Supposedly vulnerable adults

Moderator: ArthurWankspittle

User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 3550
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:02 am
Contact:

Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby grixit » Fri Sep 30, 2016 12:47 pm

I've figured it out, it's just another sovspeak reversal of meaning.

Just as they think the word "includes" is used to *exclude* things, they also believe that if they use the word "vulnerable", it makes them *invulnerable*.
I voted for Hillary, and i didn't even get a stupid tshirt!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4

FatGambit
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 429
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:41 pm

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby FatGambit » Fri Sep 30, 2016 1:06 pm

It's because guidelines state something to the effect of if a vulnerable adult is in the household they should back off, and generally not be too heavy handed as society doesn't like it when big men extract money from little old bob in the motorised wheelchair with the threat of taking away said wheelchair to sell.

They're just latching on to it like the pond scum they are, which will undoubtly make life harder for people who are genuinly vulnerable, just because you've had to take an asprin for a headache doesn't make you disabled.

Not something to make light of I'm afraid.

letissier14
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 906
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 4:02 pm

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby letissier14 » Fri Sep 30, 2016 1:37 pm

Groups like Ca3, BTBAB and GOODF make a point of telling people that if bailiffs turn up tell them it is a vulnerable household.

Fmotl claim vulnerability accounts for single mothers, people with children, on benefits etc.

I have seen so many of these cases, that it is getting to the point where someone who really does have a claim to be classed as vulnerable, is getting ignored by bailiffs because of the bailiffs having to deal with so many people claiming they are vulnerable, when it is clear they are not vulnerable at all.
I don't take sides, I read all the facts and then come to my own conclusions

Firthy2002
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:24 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby Firthy2002 » Fri Sep 30, 2016 7:14 pm

They also repeatedly fail to understand that vulnerability only counts for the debtor and the onus is on them to prove it. Doesn't matter if you live with your gran who has dementia, they'll still come knocking.
-=Firthy2002=-

Watching idiots dig themselves into holes since 2016.

User avatar
PeanutGallery
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:11 pm
Location: In a gallery, with Peanuts.

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby PeanutGallery » Sat Oct 01, 2016 2:26 am

It's also the case that being vulnerable doesn't mean you cannot live up to your obligations and that the extent of the vulnerability must be taken into account during an enforcement action. Ideally this would mean the bailiffs, social work teams and the individuals support workers all working together to resolve the issue.

Except that what often happens is one hand doesn't even know where the other is and if HCEO's are involved they can arrive with little warning. The main issue with vulnerable people isn't the recovery of debts, it's evictions. Because a vulnerable person may simply vanish onto the streets and not be aware or seek the help they are entitled to or taking all the items they need for their medical condition (which may be more than just medication). In these circumstances their is very obviously a risk to health.

I would suppose that the ideal time for the debtor/evictee to list any vulnerabilities would be in the court process, so that the officers of the court can be informed and can contact the agencies who could facilitate help, I would also say that if the court is aware of a vulnerable person being evicted, it should consider their needs above that of the landlord when considering transferring to the high court for enforcement, as HCEO's routinely conduct no notice evictions and these are more onerous for the various agencies to step in.

More should be done to help those who have genuine vulnerabilities and in such a way that the enforcement officer doesn't find out about it when he or she is standing on the doorstep.
Warning may contain traces of nut

Normal Wisdom
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 779
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:28 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby Normal Wisdom » Sat Oct 01, 2016 8:47 am

Of course it never occurs to those idiots who try to hide behind their "vulnerable" relatives that they also have a responsibility not to expose them to such stressful situations.
Mark Ceylon / Seylon / SriLankerC Haining - "... a dangerous and unpleasant boil on the arse of humanity".

Bungle
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2015 2:26 pm

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby Bungle » Sat Oct 01, 2016 9:07 am

letissier14 wrote:Groups like Ca3, BTBAB and GOODF make a point of telling people that if bailiffs turn up tell them it is a vulnerable household.

Fmotl claim vulnerability accounts for single mothers, people with children, on benefits etc.

I have seen so many of these cases, that it is getting to the point where someone who really does have a claim to be classed as vulnerable, is getting ignored by bailiffs because of the bailiffs having to deal with so many people claiming they are vulnerable, when it is clear they are not vulnerable at all.


The 'vulnerable household' template peddled by these sites has harmed genuine vulnerable debtors.

Debt collecting agencies and bailiff companies receive thousands of these letters and in one case that I saw on BTBATB a few days ago, a lady posted a reply from a bailiff company where they stated that the person appears to have used a downloaded document from the internet and had failed to provide any evidence to support the claim to being 'vulnerable' and that she should take proper advice.
TUCO said to me:
“I envy you for the job that you do in helping advise people. If I could choose an occupation, this is what I would like to do. Much of the advice that I pass onto people is heavily influenced by your posts”.

Muggy
Stowaway
Stowaway
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby Muggy » Sat Oct 01, 2016 9:22 am

The Beat the Bailiffs vulnerable template is so awful that it is almost embarrassing to display it publicly. But I will.


Dear Sir or Madam,

Re: Account number: [your account number]

NOTICE TO CEASE AND DESIST
PROTECTION FROM HARASSMENT ACT 1997

PLEASE SUPPLY ME WITH A COPY OF YOUR COMPLAINTS PROCEDURE

I am writing to inform you that according to paragraph 77 of the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014, I am classed a vulnerable household, for the following reason;

[Reasons for Vulnerability]

Regulation 10(1) of the taking control of Goods Regulations 2013 provides me with statutory protection as a vulnerable household.

Paragraphs 70 to 78 of the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014 says enforcement agents must withdraw from the property.

As you have now been notified that I am a vulnerable debtor you should alert the creditor, as paragraph 30 of the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014. Paragraph 16 says the creditor/council MUST be prepared to take control of the case.

As the class of vulnerable debtor is prescribed by the Ministry of Justice, neither the bailiff or the creditor, is entitled to question whether or not a person is classed a vulnerable person for the purpose of civil enforcement.

Please do not pass me on to your welfare dept. as you have now been informed that I am a vulnerable household and should return the debt. Passing me on to your welfare dept. is a delay tactic. As there will be no change in my circumstances in the near future, you will only wasting your own time as no fees will be collected from me.

Any further enforcement action will be classed as harassment. I have also sent a copy of this letter to the original creditor to inform them that they should recall the debt and remind them that according to Paragraph 7 of the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014 they are responsible for any enforcement agents acting on their behalf.

ALL PARTIES HAVE BOTH BEEN INFORMED THAT I AM CLASSED AS A VULNERABLE HOUSEHOLD AND SHOULD CEASE ALL ENFORCEMENT ACTION

Kind Regards,


[Your Name]

Bungle
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2015 2:26 pm

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby Bungle » Sat Oct 01, 2016 9:53 am

letissier14 wrote:Groups like Ca3, BTBAB and GOODF make a point of telling people that if bailiffs turn up tell them it is a vulnerable household.

Fmotl claim vulnerability accounts for single mothers, people with children, on benefits etc.


Perhaps somebody ought to post a copy of this recent decision from the Local Government Ombudsman before they tell somebody to send the 'vulnerable household' template letter to the council or bailiff company !!!



Local Authority: Trafford Council



5. Ms B has arrears of council tax for a property she used to live in. The arrears are just over £460. She does not dispute the arrears.

6. When the debt first arose the Council agreed a payment arrangement with Ms B. The payments were not made so the arrangement was cancelled.

7. Ms B lives with her partner and they have a young child. Ms B says her and her partner have separate finances. The debt arose before she was living with her partner. Ms B has no income and receives no benefits other than child benefit. Her partner pays for all household expenses. Ms B has other debts. She suffers from severe anxiety and post natal depression.

8. The Council has asked Ms B for details of the household income including her partner’s income and expenditure. Ms B says she cannot provide it as she does not know it. As she has no income this would mean that effectively her partner would be paying her debt from a time before they were together.
The issues

The repayment arrangement

9. It is not for me to say how much Ms B should repay. I am considering whether there is any administrative fault in how the Council has considered the matter.

10. The Council considered it could take into account Ms B’s partner’s income because the only reason she does not have any other income (including benefits) is because he is supporting her. The Council has referred to how entitlement to benefit is assessed which will take into account household income. If Ms B received benefits (other than child benefit) the Council could apply for a deduction from her benefits.

11. I do not consider there was fault in the Council asking for Ms B to provide details of the household income. However once it became clear that Ms B did not have details of his income I consider it was wrong for the Council to continue to press Ms B to provide the information.

12. The Council proposed that a suitable payment arrangement with Ms B to clear the debt would be £40 a month which would mean it was cleared in a year. Ms B’s only known income is £20 a week child benefit. As the Council has no reason to believe that Ms B has more income available to her I do not consider the Council’s proposed payment arrangement is flawed and cannot be justified.

13. The Council has now asked Ms B for proof of her income.

Vulnerability

14. Ms B considered the Council should recall the debt from the bailiffs. The Council accepts that Ms B is vulnerable.

15. The Council’s position is that where a debtor is vulnerable it will put a hold on the action with its enforcement agents and carry out a financial assessment. Once an arrangement has been agreed the Council would liaise with its agents and instruct them to add this to their records.

16. The Council comments that it has taken control of this case in accordance with the relevant provisions of the guidance.

The Council further states the guidance and regulations do not provide that vulnerability ends enforcement. Nor does a declaration by a debtor that they have no goods cease enforcement as this can only be confirmed by an enforcement agent visit. It is the duty of the enforcement agent to search for goods on behalf of the creditor. It is not the case that because a debtor is vulnerable then the creditor may not take control of goods provided the correct process is followed.

17. I do not consider there was administrative fault by the Council on this point. The matter was put on hold with the bailiffs and that has continued during my investigation.




http://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/bene...tax/15-005-395
TUCO said to me:
“I envy you for the job that you do in helping advise people. If I could choose an occupation, this is what I would like to do. Much of the advice that I pass onto people is heavily influenced by your posts”.

Bungle
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2015 2:26 pm

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby Bungle » Sat Oct 01, 2016 9:58 am

Extracts from another Local Government Ombudsman decision on 'vulnerability'.


Local Authority: Newcastle-under-Lyme-District Council.


Analysis:

The debtor in this case (Ms X) had a representative assisting her. She had two Liability Orders (2011/2012 and 2013/2014), In the case of the 2013/4 Liability Order, the council made an attachment of earning order to recover this debt. The AOE failed in August 2014 as Ms x moved jobs. She failed to advise the council of her new employer. The account was therefore referred to bailiffs.

Although the debtor was employed, she nonetheless had a history of mental health problems and a letter was obtained from her GP confirming that she suffered with stress, anxiety and depression and that this could be triggered by financial concerns.

The representative complained to the Ombudsman because the local authority would not agree to recall the debt from the bailiffs.

Paragraph 12:

The council would only agree to recall the 2013/2014 debt from the bailiffs provided that Ms X brought the current council tax year up to date. Ms X’s representative felt this was not achievable.

Ms x was hospitalised with a suspected heart attack in February 2015. The bailiff placed a hold on the account for 28 days. After 28 days and having received evidence of Ms B’s hospitalisation at the end of February, the bailiff discussed the case with the Council.

Paragraph 13:

On 30 March the bailiff agreed to reduce the instalments they had requested in line with Ms B’s request. The bailiff records indicate that some, but not all payments were made. This prompted further enforcement contacts. The Council confirmed that Ms X was now paying bailiffs £5 per week for the 2013/14 debt. The bailiff records indicate this arrangement began in July 2015

Paragraph 26:

The bailiff records indicate that it took account of Ms X’s health and the information provided. Although I recognise that Ms X and her representative wanted the Council to recall Ms X’s account from bailiffs, this was a decision for the Council. I do not consider the Council was at fault when it decided the account should not be recalled. I note the Council, via the bailiffs agreed a payment plan.

http://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/bene...tax/14-017-488
TUCO said to me:
“I envy you for the job that you do in helping advise people. If I could choose an occupation, this is what I would like to do. Much of the advice that I pass onto people is heavily influenced by your posts”.

User avatar
Skeleton
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1026
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 7:37 am
Location: Thailand

Re: Supposedly vulnerable adults

Postby Skeleton » Sat Oct 01, 2016 3:13 pm

The problem is a lot of the advice from places like BTBATB and people like Chrissy Morris involves you being aggressive and pointing out in no uncertain terms to the Bailiff you are a vulnerable person.

Not my advice - theirs.

They wont see the irony in that because they are to stupid to, that is the worrying bit.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played. :lol: :lol:


Return to “United Kingdom”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest