Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

[buster1967]

Hi,
Could someone please advise us of what to do next

Son in law got a court fine , he then lost his job and buried his head in the sand and missed a few payments
He eventually contacted the court to explain he was now claiming job seekers allowance , the lady at court assured him she would send out a form for him to fill in for reduced payments .
The form never arrived, instead what arrived was a marstons letter, distress warrant, it gave him 7 days to pay,

It says he owes £100 which is the balance of the fine, and £85 marstons admin fee, and will incur a further £215 if a bailiff attends

He missed the 7 day deadline, its now about 2 weeks since the letter arrived, but he has now got the money together to pay the £100 fine and £85 admin fee, however when he rang Marstons to pay, they said he now owes the £215 on top too as he didnt meet the 7 day deadline, no bailiff as yet attended the property so can they add on this £215 attendance fee ?

He was told by marstons to speak to the bailiff direct, which he did, the bailiff says he will come round to talk to him next week when hes in the area ,
Im thinking this is just a ploy so the bailiff can claim the £215 attendance fee,

Can my son in law pay now , ie just the £100 fine and £85 marstons fee, and if so who does he pay as Marstons wouldnt take the £185 payment as they said it was now £ 400 not the original £185 ,

This seems so unfair as he hasnt had a bailiff visit yet so why should he have to pay the extra £215 , and the longer it goes on the more chance of a bailiff actually visiting and activating the attendance fee,
Ive advised him to record any conversation he has with marstons,
Any help much appreciated on where to go from here

Thanks

Buster

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

Ok I'm closing this thread unless the OP specifically asks for it to be opened again. I will also start a new thread for you all to discuss matters on http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...717#post284717

Please try to behave and keep it friendly.

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

BB can you please PM me the link to your petition so I can show future posters, or is it closed now?

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

May I suggest a new thread for that discussion to put the nasties behind us :beagle:

[bluebottle]

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

I think we are all agreed that fee fraud is a major problem. However, violence on the part of bailiffs towards debtors is beginning to catch up. That does concern me.

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

Thanks for the link Puff, it is an excellent resource of upto date information, I can recommend it, second only to this one of course.
I am not sure but I would bet the line taken by these in regards to the issue here would be roughly along the same lines as Tomtubby: copied earlier.

D

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

Puff,
Thanks for that. I have already put they can charge a fee only on attendance. The £85 is chargeable anyway.

The dispute is whether this is legally correct, but until we have definitive proof it is not, the LB line will always be to err on the side of caution to protect the poster.

I suggest strongly we leave this lie now until it is resolved definitively through the FOI and case law. I am certainly saying no more as the answer has been said several times now.

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

Whilst awaiting the info from BB, I have been doing a little research myself, both as I think this will help the OP with their problem and to further my own personal knowledge.

Apologies to all if they already knew this, but again, I feel this information is both useful and relevant to the OP.


1: From September 1994, a bailiff is not allowed by law, to charge VAT on his enforcement fees when collecting:
• Council Tax
• Business Rates
• Magistrates Court Distress Warrants.
• Child Support arrears.
• Income Tax.


Below, we have provided you with the amount of Statutory Fees that bailiffs should charge for the collection of unpaid Council Tax/Business Rates.
Please note that the regulations do not allow for a bailiff company to charge a fee for sending you a letter when collecting Council Tax.
The Statutory Fees they can charge, are as follows:


First visit fee: £24.50
This is for a first attendance to levy, but where a levy does not takes place. (For example; where you are not in)
The bailiff can charge a levy fee if they levy, but he cannot charge both amounts on the same occasion.

Second visit fee: £18.00
Despite any further visits, the bailiff can only charge for a maximum of 2 visits.

Attendance fee: Reasonable Costs
The Statutory Regulations state the following:
" one attendance with a vehicle with a "view to recovering goods aftera levy has been made"
The maximum number of removal/attending to remove/enforcement fees that a bailiff may charge is two. However for the second visit then goods must have actually been removed.
Many bailiff companies will attempt to charge an "Enforcement Fee". This is the same as an attendance/removal fee.

I am providing this link as perhaps this will explain the confusion surrounding this matter,
http://www.bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/bailiff_facts.htm

This is also the site I found the above information.

[bluebottle]

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

I would appreciate details of incidents involving Marston Group bailiffs enforcing court fines to put to the MoJ. I am sick to the back teeth of hearing about peeps being assaulted, intimidated and lied to by this out-of-control company. The sooner the MoJ are told and, hopefully, do something about it, the better. If necessary, I will go to the media and see what Chris Grayling has to say. I can't see him being too keen to be seen or heard singing the praises of a thug outfit. The sooner fines enforcement is returned to HMCTS staff and police, the better.

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

.... and until that time the LB stance is to protect its posters by not exposing them to unnecessary risks. I think this is what we have been trying to say. Once the FOI is back and we have proven case law to back it, great. Until then, we err on the side of caution.

[miliitant]

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

brill

[bluebottle]

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

That's why I'm putting in a FOIA request to the MoJ.

[miliitant]

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

i myself am getting rather annoyed at this argument now.
i am not criticising anybody.
All sides are putting up concise logical arguments to support their points of view.
i know myself nothing on baliff law and i do not like seeds of doubt rumbling in my mind.

as stated before

we need statute/caselaw/contractual detalis to end this once and for all

someone must be right and someone must be mistaken, to continue to push one sides point of view across without validation, even with good intentions can be dangerous, so why dont we just call a truce until we have something in writing from the horses mouth direct

easier said than done i know, but this is just plain silly

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

Hi
HC
Yes we have seen this, we are aware of these regulations, we have seen your letter( which could be the result of a any number of scenarios by the way, and fools no one).

Could you provide proof or some other authoritive source which will support your contentions.

Sorry this is going no where.

really my last post on this unless some relevant information is presented.

D

Re: Urgent advice needed re marstons distress warrant

Perhaps if you could provide a link to some authoritive source that shares your beliefs.

Section 76 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980 (issue of the Warrant of Distress) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/76

Part 52 of the Criminal Procedures Rules 2011. (rules for Enforcement of fines and other ORDERS for payment)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2...9/part/52/made

Section 92 of the Courts Act 2003 (A Costs Order or a Fees Order is required for defendants to be liable for bailiffs fees) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/39/section/92

Section 38 of Schedule 5 of the Courts Act 2003 (provides list of further steps a court can take against a defendant for non payment of fines) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...5/paragraph/38

The Magistrates' Courts (Civilian Fine Enforcement Officers) (No. 2) Rules 1990 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1990/2260/contents/made

Section 92 of the Access to Justice Act 1999 (Execution of Warrants) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...on-of-warrants



A defendant aggrieved by bailiffs fees £85/215 for executing warrants for unpaid court fines can therefore challenge the enforcement fees with a letter like this one:

The Court Manager
[NAME OF] Magistrates' Court
Address 1
Address 2
Address 3
Postcode

[DATE]

Dear Sir,

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Re: [YOUR NAME + FINE REFERENCE]


I received a document from a company called [NAME OF BAILIFF COMPANY] on [DATE] who said they are acting on your behalf collecting an unpaid court fine of [AMOUNT].

(IF APPLICCABLE) I paid the sum of [AMOUNT OF FINE+£300 FEE and] their document was presented in manner that is designed to mislead me into believing I have been ordered by the court to pay your enforcment contractors' fees of [AMOUNT/£85] [and a further £215] in ADDITION to the fine.

HMCTS official advice leaflet called EX345, published by the Court Service says Page 5; they do not charge me for the work they do.

The Distress Warrant, issued in the Magistrates Court under Section 76 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 orders me to pay the amount I was fined, but it does not include an order I pay the fees of your enforcement contractor.

There is no order made by the court that made me liable for your contractors fees.

As the company said they were working under a contract, on behalf of HMCTS and I accepted their document to be truthful and honest in regards to the amount the court orderd me to pay.


However, I now understand that:

a) the terms of the contract, which is called the HMCTS Enforcement Services Contract, only enables enforcement contractors to deduct sums from the fine recovered, but there is no clause that enables them to obtain money from me had I have not been ordered to pay.

b) Under Section 38 of Schedule 5 of the Courts Act 2003 which prescribes a list of further steps a court can take for the enforcment of unpaid fines, does not provide for the making of an order against defendants to pay the fees of an enforcment contractor or other company.


In making this complaint, I confirm that:

a) I am not an agreed party to the HMCTS Enforcement Services Contract, and therefore I have no contractual obligation under it.

b) I have not been ordered by a court to pay the fees of the enforcement contractor or other company

c) I have not been means tested or assessed as to my ability to pay any fees at all.

d) Part 52 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2011 does not apply in this case, because there is no order for payment for the contractors' fees, and the contractors' fees do not constitute a fine.

d) No goods belonging to me have been distressed by the contractor.


COMPLAINT RESOLUTION

a) Provide a written list of non-consolidated list of fines that have been made against me along with their respective amounts, any amounts paid, dates and name of the sentencing court.

b) Return the case to HMCTS administratrion

and:

If a costs order has been made against me requiring that I pay the fees of the enforcement contractor:

c) A copy of the order along with the adjudged amount, any amount paid, date and name of the court making the order.

If you are unable or unwilling to satisfy all this complaint, please clearly mark your response letter at the top with the words FINAL RESOLUTION and I will ask the Parliamentary Ombudsman to intervene.

Please note, that in the absence of the final resolution letter from you within 40 days of today's date, then I will automatically escalate the complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman for failure to comply with prescribed complaints procedures.

This letter is not a request under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Yours Faithfully


[YOUR NAME]
Encs:
Copy of enforcement contractors' document.
(If applicable) Payment of balance of the fine amount/Proof of payment of the fine.

cc [NAME OF MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT] MP, Enforcement contractor. For information only

The final result is something like this: