Equita fees

[jb75]

Hi all,

I've found most of the information I need regarding the phantom fees Equita have charged, but nothing that seems to confirm this so thought best to check.

I had visits from 3 different Equita bailiffs,

Visit from first bailiff in December 2009 to collect outstanding council tax against 2 liability orders (2008/2009 and 2009/2010).

September 2010, visit from second bailiff, to collect against the balance still outstanding on the 2009/2010 liability and also the new 2010/2011 liability (2008/2009 had been cleared in full).

October 2010, visit from third bailiff, same detail as September visit.

At no point has any bailiff gained entry, nothing has been signed, and no walking posession order made, payment arrangements were made at the door, and adhered to.

The visits did happen, but I'm lost trying to figure out the correct charges:

• -Can they charge double because there were 2 liabilities to collect?
• -Because it was a different bailiff calling each time, is that another "first visit" or is it a "second visit"?
• -Should September 2010 visit be charged as first visit or second? (it was second visit to collect 2009/2010 liability but first for 2010/2011).

Hopefully that makes sense.

Thanks in advance for any help or advice.

[Caspar]

Re: Eqiuta fees

This is one you need Amy to give a definitive answer to. I would say you are liable for two visits and that is it as the September one would have counted as the second visit on the old LO and the first visit on the new LO.

My understanding is they cannot charge two fees on one visit though, so I would imagine they'd have to count this as the first visit on the new one and charge for the second visit on the old one.

This would mean you owe £42.50 if I'm right.

[Amy]

Re: Eqiuta fees

They are allowed to charge for two visits per liability order, but only if these visits took place on different days.

Did they?

[jb75]

Re: Eqiuta fees

Thanks for looking at this,

To clarify in short,

1st visit, bailiff number 1, LO's 1 & 2
2nd visit, bailiff number 2, LO's 2 & 3
3rd visit, bailiff number 3, LO's 2 & 3

each of the above visits was a different day, but with 2 LO's each visit.

Hope that makes a little more sense.

[Amy]

Re: Eqiuta fees

If they made one visit on the same date but for two different liability orders, then I would argue this is one visit, but you should be aware that they will fight you on this and your success will depend on how firmly you stick to your guns.

[jb75]

Re: Eqiuta fees

Thanks Amy,

I was originally thinking that it should be a first visit fee for each of the first and second visits (because of new liablility) and a second visit fee for the last one.

In hindsight I'm thinking that I should dispute all except for one first visit fee and one second visit fee, then wait and see what equita comes back with.

I haven't gone down the route of SAR yet, but think it might be a good idea to do it and find exactly what they charged for when.

Maybe if I do that then some more of the phantom fees will mysteriously disappear, £150 fell off of the total when I asked for a breakdown of the fees charged, (suggestion I read on another forum) but that still leaves just over £600 for the 3 visits.

Could I just confirm (sorry if I'm being a bit thick here) that they should have only charged visit fees, and not levy fees or any fictional fees not prescribed.

Thanks again.

[Amy]

Re: Eqiuta fees

Have you had a read of this yet? Bailiff Guide - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

Have they made any levies?

[jb75]

Re: Eqiuta fees

I read that, and many other threads before starting this one, now I'm just trying to clarify the points that I'm uncertain of, maybe the answers are there but I'm just not reading it correctly. Also tried looking into Legal Beagles but the thread appears to be missing.

The behaviour expected from a bailiff when carrying out his duty is very carefully laid out in the “National Standard for Enforcement Agents” which, among other things states that:-

I already found the "national standard" on HM courts service website, information there indicates that it contains guidelines as opposed to statutory ruling.

I haven't looked into the OFT examples of unfair practice yet, (will do that in the morning) unreasonable charges could apply to the levy fee as no levy was made (I'm assuming that levy means goods taken) but what about other fees they choose to add?

[Amy]

Re: Eqiuta fees

A walking possession is an agreement between a debtor and a bailiff whereby the bailiff levies on goods and those goods then technically belong to him, but in exchange for you making the agreed payments towards the debt, he agrees not to remove and sell your goods.

However, the above only applies if the levy is valid.

[jb75]

Re: Equita fees

Sorry, been a long day, brain not functioning properly now, I completely forgot about the WP order coming between the visit and the removal.

Still didn't happen though, none of them got past the front door, and nothing outside for them to levy against.

Going to send them SAR tomorrow, try to find out exactly what the phantom fees relate to, no doubt they will take the maximum time before replying.

Thanks for the information.