JBW the Fraudsters

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#36 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 17 Mar 2016 08:52

I am no solicitor, but I cant see how its not a winnable case. I have JBW charging for 3 "phantom visits", only providing GPS records for the first 2 visits, and admitting in writing they have no evidence for visit 3. I also have them charging an ATR fee for a non-existent tow-truck "unjust enrichment". I have asked for disbursement & receipts for this truck, this request has been ignored. I have them in writing admitting the van was under the bailiff seizure, yet no 'control of goods' was signed or given to me. I have them making false & misleading statements, "misuse of power". Then causing a payment to be made under duress after making false statements. Not to mention all this happened to a work vehicle which is exempt, and it is clear it is a work vehicle (a white van with sign writing). Also excessive levying, van was worth 5 x the £630 debt at the time. When I asked JBW why they deemed it ok to do all of this. Their defense was, the van was the only item of any value available to the bailiff. This is more lies, i'd allowed him into the property (due to bad weather), so he was in perfect position to note and/or seizure other goods. Either way, there are items outside including bikes that could've covered the debt. If he'd attended the property during any of his first 3 'phantom visits', he'd of known this and not seized an exempt work vehicle. I have asked for a sworn affidavit, but so far nothing... Their letters support my story anyway. If he didnt make false statements regarding the van, then why does their paperwork say the van was in fact seized, and why did he charge a trucks ATR fee?

Does this sound like a winnable case to you??

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#37 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 17 Mar 2016 09:15

GPS is inadmissible evidence. That test has already failed at court. Bailiffs stopped using GPS for this purpose.

There is no such thing as ATR in enforcement regulations. A detailed assessment hearing will put hat to bed.

Without looking over your documentation, I can't say either way whether your case is winnable. I have to look your case over and from the evidence to hand, I can tell you whether your case is suitable for solicitor execution.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#38 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 17 Mar 2016 09:27

Yes, I didn't think the GPS record had much backbone to it as evidence of a visit. My mother who is disabled was at the property at each "visit" and confirms nobody called. Not to mention there was no 'notice of visit' pushed through the letterbox. The first notice I received for the first 2 visits was a letter through the mail a week after these apparent "visits" took place saying "our bailiff was in your area but was unable to meet with you".
When I made a 'Subject Access Request' to see these copies of the notice pushed through the door, they didnt or were just unable to provide me with copies. The first time I was aware of visit 3, was when viewing the SARs fee page, as there was no letter through the mail regarding this visit.

How do I go about arranging for you to look at my case & paperwork??

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#39 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 17 Mar 2016 10:12

Write a first person account of the history of the debt and a chronology of events leading up to the enforcement. Then give an account what has happened to present.

Collate together all your evidence, everything to support your case. I need this because my job is to assist the court in determining the outcome of your claim.

Upload everything here: http://www.dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk/telephone.html

There is a £35 fee to pay,

It then gives you the number to call me on. We will go through your first-person account, and your evidence.

I will then tell you if you have a winnable claim.

If you have a winnable claim, then I will prepare the legal argument, any court documents and witness statements, and assign the case to a solicitor for execution. The solicitor will send you an engagement letter.

If your claim qualifies for no-win no-fee, (your claim must be more than £5000) then you only pay the first hour work to the solicitor for them to start work and set up the agreement. After that, you pay nothing, all the solicitors costs are covered. You only pay court fees, or use a form EX160a if you are on a low income. If you win, you get all that back plus your award. However under no-win no-fee, you make over a % of the award. The solicitor will recover his costs (including mine) from the other party.

If you choose not to use no-win no-fee, then you will have to pay the solicitor in advance of the work being done. The good news is you get 100% of your award and the solicitor recovers their costs (including mine) from the other party and you are refunded.

If your claim is not winnable, then I will tell you. you only have £35 to lose.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#40 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 17 Mar 2016 10:25

Where are you based? Would it be at all possible for me to come to your office for say a 30 minute face-to-face, giving you the £35 at the visit (or before), as I have a lot of documentation which would take forever to upload (probably not all of it is relevant, but I wouldn't know which is deemed relevant and which is not).

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#41 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 17 Mar 2016 10:41

PS - If I chose not to use 'no win no fee', how much would the solicitors fees likely to be??

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#42 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 17 Mar 2016 11:45

Depends on what level solicitor you want. Grade 3 is £200 an hour. Grade 1 is £450 an hour. Coursel £650 and a silk is £1800.

Under no win no fee. I choose the solicitor and I use grade 1 every time. Its called "Damages based fee agreements" and were introduced for litigation in 2014. It enabled me to offer no win no fee for DWB clients.

If you prefer, I can just prepare the paperwork to solicitor-ready execution and you use your own solicitor. £200.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#43 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 17 Mar 2016 13:59

That might be an idea... where are you based?

If I filed a claim in the court, I assume my local county court? How long until i'd be stood in court - 6 months or so??

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#44 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 17 Mar 2016 14:54

If you want a meeting, it will be in Holborn.

Your local county court is good.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#45 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 17 Mar 2016 17:49

ok, and how much would a meeting cost and for how long?

Do you know how long it takes to get to court from filing the claim... roughly??

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#46 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 17 Mar 2016 20:03

Cheaper to do it by phone. £35.

Timescale from teleconference to filing at court. Less than a week.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#47 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 18 Mar 2016 15:15

thanks

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#48 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 18 Mar 2016 15:20

I have asked JBW & TFL multiple times for evidence of work done & receipts. Both have instead replied with a history of the debt. Is this the actions of a guilty company who cannot provide what i am asking, or is this just normal procedure?

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#49 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 06 Apr 2016 14:33

N1 claim form filed today!

Any tips or advice on going forward or how TFL/JBW might respond from now until court??

many thanks!

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#50 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 06 Apr 2016 21:25

This article gives a summary of the procedure for bringing a claim in the small claims court.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#51 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 06 Apr 2016 21:55

Thank you for that.

When i have approached JBW, CIVEA and The TFL for documents and evidence of work done, all have replied with letters chronicling the history of the debt. Would you say this is because they CAN'T provide the evidence I am asking for?

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#52 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 06 Apr 2016 22:00

I wouldn't bother complaining to JBW.

Likewise CIVEA. Its an apologising service. Run by Jacobs, Marston, Newlyn and Dukes. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/comp ... 0/officers

Just head the shortest route to the hearing date. Take no notice of the excuse letters.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#53 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 06 Apr 2016 22:26

I wouldn't have bothered going to JBW & CIVEA if i'd known then what I know now, but those complaints are done now. Looking forward to the court action and their reply to be honest. Never taken to someone to court before, but I struggle to see how the courts won't see what I can see...

- charging for work not done/phantom visits (fraud)
- unjust enrichment
- making false statements
- seizing a work vehicle
- failing to leave any notice
- failing to provide evidence of work done when asked
- failing to provide a full 'Subject access request'
- failing to follow industry standards
- excessive levying

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#54 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 07 Apr 2016 09:01

The court will ask to see evidence of all that.

Then the burden of proof to the contrary resides with JBW. Otherwise JBW will defend it with things likec"the claim is vexatious and frivolous" or "does not plead a proper cause of action" etc.

Support your claim with everything you got.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#55 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 07 Apr 2016 12:05

I have paperwork of me requesting evidence of work done numerous times.. they have still not provided satisfactory evidence, only GPS records for 2 out of 3 phantom visits. Then admitting in writing they have no evidence for the 3rd visit... i am hoping this is enough evidence on my side to support my claim of phantom visits, also an affidavit from my disabled mother who was in the property during all 3 visits, being disabled she rarely leaves, and can confirm no visits. Plus no 'notice' for visits through the letter box, I have asked for copies of these too - yet nothing!

I have asked for an affidavit from the bailiff involved, to explain why he made the false statements that he could & would seize a van (work vehicle, clearly signed as that), this request has been ignored... but i have written confirmation from jbw the van was seized, even though no 'control of goods' notice was left & no previous levy had been made. Also the ATR truck charge also supports my side that he'd made these false statements.... also supports my claim of 'unjust enrichment' as no truck was called & the van is exempt. If this seizure was 'abandoned', then surely the ATR charge shouldv'e been abandoned too?? There were other items available for him to seize on the outside of the property, such as 2 bikes, not to mention i'd allowed him in the property, so he was in perfect position to seize other goods... goods to the value of the debt instead of committing 'excess levying'. My mother, again was in the property when all this took place and can back everything up with her own affidavit. With the risk of losing my van & main work tool as a courier, meant 'under duress' i made a payment i could not afford, after his false statements & threats.

I also have a transcript of me calling JBW 4 weeks earlier trying to pay half the debt, and make arrangements for the other half.... they refused this and demanded full payment. I'm hoping this document also helps my case.

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#56 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 08 Apr 2016 14:52

Sorry, another query... if i have received no 'notice of controlled goods' or 'walking possession order', this would i assume mean an 'abandoned levy'?
(of course he'd of had to abandon any levy, he was trying to levy against what is quite clearly a work vehicle)...

anyway, if the levy was abandoned, does that then make the ATR fee is invalid. Baring in mind he had no previous levy to charge the ATR anyhow.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#57 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 08 Apr 2016 15:49

A lot of what you are telling me doesn't fit JBW's current modus operandi.


alanA1 wrote:I have paperwork of me requesting evidence of work done numerous times.. they have still not provided satisfactory evidence, only GPS records for 2 out of 3 phantom visits.
Under the old rules, JBW relied on GPS results to prove repeat visits when PCN enforcement allowed for a 28% charge on each visit demanding the sum owed. That came to court in 2013 and JBW lost the case because GPS evidence was ruled inadmissible.



alanA1 wrote:Then admitting in writing they have no evidence for the 3rd visit... i am hoping this is enough evidence on my side to support my claim of phantom visits, also an affidavit from my disabled mother who was in the property during all 3 visits, being disabled she rarely leaves, and can confirm no visits. Plus no 'notice' for visits through the letter box, I have asked for copies of these too - yet nothing!
It changes nothing because only one enforcement stage fee can be charged.


alanA1 wrote:I have asked for an affidavit from the bailiff involved, to explain why he made the false statements that he could & would seize a van (work vehicle, clearly signed as that), this request has been ignored... but i have written confirmation from jbw the van was seized,
If they have removed it, then the person using in his employment can make an interpleader claim on a form N244 and file the application with a witness statement and evidence to your local county court quoting the PCN number and the issuing council named as the respondent.

You only need to ask the bailiff company to return the goods, and if they fail to do so after the three day statutory period, execute the for N244.




alanA1 wrote: even though no 'control of goods' notice was left & no previous levy had been made.
No change. The regulation say the bailiff must do one of the following to take control of goods.
  • Immobilise it
    Remove it
    Controlled goods agreement
    If on a commercial premises - secure the premises,
alanA1 wrote: Also the ATR truck charge also supports my side that he'd made these false statements....
The regulations dont provide for an "ATR truck".


alanA1 wrote: also supports my claim of 'unjust enrichment' as no truck was called & the van is exempt.
Unjust enrichment does not apply. An unjust enrichment claim would be like the one on A1 Environmental Ltd (Newlyn) because they charged £48 a day to store car, but the Council still have 21 days to show how they (A1E) has been disbursed £48 a day.



alanA1 wrote: If this seizure was 'abandoned', then surely the ATR charge shouldv'e been abandoned too??
There is no ATR.

alanA1 wrote: There were other items available for him to seize on the outside of the property, such as 2 bikes, not to mention i'd allowed him in the property, so he was in perfect position to seize other goods... goods to the value of the debt instead of committing 'excess levying'.

My mother, again was in the property when all this took place and can back everything up with her own affidavit. With the risk of losing my van & main work tool as a courier, meant 'under duress' i made a payment i could not afford, after his false statements & threats.

I also have a transcript of me calling JBW 4 weeks earlier trying to pay half the debt, and make arrangements for the other half.... they refused this and demanded full payment. I'm hoping this document also helps my case.

Before I comment any further, can you show me the documents JBW have given you that charges you the ATR fee and the use of a GPS device to prove an enforcement visit was made.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#58 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 08 Apr 2016 16:07

yeh sure... hope they've sent through ok.

They have provided no other evidence of visits 1+2 (only GPS) despite numerous requests. And confirmed no evidence for visit 3.

The events took place between August - October 2013
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#59 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 08 Apr 2016 17:00

ps - the SAR was sent to me in Feb 2014, so they would've known by then GPS is inadmissable as evidence. Do you have any details on that court case? Where JBW lost due to the GPS not being valid ??

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#60 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 08 Apr 2016 17:16

The claim was in the small claims track.

What action do you want to take? do you want to reclaim it?
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#61 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 08 Apr 2016 17:20

I have already filed a small-claim myself using 'Money-Claim online'.

claim is for all bailiff fees, sar fee, online solicitor fee, postage costs, my work + time since Oct 2013 and damages for stress caused.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#62 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 08 Apr 2016 17:48

Let see how that pans out.

The court will decide on balance of probability whether the work was done. If GPS is their only evidence, then I doubt that defence by itself will suffice.

Do the claim on one letter fee, (delete if no evidence of a letter is given) and one visit 28% of the sum on the distress warrant. Reclaim everything else you paid, plus interest.

Its difficult to claim stress, but if you can show the bailiff company has aggravated or antagonised you, then you can invite for the court to award a sum at its discretion in the order of a specified sum. Give a maximum and let the court discount it.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#63 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 08 Apr 2016 18:10

well i've requested other evidence numerous times, a photo of the property or copies of the notice supposedly pushed through the door on the day, yet they have not provided any.. so they've had their chance.

My disabled mother never leaves the property and will make an affidavit to say she was in during the first 3 contested visits.

They've admitted no evidence for visit 3.

I have evidence of doctor visits to confirm the ill-health this caused me.

Also have bank-statements from that time to show the financial burden his fraud and false statements/misuse of powers caused to me.

My compensation for stress & damages is in-line with that recommended by the ombudsman.

Does the above sound like i have a fighting chance to you?

I also have a transcript of a conversation some weeks before the bailiff actually came, of me trying to pay JBW but being refused.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#64 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 08 Apr 2016 18:11

Add to yuor witness statement and invite the court to have JBW produce. Otherwise apply to grant your claim.

I recommend you need a skillfully draftedwitness statement. Post up what you have and I'll ask an admin to give you a members board so its not indexed by Google on the internet.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#65 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 09 Apr 2016 06:44

So you're saying, in my witness statement, invite the court to ask JBW for some real evidence themselves?

I have not yet made my witness statement. I only filed the claim a few days ago and am waiting the 14 days to reply.

I may even call you for advice, once this moves forward again (£35 fee I'm aware).

I am tempted afterh is claim to file another for lost earnings, which isn't included in this claim.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#66 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 09 Apr 2016 16:37

Always claim for everything. You can't add later.

You can invite the court to require a party to produce. Especially if they fail to produce when you asked. The court can decide on the absence of evidence if the other party wriggles.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#67 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 11 Apr 2016 23:08

I am already claiming the max for small-claims.

I planned to bring a separate claim for lost earnings later, if poss?

But I will defo invite the courts to produce any real evidence.. especially as i have already done this many times and i am still waiting.

So what is standard procedure now? Wait the 14 days for TFL to reply, then i have another 14 days to give my evidence and statements?

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#68 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by Schedule 12 » 12 Apr 2016 09:52

You can't bring a separate claim later. The bailiff company will say it's an abuse of process.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#69 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 12 Apr 2016 15:50

Ah right, my first mistake then. Maybe I'll show my lost earnings in a bid to convince the judge to award me what I've asked.

Do you happen to have any more info on the case in 2013 where JBWs GPS evidence was thrown out?

alanA1
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 Jun 2015 19:59

#70 Re: JBW the Fraudsters

Post by alanA1 » 23 Apr 2016 18:48

So TFL intend to the defend the claim.

Do you happen to have any information on the case from 2013 where GPS evidence was thrown out for JBW?

Post Reply