Drakes bailiff Pt4 complaint court report from Bailiff Advice Online
Date: Monday, May 19 @ 14:14:49 BST
Topic:
Bailiff Advice Online reports
In a recent Form 4
Complaint to the court a Drakes Group bailiff had his certificate revoked. Compensation was also awarded to be paid to the
person who made the complaint.
In his summing up, the Judge was highly
critical of the company.
This
complaint was made to Middlesborough County Court in February 2008 by a
disabled lady, who is confined to a wheelchair.
The bailiff in question had his
bailiff certificate revoked and compensation was ordered to be paid to the lady
from the bailiff's bond.
The brief details of the case are as follows:
A
parking ticket had been incurred and a bailiff from Drakes Group (now Marston
Group) had visited her home early in the morning and clamped her car BEFORE
knocking at the door.
The car was clearly displaying a disabled blue badge and
the warrant in the possession of the bailiff was in the name of Motability
Finance. It was therefore clear to the bailiff that the vehicle in question was
a disabled vehicle.
The bailiff charged £553.36.
The
bailiff also maintained that he had attended at the house the previous
afternoon which was denied by the lady in question as the family run a business
from their premises with approx: 8 members of staff.
Drakes Group, in
attempting to prove that a previous visit had taken place produced copies of
satellite navigation print outs which the court dismissed as they merely proved
that the bailiff had been in the vicinity....not at the house in question.
At the
hearing, the Judge was critical of the bailiff, but in particular was most
critical of the company; Drakes Group Ltd for the following:
RE: THE
CAR BEING CLAMPED BEFORE KNOCKING AT THE DOOR.
"There
appears to have been absolutely no reason to do that except to bump up Drakes'
fees.....which had already been bumped up, it seemed to me, by a heavily
unjustified charge the day before".
RE: THE
ALLEGED VISIT THE PREVIOUS DAY.
"I
regard it as significant that there is no copy of the letter left (the previous
day). I am told that this is a system of Drakes, but Mr X is the only person
who can carry the can for an unsatisfactory system."
RE: THE
CHARGES OF £553.36
"Looking
at that document (breakdown of fees) which contains five figures, there is a
maximum of one which is accurate, all the others are excessive".
He also
said that "it seems to me that Mr X is trained to seek excessive amounts by is
employers".
The
Judge confirmed that the "correct figure would probably have been
something under £200 made up of the original £95 (PCN), letter and two visits
if one took a favourable view about the first visit, certainly NOT
£553.36"
RE:
SUMMING UP, THE JUDGE SAID THE FOLLOWING:
"All
in all, this is a disgraceful performance, which I find particularly disturbing
since it seems to be in accordance with the policy of the employers Drakes
Group Ltd.
I find it a matter of considerable regret that there is no body
which governs the company rather that the individual bailiff. If there had
been, it seems to me that Drakes Group ought to be taken before it and deprived
of any licence it had".
"It
seems to me that it is perfectly clear that firms of this sort ought to be licensed
and ought to operate under a statutory code of conduct rather than regarding
themselves as......having a licence to rip off debtors".
Further details are available from Bailiff Advice Online
|
|