Because of the amount of resistance put up against the eviction and the preparation beforehand by protesters and activists, i honestly do not believe the bailifs would have stood a chance. The council, bailifs and cops knew this. Thats why the fascist pigs were sent in first with the blessing of your local MP. Would not been suprising if you had a repeat of last augusts events triggered by this political policing. Solidarity to all those resisting eviction.

Exactly; although it might not be the norm, it was very predicatable that we would face riot cops rather than bailiffs in the first instance..

The Under-Sheriff or Deputy Under-Sheriff who enforces High Court writs of possession to evict people (using hired thugs, formerly called "Sheriff's Officers" and now known as "Enforcement Officers") has always had the power not only to request police assistance, but to actually require it and instruct the police. This cops usually don't understand this and don't like the idea that someone who is not a cop has the power to tell them what to do.

Each county has a Sheriff (a toff), an Under-Sheriff, and a Deputy Under Sheriff (usually a thuggish lawyer). The Sheriff is supposed to be the muscle of the monarch's representative in each county, the Lord Lieutenant. Their job used to be keeping an eye on things, reporting back, and enforcing the monarch's writ when instructed. Now, with these newfangled inventions such as railways and telegrams, the job is just a sinecure, but a vestige of it remains in the Deputy Under-Sheriff evicting us in the name of da kween.

County Court bailiffs enforcing the equivalent warrants of possession DON'T have the same powers and the rozzers are not supposed to help them. If they are present at a County Court eviction (which is actually quite rare) it's supposed to be to "keep the peace" and not to help with the eviction. Err ...yeah... some of us have seen the cops "not helping" with a resisted County Court eviction quite a few times, though I've never heard of it being challenged legally.

Major evictions being led by police, with the Deputy Under-Sheriff either lurking somewhere in the background or having deputed "Enforcement Officers" to hide behind the cops are nothing new. Huntley Street in 1978 and many of the anti-road occupations of the 1990s are examples.

What I don't know is the funding of all this. Hiring Constant & Co or specialist climbers / tunellers etc as "Enforcement Officers" costs a lot of money. But does the Under-Sheriff or Basildon Council directly have to pay for the cops, I wonder? Does anyone know? It could be that violent cops in place of violent "Enforcement Officers" means they have tazers AND save money, too.

It's nothing to do with the amount of resistance methinks.

Some of the biggest most up-for-it site evictions during the 90s had an Under-Sheriff amongst the trees, telling people to come down, ordering people about...climbers, tunnelers and court officers/bailiffs moving around doing all the work, and cops only doing initial fence-entry, deniable under-cover-of-dark violence, and being handed people they'd then arrest.

I don't remember if they were high court or county, but I think county.

Under-Sheriff I met was a toff lawyer (father was the Under-Sheriff, father's father etc etc)!

The bailiffs can ask the police to be present if they think you might try to stop them from getting in. The police aren't allowed to help the bailiffs with the eviction but they can attend to prevent any disturbance. The police can arrest anyone who is violent.
 http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repossession/ordered_to_leave/eviction_by_the_bailiffs

It may be worth ringing the shelter line if you want the law references.

0808 800 4444