Hi All,

In Sept

me and my partner split up and I applied for housing and council tax benefit,

this then gets a bit confusing,

buy they agreed I was entitled going forwards in jan for benefits, but they were not going to back date,

I then appealed and they agreed I was entitled to the back date but not what I had from Jan up to agreeing the back date.

the council tax benefit didnt actually get sent across till the 11th of March, and even then it was only 124 pounds.

I didn't hear further until on Saturday when a Rundles bailiff turns up at the door.

I asked what the debt was for as this years (16-17) I paid in full to get rid of it all.

He couldn't tell me what the debt is for,

he said it is probably council tax - those were his exact words,

i said I would be back I need to make a call, and I shut the door and locked it.

He could hear me on the phone, and next thing he shoves a bit a letter through and off he goes.

Turns out I have discovered today there was still a debt of 375 for Jan - April,

and the extra money the bailiff wants is their charge, taking it to 682.00.

I expressly asked him was it with charges and he said no.

I think he had one of those cameras as well so there should be evidence of this conversation.

I have asked the council to take the debt back and I will pay the 375, and they have refused,

My local MP is already on the case regarding my housing benefit issues,

and I have jsut re-contacted them regarding this problem as well.

They also asked if I had cars on the driveway,

I did have mine and my brothers as he was visiting, and they are both financed.

The problems I have had have been going on since September, and are still not resolved.

Is there anything I can do,

I figure If i call up the auto mated line and pay 376 then ive paid it and dont owe anything.

.. will this work?

Before getting to the very late stage of a personal visit, you should have received an initial letter from Rundles. This would have been a Notice of Enforcement. A complaince fee of £75 would have been added to the debt at that stage. Most importantly, this notice would have invited you to contact Rundles to agree a payment proposal. You need to contact Rundles to make enquiries as to the absence of this notice.

If no contact is made following the Notice of Enforcement, the account will be passed to the enforcement agent and accordingly, an enforcement fee of £235 would be applied. The fees appear correct but you do need to contact Rundles regarding the missing Notice of Enforcement.

Once an account is with an enforcement company it is very difficult to avoid bailiff fees. This is best explained by reading the following guidance:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?453047-Bailiff-enforcement-Setting-up-a-payment-arrangement-and-whether-you-can-pay-the-court-or-the-council-direct

Once you have made enquiries with the council, please post back.

You've been exceedingly unlucky with bailiffs over the last few years looking back at your previous posts!

So to precis your post, there is a debt remaining after sorting out your benefits of £375 from last years Council Tax (Jan 2016-April 2016). Bailiffs have now turned up to enforce this debt, adding their fees on top, though bizarrely they have charged £307 not £310.

Firstly, do not let the bailiffs in. They have no right to force entry to your property, but can walk in through an unlocked door. They can also take control of goods outside (usually a vehicle), so make sure they are parked well out of the way.

Did you get a letter headed Notice of Enforcement giving you 7 days to come to a payment arrangement with the EA? As you may know from previous years, this is a requirement, and you incur a £75 fee at the start of this stage (the Compliance Stage). If you haven't, you need to enquire about this with Rundles.

If no agreement is reached, after 7 days the EA can visit, and a further £235 fees are incurred at this stage. This is the stage you appear to be at.

The council will want you to deal only with the bailiffs, who will be looking for you to clear the debt within 2-3 payments, including the bailiff fees, hence them refusing to deal with you at present.

You state you don't want to pay these fees. In this case, do not pay the council anything at present, as if you pay say £150, the council will usually forward the payment to the enforcement company, the first £75 will go directly to pay the bailiff's Compliance Stage fee; the remaining £75 would be split pro-rata, roughly 70:30 between the council and the remaining bailiff fees.

There are only two ways you can avoid paying the fees. The first is to sit things out, denying entry to the bailiff, and ensuring they do not take control of your, or your brother's car (more on that in a bit), and wait until eventually the warrant is returned to the council, at which stage fees die and you can come to an agreement. Some on here are very anti this approach, though it would spare you the extra fees.

If you choose this route, you'd need to write to the council's Head of Revenues, copied to the Chief Executive and Rundles, explaining you are willing, and want to pay the £375, but will not be allowing the EA entry to your premises, or allowing anything outside to be taken under control. It's critical you show your desire to pay the £375.

Re. the cars, you state they are both financed, but don't state how. If by conventional HP, they should not be seized by the EA - there is a huge argument around this issue. The easiest thing is to assume the EA would clamp it (them), probably to try to coerce payment from you, so it is best to keep the vehicles well out of the way. This avoids getting into any argument over whether they can or cannot sieze vehicles on HP, you keep control of your vehicle(s) and sit it out.

The second way is if you have nothing of value, though you have already mentioned your car. If you didn't have anything, there would be no harm in allowing the EA access to see you had nothing, so the account would be returned, with a note advising you had insufficient goods. This appears to not be the case for you.

If you sit it out successfully, you can pay a sum to the council (obviously you'd have been putting your affordable repayment to one side) and clear the debt. If there is any outstanding, they may agree a repayment plan, or they may use another collection option such as an AOE which you have had previously. They 'might' use another bailiff company, in which case you'd have to sit it out again. It does happen occasionally, but is the exception rather than the rule as far as I'm aware.

I hope this helps. If you decide you are happy to pay bailiff fees, obviously you need to contact the bailiff who will be looking to clear the debt in 2-3 payments, occasionally more. That has to be your choice.

I should add to this that these fees are prescribed by law.

Also, it is not true that you will avoid paying fees, as the order can smply be sent to another bailiff, who will add exactly the same fees, and of course may pester you for another six months

What that means , six months of not being able to leave your door open or your(or anyone else's) car outside your house, being worried about every knock on the door. bailiffs can attend 365 days a year of course.

As for writing the letter , there are hundreds of these cases every week , they will not be interested , a waste of everyone's time.

People on here do not realize that there is a debt which needs to be paid that debt includes fees.

Best advise as usual comes from or bailiff expert(BA),that is what you should do.

I think my post addressed the vast majority, if not all of Dodgeball's points. Fees do die when the debt is returned, a small number 'may' be passed for enforcement by bailiffs again, but it's rare.

As I said also, it is your choice, and yours only. You can only make a fully informed choice if you have been told your options, I've tried to do that, including mentioning coming to an agreement and paying the debt with all the fees, which appears to be Dodgeball's preferred option.

The first thing to check is the Notice of Enforcement though, as both Bailiff Advice and I highlighted.

It seems as if the fact that you paid the EA on their visit has been overlooked.

It is strange then that after you had paid what you thought was everything,

you get hit with an extra £375 unless it was solely for his fees

although I am not sure how that figure was arrived that-£75 and £235 comes to £310 .

In any event, by making a payment, the first £75 is

(Or should be) automatically forwarded o the EA.

You mentioned January as the Council yardstick for payments to commence

-was that because you did not inform them of your changed circumstances till then.

Good on you for getting your MP involved as it might mean the Council will be more careful in their dealings with you.

Did the Council advise you that you were In danger of being handed over to bailiffs for non payment.

When they are trying to work out when things like benefits etc are to be paid and how much,

they still expect you to pay what is outstanding and then repay you the difference once the details have been agreed.

Hopefully the MP will give them a kicking if they have been slow to adjust their figures

and then heaping on extra misery on you by sending in the bailiffs probably unnecessarily.

That's not how I read it lookinforinfo.

I asked what the debt was for as this years (16-17) I paid in full to get rid of it all.

I took that to mean he'd already paid this years in full, but there was a debt from last year, the OP shut the door to make a phone call, audible to the EA, buut the EA left. The debt escalated from £375 to £682, meaning fees of £307, not £310 were added.

I did a precis so the OP could state whether or not my reading was correct, so it will be interesting to see what they say when they post back.

I agree totally about any potential delays, and trust the MP will address this.

It seems as if the fact that you paid the EA on their visit has been overlooked. It is strange then that after you had paid what you thought was everything, you get hit with an extra £375 unless it was solely for his fees although I am not sure how that figure was arrived that-£75 and £235 comes to £310 .

 

In any event, by making a payment, the first £75 is (Or should be) automatically forwarded o the EA.

I also thought when initially reading the post that the OP had paid the bailiff. This is not the case. He refers instead to the fact that he was confused by the visit given that he had already paid the entire council tax bill for 2016/17 to the council. It was after closing the door and calling the council that he became aware that the enforcement agent was collecting an entirely different debt for £682 which includes arrears from an earlier period of approx £375. There is minor error somewhere of £3.

Yes, that's how I read it Bailiff Advice. You're right about the £3 error as well, but it's in the OP's favour, so all good!

If there is a miscalculation on this debt and just £3 remains unpaid then the debt has not been paid in full and this could allow the EA to continue enforcement possibly?

You could ask for a breakdown of monies and fees paid to verify the correct balance of the full debt owed

Deffo ask as per MM, for that breakdown, a record of payments made and on which year, needs clarification. Mind you if it goes back to the council and another bailiff gets the account there will be another £75 Compliance Fee to pay according to DB.

If it goes back to the council, and is then given to a new enforcement company, then another Compliance Fee would be payable. How likely is this to happen in reality? Very unlikely. If the first company couldn't collect, why would a second one be able to? The council would more than likely go for an AOE or one of the other options available. There's also a question over what would happen to any monies paid. If nothing had been collected, no fees would be due. This is more for a discussion thread than a live thread though.

Debtors should not be scared by statements such as those seen on another thread in recent days.

If it goes back to the council, and is then given to a new enforcement company, then another Compliance Fee would be payable. How likely is this to happen in reality? Very unlikely. If the first company couldn't collect, why would a second one be able to? The council would more than likely go for an AOE or one of the other options available. There's also a question over what would happen to any monies paid. If nothing had been collected, no fees would be due. This is more for a discussion thread than a live thread though.

 

Debtors should not be scared by statements such as those seen on another thread in recent days.

No they shouldn't, but too many threads are hijacked and turned into discussions.

No they shouldn't, but too many threads are hijacked and turned into discussions.

Hear! Hear! Spot on.

I should add to this that these fees are prescribed by law.

 

Also, it is not true that you will avoid paying fees, as the order can smply be sent to another bailiff, who will add exactly the same fees, and of course may pester you for another six months

What that means , six months of not being able to leave your door open or your(or anyone else's) car outside your house, being worried about every knock on the door. bailiffs can attend 365 days a year of course.

 

As for writing the letter , there are hundreds of these cases every week , they will not be interested , a waste of everyone's time.

 

People on here do not realize that there is a debt which needs to be paid that debt includes fees.

Not to detract or be pedantic but is it not the case Bailiffs are not allowed to enter your home on Christmas day or bank holidays?

Regards to all

Not to detract or be pedantic but is it not the case Bailiffs are not allowed to enter your home on Christmas day or bank holidays?

 

Regards to all

They can but I think Christmas day and Easter Sunday are bailiff free

No they shouldn't, but too many threads are hijacked and turned into discussions.

The truth of the matter is that too many threads start and finish with just one post from the OP leaving questions unanswered.

Not to detract or be pedantic but is it not the case Bailiffs are not allowed to enter your home on Christmas day or bank holidays?

 

Regards to all

No 365 days a year.

TCOG 2013

I think my post addressed the vast majority, if not all of Dodgeball's points. Fees do die when the debt is returned, a small number 'may' be passed for enforcement by bailiffs again, but it's rare.

 

As I said also, it is your choice, and yours only. You can only make a fully informed choice if you have been told your options, I've tried to do that, including mentioning coming to an agreement and paying the debt with all the fees, which appears to be Dodgeball's preferred option.

 

The first thing to check is the Notice of Enforcement though, as both Bailiff Advice and I highlighted.

It seems That I am OK responding to this so.

No you are incorrect re issuing orders is quite common and about to be moreso.

My preferred option is always to get people out of debt, not avoid it.

Yes this was covered by BA.,

No 365 days a year.

 

TCOG 2013

How does this fit with the National Standards? What do they say about this issue?

It seems That I am OK responding to this so.

 

No you are incorrect re issuing orders is quite common and about to be moreso.

 

My preferred option is always to get people out of debt, not avoid it.

 

Yes this was covered by BA.,

What is about to happen to make it more common?

My preferred option is to get people out of debt, not further into it by incurring unnecessary fees.

The debtor has not returned to this thread and until he does so I cannot see any need for any more posts.

Are you aware of anything about to happen which will lead to more orders being re-issued, as per Dodgeball's comments? It's not something I've seen mentioned previously on here, so it would be interesting to know if this has substance or not.

The OP seems to have glazed over around 5.30pm yesterday due to the long discussion, I suspect.

Thread closed.

OP, if you would like the thread reopened, please contact one of the site team or report this thread.

HB