can a bailiff be a debt collector and a enforcement agent

[chantellelou]

I have 2 accounts with a bailiff company nothing large well untill fees was added. one was sent to enforcement agent and the other to a debt collecting agent both under the same company. I was then informed the enforcement agent is also my debt collection agent are they allowed to do that? it feels a bit misleading if he can say he's a debt collector not a enforcement agent.when in fact he is a enforcement agent

[lgfa92]

They can act in different matters with different powers at the same time. They can only use enforcement agent powers though where that particular debt legally allows it.

[chantellelou]

so he can come to my house as a debt collector but can use his enforcement powers? I don't trust the bailiff company as they have messed up numerous times and tbh are quiet difficult to work with

[lgfa92]

so he can come to my house as a debt collector but can use his enforcement powers? I don't trust the bailiff company as they have messed up numerous times and tbh are quiet difficult to work with

He could come to the property as a debt collector for one debt and then also collect another debt as an enforcement agent at the same visit, if required. The key is that enforcement powers can only be utilised for certain debts.

[chantellelou]

the liability order he has for the debt is wrong as well my court summons I got a copy off has a £100 difference to what the liability order he has states I also got it in writing from the bailiff company what amounts go to which liability period without bailiff charges added on.was originally 64 +80 for court fees yet my court summons states I owe 161 +80 court fees

[lgfa92]

the liability order he has for the debt is wrong as well my court summons I got a copy off has a £100 difference to what the liability order he has states I also got it in writing from the bailiff company what amounts go to which liability period without bailiff charges added on.was originally 64 +80 for court fees yet my court summons states I owe 161 +80 court fees

The liability order balance will almost always be higher than the summons as most councils will add an extra fee for the liability order. It would need a full appraisal of the situation and documents to see exactly what has happened.

[chantellelou]

my liability says 144 but summons says 241

[lgfa92]

my liability says 144 but summons says 241

The liability order can be granted for a lower amount than the summons, that's not an issue, legally - there are multiple ways the balance can change between the summons being issued and the liability order being granted but without seeing all the balance adjustments that have occurred it's impossible to say exactly why.

[chantellelou]

it seems a bit odd to me I wasn't aware of it until they sent it to a enforcement agent

[lgfa92]

it seems a bit odd to me I wasn't aware of it until they sent it to a enforcement agent

Again, without the full details it's impossible to say exactly what has occurred, but there's no need for the council to evidence that you received anything. All they legally have to do is issue any paperwork to the last known address.

[chantellelou]

they new I had moved as of the 3rd September the court summons was sent to old address in October I can prove they was aware I no longer lived at the address but I did seem to be getting anywhere with them just say to deal with bailiff

[lgfa92]

they new I had moved as of the 3rd September the court summons was sent to old address in October I can prove they was aware I no longer lived at the address but I did seem to be getting anywhere with them just say to deal with bailiff

To dispute the liability order you'd either have to persuade the council they'd acted incorrectly - depends on the council as to whether or not they'll take heed of an argument advanced on that - or you'd need to ask the magistrates' court to re-open the liability order hearing and decline the order on the grounds it was not procedurally correct in the application process (not an easy task to do).

What you need to be doing really is to have the liability properly challenged if you're not liable as per your other post - https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...ancy-agreement

It's not always about challenging everything, it's about picking the right things to challenge to resolve it as easily as possible under the circumstances.

[chantellelou]

I haven't refused to pay it's more refusing the bailiff action and the bailiffs I'm dealing with are horrendous and could of stopped it going to them if I was made aware of the proceedings

[lgfa92]

The overall solution to your problem is to challenge the liability that the council have determined as that, on the basis of what you have said in the other post, is incorrect and you should not be held liable.

There is a correct route and manner to do this so that you a) correctly the challenge the right thing and b) allow the possibility of a valuation tribunal, if required. I see clients regularly who have struggled on and missed their chances because they've not followed the correct process - make sure you're not one of these people who misses out.

[lgfa92]

I haven't refused to pay it's more refusing the bailiff action and the bailiffs I'm dealing with are horrendous and could of stopped it going to them if I was made aware of the proceedings

And that takes it backs to what I have said in my previous two posts, it has to be challenged in the right manner. Until that is done the council's decision is deemed to be correct and so is the action taken on the back of that decision. It's easy to forget that council tax is a legal process and that process needs to be dealt with in the right way.