Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post Reply
John The Baptist
Posts: 230
Joined: 06 Jun 2017 17:22

#1 Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by John The Baptist » 10 Oct 2017 11:37

I am the poster "alreadyexists" from CAG.

Now that Marc Gander has gone to extraordinary lengths to remove my posts from the main forum (thanks Marc, I'm flattered that you have gone to such lengths just for me and nobody else) Sheila Harding has done what she always does and taken full advantage of the fact that I cannot defend myself from her constant pack of lies.

Today Harding has posted this extraordinary and highly defamatory lie about me:
Furthermore, this poster's 'assistance' had included him writing a personal letter to the Judge at Brighton County Court (on behalf of the debtor).
I wish to make it perfectly clear that I did not in any way assist this man in complaining about a bailiff, or indeed have I ever assisted anyone else, ever in making a complaint to the court. Any letters, complaints or any other form of contact to the court that this man made regarding bailiff practice has been done without my prior knowledge or assistance. Had I helped in any way, I most certainly wouldn't have written to the judge that the bailiff was "a peeping Tom pervert" as has been widely broadcast on the internet. In the particular case that Harding is posting about, she knows exactly the square root of fcuk all about the matter and has continually posted inaccuracies about it for months on end.

Harding has previously seized upon this man's misfortune to claim that it was Jason who assisted in the complaint. Having exhausted that avenue, Harding now attempts to defame me with the same dishonest and tiresome accusations.

Furthermore, I would add that had it not been for Harding's clear anger and frustrations regarding me posting on CAG, I would have left there months ago. The forum, like most advice forums these days is littered with idiots posting garbage. Apart from UncleBulgaria and Lookingforinfo, the bailiff section on CAG is an absolute shambles.

There has been untold misinformation and misconceptions about EAC2 complaints, mainly from Harding and her lackey Peter Bardsley although more recently that Colin clown has also decided that he's an authority on the subject. I will shortly provide a detailed explanation of EAC2 complaints and explain why, contrary to the claims of the aforementioned three idiots, EAC2 complaints are not the danger that they would have you believe.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13275
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#2 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Schedule 12 » 10 Oct 2017 13:11

The CAG board as good in its time with bank charges. I was never involved with bank charges, but when the OFT pulled the plug, the CAG board had no focal point. It became a consumer forum without anyone having expertise in consumer law. Just moderators bouncing around the forum "threads tidied" and "hello there".

When its bailiff board only had Sheila commentating, it bombed. It only made a comeback when already-exists started posting. Now he is banned, we can let the CAG board return to a state of pasture. We can deal with the real issues here without them. This board was created because of the nonsence posted elsewhere on the internet. The public voted with their keyboards who to choose for their advice.

Sheila has no court experience. At the High court assisted by someone called Steve Baker, she remained seated when speaking to the judge and was reprimanded, and her mobile phone rang while I was addressing the court. She committed herself to saying on court on record she "categorically" had no involvement in Peters website. That may come unstuck if Peter denies it. The court takes a very dim view on anyone lying to get a costs order. We know she lied to court before over her car tax because she gave the court a false address, and looking at her website, she is impartial to hiding behind false addresses.


She has never been involved in the EAC2 so it is beyond me why she makes it her concern. The complaint is a witness in other legal proceedings and if he is contacted by Sheila, then it could amount to interfering with a witness.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#3 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 10 Oct 2017 14:31

It's concerning that she is allowed to continue with the misinformation - why does she do it? Does she really believe it's correct or does she receive some sort of incentive to push the narrative? She continually argues against issuing any sort of complaint against a bailiff - he opinion always seems to be that the debtor has embellished the facts, or is acting emotionally and that the bailiff has kept within the law.

She doesn't consider that even if a debtor cannot prove something, making a complaint or sending a note of consideration may reveal a pattern of behaviour regarding certain bailiffs - Gary Brown is just one example. He may come across as polite and calm on Channel 5 but we know the reality away from the cameras - a lying, foul-mouthed bully with a criminal conviction (committed on MOD premises) who regularly acts unlawfully. He's even needed to leave 2 other EA companies as they hated him.

Sheila seems to surround herself with other dubious characters - Steve Baker in his 'anonymous' FMOTL mask, seanamarts and her 'England First' hobbies, the foul-mouthed newsagent and his missus. That's not to mention her weird tolerance of the hollow-headed illiterate chimp.

I just find it baffling that she continues to get away with it - she must surely have something on Gander.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

John The Baptist
Posts: 230
Joined: 06 Jun 2017 17:22

#4 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by John The Baptist » 10 Oct 2017 14:46

Harding is very forceful and very persuasive, you only have to look at the pathetic Sue Oddy to see how she wraps weaker individuals around her little finger. The same has happened with Marc Gander. I think that he realises that he has been sucked into Harding's web but rather than be man enough to distance himself from her and put his foot down (as Wes Serra seems to have done and as Legal Beagles did), he prefers to brush it under the carpet to the detriment of his members, in order to save face. Harding is clearly walking all over him.

And by the way Harding, you lying troll:
Apart from the fact that only a username has been provided (as opposed to the real name of the poster), I cannot see where you should be getting your knickers in such a twist. Also, what concern is it to you?

Just take a deep breath and count to ten. Your angry will likely subside. There's a good lad.
"Herring" is not me. We seem to have crossed this bridge before. Even if it was only a username, does that give you licence to lie? I thought you were the epitome of "accurate information"?? Are you now saying that it is right to post lies and inaccuracies if only a username is being discussed?

John The Baptist
Posts: 230
Joined: 06 Jun 2017 17:22

#5 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by John The Baptist » 10 Oct 2017 15:10

Is Seanmarts the one who recently encouraged people on FB to leave bacon at mosques?, Ex CAG admin Seanmarts?

She sounds charming

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#6 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 10 Oct 2017 15:21

Yeh - seanamarts... can't even spell their own name right. It should be seamanarts (seaman arts), Wendy Seaman and her arts and crafts. She's strangely deleted the FB page that had all the England stuff on it, now trying to pass herself off as a loving old granny rather than a potty-mouthed xenophobe. Still, at least Sheila was pleased to see her back on the forums.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#7 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 10 Oct 2017 15:28

OMG The self confessed and proven liar has just come out with this:
I don't run any blog
:lol: :lol: :lol:

We believe you chimp, thousands wouldnt. Do you remember last time when you denied that you were the owner of the blog but you would be talking to the owner later on that evening? Only for a judge order you be named?

Anyway cares who owns a grubbly little blog that nobody reads other than 4 or 5 people who have the combined IQ of a slug?

If I may take this opportunity to have my say on Harding, she is the biggest hypocrite going. She asks others to provide proof yet makes the most ridiculous of claims herself that are easily shown to be dishonest.

She frowns upon "debt avoidance" but is more than happy to participate in a bit herself now & again

She tells debtors they cannot claim LIP fees and then submits the mother of all LIP claims.

When the judge picked himself off the the floor, he scrubbed most of it off.
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#8 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 10 Oct 2017 15:43

JimUk1 wrote:
10 Oct 2017 15:28
OMG The self confessed and proven liar has just come out with this:
I don't run any blog
:lol: :lol: :lol:

We believe you chimp, thousands wouldnt. Do you remember last time when you denied that you were the owner of the blog but you would be talking to the owner later on that evening? Only for a judge order you be named?
Sheila dropped him in it by letting that happen. Wonder if they'll exchange Xmas cards this year?

She frowns upon "debt avoidance" but is more than happy to participate in a bit herself now & again
She considers someone trying to remove bailiff fees as a debt avoider - this really seems to grate with her. Why does think wanting to pay the debt but not the fees is 'debt avoidance'?
She tells debtors they cannot claim LIP fees and then submits the mother of all LIP claims.
£2500 she claimed wasn't it? For travelling to London? Maybe she had to feed Sumo Steve on the way.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

John The Baptist
Posts: 230
Joined: 06 Jun 2017 17:22

#9 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by John The Baptist » 10 Oct 2017 16:14

I think that Dodgeball is probably correct that he doesn't run the blog - Lets be honest, he couldn't run a bath.

However, I don't think that he is worthy of being responded to on here. One of the downsides of my correcting Harding on CAG was that I was giving Dodgeball so much oxygen. He's had his fun and now it's time for him to be ignored again, like the insignificant little weasel that he is.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#10 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 10 Oct 2017 16:36

He couldn't run his feckin' nose.

Just remember all the lies he told about not owning the old blog, having no control, having no idea who registered it - it was all bull-plop. At least one good thing came from Sheila's case. They both need responding to otherwise debtors will continue to be misled by their self-interested 'advice'.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13275
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#11 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Schedule 12 » 10 Oct 2017 17:36

Pote Snitkin wrote:
10 Oct 2017 14:31
Steve Baker in his 'anonymous' FMOTL mask,
I've just been told Steven Baker is a regular on Quatloos posting endorsements for others. Does anyone have any more info on him? I've not come across him before and I don't know why he would support someone like Sheila. Anyone with a brain would know Sheila has caused more trouble for debtors than bailiffs can ever do.

A Google search found him wearing a Guy Fawkes outfit holding up a board telling drivers there is a speed camera. We have a members board if anyone needs confidence. I have a feeling I will be seeing him again at court.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13275
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#12 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Schedule 12 » 10 Oct 2017 17:40

JimUk1 wrote:
10 Oct 2017 15:28


She tells debtors they cannot claim LIP fees and then submits the mother of all LIP claims.

When the judge picked himself off the floor, he scrubbed most of it off.
She asked for £2500, and the judge turned his nose up at that. She got £1150, but in an email, she told me it was £1200. I don't know why she added £50, as that is another lie to add to the book.

She didn't send a friend to Nominet's hearing, it was Peter Bailiff-can-take-my-hire-purchase-car that sent her.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13275
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#13 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Schedule 12 » 10 Oct 2017 17:42

Pote Snitkin wrote:
10 Oct 2017 16:36
They both need responding to otherwise debtors will continue to be misled by their self-interested 'advice'.
I think that is better done elsewhere. We are here to help debtors.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13275
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#14 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Schedule 12 » 10 Oct 2017 17:53

Pote Snitkin wrote:
10 Oct 2017 14:31

I just find it baffling that she continues to get away with it - she must surely have something on Gander.
I don't understand why he supports Sheila when it is obvious she is giving wrong advice. I don't think she has anything on him, he just wants the ads clicked on for the Adsense income. He banned the wrong people from his board, otherwise, he would have been kingpin of bailiff advice. He threw it away for nothing in return.

I don't think Marc is in the bailiff's pockets. I cannot say the same for Sheila because too many clients have told me she communicated their details to bailiff companies. This could amount to debt mediation, which is a regulated business activity which she is not licensed. I still find no evidence she is registered under the DPA.

Earlier this year, CAG's data controller complied with a section 10 and agreed not to process my personal data. They have now breached it by putting my name on their website. I think that may be an actionable cause under section 13 because it doesn't fall under the Special Purposes because it is one of several dozen of Sheila's rant made to cause annoyance to me and supported by the fact that she has a history of getting other people to make them.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13275
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#15 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Schedule 12 » 10 Oct 2017 17:56

Pote Snitkin wrote:
10 Oct 2017 15:43

£2500 she claimed wasn't it? For travelling to London? Maybe she had to feed Sumo Steve on the way.
She told the court she travelled from North Devon. Her service address is TA24 which is in Somerset.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

John The Baptist
Posts: 230
Joined: 06 Jun 2017 17:22

#16 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by John The Baptist » 10 Oct 2017 18:21

Schedule 12 wrote:
10 Oct 2017 17:42
Pote Snitkin wrote:
10 Oct 2017 16:36
They both need responding to otherwise debtors will continue to be misled by their self-interested 'advice'.
I think that is better done elsewhere. We are here to help debtors.
I just felt that her absolutely reprehensible lies were worthy of their own thread on here. She has to be made aware that when she posts these ridiculously dishonest statements, she needs to think them very carefully through because otherwise, she is just going to end up looking very silly - As she has made herself look today. It must be remembered, that the debtor in question has suffered a great injustice (not in the EAC2 but in other aspects) and all Harding is interested in doing is manipulating the situation so it can be used for her to fire bullets. The woman makes me puke.

The days are long gone when Sheila "honest as a day is long" Harding can just come out with this crap and expect people to believe her.

I've said my piece now and am happy to return to my role as lurker.

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#17 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 10 Oct 2017 21:24

Pote Snitkin wrote:
10 Oct 2017 16:36
He couldn't run his feckin' nose.

Just remember all the lies he told about not owning the old blog, having no control, having no idea who registered it - it was all bull-plop. At least one good thing came from Sheila's case. They both need responding to otherwise debtors will continue to be misled by their self-interested 'advice'.
I would imagine that they have just done what any intelligent person would have done in the first place and just got the domain registered in the name of a friend or a relative. Remember that these four mongrels aren't the sharpest tools in the box, it would have taken them months to work that one out between them.

Who gives a sh#t anyway? Nobody is going to give it more than 20 seconds max of their time. If it's anything like the last one was, it will be full of moronic ramblings that make no sense to anyone.

I think it's quite funny that they are making so much effort over it. If they had made the same amount of effort in their professions, they wouldn't be the losers that they are today
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#18 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 11 Oct 2017 08:41

Schedule 12 wrote:
10 Oct 2017 17:36
I've just been told Steven Baker is a regular on Quatloos posting endorsements for others. Does anyone have any more info on him?
I do know that he's made at least 261 FOI requests about various parking issues. Sheila will naturally be displeased at such a waste of resources.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

delta157
Posts: 195
Joined: 13 Oct 2013 16:00

#19 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by delta157 » 11 Oct 2017 21:55

Pote Snitkin wrote:
10 Oct 2017 16:36
He couldn't run his feckin' nose.

Just remember all the lies he told about not owning the old blog, having no control, having no idea who registered it - it was all bull-plop. At least one good thing came from Sheila's case. They both need responding to otherwise debtors will continue to be misled by their self-interested 'advice'.
Given I had a bop at Dodge on the former site he was deleting my posts as they were written, but a quick screen shot proves he had control which contrary to his claims he didn't. I think some of them were posted on here at the time!

I've almost given up on posting on all forums due to the bitter in house rubbish and for personal and medical reasons too...

But given the fact over the past nearly 3 years every 'case' I've been involved with at the EA enforcement stage saw their fees removed and the debts taken back in house and a great repayment plan agreed, this total was 29 at County Court level and 4 at High Court level. Not one set of fees were added after returning the debt the creditor.

As far as the other is concerned very little contact with her, I no longer haver email nor phone numbers. Suffice to say I'm glad I'm out of it all.

Are there any links to any new sites created to have a go about here please as I am bored atm.

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#20 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 15 Oct 2017 14:46

Anyone able to make head or tail out of Harding's latest attempt to look knowledgeable over on CAG?

She appears to be suggesting that a debtor has claimed damages in an EAC2 complaint.

She then seems to think that it's worthy of starting a new thread because the judge stated that it is permissible to charge 3 separate enforcement fees for 3 separate PCNs. Of course 3 separate enforcement fees can be charged Harding. The only time they can't be is if it's possible to enforce them all at the same time. Unless the 3 offences all occur on the same day, it's hardly likely to ever be the case is it? Why do you need a thread to state the obvious? It only seems to be you who (as usual) doesn't understand.

Also, it's noteworthy that Harding hasn't made any mention of a costs order. Harding usually cannot wait to tell us that the debtor has been made to pay costs. Does this mean no costs were awarded?

It all seems vet vague to me.
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#21 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 15 Oct 2017 14:54

As for that other mongrel:

The Judge:
The first issue that I need to address is the lawfulness or otherwise of the seizure of the vehicle. There are two sources of law in relation to the seizure of vehicles in these circumstances. The first is in Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007
Paragraph 9 of Sch.12 provides:

“An enforcement agent may take control of goods only if they are—

(a) on premises that he has power to enter under this Schedule, or (b) on a highway.”

In relation to the definition of “premises that he has power to enter under this Schedule”, those are limited to places either where the owner of the goods works or carries on his trade or is one of where he usually lives. That is contained in paragraph 14 of Schedule 12.

The Chimp:
I wonder why the judge did not examine the TCE,s part in all this
PS Question marks after you ask a question please chimp - You've been told about this on numerous previous occasions.
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#22 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 25 Oct 2017 21:52

There is a good thread unfolding on CAG regarding Jacobs and a student.

Harding has already managed to misunderstand what has been posted and got the name of the creditor (LA) wrong. :lol:

She is now giving the OP the third degree over why the payment was made directly to the LA. Unbelievably, she has not questioned why the LA accepted the payment if it shouldn't have been made.

I think that Harding is being influenced because Jacobs have written on their NOE the methods of payment that may be used. Unfortunately, Harding does not seem to understand that there is ne restriction in law as to how a payment may be made and of course this is acknowledged in the NS where it is stated that creditors must inform bailiffs of payments made directly.

It is of course a complete and utter waste of time conducting an inquest as to why and where payment was made because all parties accept that the payment was made and have adjusted their figures accordingly. The OP has visited the forum to seek help and advice regarding the fees, not to be interrogated over whom payment was made to - This serves no purpose and helps no-one. It is wholly irrelevant.

What Harding should have been asking is:

1. Did the OP notify the council of a forwarding address?
2. Did the OP receive a NOE or was that sent to the student accommodation?
3. Does the OP accept that his/her exemption ran out and that the premises were occupied after the date that the exemption ran out. Has the OP checked the date that the exemption ran out?

Harding continually fails to identify key issues and/or prioritise actions which often leads to lengthy irrelevant threads that serve no purpose other than to confuse the OP
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13275
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#23 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Schedule 12 » 25 Oct 2017 22:08

I hear Sheila Harding is lying (again) about an application to vary was dismissed. Her application was never heard because it was vacated after I paid it.

Her friend Guy Fawkes wasn't at all happy when I asked him about his internet activity. The proceeding has nothing to do with Sheila, yet she telephones the solicitor for Nominet pressing them for information. I got a witness statement.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4089
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#24 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Amy » 25 Oct 2017 22:10

She’s a silly woman who needs a man to look up to and show her the way to go. Much as Michelle and I do...

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#25 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 25 Oct 2017 22:23

Get back to your sink woman - us macho men have man stuff to do like talk about football and birds and.. and ... wave our wangs about or something.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4089
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#26 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Amy » 25 Oct 2017 22:34

I’ve cleaned the toilet of your manly pee for the millionth time today. Off to do Jason’s washing up now. Purely a working relationship and all that, naturally.

John The Baptist
Posts: 230
Joined: 06 Jun 2017 17:22

#27 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by John The Baptist » 25 Oct 2017 22:38

Pote Snitkin wrote:
25 Oct 2017 22:23
Get back to your sink woman - us macho men have man stuff to do like talk about football and birds and.. and ... wave our wangs about or something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byNBoFYoxx0

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#28 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 25 Oct 2017 23:44

I really cannot believe just how unbelievably stupid Harding is. She is still conducting an inquest into something completely irrelevant. No matter who the money was paid to, there is a balance of £310.

Harding has now said this:
As Jacobs Ltd were still enforcing the Liability Order, the council should have passed your payment over to Jacobs Ltd so that they could deduct the Compliance fee of £75.

The following fairly recent decision from the Local Government Ombudsman may assist with understanding the position with paying the council direct:


Amazingly, Harding then posts a link to an ombudsman decision that CONFIRMS a payment may be made directly to the council and the only fault found was that the council did not notify the bailiffs that payment had been made, thus reducing the amount outstanding:
There was some fault by the Council because it failed to tell the bailiffs that it had reduced the arrears. If it had informed the bailiffs then, during the visit, the bailiffs would have asked for £310 rather than £423.
Now stop embarrassing yourself Harding. You clearly have no ability whatsoever to read and understand these LGO decisions that you continually post. The LGO DID NOT, repeat DID NOT say that the council should have passed the money onto the bailiffs. The LGO stated that the council should have notified the bailiffs of the new amount outstanding which is exactly what happened in the case that you are currently making more problematic than it was before you stuck your clueless nose in.
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#29 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 26 Oct 2017 11:55

It's absolutely disgraceful that she's saying Jacob's must be paid their fees. She must surely be in some sort of arrangement with them.

Sheila dear, the council re-issued a new bill to the OP for £240 which they promptly paid. Why on earth would the OP pay this amount to Jacob's? It was a bill from the council. If the council failed to inform Jacob's that the account had been returned then that's no fault of the OP.

Trouble is, whenever someone with knowledge tries to post on there to correct her idiocy, the mods ban them.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13275
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#30 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Schedule 12 » 26 Oct 2017 12:25

The mods are doing us a favour. Let them keep banning.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#31 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 26 Oct 2017 12:50

She hasn't had the intelligence to attempt to ascertain the address that the NoE was sent to, nor to suggest that the notice was defective in any case due to the figure being demanded being wholly incorrect and way more than the amount actually due.

Jacobs are one of the companies that she is in bed with so she wouldn't help even in the unlikely event that she knew how to.
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#32 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 26 Oct 2017 14:41

Happy to be corrected.
And as is usually the case chimp, I am happy to correct you.

If a liability order is obtained and then the debtor subsequently obtains a discount/reduction etc, the amount of the order remains. However, (and this is the important bit so read it carefully) The debtor is only expected to pay the revised, reduced amount. The remaining balance is then deemed to be paid.

Now run along & tell the OP as (s)he appears to be in sixes and sevens from all the misinformation that she has been given, apologise for your buffoonery and explain that a revised LO should not have been issued.

The grounds for complaint are that the bailiffs visited after issuing a defective notice of enforcement. The OP has already explained to you that (s)he could not afford to pay the incorrect amount demanded on the defective notice. Had the correct amount been demanded, the OP would have been in a position to pay, as demonstrated once the revised bill was issued.

As for this amazing comment:
The problem here IMO is that so many EAs receive frivolous claims that fees are not due, they sometime disregard genuine cases like yours
Is that a bit like us convicting the Birmingham 6 or the Guildford 4 for murder but it's OK because the courts often hear frivolous claims of innocence? These people are representing Government agencies, they are not permitted to take the law into their own hands on the basis that they receive "Frivolous claims". The reason that these boards are in place is to oppose those exact actions. Bailiffs may not take the law into their own hands, no matter how hard done by they think they have been.
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#33 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 26 Oct 2017 15:09

They (that is Sheila) seem to be overlooking that the OP has stated that the council tax department told her to pay via their online system. There is nothing due to Jacob's from the OP yet they seem to have been led to believe they should be paying at least the compliance stage fee?

No they should not! The council issued a revised bill, sent it directly to the OP seemingly with the LO costs also removed and the OP paid it as instructed. Why does Sheila insist that it should have been paid via Jacob's?

Also why has no-one pointed out to her, as Jim said, that the LGO decision she posted does not say anything about the council needing to send direct payments to the bailiff? Why does no-one have the guts to just say it?
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

JimUk1
Posts: 217
Joined: 02 May 2017 16:08

#34 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by JimUk1 » 26 Oct 2017 17:59

Who exactly is going to stand up to her? There are only 3 nuggets who post on there, soppy chops Brassnecked, the disgraced postmaster Clive and the chimp. You could not get three soppier, weak minded men if you tried. Even Amy & Michelle would be able to henpeck that trio.
Dodgeball: As the discerning viewer will realise , I was aware of the mistake in the reply when I posted it

:lol: Of course you were Dodgeball - It was purely coincidence that you only mentioned it after it had been pointed out to you on here.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6571
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#35 Re: Sheila Harding Lying Again

Post by Pote Snitkin » 26 Oct 2017 18:31

Uncle B & Lookinforinfo for a start. Blowjob Craig and Colin are in thrall to her and leakie is too timid, so they're out of the question. But by not correcting her, they are all equally culpable of spreading misinformation.

Let's ask any of them once more - in the LGO decision Sheila posted, where does it say that the direct payment received by the council should have been given to the bailiff?
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

Post Reply