I have had a letter from Jacobs saying they have a fixed amount of time in which to collect a debt and will not accept my offer of payment as its too long. They have not asked for income expenditure to see what I can / cant afford. My question is what do I do next. I can't increase the offer to what they want - its over double what I offered £66 rather than £30. Thanks

I have had a letter from Jacobs saying they have a fixed amount of time in which to collect a debt and will not accept my offer of payment as its too long. They have not asked for income expenditure to see what I can / cant afford. My question is what do I do next. I can't increase the offer to what they want - its over double what I offered £66 rather than £30. Thanks

Without knowing she background information it is difficult to know whether or not Jacobs are being fair.

All enforcement companies will be guided by the relevant contracts that they hold from their local authority clients. With councils supposedly being desperately for case, many state that they would not want their enforcement agency to accept payment arrangements over a period of more than 3-6 months. Contracts will also stipulate payment targets etc.

How much is the Liability Order owed to the council?

Has a visit been made to your premises or have you made a payment proposal within what is called the 'compliance' period (the date from receipt of the Notice of Enforcement and before the 'cut off' date for payment to be made)?

The history is for a property that was empty from oct 2016 to may 2017. Council gave a discount for oct - dec but we were negotiating any further discount as property not fit to live in. They issued a further discount after supplying photos but as I'd not paid anything they issued a summons in Feb for remainder of year. As we'd be sorting discounts I genuinely hadn't know I was supposed to pay and then get reimbursed if overpaid. Council are happy for lower payments on what I owed for April - May 2017 and did this without income / expenditure but Jacobs won't budge and haven't even asked if I could afford.it just stated this is the amount. I still own this property but my son lives there now -

I rent elsewhere. Also having spoken to the Council they say I need to pay Jacobs. Hope thats enough info to help any further information. I'm not against paying but really can't pay any more and even that amount I've offered is a struggle.

All bailiff companies have welfare departments which when you ask to be referred they have to help you reach a mutually agreeable payment plan.

There is about £260 outstanding might be a pound or two more but not dramatically different.

I was already in contact with the council about the discounts so did not understand why they took this action. The judgement was issued but I am not aware if receiving papers as I would have disputed / attended court if i had known. After judgement we were still in contact and I did eventuly get told thw discount was being applied although this was after judgement was issued. I also received a very long letter saying why they had done the court action.

Thank you I will ask for this

Part time employed only and as shifts change each week almost impossible to pick.up other work. I'd struggle to increase to £45 tbh. Already stretched as.other half isn't earning enough and I'm having to pay most of the bills.

I was already in contact with the council about the discounts so did not understand why they took this action. The judgement was issued but I am not aware if receiving papers as I would have disputed / attended court if i had known. After judgement we were still in contact and I did eventuly get told thw discount was being applied although this was after judgement was issued. I also received a very long letter saying why they had done the court action.

Just in case you are wondering, there is no judgment recorded against your credit file.

You say that you do not understand why the council pursued a Liability Order.....you then mention that the council have sent a long letter to you outlining why they had taken court action !! Does that letter not address your query?

With the debt being £270, I would not hold out much hope of Jacob's accepting a low repayment of £30 per month as this will mean that it would take almost 10 months to clear the debt. Such a long repayment term is most unusual. That said, you really must ensure that if you are going to speak with the council, that you do so tomorrow otherwise you risk the account being passed to an individual enforcement agent for the purpose of taking control of your goods (which could a serious step if you have a vehicle parked outside of your home. This step would also involve an enforcement fee of £235 being applied to a debt that is already unaffordable.

Please do post back once you have spoken with the council.

Explain how you have contacted Jacobs upon receipt of their notice and that they have been unable to accept your offer of repayments. Go on to state that you believe that your situation is quite exceptional, given you only work part time and that you are struggling financially. State you would not be able to sustain the repayments at the rate that Jacobs require. Ask that the council consider your offer of £30 per month based on the I&E breakdown that you attach to the letter/email. Emphasize that this is all that you can afford.

The situation is far from exceptional - trying to state a particular case is 'exceptional' will often alienate people. By all means a person should be able to provide the evidence and emphasise that they is all they believe they can afford but it needs to be kept in perspective.

Go on to enquire as to why the council did not send you a request for further information. remind them that at no time have you ignored this debt and continued to remain in contact with the council both before and after the issuing of the liability order. Given that you only work part time, state that you consider the decision to use enforcement agent to be wrong and had the council requested further information, they would have been aware that your financial situation was not ideal for enforcement.

A 'request for information form', the regulation 36 notice, is not a legal requirement. The council are not required to send it or undertake any means testing (or similar) prior to using an enforcement agent.

State that had the council requested further information, it would have been clear that enforcement was not suitable and that an attachment of earnings was better suited in your case.

An attachment of earnings is not necessarily a better option and wouldn't have to be used, even if the council had the information. Without knowing the wages it can't be said what it would bring in but ultimately the overall decisions from the council is under no requirement to do what is better for the debtor.

Furthermore, guidance from Government agencies and Citizens Advice both urge authorities to explore alternatives to enforcement - Especially when the debtor is on low income.

There is guidance which urges a Local Authority to give consideration but there's no legal requirement to do so.

Please do post back once you have spoken with the council.

I'd echo that - the way forward is to speak with the council and then position yourself based on their response.

Excellent response as usual SS.

I was also surprised to read the advice given by the previous poster. Just because the OP works part time and is struggling financially (as are most people whose cases are referred to bailiffs) does not mean that her circumstances are 'quite exceptional'. In fact, far from it.

I also don't known where the misinformation comes from regarding the reference to a local authority supposedly having to provide the OP with a 'request for further information'. Thankfully you have resolved the misinformation on this point.

Also as you will see stated below, the post from SS was not an excellent response and is littered with mistakes.

Mistakes, Where ? The default position you adopt is that everyone else is wrong simply because they point out the legal position in respect of legislation. Where it may well be helpful in some cases for a council to step back slightly before taking enforcement action they can continue to take as it long as the law says it's legal.

Again, your claim that there is no requirement to follow guidance is not worth the paper it is printed on in this situation - Nobody is considering legal action. A failure to heed valid advice is deemed maladministration. Furthermore, the LGO has stated publically that if recognised guidance is not followed, she will likely deem the council guilty of maladministration.

I never said guidance wasn't important, I pointed out that it is not legally binding - a different issue all together. I also never mentioned any taking legal action.

The LGO declines to find fault in many cases on the basis the council has followed legislation and acted correctly, even where it is possible that the council may have taken some action because what they have done is not in anyway contrary to legislation. If there was maladministration every time the council didn't do something that someone, somewhere, had suggested they may do then every almost single case would be upheld by the LGO, something which doesn't happen for the obvious reason.

Thank you for all the info guys I am following it all up and in the process of speaking with the Council / baliffs. Hopefully it will get resolved but if further questions will come back. I'll let you know how I get on.

Thank you for all the info guys I am following it all up and in the process of speaking with the Council / baliffs. Hopefully it will get resolved but if further questions will come back. I'll let you know how I get on.

Please do iconlass...I will temp close your thread for now as it will be 10 pages long otherwise...drop me a PM when you are ready to open it again.

Regards

Andy