Hi,

I was visited today by two bailiffs form the company Court Enforcement Services Limited pertaining to the payment of a business electricity bill.

I had not received a letter or other warning of the visit which was to my home address and not the business address.

My residential address is used as the registered office of the business, hence their knowledge of it, however it is not my property (it is jointly owned by three family members.)

I was upstairs at home when the bailiffs entered via the unlocked back door (I believe this is their right?)

They told me that they would be taking £3367.58 (they didn't give this exact figure initially) worth of goods or money for enforcement of a High Court writ for the electricity debt of £2300.

During our interaction the bailiffs referred to themselves as "The Court Enforcement Service" which I think is deceitful and an attempt to portray themselves as officers of the law rather than employees of a limited company, which is apparent form the documentation they gave me before they left.

I asked for some documentation pertaining the the Order or Writ that they were carrying out and was shown an illegible document on the screen of a phone which was heavily cracked. They had no other paperwork to offer.

They asked me (more than once) if I was refusing to pay the bill. This is not the case and I had previously spoken to a representative of my electricity provider in person regarding the debt and did not know that the utility company had applied for a court order. (I have the funds to pay the £2300 to the utility company directly and acknowledge that this is what my company legitimately owes).

I told the bailiffs that there was money in the safe a the business premises (which there is) about 10 miles away, but I could not get hold of my business partner to ask him to access it as his personal phone wasn't answering and the business was shut at the time.

I was told that this was irrelevant and that they (the bailiffs) would travel to the business premises and break the door down in my absence to take goods to the value of £3300 if I didn't pay up.

In the end I paid their demand via direct debit as I did not want people breaking into my business premise and was issued a receipt which is how I found out I was dealing with Court Enforcement Services Limited and not "The Court Enforcement Service" (LOL).

After the two gentlemen left I consulted the CAB website as to the fees which bailiffs may charge. From the CAB site it seems that the maximum they could levy is around £360 (which I would dispute anyway as I have not reneged on payment in the first place and was unaware of their impending visit). However they have extracted a fee of £1000 which I only acquiesced to under the threat of a break in at my business.

I am considering having my bank cancel this payment.

If anyone can advise on theese issues it would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

High court enforcement fees are more than the standard enforcement fees. They referred to a high court writ.

Suggest that you don't cancel the payment, as another visit will occur and more fees will be added. They should have provided you with paperwork confirming fees they charged and you would need to post these up, so people can comment. Based on what i have read previously £1000 in fees might be correct.

The enforcement officers were entitled to go to your address as it was the registered address for the business. They could not have taken any goods unless they believed they were owned by the business. Of course they might have implied they would take goods and it was up to you to prove personal ownership.

Surely it cant be right that they can charge £1000 pounds without so much as sending a letter? I feel that the bailiffs have tricked me into paying fees that are not owed!

I cant provide any inormation regarding the writ as I havent seen it or any other paperwork.

Looking around the forums I can see a very similar situation wiht the same bailiffs in another thread. Are they known for this kind of practice?

Surely it cant be right that they can charge £1000 pounds without so much as sending a letter? I feel that the bailiffs have tricked me into paying fees that are not owed!

 

I cant provide any inormation regarding the writ as I havent seen it.

You need to ask them for the writ details i.e which court issued it, so you can contact the court to check. Also ask for a full breakdown of the fees.

With a CCJ, the claimant can elevate to high court by paying a fee and High Court Enforcement Officers can attend without much warning. Edit to correct, See this link for details of process and fees.

https://www.businessdebtline.org/EW/factsheets/Pages/high-court-debt/high-court-enforcement-officers.aspx

It is the case unfortunately that High Court fees can be exceptional expensive and are greatly misunderstood (by the public and enforcement agents).

When an initial Notice of Enforcement is sent, a compliance fee of £75 plus vat is applied (£90). Unless full payment is made before the compliance stage ends ( a period of 7 clear days from the date given on the NoE, a personal visit must be made and will incur a 'first enforcement stage fee' of £190 plus vat (£235). As the debt was in excess of £1,000 there is a further 7.5% uplift.

The next fee ( Second enforcement stage) is where many problems arise. This is a set fee of £495 plus VAT

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/schedule/made?view=plain

If payment is not forthcoming when the enforcement agent visits, and he is unable to enter into a controlled goods agreement, then the case can progress to the 'second enforcement stage'.

In your case, you need to obtain a detailed breakdown of the fees charged.

Firstly I would strongly advise not to try & reverse the payment you have made. If you do so then it could be they turn up at your business premises and force entry to remove goods, they could also apply for a Warrant to force entry to your residential address. If this happens then you are faced with even more costs. Hard I know but at least at present having paid in full you are not faced with any unwelcome visits and can take a bit more time in sorting this out.

Were you aware of the initial CCJ? If not then you you need to find out where all the documentation was sent - this can be obtained from the utility company, also which Court awarded the CCJ and I assume it would have been a Default Judgment. This could well be the whole crux of what happens next.

An application for a set aside does not suspend enforcement, unfortunately.

i think more info isrequired before we start theorizing abut the bailiffs motivations.

At present all has been paid in full so no further enforcement is possible but we do need to know more about the original CCJ.

 

When an initial Notice of Enforcement is sent, a compliance fee of £75 plus vat is applied (£90). Unless full payment is made before the compliance stage ends ( a period of 7 clear days from the date given on the NoE....

That's incorrect BA, the seven clear days starts from the expected delivery date of the NOE, not the date on the NOE.

In addition, VAT should not have been charged as the creditor, a utility co, will be VAT registered. In such a case, the creditor will pay the VAT and later reclaim it. From what I can see, the fees should not have exceeded £362.50. CES have taken over £1000 for fees - this continues to show that some EA's are sadly still motivated by greed.

Surely if the OP was not even aware that a court order had been applied for then a simple application for a set aside would suspend enforcement in any case?

 

 

If it were me, I would certainly try to get my money back sooner, rather than later and with an application for a set aside, there would be no fear of anyone returning to force entry. There are several grounds to ask the bank to reverse the transaction:

It is not fair to either the OP or visitors to make assumptions for something as important as this.

The original poster did not say that he was not aware of the summons. What he did say was that the was not aware of the court order (which is not the same at all).

At least twice a week, I receive enquiries from individuals who had made an application to 'set aside' a judgment and had been refused permission to do so. Courts are very reluctant to grant some applications if the outcome would be the same. In this particular case, I cannot see where there would be grounds for the court to grant such applications given the following comment from the OP:

You have also cast doubt on whether or not a Notice of Enforcement had been sent by the enforcement company. The difficulty with this is that under the Interpretation Act, the notice is deemed served unless the contrary can be proved.

Hi Ploddertom.

 

 

THE OP has not only paid in full, he has paid £600 over the odds. The OP has already stated in post #1 that he wasn't aware that the electricity provider had applied for an order. My feeling is that if the OP was to obtain his money back, he would be in a far stronger position and it would be far more likely that the bailiff and creditor would accept an offer to settle and payment of compliance and 1st stage enforcement fee. Contrary to what Dodgeball has stated, the electricity supplier WILL suspend the writ whilst a set aside is being applied for.

 

 

Put yourself in the shoes of the OP. If you had paid £600 that you shouldn't have, wouldn't you want that money back? Leaving it in the hands of the bailiff makes it 10 times as hard to recover whereas if you hold the money, they are far more likely to accept your offer to settle and pay the lawfully incurred fees.

It is very simple. The OP has paid in full therefore there can be no further enforcement and the Writ has been executed successfully - the utility company will receive their money within the allowed specified timescales - & he/she can establish the rights & wrongs of what happened without the fear of the knock on the door. It is impossible to guess at the fees charged as we do not know what they are and therefore whether they are correct or not. The way forward with the fees is one of 2 routes:

1 - detailed assessment if the OP thinks he/she has been overcharged if or when they get a breakdown. They could win or lose this and leave themselves open to being awarded costs against them - not a route to be taken lightly.

2 - if there has been no knowledge of the original CCJ then Set Aside is a possibility given that it has been said they could have afforded to pay in full prior to enforcement. If successful they will receive every last penny back - enforcement fees & CCJ. There is still the debt outstanding to pay and this is paid ASAP. The Judgment Creditor may try to argue over their costs of enforcement but if it can be seen they have jumped the gun then that is there tough luck.

I would hazard a guess that the fees charged will have been Compliance Fee, 1st & 2nd Enforcement Stage, 7.5% Uplift + VAT which they are allowed to charge. Other charges to be included will have been the Costs of Execution + Interest @ 8%pa.

In addition, VAT should not have been charged as the creditor, a utility co, will be VAT registered. In such a case, the creditor will pay the VAT and later reclaim it. From what I can see, the fees should not have exceeded £362.50. CES have taken over £1000 for fees - this continues to show that some EA's are sadly still motivated by greed.

It is my understanding that the VAT rules have actually changed. I don't have the details to hand at present.

It is my understanding that the VAT rules have actually changed. I don't have the details to hand at present.

Please post them up if you find them. Until then, the latest known advice is that VAT should not be charged.

 

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/vat-business-non-business/vbnb41720

 

Many Thanks

Many Thanks

That's the current advice I refer to.

What is needed is more background information from the OP.

The OP has stated that he made payment by direct debit (presumably a direct bank transfer from his account to the enforcement companies). I would therefore be very surprised indeed if he were able to gets the agreement of the bank to reverse the payment.

As I have said before, further information is needed from the OP.

You cant set a side for the above reasons...you must have a proposed defence with merit to the original claim.....the OP does not have one as far as I can see...and therefore any application would be a waste of £255.

I think its best we wait for the OP to return now to consider the advice offered and therefore I propose to close this thread on a temporary basis until such time the OP requests it reopened.

Regards

Andy

Hi,

The thread I posted yesterday on this matter has been closed so I will formulate my enquiry more concisely.

I would like to know if, given:

a) I did not receive a notice of enforcement.

b) I was visited only once by bailiffs.

c) No goods were taken into their control to be sold.

Can I be charged £1170.22 in fees by the bailiff's company for the recovery of a commercial utility debt of £2197.36?

Additionally I would like to know if, given:

a) The bailiffs did not produce a writ.

b) They could not/would not produce a breakdown of their fees

c) Were dressed in the manner of and portrayed themselves as officers of the law

Have they acted unlawfully?

If the answer to the first question is "no", then my intention is to have my bank chargeback the full amount taken by the bailiifs and to pay my creditor, in full, the outstanding debt. I have informed them of this and of the poor conduct of the agents acting on their behalf.

If the answer to the second question is "yes" my intention is to point this out to them when the bailiffs find themselves out of pocket, so to speak.

I will, as a gesture of goodwill, pay the bailiffs company the fee due for the enforcement notice when I receive it.

Any info or advise is welcome.

Thanks.

edit: I would like to add that the bailiffs justification for the fee they are trying to extract is that the Lord Chancellor said they can charge this amount.

You are going about this the wrong way. It is more important to know about the relevance of the original CCJ.

In the first instance I would like to clarify whether i have been fleeced.

WRT the court judgement it was a High Court Writ according to the bailiffs, although I am not privy to it.

edit: I think it will be easier to decide on course of action if the Lord Chancellor did imbue these bailiffs with the authority to extract the stated amount.

To clarify:

A notice of enforcement was not sent. hence I could not have received one.

I think the structure of the fees is as you say. However I feel that the notice of enforcement may have deliberatley not been sent in order that higher fees could be charged.

I cant believe that you "cant see a major problem" with impersonating an officer in order to steal £600?!?! I imagine that could attract a custodial sentence?

I did not receive a claim pack, btw.

I gather this was a business to business debt?

 

Paying the creditor minus the fees will not stop enforcement. The writ commands the bailiff to take control of goods to recover the debt AND any fees they are entitled to.

 

 

This is what I would like to accurately determine. If they have overcharged by £600 then i'll take back the £600. If they MUST send a notice of enforcement then I'll take back the whole lot.

It could be the NoE was sent to the same address as all the original CCJ docs. As I have said previously if you decide to go the chargeback route then you then see how quick they will then act. As you have business premises they are allowed to force entry and if there is anything there they will remove immediately, if insufficient they then have the right to obtain a Warrant to force entry to your residential premises - for those that say NO to this then I am sorry but it does happen. The fees will then rise again substantially.

At present you have no threat of any further action so why rock the boat. All further action relies on what can happen through the County Court.