Discussion in 'The Off-topic Lounge' started by Miesha's Taint, Mar 16, 2016.
Lavender shirt got upset...NO PUBLICITY!!!
I love this shit it's a terrible shame more people don't know.
Debt collectors and bailiffs have no powers except in very extreme circumstances, and can only be used as a last resort. So whenever you see a bailiff breaking in to a premise or using force is totally illegal as it any police officer helping these people to do so,
Even when force is authorised it is classified as reasonable force and can not be used against a human as per the tribunal courts and enforcement act regulation 12
Regulation 12 is what bailiffs/ enforcement officers think gives them powers to do what they want whenever they want including the use of force... but i will say this again it can not be against another human being....
and section 24 1 and 2 explicitly state
24(1)The power to enter and any power to use force are subject to any restriction imposed by or under regulations.
(2)A power to use force does not include power to use force against persons
it is also stated in the criminal law act of 1997 which states
6 Violence for securing entry.
(1)Subject to the following provisions of this section, any person who, without lawful authority, uses or threatens violence for the purpose of securing entry into any premises for himself or for any other person is guilty of an offence, provided that—
(a)there is someone present on those premises at the time who is opposed to the entry which the violence is intended to secure; and
(b)the person using or threatening the violence knows that that is the case.
(2)[F2Subject to subsection (1A) above,] the fact that a person has any interest in or right to possession or occupation of any premises shall not for the purposes of subsection (1) above constitute lawful authority for the use or threat of violence by him or anyone else for the purpose of securing his entry into those premises.
(a)whether the violence in question is directed against the person or against property; and
(b)whether the entry which the violence is intended to secure is for the purpose of acquiring possession of the premises in question or for any other purpose.
(5)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding on the standard scale or to both.
Now a bailiff will show a police officer if present part of schedule 12 of the control of goods act NOW Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
68(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he intentionally obstructs a person lawfully acting as an enforcement agent.
(2)A person is guilty of an offence if he intentionally interferes with controlled goods without lawful excuse.
(3)A person guilty of an offence under this paragraph is liable on summary conviction to—
(a)imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks, or
(b)a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or
So the police will arrest you under this act if you breach the peace by not allowing them entry...
the police officer is a public servant and you are the public and the bailiff/ enforcement officer is not,
Now Now if you are standing in front of your door peacefully resisting and refusing to move you can not be moved out of the way!
For an arrest under a breach of the peace there is massive amounts of case law which shows the aggressor is the one that should be arrested,,,
The main definition of this comes from RV Howe 1981 case law and the following case laws define who should be arrested for a breach of the peace..
Only a real ans sufficient breach of the peace should deprive a citizen not at the time acting unlawfully of his liberty..
Foulkes v the chief constable of Merseyside
The threat must come from the person to be arrested...
Redmond-bate vs the director of public prosecution 1988
the conduct must clearly interfere with the rights of others and its natural consequence must be " not wholly unreasonable violence" from a third party.
Redmond-bate vs the director of public prosecution 1988
The conduct of the person to be arrested must be unreasonable
Nicole and selvanayagam vs director of public prosecution 1996
The debtor cannot use violence but the degree of resistance may be marched to the force being used to try and get in
Simpson v morris 1831
the law allow you to peacefully resist the possession of your home or property
if the bailiff is there for a debt or a non criminal fine than it is a civil matter and the police must be impartial no matter what the paperwork says...
What is now held s the authority for determining a breach of the peace is as follows...
There is a breach of the peace when a harm is to be done or likely to be done to a person or in his presence to his property or by a person being in fear of being so harmed through an assault, affray or riot unlawful assembly or disturbance...
To all police officers
The threat must come from the person to be arrested,,,, which means if a bailiff touches you or moves you out of the way, they are the ones that should be arrested...
Another very important thing here is what sir Alexander Cockburn stated
the officer has no right to force himself into the respondents house, which was the respondents castle, whether the officer was known or not this was illegal, and therefore he was not in the execution of his duty at all when he was assaulted, he seems to have provoked the assault.
lord jush commented
every man house is his castle and a bailiff cannot force his way inside to force execution of a debt..
A person is entitled to resist entry to their property against their will and if force is used they can oppose it with reasonable force themselves...
A bailiff placing a foot in the door is trespass and any levy attempted after this is invalid and the entry to the premises may be resisted...
Now I became so angry at this page....
that I considered them to be inciting violence against another human being for they are telling bailiffs enforcement officers that they can do what they want, yet omit to include what the law actually says about what they can not do! purposely with intent to deceive IMHO.
Even the headline Sheriffs Office, they are not the Office of the Sheriff, Anyway that part is bye the bye... So I thought sod that these people are acting in a criminal manner”inciting violence against another” and decided to put an argument to the FSA outlining their attempt to deceive.
I was about to send it to them then I noticed this...
Section 99, Schedule 7, paragraph 5 of the Courts Act 2003: 5. It is the duty of every constable, at the request of - a) an enforcement agent or b) a person acting under the enforcement agent's authority, to assist the enforcement agent or that person in the execution of a writ.
I thought this can not be right so I looked up the act and its schedule... and low and behold it is clearly there in black and white....
Thanks for the info
Fuck those cunts. You should be allowed to clock up debt without people trying to make you pay for it.
I find it shameful that we Americans gave the Brits that greatest language in the world. They have just taken it and bastardized it with that horrible accent.
You can also tell the guy is a professional deadbeat.