.// (the debtor)
Despite other posters saying differently, this is what I feared...I have no proof of ownership for anything should the worst come to the worst.
