this is a news item (test)

Main Menu


Started by M O'D, February 23, 2013, 06:18:55 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



A debtor can remove right of implied access by displaying a notice at the entrance. 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

Bailiffs and police involvement

If a police officer is in attendance and assists the bailiff to gain entry or persuades the debtor to open the door then any levy the bailiff makes is void and the debtor can sue for damages. Skidmore v Booth [1834] 6 C&P 777

There must be very good reasons for arresting a debtor on the grounds of preventing a breach of the peace, only a serious and imminent threat justifies arrest, Foulkes v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [1998] 3 All ER 705

If a police officer arrests a debtor after throwing a bailiff off the premises who had refused a request to leave, the officer is guilty of false arrest because no offence was committed and the bailiff was there illegally: Green v Bartram [1830] 4 C&P 308.

A police officer must arrest a bailiff for breach of the peace if he places the debtor in fear of violence or harm if that offence is made in the presence of that officer, R v Howell (Errol) [1982] 1 QB 427.

If a bailiff causes a disturbance but does not make a threat, it is unreasonable for the police to arrest him. Bibby v Constable of Essex [2000] Court of Appeal April 2000.

Bailiffs can climb in through a window if one is open Tutton v Darke [1860] 5 H&N 647 or Nixon v Freeman [1860] or through a skylight - Miller v Tebb [1893]

A Bailiff cannot break a window or window pane to gain entry, Attack v Bramwell [1863] or breaking a pane of glass in order to open a fastened window is indisputably unlawful, Porter v Chapmman [1855] The Times January 25th 0c QBD.

Opening a closed but unlocked window is unlawful, Arkins v Brunton [1867] 4 Bar Reports 84 (Ireland, QB)

Opening a closed window is certainly unlawful and cannot be justified by any sort of implied license, Lenty v Hunt [1894] 2 PMR 663 or Ancaster v Milling [1823] 2 D&R 714 or Arkins v Brunton [1867] 4 Bar Reports 84 (Ireland, QB) or Villeneuva v Clarke [1890] 35 EG 458

A Bailiff may open a unlocked or closed door, but cannot open a closed but unfastened window, Nash v Lucas [1867] 2 QB 590

A Bailiff cannot open a closed latched window, Hancock v Austin [1863]

The fastening that secures a window may not be removed, Bell v Oakley [1814]

Opening a closed window is unlawful and cannot be justified by any sort of implied license, Ancaster v Milling [1823] 2 D&R 714. with links to download cases

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice
Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted


Here's an alternative move that may prove effective  8):

Re: Removal of Implied Right of Access..Bailiffs told to IGNORE
by wishy ยป Mon May 27, 2013 3:40 pm

Quote"contact agent, anyone who fancies a giggle   

Do bailiffs have Construction Skills Certification Scheme cards? no

If a bailiff has a CSCS card would he be employed by you? no

Can a bailiff walk onto a construction site without the CSCS card and being given authority by the construction company to do so? no, he's not insured.

So leave a sign on your gate saying "site under construction" and a couple of hard hat and boot signs (all cheap enough) a contact letter box for your private mythical construction company and the phone number of an old sim card you dont use   

Now they cannot enter

They may wait for people coming and going but "sorry mate i cant help you i only work here, you'll have to contact head office, leave a note in the post box, the gaffer'll probably pick it up friday when he drops wages off"    bloody red tape"
All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice
Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted


My last experience with bailiffs was a couple years ago 2 perverts came to my door, I used 'No legal name' approach, I told them who and what they are, and who and what I am. The whole drama went on for longer than I hoped, about 15 minutes, they left then returned after short time for a further 5 minutes.
Funny... thety played good cop bad cop tactics. They wanted to know if I was ex military or police and how did I know all this...
No legal name is like a silver bullet in my experience.
It seems once the perverts recognize that you know what you are and that you cannot possibly be a legal name, it's like tilting a pinball machine they go weird and stop functioning.