The latest posting about a supposed court 'victory' regarding a 'detailed assessment' against a High Court enforcement company (DCBL I believe) has come from a forum owner. He claims that the case had been brought against a company by his client. We must no lose sight of the dreadful misinformation that person wrote about two of his previous clients cases (Bola & Murgatroyd). Thankfully for the public, I provided the evidence. Both cases were certainly not as reported. In fact, far from it.

I will approach the HCEOA and DCBL later today for more information.

The Strand, 23rd June. DCBL were the bailiffs.

Is your information from a reliable source? The reason for asking is because the courts cause list for that day do not show DCBL as being featured.

Are detailed assessments listed?

The Strand, 23rd June. DCBL were the bailiffs.

Are detailed assessments listed?

You surprise me.

Every case heard in the High Court is listed.

Well seeing as we're using names from elsewhere.... do you have a link to the list and I'll have a look for you.

It is not so much about using names from elsewhere, it is more about the fact that despite the number of times that you have been banned from this forum (and one other) over a period of at least 3 years, you continue to return with yet ANOTHER username. With the greatest of respect, that is not something that I do or need to do.

What I find very disturbing is the purpose of your posting on here. It follows a pattern all the time and that is to find a way in which to avoid paying bailiff fees. But more worrying, is that you will normally post first and shortly afterwards, a 'new user' will join the forum. This time we have the user (alreadyexists). No prizes for guessing who that poster is.

If you have such good advice to give, then why in heavens name do you not correct the daily misinformation given out on your own forum?

Looking at this thread, I find it very unlikely that the second stage fee would be charged if payment was made in full at the first visit. Section 4(5)a states that only ES1 fees can be applied if a CGA is successfully commenced, I find it difficult to believe that anything different would apply in the case of full payment.

https://www.hceoa.org.uk/images/content/documents/fees-best-practice/HCEOA-Best-Practice-Fees.html#p=2

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/regulation/4/made

(a)where the enforcement agent and the debtor enter into a controlled goods agreement which the debtor does not breach, only the first enforcement stage fee may be recovered from the debtor; and