Overturning 700 years of Common Law!

[obvious]

The law is being changed to allow bailiffs powers of forced entry. Don't let them just get away with it, sign the petition below. At the very least, police should be present when someone is 'legally' breaking in to inhabited property. There are a lot of vulnerable people out there who this will affect and dare I say plenty of ex-con bailiffs ready to take full advantage.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Bailiff-Violence/

On the 06 July 2004 Standing Committee E considering the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Bill, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs did not tell the Committee that they were abolishing the rights of citizens to refuse entry to bailiffs established in around 1300, confirmed in Semayne’s case in 1604, and upheld by the courts ever since. The Committee was not informed that it was abolishing centuries of common law. Neither was the measure introduced or debated on the floor of the House of Commons. We demand this fundamental right to freedom from the threat of violence in our own homes be reinstated, and safeguarded for the protection of future generations.

[TheAnimus]

surely this will only allow Bailiffs to enter once a court order has been given?

if so, then the bastards deserve too have their TV taken.

I've had the joys of trying too get money from people who owe my parents business. One lot that really pissed me off had just gone away for 2 weeks on holiday, whilst owing over 1.8k.

If a court has ruled against you, i see no reason to not give the balifs right too enter.

[Marcos]

surely this will only allow Bailiffs to enter once a court order has been given?

if so, then the bastards deserve too have their TV taken.

I've had the joys of trying too get money from people who owe my parents business. One lot that really pissed me off had just gone away for 2 weeks on holiday, whilst owing over 1.8k.

If a court has ruled against you, i see no reason to not give the balifs right too enter.

i dont think i can argue with that

[TeePee]

surely this will only allow Bailiffs to enter once a court order has been given?

if so, then the bastards deserve too have their TV taken.

I've had the joys of trying too get money from people who owe my parents business. One lot that really pissed me off had just gone away for 2 weeks on holiday, whilst owing over 1.8k.

If a court has ruled against you, i see no reason to not give the balifs right too enter.

I don't think I can agree with that.

[TiG]

Just interested why you are against it Teepee?. I mean if you refuse baliff's access don't they just get the police involved and enter anyway?. Surely its just taking a step out the process.

If you've gone to court and you have assets that are able to be taken in payment then surely that should happen?.

Non payments of fines is otherwise a prison sentence, i'm not certain what is that much of a problem?. If you've broken the law, and been fined and you can't pay the fine (which the court is supposed to take into account and offer you payment terms).

Interested to hear if i've missed something though.

TiG

[TheAnimus]

I don't think I can agree with that.

Normally for this too happen, you will of had to of been in a legally binding contract too pay.

If that is disputed you will be in a posistion too settle this with arbitration before you have a judge rule against you, and order in bailiffs.

As it is i understand that they can enter through an open window anyway?

[SiM]

This petition site sucks, there should be the ability to vote against the petition. Because even if 50,000 people sign the petition, there might be 100,000 people who disagree (and would have signed the anti-petition if there was one).

But on topic, why shouldn't lenders be able to recover whats rightfully theirs? If your bank goes bankrupt, surely you would want to recover some of your savings from the bank's assets...

Who cares if its 700 years old... wasn't burning witches legal back then? you have to move with the times...

[JPreston]

I'd sign, but I'm abstaining from signing any of those because all the worthy petitions are dwarfed by the ones set up by idiots to 'ban the metric system' or 'make petrol 10p a pint'. See also: 'Cancel plans for ID cards and National Identity Register' vs 'hypothetical road pricing scheme at a cost which I just made up'

But this is a stupid, unjust development which will free unregulated thugs to intimidate and rob from the most vulnerable, in the name of protecting their commercial interests at the cost of society. The govt should do something about irresponsible lending, loan sharks and door-to-door 'tick' ladies first.

[badass]

Hmmm somehow I dont like the idea that a bunch of thugs employed by XYZ finance have right of entry to anyones house without getting the police involved.
What if someopne's fraudulently got credit or something and used names and addresses of someone they know, and the company ignored the residents protestations that its nothing to do with them?

[JPreston]

Hmmm somehow I dont like the idea that a bunch of thugs employed by XYZ finance have right of entry to anyones house without getting the police involved.
What if someopne's fraudulently got credit or something and used names and addresses of someone they know, and the company ignored the residents protestations that its nothing to do with them?

Next week we'll be told that's another reason we need ID cards....

[TiG]

Hmmm somehow I dont like the idea that a bunch of thugs employed by XYZ finance have right of entry to anyones house without getting the police involved.
What if someopne's fraudulently got credit or something and used names and addresses of someone they know, and the company ignored the residents protestations that its nothing to do with them?

From what i've read...

"break in to domestic premises and enforce consumer credit debts, including credit card bills, which are the subject of a County Court Judgment."

Which to me says that it has gone past the situation where a court case has happened, meaning if someone has had fraud committed against them then it shouldn't be possible to come to this.

TiG

[obvious]

Yeah, for me it's mostly about believing that at the very least the police should be present if someone is 'legally' breaking in to property. There are a lot of vulnerable people out there who it would be easy to take advantage of and I certainly wouldn't put it past your average bailiff. At least the police still have some level of respect and accountability left.

[TeePee]

Imagine you owe £500. There is £1000 sat on your kitchen table. Without the police there, would you come back to find £500? Or the full £1000 gone and the bailiff took your £2000 plasma screen to settle the debt?

I'm not against making people pay their debts, only against letting people who are basically thugs break into peoples houses. The police have accountability.

[finlay666]

Imagine you owe £500. There is £1000 sat on your kitchen table. Without the police there, would you come back to find £500? Or the full £1000 gone and the bailiff took your £2000 plasma screen to settle the debt?

I'm not against making people pay their debts, only against letting people who are basically thugs break into peoples houses. The police have accountability.

AFAIK they will have already checked to recover goods worth the value in auction (so normally about 20% of their actual worth) and when they go to collect it if the money is there to recover the debt surely they will only take that (+the fees that they will have charged for the visit etc.)

though that does rely a LOT on honesty on their part

[SiM]

Imagine you owe £500. There is £1000 sat on your kitchen table. Without the police there, would you come back to find £500? Or the full £1000 gone and the bailiff took your £2000 plasma screen to settle the debt?

I'm not against making people pay their debts, only against letting people who are basically thugs break into peoples houses. The police have accountability.

Why would you owe £500 and have all that stuff... Surely:
1. you wouldn't borrow if you had all that
2. you would pay it off before the 10th warning and the court case by selling the plasma yourself, or with the money on the kitchen table.
3. anyone leave £1000 cash on a table while they are out deserves to get robbed

[TeePee]

My senario wasn't realistic. But it illustrates my point.