Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Venger

Court Bailiff Attempts To Evict

Recommended Posts

The court-bailiff doesn't do himself any favours in his approach. Him and two other associated people involved in trying to take possession of a house.

Why not just take a few copies of the correct paperwork to hand over, and get the job done? And not be so aggressive from the start? The protester does have a point, it's a distressing situation for some people in that situation, so they could just show some professional civility.

Also I'm just slightly surprised how 'rough' they are, finding it hard to control their tempers. Shouldn't really be surprised because the world isn't Injin peace-and-love and 'debt isn't real', and the bailiffs probably have to deal with some right sorts, but still, could just be calm and do it right from the beginning.

.

Published on 13 Feb 2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPKOa-5GPPg

Found after reading this blog, which covers the points in the video on how they resisted the eviction/repossession.

http://mypropertymen...beats-eviction/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The court-bailiff doesn't do himself any favours in his approach. Him and two other associated people involved in trying to take possession of a house.

Why not just take a few copies of the correct paperwork to hand over, and get the job done? And not be so aggressive from the start? The protester does have a point, it's a distressing situation for some people in that situation, so they could just show some professional civility.

Also I'm just slightly surprised how 'rough' they are, finding it hard to control their tempers. Shouldn't really be surprised because the world isn't Injin peace-and-love and 'debt isn't real', and the bailiffs probably have to deal with some right sorts, but still, could just be calm and do it right from the beginning.

.

Published on 13 Feb 2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPKOa-5GPPg

Found after reading this blog, which covers the points in the video on how they resisted the eviction/repossession.

http://mypropertymen...beats-eviction/

What a bunch of thugs.

Interesting point that a person cannot be evicted if they are in the property and do not voluntarily leave. It relies on the Police knowing their onions, I suspect that could have gone either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bunch of thugs.

Interesting point that a person cannot be evicted if they are in the property and do not voluntarily leave. It relies on the Police knowing their onions, I suspect that could have gone either way.

Could imagine the two "heavies" getting into a lot of bother with that approach in certain areas, presumably they go in in larger numbers and with police in attendance in rougher areas? But surely if you can`t pay your house debt you should do the decent thing and pack up and leave?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I could tell (could be wrong) the court document wasn't fully completed, needing a signature. If so, that seems like reasonable for the home-owner to resist eviction. Also I got the impression that the court could issue a more powerful document for the Court Bailiff to enforce the judgment. The police weren't heroes though, just preventing a breach of the peace and doing their job.

Perhaps the Court Bailiff is used to people leaving a property before the day he arrives. The mortgage debtor will, in all probability, been given a lot of notice before it reached that stage, and process in court to give their case. I don't know anything about these processes but if anyone official wanted to enforce something against me, I'd want to see and read and keep an enforcement document in my possession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I could tell (could be wrong) the court document wasn't fully completed, needing a signature. If so, that seems like reasonable for the home-owner to resist eviction. Also I got the impression that the court could issue a more powerful document for the Court Bailiff to enforce the judgment. The police weren't heroes though, just preventing a breach of the peace and doing their job.

Perhaps the Court Bailiff is used to people leaving a property before the day he arrives. The mortgage debtor will, in all probability, been given a lot of notice before it reached that stage, and process in court to give their case. I don't know anything about these processes but if anyone official wanted to enforce something against me, I'd want to see and read and keep an enforcement document in my possession.

Having reached that stage I would be looking to get out from under as much debt as possible, not wasting time arguing with a pair of d*ickheads. It is a foregone conclusion that the bloke will be leaving the property one way or another? Situation like that is time to skip the country, or go off the radar in a relatives spare room, which happened a lot in the last crash I think. What I wonder is, how many of these people now filming balifs etc. were lapping up their HPI in the early stages of the bubble?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I could tell (could be wrong) the court document wasn't fully completed, needing a signature. If so, that seems like reasonable for the home-owner to resist eviction. Also I got the impression that the court could issue a more powerful document for the Court Bailiff to enforce the judgment. The police weren't heroes though, just preventing a breach of the peace and doing their job.

Perhaps the Court Bailiff is used to people leaving a property before the day he arrives. The mortgage debtor will, in all probability, been given a lot of notice before it reached that stage, and process in court to give their case. I don't know anything about these processes but if anyone official wanted to enforce something against me, I'd want to see and read and keep an enforcement document in my possession.

Seemed like a two-pronged attack- the document was not signed, and in any case if it was it still didn't authorise the use of force in a civil matter.

You're assumption about most people having left already is likely quite true, if the comment about 50 evictions per week by one of the bailiffs is accurate. That probably leaves little time for any discussion/resistance. Maybe they get the occasional bit of bother but I can't imagine they get people ensuring that the relevant documentation and authorities exist before leaving, I guess most people who are evicted are not great at managing their affairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having reached that stage I would be looking to get out from under as much debt as possible, not wasting time arguing with a pair of d*ickheads. It is a foregone conclusion that the bloke will be leaving the property one way or another? Situation like that is time to skip the country, or go off the radar in a relatives spare room, which happened a lot in the last crash I think. What I wonder is, how many of these people now filming balifs etc. were lapping up their HPI in the early stages of the bubble?

It's an inevitable consequence of the anti-banker rhetoric presented by the media as a whole. At least these guys were legally opposing the civil eviction order. Some of the actions taken in Eire were less so....

Regardless of how much debt these film makers legally took on, there is no reason to allow bailiffs to act illegally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess most people who are evicted are not great at managing their affairs.

I'll bet they're a dab hand with Facebook and YouTube though! Expect more of this in the future, as the cry of "I know my rights" echoes through the land.

Nowadays, nobody has to pay for their mistakes.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having reached that stage I would be looking to get out from under as much debt as possible, not wasting time arguing with a pair of d*ickheads. It is a foregone conclusion that the bloke will be leaving the property one way or another? Situation like that is time to skip the country, or go off the radar in a relatives spare room, which happened a lot in the last crash I think. What I wonder is, how many of these people now filming balifs etc. were lapping up their HPI in the early stages of the bubble?

I guess most people who are evicted are not great at managing their affairs.

That most likely in so many instances, as well as how dws calls it, many people very willing to take on big debt, as they think it can only go up in value forever?

It's no wonder all these debtors hate the banks. "Debt isn't real. Write it off and let me have the nice house for free."

I managed to make out the address on the court eviction papers on the video. Think they debt the Court Bailiff had against them was about £100K, from what was being said in the video

Sold prices link

£1,150,000 Detached, Freehold 31 Oct 2006

Streetview link

repo_millionandmore.jpg

post-12306-0-93426300-1369919863_thumb.jpg

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These guys are freelance and get paid £200 per job. Can manage a few jobs every day.

Here's a tip: when they turn up at the door produce a pet - they'll have to call in an animal welfare officer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently there was no loan, according to the commentary.

Yes, the mortgage is now an asset for the bank, but they did pass credit to the borrower so that he could become the owner of the property...means of exchange has passed, otherwise he couldnt own the property.

Of course, the eviction should be carried out legally, but evicted, they must be...

oh, and its a possession, NOT a repossession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently there was no loan, according to the commentary.

Yes, the mortgage is now an asset for the bank, but they did pass credit to the borrower so that he could become the owner of the property...means of exchange has passed, otherwise he couldnt own the property.

Of course, the eviction should be carried out legally, but evicted, they must be...

oh, and its a possession, NOT a repossession.

Absolutely, but I do hate to see bailiffs dressed as football hooligans and behaving like thugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely, but I do hate to see bailiffs dressed as football hooligans and behaving like thugs.

I was passed by a load of them the other day...about 6 of them, all big men, taking up the entire path...all shaved heads and black trousers.

There really is no need for the intimidation...One person should be able to carry out the eviction/change of locks...Of course, for safety sake, a ready backup should be provided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eviction is necessary, these are the people who kept the responsible from being able to afford their own homes by fuelling the bubble paying more than they could afford. When it finally comes to a head I've no sympathy for how they are treated at all. The people vs the banks crap at the start is pathetic, how about living within your means, idiots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eviction is necessary, these are the people who kept the responsible from being able to afford their own homes by fuelling the bubble paying more than they could afford. When it finally comes to a head I've no sympathy for how they are treated at all. The people vs the banks crap at the start is pathetic, how about living within your means, idiots.

Of course eviction is necessary, but the end does not justify the means. These were just a bunch of thugs behaving like thugs. The protesters were equally annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eviction is necessary, these are the people who kept the responsible from being able to afford their own homes by fuelling the bubble paying more than they could afford. When it finally comes to a head I've no sympathy for how they are treated at all. The people vs the banks crap at the start is pathetic, how about living within your means, idiots.

Am in agreement with your post, except for the highlighted section. Perhaps the cops should have just sent the dogs in? Maybe if the bailiffs carried baseball bats, they wouldn't have needed the cops in attendance?

Might is right? You need to be careful here, as what happens if the evictee's team have more baseball bats, and more bodies to wield them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting point that a person cannot be evicted if they are in the property and do not voluntarily leave.

From what the scouse guy was saying it sounded like somebody refusing to leave voluntarily could still be evicted lawfully but a different warrant would be required. I'm not sure who would have the authority to forcibly remove the occupier though. The police?

I'm glad the police stopped the bailiff from behaving illegally but it's hard to escape the idea that if you haven't paid your mortgage you're going to lose the house eventually by some mechanism. This principle is the bedrock of the UK financial system so the authorities are hardly going to let it disappear thanks to a clever legal argument. I guess you could drag it out for years if an Act of Parliament was required but they would get you in the end.

Still, if it was to turn out that mortgage payments are optional in the UK it would be interesting to watch the financial markets price this information in!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok you and Bruce are right. But it is a problem if we confuse the methods of an eviction with the rightful purpose of an eviction, as the protestors seem to have done themselves. The commentary was all about people versus the banks and how dare they take the people's homes! Which is crap, if they didn't sign up for a mortgage they couldn't afford in the first place we wouldn't all be in this mess.

This victim mentality and lack of personal responsibility is irritating.

The bailiffs point 'what if everyone took this attitude' was a good one. The banks are incorrectly showing forbearance at the moment , slowing the much needed correction. We do not need self righteous debtors preventing the few that do get through.

I've yet to see a YouTube video pointing out the injustice of a family of half wits living it up in a house they can't afford contrasted with those more responsible being evicted by a landlord as a matter of course with no eyebrows raised at all.

I've been evicted as well, and I paid all my bills. My crime was to be a tenant, a position forced onto me by the likes of the 'victims' in the video. Perspective please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll bet they're a dab hand with Facebook and YouTube though! Expect more of this in the future, as the cry of "I know my rights" echoes through the land.

Nowadays, nobody has to pay for their mistakes.....

Yup. Exactly. 100% spot on.

Fred "the shred" Goodwin pension pot = £16 million

Bob diamond total remuneration 2007-2012 = £120 million

Senior bankers jailed for PPI & Libor fraud = 0

Senior HSBC bankers for money laundering drug cartel money = 0

The list goes on and on.

It's an abysmal failure of those involved to pay for their mistakes. But I'm glad your in wholehearted agreement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup. Exactly. 100% spot on.

Fred "the shred" Goodwin pension pot = £16 million

Bob diamond total remuneration 2007-2012 = £120 million

Senior bankers jailed for PPI & Libor fraud = 0

Senior HSBC bankers for money laundering drug cartel money = 0

The list goes on and on.

It's an abysmal failure of those involved to pay for their mistakes. But I'm glad your in wholehearted agreement.

Labour prime ministers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Requires a possession order, and then followed by a warrant of eviction issued by a County Court to evict.

Strictly speaking, if you don't leave on the Warrant you are in contempt of Court, though you can apply to have the Warrant suspended.

The bailiffs appeared very unprofessional. Its embarrassing when you consider they are representatives of the Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course eviction is necessary, but the end does not justify the means. These were just a bunch of thugs behaving like thugs. The protesters were equally annoying.

I found the evictees to be very annoying - and I support (part of) their cause[1]. He seemed to be creating a scene for the sake of it.

[1] I supported the bit about getting the correct warrant in place and following the law. Just because "if everyone did this" is hard for a bailiff to imagine is no reason to chuck the law to the wind. OTOH, I didn't buy all the "people v the bankers" nonsense. Pay your debts or get possessed (eventually!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think they debt the Court Bailiff had against them was about £100K, from what was being said in the video

£1,150,000 Detached, Freehold 31 Oct 2006

So around 10% of the price the bank were happy to value the property at when giving the original mortgage? Nice (for the bank).

That aside, I don't quite understand why they can't service a 100K mortgage...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So around 10% of the price the bank were happy to value the property at when giving the original mortgage? Nice (for the bank).

That aside, I don't quite understand why they can't service a 100K mortgage...

not sure why the debt amount would be on the warrant for eviction and possession

Of course, they may have been there for other recoveries too.

The same rule applies....let them in and they are in...keep them out and they cant break in.. leave a window open and they climb in..then it Syonara to the Sofa and Xbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So around 10% of the price the bank were happy to value the property at when giving the original mortgage? Nice (for the bank).

That aside, I don't quite understand why they can't service a 100K mortgage...

It could be arrears? Also I just heard 100 mentioned, or maybe 150. It could have been a simple £100/150 bailiff fee.

At one point in the video, in the background, just after the document stage close-ups, the court-bailiff is telling the older man who seems to be the mortgagor home-owner, that the judge is "not happy at all." Thought he looked truthful when he said that.

Later on the man who appears to be the home-owner, not the taller younger man, indicates to the bailiff he's "not called that name", and the bailiff says something like "Even though you've acknowledged yourself as that person on the previous times we've met." There are steps to take to prevent repossession (possession), ideally by clearing arrears in good time, and filling in forms for court for more time, but quite base to seemingly lie about your identity right at the death when court bailiff comes around in an effort to prevent eviction.

£1.15m house buy in 2006, I've got no sympathy. Could possibly have bought a small terrace or semi, and had absolutely no worry problems ever, be financially secure into older age, but chose to pay £1.15 million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 241 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.