EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

It was actually me who corrected it. You were claiming fees could be added, on the strength of Thamesides rubbish. It was only after you had read my comments that you changed your stance. No big deal. The important thing is that you realise they were wrong.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Sch13 permits fees to be added PROVIDED that regulations allow for it. At present, they do not. I cannot put it any simpler.

The opinion that LA's are playing catch up, is just that, an opinion and one that I do not subscribe to. I am no fan of LA's however, they have got more right than you give them credit for.

I am afraid you have a basic misunderstanding of the structure of regulations and statute, regulations do not enable statue it is the other way around.

The amendment does not say that regulations may be made to enable the charging of fees.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

As said this matter is far from resolved.
and even if I am wrong, and for some reason the amendment to source legislation did not have the effect intended, there will not be a loophole here, at least not one that exists for long, as said this was an error in the initial drafting of the legislation, errors will be rectified.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Try to look at it like this:

Sch 12 is the procedure, regulations are what are adhered to in order to carry out the procedure.

The LGF Act, again is the procedure to be followed, regulations are what must be adhered to in order to carry out the procedure.

You need to understand that the 2 are entirely different entities, working in tandam with each other. It is not a case of 1 over diding the other. There would be no point having regulations and everything would be merely included within the primary legislation. I think that this is what is confusing you.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

It was actually me who corrected it. You were claiming fees could be added, on the strength of Thamesides rubbish. It was only after you had read my comments that you changed your stance. No big deal. The important thing is that you realise they were wrong.

No if you look on the FOI request you will see that I questioned the initial response and they corrected based on that information.
I am just in search of the correct situation

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...utgoing-412337

Dear Freedom Of Information Requests,

Many thanks for your prompt response to my query, I have a few
points which I would like to raise in reference to your reply.

In point 1 you state that the regulations permit the contracting
out of the issuance of attachment of earnings orders, would it be
possible for you to supply the number of orders imitated by EAs
this year (from April 2014 to date)

In point 2 you state that the ability to add fees to the order is
contained within section 37 of the of the Council Tax
Administration and Enforcement regulations 1992 (as amended), the
section you refer to (subsection b) was withdrawn when the TCE was
in introduced In April this year.( by the consequential amendment
regulations)
I am aware that there is some amendment to the Local government
finance act via section 107 of schedule 13 of the TCE, however I
would like some confirmation of the current regulatory situation
regarding this.

Yours sincerely,

david browning

[Amethyst]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Since 1 April 2014 Enforcement Agents have issued 137 Attachment of Earnings Orders on behalf
of the Council.

How many of those have had fees included in the AOE ?

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Try to look at it like this:

Sch 12 is the procedure, regulations are what are adhered to in order to carry out the procedure.

The LGF Act, again is the procedure to be followed, regulations are what must be adhered to in order to carry out the procedure.

You need to understand that the 2 are entirely different entities, working in tandam with each other. It is not a case of 1 over diding the other. There would be no point having regulations and everything would be merely included within the primary legislation. I think that this is what is confusing you.

Yes and they are both statute,they both have equal standing, schedule 13 is part of the TCE( statute), this is why it can amend the lgfa.

I am not saying taht one of these over rides the other, just that either overrides secondary legislation, whatever its source.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Incidentally this a reason why the criminal procedure rules frequently quoted elsewhere, in advice given to people are irrelevant, because they have been over ridden by the statute in the form of the TCE and have been for some time.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

How many of those have had fees included in the AOE ?

Well the question posed was how many have been issued by EAs under the contracting out provisions.
If this answer refers to this and the EA issued them I would expect all of them, as I cannot see the EA doing this without payment.

[Amethyst]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Okay, and if you have concluded, and Tameside have come to the same conclusion,( As a result of this amendment Enforcement Agent charges can no longer be recovered under an
Attachment of Earnings Order. I can confirm that our existing Contractors are aware of this regulation change.) ie. that fees may not be added to the AOE, and fees have been added, is action going to be taken to have those fees removed from the AOEs ? That is probably the question I'd be asking them.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Here is the amendment to the statute
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/15/schedule/13

107

(1)

Schedule 4 (enforcement: England and Wales) is amended as follows.

(2)

In paragraph 1(1) and (2) after “recovery” insert “ , otherwise than under Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (taking control of goods), ”.

(3)

In paragraph 5 (attachment of earnings etc)—

(a)

in sub-paragraph (1A)(a) for “; and” substitute “ (unless paragraph (b) applies); ”;

(b)

in sub-paragraph (1A)(b) for sub-paragraph (i) and the words before it substitute—

“(b)

where a person authorised to act under the power conferred by section 14(4) (power to use the procedure in Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007) has reported to the authority concerned that he was unable (for whatever reason) to find sufficient goods of the debtor to pay the amount outstanding—

(i)

the amount outstanding at the time when the attachment of earnings order is made, and”;

(c)

at the end insert—

“(9)

In this paragraph “the amount outstanding” has the meaning given by paragraph 50(3) of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

It seems pretty straight forward to me, and was the same requirement included previously in the council tax regs, it has been lifted form there and inserted in the source legislation.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Okay, and if you have concluded, and Tameside have come to the same conclusion,( As a result of this amendment Enforcement Agent charges can no longer be recovered under an
Attachment of Earnings Order. I can confirm that our existing Contractors are aware of this regulation change.) ie. that fees may not be added to the AOE, and fees have been added, is action going to be taken to have those fees removed from the AOEs ? That is probably the question I'd be asking them.

This whole issue is a mess, as said there was an error which created this. It was never intended for fees not to added to AOEs and the various amendments have been attempts to remedy the situation.

[Amethyst]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Well I tried to figure it out and apply the amendments and remembered why I leave it to you guys to work out the intricacies.... xx

LGFA sch. 4
Para 5 (1A)For the purposes of this paragraph the appropriate amount is the aggregate of—

(a)any outstanding sum which is or forms part of the amount in respect of which the liability order was made; and

(b)where the authority concerned has sought to levy an amount by distress and sale of the debtor’s goods under provision included by virtue of paragraph 7 below and the person making the distress has reported that he was unable (for whatever reason) to find any or sufficient goods of the debtor on which to levy the amount—

(i)such sum as is referred to in sub-paragraph (2)(b) of that paragraph, and

(ii)if the authority has applied for the issue of a warrant committing the debtor to prison under provision included by virtue of paragraph 8 below, a sum (of a prescribed amount or an amount determined in accordance with prescribed rules) in respect of the costs of the application

(9)In this paragraph “the amount outstanding” has the meaning given by paragraph 50(3) of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.”


LGFA sch. 4
Para 7
(2)For the purposes of this paragraph the appropriate amount is the aggregate of—

(a)an amount equal to any outstanding sum which is or forms part of the amount in respect of which the liability order was made; and

(b)a sum (of a prescribed amount or an amount determined in accordance with prescribed rules) in respect of the charges connected with the distress.



TCEA
Para 50
(3)The amount outstanding is the sum of these—

(a)the amount of the debt which remains unpaid (or an amount that the creditor agrees to accept in full satisfaction of the debt);

(b)any amounts recoverable out of proceeds in accordance with regulations under paragraph 62 (costs)

TCEA
Para 62
Costs

62(1)Regulations may make provision for the recovery by any person from the debtor of amounts in respect of costs of enforcement-related services.

(2)The regulations may provide for recovery to be out of proceeds or otherwise.

(3)The amount recoverable under the regulations in any case is to be determined by or under the regulations.

(4)The regulations may in particular provide for the amount, if disputed, to be assessed in accordance with rules of court.

(5)“Enforcement-related services” means anything done under or in connection with an enforcement power, or in connection with obtaining an enforcement power, or any services used for the purposes of a provision of this Schedule or regulations under it.

[Guest]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

Again, this is your opinion only. With regards the foi request, this is how the sequence of events went:

1. You posted the foi response and pointed all and sundry to the amendment to reg37 that Thameside had quoted.
2. You then followed this up by posting that you saw no reason why the fees could npt be applied universally and not just to Thameside residents.
3. I then posted you a link to the legislation that repealed the aforementioned amendment.
4. You then submitted the foi request that you quoted above.

I trust you do now accept that fees cannot be applied universally?

[Amethyst]

Re: EA Action and Attachment of Earnings

lol, so the amendment I was figuring out was repealed anyway? These people really want to make their minds up. Where was it repealed ?

This is it coming into force
Sch. 13 para. 105 coming into force by S.I. 2014/768 art. 2(1)(b)
Sch. 13 para. 106 coming into force by S.I. 2014/768 art. 2(1)(b)
Sch. 13 para. 107 coming into force by S.I. 2014/768 art. 2(1)(b)

Provisions coming into force on 6th April 2014

2.—(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) to (6), the following provisions of the 2007 Act, so far as not already in force, come into force on 6th April 2014—

(a)sections 62 to 89(1);

(b)Schedules 12 to 14(2) and Parts 3 and 4 of Schedule 23.