Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

I'm actually of the opinion that a bailiff, like any other tradesman, is entitled to charge a fair fee for a fair job, but also feel their role in society is archaic. The current fees are in no way fair for the work done - £75 for sending a letter, £235 for knocking on your door. Simply not justified. There are cheaper and more productive ways of collecting these debts.

Yes, that is an entirely different discussion and I agree with you. It has always been the case that Further Steps Notice provides for various ways of collecting the debt, the most efficient of which is an AOE or deduction from benefits. There is little room for corruption then either, but of course many would not want to their employers to know. The over-simplistic answer is avoid this by paying in the first place. However, we all know, even if the government appear not to, that life's twists and turns stop you being able to do that sometimes.

There are very few 'won't pays' and far more 'can't pays'. The simplification of the fee structure has helped enormously as we see through all the forums, but the fees are what they are. We can think them fair or unfair, but it doesn't change them.

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

No, the fee is always payable - that's never been disputed. The bailiff has every right to charge the fee, but he has no right to demand it from the council if you pay them direct. He can only recover the fee from the debtor - the debtor is the only one who is charged the fee.

However, he cannot use the original warrant for his fees only. The liability order was for the debt and the council costs only.

You seem to be unable to understand the concept of the debt being passed to the bailiff for enforcement. Any payment made will belong to the bailiff once he is in possession of the debt, the fact that the authority is paid is irrelevant, the sum paid will just come off the balance and they will sort it out which ever way they feel they must, but it makes no difference to the debtor.

The sum due under the liability order is added to the fees due (dependent upon the enforcement stage reached). This is all in the boring legislation which you seem unwilling to read. This total(fees+ order ) makes the "amount outstanding" and it is this total which is paid by the proceeds, there is no separation it is one total amount which is due.

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

Yes, so if there's a CT debt of £75 which is then passed to the enforcement company (triggering the Compliance Stage immediately, and thus a further £75 fee) the debt is now £150.00.

If the debtor pays £75 directly to the council and the council accepts it against the debt (of £150), then £75 is still owing. Thus the amount collected (or accepted by the council against the total debt) doesn't reach the level of the debt. There is still £75 outstanding.

As I said, all the discussion in the world won't bring agreement on this, so it's best to disagree rather than go through the whole thing yet again.

No, the debt to the council is still only £75 - that is what you owe the council. You owe the other £75 to the bailiff. As I said, that document is about what happens if the baillif does not manage to recover the full debt including his fee. It has nothing to do with what happens if you pay the council direct.

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

If the £75 was not to be paid, then (in the same vein) councils should not be charging for 'court costs' or the summons either :tinysmile_twink_t2:

The council has been charged by the courts to issue the liability so are entitled to recover that. They have not been charged £75 by the bailiff. The argument about what the council's 'other fees' amount to is for another day!

The liability order is for the debt and council fees only.

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

That document is about what happens if the amount collected by the bailiff doesn't reach the level of the debt.

Yes, so if there's a CT debt of £75 which is then passed to the enforcement company (triggering the Compliance Stage immediately, and thus a further £75 fee) the debt is now £150.00.

If the debtor pays £75 directly to the council and the council accepts it against the debt (of £150), then £75 is still owing. Thus the amount collected (or accepted by the council against the total debt) doesn't reach the level of the debt. There is still £75 outstanding.

As I said, all the discussion in the world won't bring agreement on this, so it's best to disagree rather than go through the whole thing yet again.

[Kati]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

If the £75 was not to be paid, then (in the same vein) councils should not be charging for 'court costs' or the summons either :tinysmile_twink_t2:

[Kati]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

That document is about what happens if the amount collected by the bailiff doesn't reach the level of the debt.

When a bailiff working for the council collects a debt, the £75 is added on to the original debt - as is the cost for the summons etc ....

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

I wasn't arguing, at all - just pointing out an opinion .... As I already stated in post #3 I am loath to accept bailiffs are entitled to anything, but I would not (personally) want to advise someone not to pay a valid fee

I'm actually of the opinion that a bailiff, like any other tradesman, is entitled to charge a fair fee for a fair job, but also feel their role in society is archaic. The current fees are in no way fair for the work done - £75 for sending a letter, £235 for knocking on your door. Simply not justified. There are cheaper and more productive ways of collecting these debts.

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

Number 1 shows the importance of this.

Number 8.3 is interesting reading.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2...0140001_en.pdf

That document is about what happens if the amount collected by the bailiff doesn't reach the level of the debt.

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

I'm inclined to agree that no matter what is written there will always be two groups, one which believes fees are payable and one which believes they're not. I suspect all the debate and argument in the world would not resolve this.

I believe they are payable, not because someone else tells me that is the case, but because that is what I understand the legislation and everything surrounding it says. Here's a little something many of you may not have seen before laid before Parliament by Command of Her Majesty and written by the Ministry of Justice.

Number 1 shows the importance of this.

Number 8.3 is interesting reading.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2...0140001_en.pdf

[Kati]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

:tinysmile_aha_t: My word, that is such a desperate argument! No, the bailiff has been asked by the council to recover the debt - imagine a bounty hunter being asked to collect a bounty. If the bounty hunter fails to find the guy, does he get paid? No.

By your argument, the bailiff gets paid even if the debt is taken back by the council - after all, they still tried to collect the debt. Your argument would need a proper contract of employment in place. At a push, you could argue it's akin to a 'zero-hour' contract, but the principle still remains that the bailiff gets paid when it completes the job it's asked to do, taking his fee from proceeds.

I wasn't arguing, at all - just pointing out an opinion .... As I already stated in post #3 I am loath to accept bailiffs are entitled to anything, but I would not (personally) want to advise someone not to pay a valid fee

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

For CT debt, the council HIRES a bailiff or EA firm. Therefore, they are working for the council as a contractor. The bailiffs are entitled to their fee whether or not they manage to collect the debt. As the council employs them, it is in their remit to ensure the bailiff is paid out of the money collected

:tinysmile_aha_t: My word, that is such a desperate argument! No, the bailiff has been asked by the council to recover the debt - imagine a bounty hunter being asked to collect a bounty. If the bounty hunter fails to find the guy, does he get paid? No.

By your argument, the bailiff gets paid even if the debt is taken back by the council - after all, they still tried to collect the debt. Your argument would need a proper contract of employment in place. At a push, you could argue it's akin to a 'zero-hour' contract, but the principle still remains that the bailiff gets paid when it completes the job it's asked to do, taking his fee from proceeds.

[Kati]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

For CT debt, the council HIRES a bailiff or EA firm. Therefore, they are working for the council as a contractor. The bailiffs are entitled to their fee whether or not they manage to collect the debt. As the council employs them, it is in their remit to ensure the bailiff is paid out of the money collected

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

So we are saying if you pay the council direct no £75 fee is payable?
Sir vere who comes on LB needs to clarify this he or she seems to know the answer or we could tell the Bailiffs they are working for nothing if after a letter from them the debt is paid without their fees deducted or do the council pay £75 from public money to them?

No, the fee is always payable - that's never been disputed. The bailiff has every right to charge the fee, but he has no right to demand it from the council if you pay them direct. He can only recover the fee from the debtor - the debtor is the only one who is charged the fee.

However, he cannot use the original warrant for his fees only. The liability order was for the debt and the council costs only.

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

So if the council's are passing on the £75 fee, they are doing so under their own free will, as there is no legislation to compel them to. That means they are passing public funds to the bailiff. I would certainly be bringing that to the attention of the ombudsman and local MPs.

However, if they don't pass on the fee, the debt to the council is satisfied. The fees are then a matter between the 'debtor' and the bailiff, much the same as the fees due between a homeowner and a window cleaner.

Of course, the bailiff had the right to recover the fee from proceeds, but there are now now proceeds to recover from. The warrant cannot be used to solely recover fees; the warrant cannot be used to enforce the fees. What happens now?