|
||||||||
Can't Pay or We'll take it away (Series 4 Part 2) |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#176 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
|
Quote:
Nothing to do with that. It's the fact that the council will class you as "intentionally homeless" if you actually leave on time, they advise you to wait until bailiffs turn up and then they have an obligation to find you accomodation. Before that and they don't.
Nobody's fault really, just blame the Tory government, who brought that stupid rule in. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#177 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
|
Quote:
This thread needs to be renamed as the programme has not got the word "or" in it's title.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#178 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: The North!
Posts: 2,201
|
Quote:
But they are privately renting, why can't they just privately rent somewhere else? They get lots and lots of warning and then act as if they had no idea when the bailiffs turn up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#179 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
|
Quote:
Housing benefit doesn't really allow that. You have to reclaim if you move somewhere else. Also, there might be a lack of other properties that housing benefit will cover.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#180 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 191
|
I may be in the minority here but I don't see any issues with the way the agents conduct themselves. People have commented on Stewart, Brian, Del and Dael's behaviour but they usually only become a bit aggressive when the debtors are blatantly lying or don't want to even attempt to resolve the situation. They are used to being lied to, sworn at, etc and it must affect their approach in certain situations.
It's a thankless task like parking wardens but somebody's got to do it otherwise we'll all be getting away with not paying our debts. I understand the debtors are not happy to see them but at the end of the day if they had paid their debts or respected the court orders, they wouldn't have agents turning up at their door. Someone, somewhere is owed that money which the courts have decided is rightfully theirs. Pay up or make an arrangement. Problem solved! |
|
|
|
|
|
#181 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,687
|
Quote:
So what's the solution? They get lots and lots of notice, far too much in my opinion, then get all upset at having to leave? The councils need to sort themselves out but from the bailiff point of view nothing is wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#182 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
|
Quote:
Lots and lots? How much notice do you think tenants should get?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#183 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,687
|
Quote:
Didn't you say yourself the process takes 7 months?
However, for certain types of eviction, the landlord can go through accelerated process that doesn't require a court hearing and then escalate the case to the High Court to be enforced by the High Court Enforcement Officers we see in "Can't Pay ..." They don't give the tenant any notice of when they are coming to carry out the eviction. I don't have a problem with going to the High Court but I think it is patently unfair and unnecessary not to give the tenant any notice at all. It also creates a problem because councils will often tell tenants that they will be given at least a few days advanced warning of the eviction date and as was said previously will refuse to consider someone homeless until they have received an eviction notice (even though they should not automatically do so). If the case has been escalated to the High Court there won't be an eviction notice which is why we so often see tenants having to go straight to the council when they are evicted. |
|
|
|
|
|
#184 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
|
So how long does the process take through the High Court?
I was referring to the 7 months as lots and lots, I didn't know it could be quicker. I agree with you about the notice as well, I don't understand that. The High Court should send a letter saying 'we're coming next week' at the very least. |
|
|
|
|
|
#185 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,687
|
Quote:
So how long does the process take through the High Court?
I was referring to the 7 months as lots and lots, I didn't know it could be quicker. I agree with you about the notice as well, I don't understand that. The High Court should send a letter saying 'we're coming next week' at the very least. The landlord can either apply to the County Court and wait for the county court bailiff to enforce it. This is where a lot of the delay occurs simply because County Court bailiffs are so busy. The other option is that the landlord can ask permission to escalate the case to the High Court for enforcement. As we see in "Can't Pay ..", High Court Enforcement Officers are private firms rather than employees of the court. They trade on giving a fast response (perhaps days from when the warrant is granted). Of course the landlord has to pay extra fees to the High Court and HCEOs but if they are not being paid rent it might still be worthwhile. In general I agree with you that tenants should have known that they are being asked to leave for some time so in theory could be making arrangements to vacate the property. However, in practice many people don't really understand what is happening when court papers start arriving or will find it difficult to get new private rented accommodation and councils are giving them conflicting advice about the help they can expect. Some tenants definitely take the p*** but others really have nowhere else to go and won't get any help until they are literally thrown out. IMO the lack of notice from HCEOs just makes a bad situation worse. |
|
|
|
|
|
#186 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 569
|
Quote:
Well I doubt very much you are a Jedi Knight either but no-one is complaining about that.
I had to pick a suitable username because it was the only one that I could think of. |
|
|
|
|
|
#187 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,635
|
Seems like they've jumbled the episodes up for some reason.
Last week's, on the 28th of September, was Episode 15 but last night's was, apparently, Episode 18, but my Sky box didn't pick it up so I manually recorded it. Next week's is scheduled to be Episode 17, but, rather randomly, Episode 16 is available on Saturday at 5pm. |
|
|
|
|
#188 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 907
|
I see last night's episode was the second to feature a firm of solicitors suing an ex-client in a personal injury claim case. I remember in the first case the client said that the solicitors wanted them to rewrite history and they refused to do it, dropped the claim and got sued.
Is this going to be a new racket? |
|
|
|
|
|
#189 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
|
Quote:
I see last night's episode was the second to feature a firm of solicitors suing an ex-client in a personal injury claim case. I remember in the first case the client said that the solicitors wanted them to rewrite history and they refused to do it, dropped the claim and got sued.
Is this going to be a new racket? |
|
|
|
|
|
#190 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Venus and Mars
Posts: 9,023
|
The two new bailiffs seem decent enough, i found them very understanding and they seemed to want to work with the debtors to get something sorteid out rather than use bully methods (i'm looking at you dael and del).
Drama queen brian made an appearance too although i did agree with del for once the resteraunt owner was taking the mic. Dael once again seemed to push his way past a person to get into someones home it's high time legal sction was taken against him if he is forcing entry, as i said it only seemed like he did from the angle we saw it from. He could very well of entered peacefully but i doubt kt from that thug. |
|
|
|
|
|
#191 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Nth East
Posts: 21,590
|
Quote:
Seems like they've jumbled the episodes up for some reason.
Last week's, on the 28th of September, was Episode 15 but last night's was, apparently, Episode 18, but my Sky box didn't pick it up so I manually recorded it. Next week's is scheduled to be Episode 17, but, rather randomly, Episode 16 is available on Saturday at 5pm. |
|
|
|
|
|
#192 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,889
|
Quote:
Well I doubt very much you are a Jedi Knight either but no-one is complaining about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#193 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,635
|
Quote:
It said before the start of last nights, that there was a change to the scheduled episode.
|
|
|
|
|
#194 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,889
|
Quote:
I see last night's episode was the second to feature a firm of solicitors suing an ex-client in a personal injury claim case. I remember in the first case the client said that the solicitors wanted them to rewrite history and they refused to do it, dropped the claim and got sued.
Is this going to be a new racket? |
|
|
|
|
|
#195 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,765
|
Why didn't the HCEO's take that bloke's (Sonny?) stock away as a part payment for the £47K debt. I thought something was said about the debtor not wanting them to take his stock away, but that doesn't normally stop them! They pulled it all out of his garage and then put it all back.
Does anybody know, please? |
|
|
|
|
|
#196 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 907
|
Quote:
Why didn't the HCEO's take that bloke's (Sonny?) stock away as a part payment for the £47K debt. I thought something was said about the debtor not wanting them to take his stock away, but that doesn't normally stop them! They pulled it all out of his garage and then put it all back.
Does anybody know, please? |
|
|
|
|
|
#197 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Home For The Bewildered
Posts: 86,529
|
Quote:
Why didn't the HCEO's take that bloke's (Sonny?) stock away as a part payment for the £47K debt. I thought something was said about the debtor not wanting them to take his stock away, but that doesn't normally stop them! They pulled it all out of his garage and then put it all back.
Does anybody know, please? Nothing happened, and as already mentioned the dresses would not have come close to covering the debt. ..................................... Felt sorry for the older couple at the end, but she did make me laugh telling them to take what they want. 'Take those sofas away if you like - you'll be doing me a favour'
|
|
|
|
|
|
#198 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wolf359
Posts: 96,766
|
Quote:
Why didn't the HCEO's take that bloke's (Sonny?) stock away as a part payment for the £47K debt. I thought something was said about the debtor not wanting them to take his stock away, but that doesn't normally stop them! They pulled it all out of his garage and then put it all back.
Does anybody know, please? |
|
|
|
|
|
#199 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,765
|
Quote:
The claimant said they didn't want the items as part payment, so they had no choice but to put them back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#200 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,283
|
Quote:
The claimant said they didn't want the items as part payment, so they had no choice but to put them back.
After the show aired I did some digging. Customers are not happy bunnies indeed (the first comments are recent due to the show but you can also see older reviews): https://en-gb.facebook.com/Wantthatd...68385156695239 https://www.sitejabber.com/reviews/w...hatdress.co.uk http://www.complaintsboard.com/wantthatdress-b123061 https://www.yell.com/biz/egg-media-u...ester-7772346/ |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:36.




