Search
Latest topics
» Virgin money locked my account fraud queryby daveiron Yesterday at 12:32 am
» large Solar storms heading to earth as we speak
by daveiron Yesterday at 12:16 am
» Astra Zeneca
by assassin Fri May 10, 2024 4:55 am
» At last.
by daveiron Thu May 09, 2024 6:53 am
» Know who you are
by LionsShare Wed May 08, 2024 1:24 pm
» hmrc bond
by LionsShare Tue May 07, 2024 9:56 am
» Chainsaws 1
by assassin Sat May 04, 2024 5:07 am
» Supply What Does It Mean?
by LionsShare Thu May 02, 2024 11:45 am
» Speed ticket Is This The Way To Go?
by flyingfish Wed May 01, 2024 10:11 pm
» DSAR
by brownowl Mon Apr 29, 2024 1:15 pm
» Council Tax questions we should all be asking
by LionsShare Mon Apr 29, 2024 10:20 am
» Whats In A Name?
by LionsShare Sun Apr 28, 2024 8:49 pm
» The infamous DP continus
by Biggiebest Sun Apr 28, 2024 2:20 pm
» Purchased Used car, thew con rod after 4 weeks, 40,000mi on clock, can we get out of the finance?
by assassin Sun Apr 28, 2024 3:19 am
» C'Tax & The Bradbury Pound System
by flyingfish Sat Apr 27, 2024 8:21 pm
» Warranty issues
by brownowl Sat Apr 27, 2024 12:05 pm
» Smart Meter and Pre Pay Meter remedy
by daveiron Sat Apr 27, 2024 8:29 am
» are they feeling the pinch...?
by pitano1 Fri Apr 26, 2024 7:19 pm
» Fruit
by assassin Fri Apr 26, 2024 4:36 am
» Are Lowell getting desperate ?
by waylander62 Wed Apr 24, 2024 2:08 pm
» Electric Vehicles
by assassin Wed Apr 24, 2024 4:57 am
» Water charges
by daveiron Wed Apr 24, 2024 4:36 am
» 20 mph speed limit enforcable????
by flyingfish Tue Apr 23, 2024 9:26 pm
» Allotments
by flyingfish Tue Apr 23, 2024 7:54 am
» Energy debt
by flyingfish Tue Apr 23, 2024 7:49 am
» HO HO HO not that shinning or with clean hands !!!!!!
by Lopsum Sun Apr 21, 2024 7:04 pm
» Psychological Operation - Evidence on more fraud
by Lopsum Sun Apr 21, 2024 7:00 pm
» Allodial Title
by urchinatheart Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:13 am
» Grow Potatoes
by Mrblue2015 Wed Apr 17, 2024 8:18 am
» Feed Yourself For Less
by assassin Tue Apr 16, 2024 7:23 pm
» New GOODF - small account closed upon Notice 3
by RaspberryBlu Tue Apr 16, 2024 1:02 pm
» DWP
by daveiron Tue Apr 16, 2024 12:23 am
» LGA1888 sect79 sub2
by urchinatheart Mon Apr 15, 2024 9:15 am
» Know Who You Are Even More Volumes To Come
by LionsShare Sun Apr 14, 2024 11:24 am
» Woke, Nimbys, Snowflakes and idiots
by urchinatheart Fri Apr 12, 2024 12:09 am
» Never Buy Seeds Again
by assassin Wed Apr 10, 2024 6:14 pm
» Ovo bank giro?
by LionsShare Wed Apr 10, 2024 6:07 pm
» Is your car a government remote controled car???
by Lopsum Wed Apr 10, 2024 12:48 pm
» peacekeepers apprantly get a c'tax win?
by LionsShare Wed Apr 10, 2024 11:14 am
» Can I Complete The Food Circle
by urchinatheart Tue Apr 09, 2024 11:46 am
» Council tax and summons for arrest
by LionsShare Mon Apr 08, 2024 2:44 pm
» THIS IS THE ONE ?
by schist Fri Apr 05, 2024 1:04 pm
» Garden Share
by assassin Thu Apr 04, 2024 4:37 pm
» Serial Posty been awarded £10'000 for a fake bite
by assassin Wed Apr 03, 2024 7:23 pm
» The new ruling, lie-ability order
by assassin Wed Apr 03, 2024 7:04 pm
» New Member
by schist Sat Mar 30, 2024 3:00 pm
» DVLA [Hick] Does It Work [Hick] ?
by Miss Kermit Thu Mar 28, 2024 4:15 pm
» know who you are volume ??
by daveiron Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:38 pm
» Hopefully A Success
by daveiron Sun Mar 24, 2024 9:28 pm
» Most Complete Bank Giro Credit
by LionsShare Sun Mar 24, 2024 12:06 pm
» Knowing our Lawful rights
by daveiron Sat Mar 23, 2024 6:05 am
» More Illegal Immigrants
by assassin Thu Mar 21, 2024 5:43 pm
» SAR dispute
by assassin Thu Mar 21, 2024 5:32 pm
» There goes Ireland, his off.
by midnight Thu Mar 21, 2024 1:07 pm
» Call to the DVLA
by urchinatheart Mon Mar 18, 2024 2:36 pm
Moon phases
WOIRA ,advice & caselaw
Page 1 of 1
WOIRA ,advice & caselaw
I found this in my files ,i cannot give anyone credit for it as i dont know
where i got it from.
Case law is quoted here ,so use it.
A Bailiff's Access Rights (and removal of)
They have very little. You have far more Rights than they have.
Here is the template of a Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access.
Here is the Case Law that goes with it (also note that a Bailiff CANNOT remove the "tools of your trade" OR "your means of transport" ABSENT the Verdict of a Jury):
The Bailiff's Manual (download)
A debtor can remove right of implied access by displaying a notice at the entrance [see the link, above]. This was endorsed by Lord Justice Donaldson in the case of Lambert v Roberts [1981] 72 Cr App R 223 - and placing such a notice is akin to a closed door but it also prevents a bailiff entering the garden or driveway, Knox v Anderton [1983] Crim LR 115 or R. v Leroy Roberts [2003] EWCA Crim 2753
Debtors can also remove implied right of access to property by telling him to leave: Davis v Lisle [1936] 2 KB 434 similarly, McArdle v Wallace [1964] 108 Sol Jo 483
A person having been told to leave is now under a duty to withdraw from the property with all due reasonable speed and failure to do so he is not thereafter acting in the execution of his duty and becomes a trespasser with any subsequent levy made being invalid and attracts a liability under a claim for damages, Morris v Beardmore [1980] 71 Cr App 256.
Bailiffs cannot force their way into a private dwelling, Grove v Eastern Gas [1952] 1 KB 77
Otherwise a door left open is an implied license for a bailiff to enter, Faulkner v Willetts [1982] Crim LR 453 likewise a person standing back to allow the bailiff to walk through but the bailiff must not abuse this license by entering by improper means or by unusual routes, Ancaster v Milling [1823] 2 D&R 714 or Rogers v Spence [1846] M&W 571
Ringing a doorbell is not causing a disturbance, Grant v Moser [1843] 5 M&G 123 or R. v Bright 4 C&P 387 nor is refusing to leave a property causes a disturbance, Green v Bartram [1830] 4 C&P 308 or Jordan v Gibbon [1863] 8 LT 391
Permission for a bailiff to enter may be refused provided the words used are not capable of being mistaken for swear words, Bailey v Wilson [1968] Crim LR 618.
If the entry is peaceful but without permission then a request to leave should always be made first. Tullay v Reed [1823] 1 C&P 6 or an employee or other person can also request the bailiff to leave, Hall v Davis [1825] 2 C&P 33
Excessive force must be avoided, Gregory v Hall [1799] 8 TR 299 or Oakes v Wood [1837] 2 M&W 791
A debtor can use an equal amount of force to resist a bailiff from gaining entry, Weaver v Bush [1795] 8TR, Simpson v Morris [1813] 4 Taunt 821, Polkinhorne v Wright [1845] 8QB 197. Another occupier of the premises or an employee may also take these steps: Hall v Davis [1825] 2 C&P 33.
Also wrongful would be an attempt at forcible entry despite resistance, Ingle v Bell [1836] 1 M&W 516
Bailiffs cannot apply force to a door to gain entry, and if he does so he is not in the execution of his duty, Broughton v Wilkerson [1880] 44 JP 781
A Bailiff may not encourage a third party to allow the bailiff access to a property (ie workmen inside a house), access by this means renders the entry unlawful, Nash v Lucas [1867] 2 QB 590
The debtor's home and all buildings within the boundary of the premises are protected against forced entry, Munroe & Munroe v Woodspring District Council [1979] Weston-Super-Mare County Court
Contrast: A bailiff may climb over a wall or a fence or walk across a garden or yard provided that no damage occurs, Long v Clarke & another [1894] 1 QB 119
It is not contempt to assault a bailiff trying to climb over a locked gate after being refused entry, Lewis v Owen [1893] The Times November 6 p.36b (QBD)
If a bailiff enters by force he is there unlawfully and you can treat him as a trespasser. Curlewis v Laurie [1848] or Vaughan v McKenzie [1969] 1 QB 557
A debtor cannot be sued if a person enters a property uninvited and injures himself because he had no legal right to enter, Great Central Railway Co v Bates [1921] 3 KB 578
If a bailiff jams his boot into a debtors door to stop him closing, any levy that is subsequently made is not valid: Rai & Rai v Birmingham City Council [1993] or Vaughan v McKenzie [1969] 1 QB 557 or Broughton v Wilkerson [1880] 44 JP 781
If a bailiff refuses to leave the property after being requested to do so or starts trying to force entry then he is causing a disturbance, Howell v Jackson [1834] 6 C&P 723 - but it is unreasonable for a police officer to arrest the bailiff unless he makes a threat, Bibby v Constable of Essex [2000] Court of Appeal April 2000.
Vaughan v McKenzie [1969] 1 QB 557 if the debtor strikes the bailiff over the head with a full milk bottle after making a forced entry, the debtor is not guilty of assault because the bailiff was there illegally, likewise R. v Tucker at Hove Trial Centre Crown Court, December 2012 if the debtor gives the bailiff a good slap.
If a person strikes a trespasser who has refused to leave is not guilty of an offence: Davis v Lisle [1936] 2 KB 434
License to enter must be refused BEFORE the process of levy starts, Kay v Hibbert [1977] Crim LR 226 or Matthews v Dwan [1949] NZLR 1037
A bailiff rendered a trespasser is liable for penalties in tort and the entry may be in breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights if entry is not made in accordance with the law, Jokinen v Finland [2009] 37233/07
where i got it from.
Case law is quoted here ,so use it.
A Bailiff's Access Rights (and removal of)
They have very little. You have far more Rights than they have.
Here is the template of a Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access.
Here is the Case Law that goes with it (also note that a Bailiff CANNOT remove the "tools of your trade" OR "your means of transport" ABSENT the Verdict of a Jury):
The Bailiff's Manual (download)
A debtor can remove right of implied access by displaying a notice at the entrance [see the link, above]. This was endorsed by Lord Justice Donaldson in the case of Lambert v Roberts [1981] 72 Cr App R 223 - and placing such a notice is akin to a closed door but it also prevents a bailiff entering the garden or driveway, Knox v Anderton [1983] Crim LR 115 or R. v Leroy Roberts [2003] EWCA Crim 2753
Debtors can also remove implied right of access to property by telling him to leave: Davis v Lisle [1936] 2 KB 434 similarly, McArdle v Wallace [1964] 108 Sol Jo 483
A person having been told to leave is now under a duty to withdraw from the property with all due reasonable speed and failure to do so he is not thereafter acting in the execution of his duty and becomes a trespasser with any subsequent levy made being invalid and attracts a liability under a claim for damages, Morris v Beardmore [1980] 71 Cr App 256.
Bailiffs cannot force their way into a private dwelling, Grove v Eastern Gas [1952] 1 KB 77
Otherwise a door left open is an implied license for a bailiff to enter, Faulkner v Willetts [1982] Crim LR 453 likewise a person standing back to allow the bailiff to walk through but the bailiff must not abuse this license by entering by improper means or by unusual routes, Ancaster v Milling [1823] 2 D&R 714 or Rogers v Spence [1846] M&W 571
Ringing a doorbell is not causing a disturbance, Grant v Moser [1843] 5 M&G 123 or R. v Bright 4 C&P 387 nor is refusing to leave a property causes a disturbance, Green v Bartram [1830] 4 C&P 308 or Jordan v Gibbon [1863] 8 LT 391
Permission for a bailiff to enter may be refused provided the words used are not capable of being mistaken for swear words, Bailey v Wilson [1968] Crim LR 618.
If the entry is peaceful but without permission then a request to leave should always be made first. Tullay v Reed [1823] 1 C&P 6 or an employee or other person can also request the bailiff to leave, Hall v Davis [1825] 2 C&P 33
Excessive force must be avoided, Gregory v Hall [1799] 8 TR 299 or Oakes v Wood [1837] 2 M&W 791
A debtor can use an equal amount of force to resist a bailiff from gaining entry, Weaver v Bush [1795] 8TR, Simpson v Morris [1813] 4 Taunt 821, Polkinhorne v Wright [1845] 8QB 197. Another occupier of the premises or an employee may also take these steps: Hall v Davis [1825] 2 C&P 33.
Also wrongful would be an attempt at forcible entry despite resistance, Ingle v Bell [1836] 1 M&W 516
Bailiffs cannot apply force to a door to gain entry, and if he does so he is not in the execution of his duty, Broughton v Wilkerson [1880] 44 JP 781
A Bailiff may not encourage a third party to allow the bailiff access to a property (ie workmen inside a house), access by this means renders the entry unlawful, Nash v Lucas [1867] 2 QB 590
The debtor's home and all buildings within the boundary of the premises are protected against forced entry, Munroe & Munroe v Woodspring District Council [1979] Weston-Super-Mare County Court
Contrast: A bailiff may climb over a wall or a fence or walk across a garden or yard provided that no damage occurs, Long v Clarke & another [1894] 1 QB 119
It is not contempt to assault a bailiff trying to climb over a locked gate after being refused entry, Lewis v Owen [1893] The Times November 6 p.36b (QBD)
If a bailiff enters by force he is there unlawfully and you can treat him as a trespasser. Curlewis v Laurie [1848] or Vaughan v McKenzie [1969] 1 QB 557
A debtor cannot be sued if a person enters a property uninvited and injures himself because he had no legal right to enter, Great Central Railway Co v Bates [1921] 3 KB 578
If a bailiff jams his boot into a debtors door to stop him closing, any levy that is subsequently made is not valid: Rai & Rai v Birmingham City Council [1993] or Vaughan v McKenzie [1969] 1 QB 557 or Broughton v Wilkerson [1880] 44 JP 781
If a bailiff refuses to leave the property after being requested to do so or starts trying to force entry then he is causing a disturbance, Howell v Jackson [1834] 6 C&P 723 - but it is unreasonable for a police officer to arrest the bailiff unless he makes a threat, Bibby v Constable of Essex [2000] Court of Appeal April 2000.
Vaughan v McKenzie [1969] 1 QB 557 if the debtor strikes the bailiff over the head with a full milk bottle after making a forced entry, the debtor is not guilty of assault because the bailiff was there illegally, likewise R. v Tucker at Hove Trial Centre Crown Court, December 2012 if the debtor gives the bailiff a good slap.
If a person strikes a trespasser who has refused to leave is not guilty of an offence: Davis v Lisle [1936] 2 KB 434
License to enter must be refused BEFORE the process of levy starts, Kay v Hibbert [1977] Crim LR 226 or Matthews v Dwan [1949] NZLR 1037
A bailiff rendered a trespasser is liable for penalties in tort and the entry may be in breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights if entry is not made in accordance with the law, Jokinen v Finland [2009] 37233/07
daveiron- Admin
- Posts : 4921
Join date : 2017-01-17
assassin, urchinatheart, LionsShare, MikeThomas, Mrblue2015, memegirl777, Sam97 and like this post
Similar topics
» Useful Covid caselaw
» What is a WOIRA please.?
» IT advice please
» Advice please
» Hi. Need help/advice
» What is a WOIRA please.?
» IT advice please
» Advice please
» Hi. Need help/advice
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|