The Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 take effect on 6th April and from the many posts made by the regular contributors on the forum it is clear that there are many concerns as to how these drastic changes will affect debtors. The local authorities (and enforcement companies) are confused with the regulations and naturally the regulars on here must be the same.

Over the next few days I have offered to put together simple Practice/Guidance Notes over different threads and these may then be used as the basis for STICKY's. To try to avoid threads going 'off topic' I think that it would be a good idea to start this thread so that we can share our views and ask questions.

Great tomtubby, we can tease out anomalies, and any direct detriments that are a result of the new system.

Here's my starter for 10: As the Controlled Goods Order takes control of ALL goods belonging to the debtor, presumably apart from any exepmt) then it is a legalisation of the old unlawful, Global Levy in effect any thoughts on this one?

The aforementioned Controlled Goods order will be easy to exploit as in take children's stuff, and third party items on the premises like a Brighthouse TV (accidently 'guv debtor never told me it was on the knock cries the Enforcement Agent) or a HP car, washing machine etc etc

I HOPE that I am wrong but the way in which I have just read the statutory regulations it would seem that the fee that debtors may have to pay to make a Third Party/or Exempt Goods claim is £120. Like I say...I hope I am wrong (it was thought that the fee would be £80).

I will make enquiries during the day and post back.

I HOPE that I am wrong but the way in which I have just read the statutory regulations it would seem that the fee that debtors may have to pay to make a Third Party/or Exempt Goods claim is £120. Like I say...I hope I am wrong (it was thought that the fee would be £80).

 

I will make enquiries during the day and post back.

That may make JBW and ANPR bailiffs very happy then when they pull a car over and ownership is disputed, if the fee is for applying for interpleader, given the atrocious track record of these companies, i can see them attempting to apply the fee for merely looking at the prima facie evidence of ownership provided to profit from the third party who knows no better. I hope I am wrong.

 

Here's my starter for 10: As the Controlled Goods Order takes control of ALL goods belonging to the debtor, presumably apart from any exepmt) then it is a legalisation of the old unlawful, Global Levy in effect any thoughts on this one?

 

The aforementioned Controlled Goods order will be easy to exploit as in take children's stuff, and third party items on the premises like a Brighthouse TV (accidently 'guv debtor never told me it was on the knock cries the Enforcement Agent) or a HP car, washing machine etc etc

Where have you read this re the Controlled Goods Agreement? I'm intrigued as from when I've read in the regulations it quite clearly lists the specifics that the Enforcement Agent must do when making a Controlled Goods Agreement:

"a list of the goods of which control has been taken with a description to enable the debtor to identify the goods correctly, including, where applicable—

(i)the manufacturer, model and serial number of the goods;

(ii)in the case of a vehicle, the manufacturer, model, colour and registration mark of the vehicle; and

(iii)the material, colour and usage, and (where appropriate) any other identifying characteristic of the goods".

From that wording it is clear in the regulations that you can't just list "all goods".

Where have you read this re the Controlled Goods Agreement? I'm intrigued as from when I've read in the regulations it quite clearly lists the specifics that the Enforcement Agent must do when making a Controlled Goods Agreement:

 

"a list of the goods of which control has been taken with a description to enable the debtor to identify the goods correctly, including, where applicable—

(i)the manufacturer, model and serial number of the goods;

(ii)in the case of a vehicle, the manufacturer, model, colour and registration mark of the vehicle; and

(iii)the material, colour and usage, and (where appropriate) any other identifying characteristic of the goods".

 

From that wording it is clear in the regulations that you can't just list "all goods".

Thanks Clinks, I had read them right, but you know as we;ll as i the question needs asking as no doubt some rogue will try it on.

The way the goods are listed is far better as they should then be clearly listed and identifiable, better for any third party goods to be identified and claimed, all this assumes the occupier lets the agent in.

When I publish the Practice Notes/Guidance I will be providing details of each notice and the requirment that each must contain.

Clunks is correct. A 'Global' levy will not be permitted.

When I publish the Practice Notes/Guidance I will be providing details of each notice and the requirment that each must contain.

 

Clunks is correct. A 'Global' levy will not be permitted.

That is excellent the concept put away for good

That is excellent the concept put away for good

Are we absolutely sure?

My understanding is the normal route will be as outlined above. However, there are two notable exceptions:

TCE Part Two.

4. (2)Where the power is conferred by a writ issued from the High Court the writ binds the property in the goods from the time when it is received by the person who is under a duty to endorse it.

(3)Where the power is conferred by a warrant to which section 99 of the County Courts Act 1984 (c. 28) or section 125ZA of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (c. 43) applies, the warrant binds the property in the goods from the time when it is received by the person who is under a duty to endorse it under that section.

Only then do we come to what will happen in most cases:

(4)Where sub-paragraphs (2) and (3) do not apply but notice is given to the debtor under paragraph 7(1), the notice binds the property in the goods from the time when the notice is given.

The part in red and bold referring to 7(1) is the detailed list of goods taken into control as above. BUT TCE Pt 2 4 (2 & 3) are still global levies from the time the EA receives the instruction.

I thought binding was the legal right to seize rather than the actual act of taking control of the goods. It simply means that once the enforcement notice has been given, the debtor isn't able to get rid of their goods unless via a bona fide sale. I think the rules simply codify previous case law anyway.

In which case Global Levies can indeed be put to bed thank you. It is worth nit picking the wording so we all have the same understanding.

What about entry, return entries and forced entry?

It would seem that SOME local authorities are looking to keep their residents aware of the new regulations. The following are links to a press article from South Northamptonshire Council and the second one relates to Wellingborough Council:

http://www.aboutmyarea.co.uk/Northamptonshire/Towcester/NN12/News/Local-News/270574-Rule-Changes-For-Bailiffs-This-Weekend

http://www.aboutmyarea.co.uk/Northamptonshire/Towcester/NN12/News/Local-News/270574-Rule-Changes-For-Bailiffs-This-Weekend

To an extent global seizures won't be used now as the fees are charged on the attendance (enforcement stage) and not whether goods have been taken into control.

To an extent global seizures won't be used now as the fees are charged on the attendance (enforcement stage) and not whether goods have been taken into control.

I must say, the fees look pretty sold for high court enforcement officers. At least £765 even though no goods are taken is a sizeable amount. Do you think some won't bother trying to remove/sale for the extra £525 + further disbursements?

It will really depend on whether the debtor will deal with the enforcement agent, their ability to pay and the goods that are available.

If the debtor tells the enforcement agent to foxtrot oscar and there is a Bentley on the drive then only one thing is going to happen.

I would add that the stages are clear and defined and it is the enforcement agents duty to recover the full amount for the creditor, by selling goods if necessary.

Well, since there is now the requirement of an enforcement notice the onus is well and truly on the debtor to get their act together. They will now have far great oportunity to get an arrangement sorted, or their stay or whatever it might be. I must say the new process, on the whole, is clear and (to me) pretty reasonable.

It will really depend on whether the debtor will deal with the enforcement agent, their ability to pay and the goods that are available.

 

If the debtor tells the enforcement agent to foxtrot oscar and there is a Bentley on the drive then only one thing is going to happen.

 

I would add that the stages are clear and defined and it is the enforcement agents duty to recover the full amount for the creditor, by selling goods if necessary.

So say it's the world famous Sheriffs Office, calling for Southern Water to a council house with a battered Fiesta outside, and an old settee in the garden, family on benefits and the furniture is worth squat, the fees come to twice the value of available goods let alone the debt. Resident chases them away filming with her phone Thoughts?

Before the Sherriffs can get in can get in, a Rosseendales Agent arrives and tries to sieze Sheriffs Berlingo as it is parked outside (just joking) for an LO on £20 of arrears of Council Tax

This scenario is likely to be more common in future especially for Council Tax LO where low income families fall into arrears due to cuts in income.

So say it's Sherforce, calling for Southern Water a council house with a battered Fiesta outside, and an old settee in the garden, family on benefits and the furniture is worth squat, the fees cone to twice the value of available goods let alone the debt. Thoughts?

There is provision within the regs for the documentation that is sent prior to enforcement stage to encourage people to seek professional debt advice. Hopefully the debtor will call to be made aware that they could look to get a variation/stay/some other option.

Of course, all this is in an ideal world - and the fee schedule is going to be incredibly disproportionate for some - and your example of a water debt is a prime example.

There is provision within the regs for the documentation that is sent prior to enforcement stage to encourage people to seek professional debt advice. Hopefully the debtor will call to be made aware that they could look to get a variation/stay/some other option.

 

Of course, all this is in an ideal world - and the fee schedule is going to be incredibly disproportionate for some - and your example of a water debt is a prime example.

Sorry Sequrnci I edited the post, but in that scenario it is counter productive to apply fees where they double or treble a debt, the enforcement then looks worse in the public eye than Wonga, and you know what happens when public opinion is outraged. Problem is Ostrich mode is often status quo for low income famlies juggling an ever decreasing income and robbing Peter to pay Paul in an attempt to survive.

The bailiffs job just got harder, a neighbour has just come knocking on the door waving todays Sun newspaper, pointing to Page 9 where they are highlighting Rip Off Britain, and castigating the energyco's and Nike.

The new regs get a column with the headline Hard-up pay £310 if bailiffs call once, followed by the opening line

" Debt hit people will be hit by bailiff fees rising by up to ten times The Sun can reveal"

It then goes into a missive highlighting the new fee structure

pointing out that £200 council tax arrears will spiral beyond £620. quoted

"One bailiff told the Sun This is a hard job but it just got harder We would always try to get people on a payment plan, but now it will be almost impossible, the whistleblower added Bosses will get richer while vulnerable people suffer"

Step change are quoted as saying that Sadly the probable outcome will be huge fees on vulnerable consumers.

Now the Sun have hold of this and are classing it as part of Rip Off Britain, the public will be ourtaged as that organ has clout at grass roots far more than any broadsheet such as Torygraph and Grauniad or middle class tabloid like the Heil. My neighbour is bouncing when the bailiffs start knocking there will be mayhem on some estates.

What about entry, return entries and forced entry?

Anyone, especially the final part?

Anyone, especially the final part?

Think that forced entry will need specific permission from the court in all cases now, so a bailiff cannot just turn up ad-hoc with a locksmith and drill the locks, but we need to read through the regs for sure.

It would be good to know. I think there are issues over re-entry, and from my understanding, they can no longer climb through an open window, but I may well be wrong?

It would be good to know. I think there are issues over re-entry, and from my understanding, they can no longer climb through an open window, but I may well be wrong?

I think you are correct regarding only peaceful entry by a door from 6th on. I think the Currant Bun article will wake up some of the low paid to what is happening and I wouldn't like to be a bailiff knocking on some estates soon. Berlingos on bricks ablaze in Brixton? MOJ have certainly increased the prospect of civil unrest with their revisions, as to low paid and benefit families they cannot afford the council tax, and most certainly not the fees.