CT bailiff fees

[Wombats]

Re: CT bailiff fees

I wonder if most of the problems are with employed or self-employed enforcement officers? Does it say what each is on their registration?

There was a bailiff position advertised yesterday in the East Midlands with a starting salary of £18000 but OTE of £30000 with an average of £27000 ( http://www.reed.co.uk/jobs/field-col...lands/25203537 ) - obviously that suggests substantial 'performance related bonus / commission'. This to my mind is likely to encourage poor practice.

[bizzybob]

Re: CT bailiff fees

It all pushes the EA into rejecting any offers of payment based on a credible I & E from the debtor showing the payments on any plan are impossible for the debtor to meet to meet, so the EA attends specifically to add the Enforcement fee. Remember that the way the pro rata payments work, the EA will be waiting a long time for their cut in some circumstances, so will do everything to increase that portion they can have.

[MissFM]

Re: CT bailiff fees

It all pushes the EA into rejecting any offers of payment based on a credible I & E from the debtor showing the payments on any plan are impossible for the debtor to meet to meet, so the EA attends specifically to add the Enforcement fee. Remember that the way the pro rata payments work, the EA will be waiting a long time for their cut in some circumstances, so will do everything to increase that portion they can have.

You will need to be target driven as you will work on a salary and performance related bonus/commission structure.

From Wombats recruitment link. Chilling.

[bizzybob]

Re: CT bailiff fees

It shows that the Enforcement Industry will never change, so taking goods away to sell for a pittance, should be abolished, there are better ways with modern financial systems to take fair payments by standing order etc. Ah say the EA's not everyone has a bank account, some people are homeless and we can't take anything from them. Wait a minute says Marstondalesica we can seize the park bench, against the arrears of council tax for the house that was repossessed, the council will never know.....

[doubleslap2]

Re: CT bailiff fees

Thankfully I haven't been banished from this site for having the temerity to suggest that EAs may not be lily-white angels. I still haven't managed to find anyone able to show how a fee of £310 is justified for knocking on your door.

[Wombats]

Re: CT bailiff fees

Thankfully I haven't been banished from this site for having the temerity to suggest that EAs may not be lily-white angels. I still haven't managed to find anyone able to show how a fee of £310 is justified for knocking on your door.

I don't think anyone would try to justify it. Like many areas of the law it appears unfair. It appears even more unfair if looked at solely in the context of council tax rather than the reforms as a whole, as the minimum debt for arriving at the stage where there is the knock on the door has increased from £42.50 to £310.

[bizzybob]

Re: CT bailiff fees

I don't think anyone would try to justify it. Like many areas of the law it appears unfair. It appears even more unfair if looked at solely in the context of council tax rather than the reforms as a whole, as the minimum debt for arriving at the stage where there is the knock on the door has increased from £42.50 to £310.

Especially as some councils will and have obtained a Liability Order where no tax was owed due to an error, then the then bailiffs have gone all medieval on the non debtor for their fees, or the LO is for a pound or even a penny, turning a penny into £400 or so at the Eas knock

(an FOI to NELC showed that LOs had indeed been sought and granted on debts of £1 or £00.01 and Rossendales were then sent in to collect on them)

[wales01man]

Re: CT bailiff fees

No one has to justify the Fees its now the law .
The Bailiffs will try to get the money whether its 10 quid or 1000 quid if its legal they are within their rights its down to Debtors to avoid the fees no other way out that easier than that?

[Wombats]

Re: CT bailiff fees

Especially as some councils will and have obtained a Liability Order where no tax was owed due to an error, then the then bailiffs have gone all medieval on the non debtor for their fees, or the LO is for a pound or even a penny, turning a penny into £400 or so at the Eas knock

(an FOI to NELC showed that LOs had indeed been sought and granted on debts of £1 or £00.01 and Rossendales were then sent in to collect on them)

I don't believe that would withstand challenge though!

[bizzybob]

Re: CT bailiff fees

I don't believe that would withstand challenge though!

The council would stonewall, and say deal with the EA, all it shows is that the system is now so automated that anomalies will slip through, and common sense will not be applied, and human intervention to ensure that due process as in weeding out applications for a debt of a trifle is followed is gone

[Wombats]

Re: CT bailiff fees

The council would stonewall, and say deal with the EA, all it shows is that the system is now so automated that anomalies will slip through, and common sense will not be applied, and human intervention to ensure that due process as in weeding out applications for a debt of a trifle is followed is gone

No, I disagree. If the council don't act, go to the LGO who would not be impressed with this conduct.

[doubleslap2]

Re: CT bailiff fees

Just because something is law does not mean it has to be complied with. Remember the Poll Tax where every adult over 18 in any household was charged? Public outrage and defiance of the law got it swiftly changed. There has to be public consensus and compliance for any law to work.

Now I'm sounding like a Freeman of the Land! :tung:

[Wombats]

Re: CT bailiff fees

Just because something is law does not mean it has to be complied with. Remember the Poll Tax where every adult over 18 in any household was charged? Public outrage and defiance of the law got it swiftly changed. There has to be public consensus and compliance for any law to work.

Now I'm sounding like a Freeman of the Land! :tung:

If you don't have compliance from the majority you have revolution. This has compliance from the majority.

[doubleslap2]

Re: CT bailiff fees

Does it? The majority of bailiffs perhaps. Most people will be unaware until they are subject to them.

[Wombats]

Re: CT bailiff fees

Does it? The majority of bailiffs perhaps. Most people will be unaware until they are subject to them.

Unlike the poll tax, most people will never be subjected to them, so even if by lack of awareness it does have compliance from the majority.

I don't have definitive figures or proof, but I think it has compliance (as opposed to approval) from the majority of people who are exposed to enforcement action as well. Sadly I don't think proof one way or another is available in any form.