debit collection firms collection under your own name or business name

[Cash is King]

So say if a debit collection agency turns up at say my business premises to collect a debit in the form of money or taking goods in my name as title of Mr John DOE. But everything in the property belongs to a limited company where Mr John DOE is the director. Can they take the goods?

 

[Nathanto]

So say if a debit collection agency turns up at say my business premises to collect a debit in the form of money or taking goods in my name as title of Mr John DOE. But everything in the property belongs to a limited company where Mr John DOE is the director. Can they take the goods?

No (as long as you have genuine documentary evidence that the property belongs to the limited company) unless Mr John DOE has signed a personal guarantee for the limited company's debts.

 

[Newchodge]

What name is the CCJ in?

 

[Mark T Jones]

No (as long as you have genuine documentary evidence that the property belongs to the limited company) unless Mr John DOE has signed a personal guarantee for the limited company's debts.

In the latter case, they'd be collecting company assets on behalf of the company

But yes, the burden of proof of ownership is on you, not them

 

[jimbof]

So say if a debit collection agency turns up at say my business premises to collect a debit in the form of money or taking goods in my name as title of Mr John DOE. But everything in the property belongs to a limited company where Mr John DOE is the director. Can they take the goods?

Surprised no one else has asked.
Are they a debt collection agency or a bailiff/enforcement officer?
I think the distinction was important, and if they are the former (per your post) I believe they can't take anything from anyone. If they're actually a bailiff/enforcement officer then it's a different matter.

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

If they are a debit company (as the OP states ) I would take them up the boxing ring

 

[Cash is King]

No (as long as you have genuine documentary evidence that the property belongs to the limited company) unless Mr John DOE has signed a personal guarantee for the limited company's debts.

So if the limited company (that John DOE is the director for) only rents the property. But all the stock and fixtures and fittings in the property belong to said company. And the debit collection agency turn to take money or goods and the director of said company (John DOE) is present at the time. and the debit collector says "Are you John JOE". And John DOE say "yes I am". And the agent say "we are hear to take your goods" then what next?

 

[Cash is King]

What name is the CCJ in?

There is no CCJ it is a Liability order. But it is in the name of John DOE

 

[Cash is King]

In the latter case, they'd be collecting company assets on behalf of the company

But yes, the burden of proof of ownership is on you, not them

So even though they are making the claim that the burden of proof is on me and not them, is that right? Hold on one moment! if that where the case then is that not a presumption of guilt, ie guilty until proven innocent

But if true. then the following applies.
1. The tenancy is in the company name and not John DOE
2. The stock purchased was purchased for cash with a till recite with no invoice name on them
3. The fixtures and fitting, well this part is complicated, as John Doe built the shop prior to opening it with his own funds, dose he need to sell it to the limited company that he is director for, for the debit collection agency not to be able to reposes any of it that is? if that where the case then dose the limited company need a recite from John DOE that he sold the stuff to the company?

 

[Cash is King]

Surprised no one else has asked.
Are they a debt collection agency or a bailiff/enforcement officer?
I think the distinction was important, and if they are the former (per your post) I believe they can't take anything from anyone. If they're actually a bailiff/enforcement officer then it's a different matter.

It is a "Notice of Enforcement" from Marston Recovery. If that helps

 

[Cash is King]

If they are a debit company (as the OP states ) I would take them up the boxing ring

Again it says "Notice of Enforcement"
Sorry but looks like I made an error in my title in the OP

But I like your approch to it though

 

[WaveJumper]

So even though they are making the claim that the burden of proof is on me and not them, is that right? Hold on one moment! if that where the case then is that not a presumption of guilt, ie guilty until proven innocent

But if true. then the following applies.
1. The tenancy is in the company name and not John DOE
2. The stock purchased was purchased for cash with a till recite with no invoice name on them
3. The fixtures and fitting, well this part is complicated, as John Doe built the shop prior to opening it with his own funds, dose he need to sell it to the limited company that he is director for, for the debit collection agency not to be able to reposes any of it that is? if that where the case then dose the limited company need a recite from John DOE that he sold the stuff to the company?

Sorry but is this not a classic case of John Doe not looking for the correct advice before embarking on the LTD journey.

Fitting out a shop with own funds, why did John Doe not lend funds to the company and have proper document history in place.

Was the stock purchased with monies from the company, (hopefully yes) surly the receipts will show in the company accounts along with withdrawals showing if required in the company bank account?

What advice did John Doe take from an accountant on starting up a company to protect John Doe from the very issues, John Doe now unfortunately finds himself.

One also wonders if done correctly how much John Doe could have saved / reclaimed if proper records had been kept and the LTD correctly funded. Perhaps the wolves would not be knocking on the door

 

[Mark T Jones]

So even though they are making the claim that the burden of proof is on me and not them, is that right? Hold on one moment! if that where the case then is that not a presumption of guilt, ie guilty until proven innocent

But if true. then the following applies.
1. The tenancy is in the company name and not John DOE
2. The stock purchased was purchased for cash with a till recite with no invoice name on them
3. The fixtures and fitting, well this part is complicated, as John Doe built the shop prior to opening it with his own funds, dose he need to sell it to the limited company that he is director for, for the debit collection agency not to be able to reposes any of it that is? if that where the case then dose the limited company need a recite from John DOE that he sold the stuff to the company?

Correct on all counts (assuming they are bailiffs or HCEOs)

They have reason to belive that the goods are yours, you have to prove that they belong to the company

 

[Mark T Jones]

The key question here, as yet unasked, is why doesn't John Doe pay what he owes?

 

[fisicx]

This might be related to this thread:

Cash machine in your shop (anyone have one?)

Evening! I plan to start up a shop some time in the new year and run cash sales. I though it would be a good idea to have a cash machine in the shop so people can get cash quickly and easy! I read up about them on the net and it says you top it up your self. and things like implying that it is...

www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk

 

[Newchodge]

So if the limited company (that John DOE is the director for) only rents the property. But all the stock and fixtures and fittings in the property belong to said company. And the debit collection agency turn to take money or goods and the director of said company (John DOE) is present at the time. and the debit collector says "Are you John JOE". And John DOE say "yes I am". And the agent say "we are hear to take your goods" then what next?

Ask them to show proof they can take goods.

 

[Newchodge]

It is a "Notice of Enforcement" from Marston Recovery. If that helps

I thought you said it was a Liability Order?

 

[Newchodge]

Hold on one moment! if that where the case then is that not a presumption of guilt, ie guilty until proven innocent

This is not a criminal case.

 

[Mark T Jones]

This is not a criminal case.

In any case, John Doe isn't innocent - he has been deemed by the courts to owe than amount.

 

[Mark T Jones]

I thought you said it was a Liability Order?

They are enforcing the liability order.

I'm not familiar with liability orders (it seems they mostly relate to Council Tax), but a quick search reveals this

Liability Order. Free Debt Advice. StepChange Debt Charity

 

[Cash is King]

Fitting out a shop with own funds, why did John Doe not lend funds to the company and have proper document history in place.

Because the company is not set up yet

Was the stock purchased with monies from the company, (hopefully yes) surly the receipts will show in the company accounts along with withdrawals showing if required in the company bank account?

That is a hyperthetical question, as we are not at that stage yet. But the receipts will go though the books, and there will be no bank account as it is all cash

What advice did John Doe take from an accountant on starting up a company to protect John Doe from the very issues, John Doe now unfortunately finds himself.

John DOE has taken NO advice from any such accountants

One also wonders if done correctly how much John Doe could have saved / reclaimed if proper records had been kept and the LTD correctly funded. Perhaps the wolves would not be knocking on the door

Sorry I dont understand any of that

 

[Cash is King]

Correct on all counts (assuming they are bailiffs or HCEOs)

They have reason to belive that the goods are yours, you have to prove that they belong to the company

HCEOs?

 

[Cash is King]

The key question here, as yet unasked, is why doesn't John Doe pay what he owes?

John DOE can not afford it and dose not belive the claim to be a legal or cetrainly lawfull one at that

 

[Cash is King]

Ask them to show proof they can take goods.

What proof do they need?

All I can see at the bottom of the letter states the following

If you dont pay or agree a payment plan on time, an enforement agent will visit you and may take your belongings into control

 

[Cash is King]

I thought you said it was a Liability Order?

At the top of the page in red it states "Notice of Enforcement"

A box a bit below that states "A Liability order has been issued for unpaid National non domestic rates"

 

[Cash is King]

This is not a criminal case.

What do you think that "presumption of innocence" only apply to criminal cases then?

 

[Cash is King]

In any case, John Doe isn't innocent - he has been deemed by the courts to owe than amount.

Not quite the case!
The liability order has no court stamp on it, no name of John DOE on it, A signature signed by someone who claims to be an officer. No signature from a judge lin wet ink

The likely hood is that council hired the court room from the court house, put them selfs in as the prosecutor/ claimant and put them selfs in as well as the person that will and has pass judgment (that is not even a magistate never mind a real judge BTW) all in my absence

 

[Cash is King]

They are enforcing the liability order.

I'm not familiar with liability orders (it seems they mostly relate to Council Tax), but a quick search reveals this

Liability Order. Free Debt Advice. StepChange Debt Charity

Thats right they do indeed relate to council tax, but they also relate to (in my case) business rates to

 

[fisicx]

The likely hood is that council hired the court room from the court house, put them selfs in as the prosecutor/ claimant and put them selfs in as well as the person that will and has pass judgment (that is not even a magistate never mind a real judge BTW) all in my absence

No they didn’t. That’s a quite ridiculous statement.

 

[Nathanto]

The liability order has no court stamp on it, no name of John DOE on it, A signature signed by someone who claims to be an officer. No signature from a judge in wet ink

The likely hood is that council hired the court room from the court house, put them selfs in as the prosecutor/ claimant and put them selfs in as well as the person that will and has pass judgment (that is not even a magistate never mind a real judge BTW) all in my absence

Oh dear, "Freeman of the land" nonsense, this is going to end badly.

The likelihood is that the council followed procedure and UK law which in this case is The Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Local Lists) Regulations 1989 and Local Government Finance Act 1988.

Essentially those laws state that if you are the tenant then you are liable for business rates, the council tell you how much and how to pay and if you don't then a court-authorised official can make a liability order against you.

You will have been issued a summons inviting you to attend court with any defence as to why you were not liable to pay business rates. Once the liability order has been made you have a short time in which you can can challenge it in the Magistrates court, otherwise you can still appeal to the High Court.

Fundamentally, did you have a tenancy for the business premises for the relevant period? If you did then UK law says you are liable so on what basis does John Doe think the claim is not legal?

 

[fisicx]

Thats right they do indeed relate to council tax, but they also relate to (in my case) business rates to

So why don’t you pay your council tax and business rates?

 

[Cash is King]

So why don’t you pay your council tax and business rates?

Its quite a well know thing that since 2003 that is how liability orders now work. Go and watch a hand full of YT vids and put into the title liability orders to see for your self what it is really all about

 

[Cash is King]

Oh dear, "Freeman of the land" nonsense, this is going to end badly.

The likelihood is that the council followed procedure and UK law which in this case is The Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Local Lists) Regulations 1989 and Local Government Finance Act 1988.

No no it all!

Essentially those laws state that if you are the tenant then you are liable for business rates, the council tell you how much and how to pay and if you don't then a court-authorised official can make a liability order against you.

No i was not the tenant

You will have been issued a summons inviting you to attend court with any defence as to why you were not liable to pay business rates. Once the liability order has been made you have a short time in which you can can challenge it in the Magistrates court, otherwise you can still appeal to the High Court.

No i was not issued a court summons

Fundamentally, did you have a tenancy for the business premises for the relevant period? If you did then UK law says you are liable so on what basis does John Doe think the claim is not legal?

John DOE was unlawfully evicted by the land lord and is no longer the tenant, but more then likly reciving a bill for another 4 or so years.

I take it that you have all ready made your mind up and it is clean who side you where on before I was ever born, never mind before you ever read this

 

[Cash is King]

So why don’t you pay your council tax and business rates?

I am not running a business so how the hell can I afford to pay rates for it?

 

[Nathanto]

No i was not the tenant
No i was not issued a court summons
John DOE was unlawfully evicted by the land lord and is no longer the tenant,

Why did the council issue a rates bill and then a liability order against you if you were not the tenant? Where did they get your details from if it wasn't from a tenancy agreement with your name on it for the dates the business rates were due?

If you were "illegally evicted" then you won't have had access to the premises so how can you know whether a summons was issued (as it will have been served to the premise's address)?

Your posts contradict each other; you say you were not the tenant but then say you were illegally evicted which is impossible if you were not the tenant to begin with...

 

[Mark T Jones]

Because the company is not set up yet

How can the goods belong to a company that doesn't exist?

I think John Doe needs to learn to present his case in a logical, factual and coherent manner

 

[fisicx]

I am not running a business so how the hell can I afford to pay rates for it?

Your opening post mentioned business premises. Which means you are obliged to pay business rates. If you are not running a business why do you have the premises?

 

[Newchodge]

Because the company is not set up yet

Then how can John Doe claim that anything is the property of the company?

 

[Newchodge]

What do you think that "presumption of innocence" only apply to criminal cases then?

Yes.

 

[Newchodge]

Not quite the case!
The liability order has no court stamp on it, no name of John DOE on it, A signature signed by someone who claims to be an officer. No signature from a judge lin wet ink

The likely hood is that council hired the court room from the court house, put them selfs in as the prosecutor/ claimant and put them selfs in as well as the person that will and has pass judgment (that is not even a magistate never mind a real judge BTW) all in my absence

Oh god not this rubbish again. Count me out.