Saturday, 5 April 2014

Feeling the love

I got mail this morning. South Gloucestershire Council has instructed Bristow & Sutor to "continue recovery action" for the sum of £42.50.  But Mrs Williams and the gang in South Glos Recovery department are bit thick. Rundle & Co went away empty handed last year, and so will Bristow & Sutor. Only a magistrate can force me to pay this money, and only after the police are involved. I wll make that whole spectacle cost them a lot more than £42.50 if I am forced to pay.  I have never paid fraudulent fees to organised crime organisations, and I am not about to start.

If South Gloucestershire Council thinks it's a good press to get the police to force a taxpayer to give into known fraudsters, then so be it.  It will cost them more than it costs me. What we see here is petty vindictiveness by SGC, knowing the police won't investigate this fraud, - and they know full well I am not going to pay without a fight, so this is essentially a council wasting taxpayers money on a vendetta - when they are in the wrong.

Bristow & Sutor: Fraudsters


  1. My guess is Bristow & Sutor have not been instructed by SGC (they have made this up).

    There would have to be £42.50 outstanding on your Council Tax for SGC to be entitled to instruct B&S to recover this sum.

    I'd guess with the sum exactly matching the prescribed fees of the aggregate of a 1st and 2nd visit made with the view to levying distress, the sum will not be owed to the council.

    If this sum is outstanding (the Council), then SGC will have most likely passed £42.50 out of your Council Tax payments to B&S in respect of their fees. If they have done this, I would be questioning the legality of an authority giving away public money to a bunch of opportunists that you paid in good faith for them to spend on the CEO's pension.

  2. I think you are right.

    I checked with

    "There is no procedure for a bailiff to get permission from a magistrate to order you to pay the fees by way of levying distress. The bailiff has to take a civil action under section 92)8) of the Courts Act 2003. I think the minimum threshold is £50 for such a claim. They can only pester you for it but nothing in legislation provides for bailiffs to levy distress to recover it.

    Even after April 06 the regulations don't provide for unpaid fees to be recovered by distress and there is no prescribed court procedure providing an audience for bailiffs with a magistrate to obtain permission to break into premises. The police provision under section 8 is still not available to bailiff companies."

    It's all bluff. But if they want to try me, bring it.