Just had a visit from Marston’s enforcement officers trying to collect an unpaid magistrate’s debt that my son accrued whilst drunk,

first of all I paid all of this fine in instalments but was late for the final £30,

3 days later my son received a letter from Marston’s saying he now owed £105 and this was a letter of enforcement £30 for the unpaid fine (which had been settled) and £75 for the letter, just for the cheek of it i filled it for him in the bin and forgot about it (6 weeks ago).

When they arrived I answered the door with my son and they said he now owed £310,

I showed them the proof of all the payment’s and they said that did not matter as the fees are now enforcement fees, £75 for the letter and £235 for them attending.

I said to them that they must of known it had been paid before attending and they charged this fee for the letter, I then went into detail telling them that they added the fees knowing full well it had been paid and they are trying to bully him.

They said they would be back with a locksmith or payment!!!

Can I also add at this stage that no 7 day letter of notice to attend was received either,

the bloody cheek,

trying to enforce payment for their own fee knowing full well before attending that the fine had been paid.

Yeah my son was drunk and disorderly

hes only 18 and has learnt his lesson

but why has society allowed the [removed] antics described above and what can i do?

thanks

if you were late with the final payment

then sorry but they are quite entitled to send a notice of enforcement [£75)

just for the cheek of it i filled it for him in the bin and forgot about it (6 weeks ago).

and because you ignored that

again they are entitled to attend and charge the £235 visit fee.

Does this mean they can enforce this using the court?

i mean the fine has been paid so the courts influence is now defunct?

The fees become part of the fine. The original fine is paid off pro rata. They are fully enforceable under the warrant

So marstons are now allowed to change the magistrates original fine ruling?

i appreciate the comments so far but does this sound like a fair society.

He did not go to court for the added fees so surely the enforcement fees are cannot be enforced without another court ruling

as any bailiff can..nothing has changed always been that way.

you broke the agreement

The final payment of £30 was late.

Yours on would of got a notice.

Once expred it goes back thru the court as defaulted.

Warrant is issued and passed to one of four company's authorised to collect magistrates court fines. Marstons are one of them.

Your not summonsed back to court.

The fine is defaulted.

It is a fair society. Everything was explained at the outset of what happens if payments default.

You are wrong

A warrant of control for the recover of unpaid magistrates;' courts fines is issued under section 76 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980; which states;

Subject to the following provisions of this Part of this Act, and to section 132 below where default is made in paying a sum adjudged to be paid by a conviction or order of a magistrates’ court, the court may issue a warrant of distress for the purpose of levying the sum or issue a warrant committing the defaulter to prison.

The warrant only confers an enforcement power to recover the sum adjudged.

Bailiffs cannot enforce unpaid fees because they are not the sum adjudged.

Read the TCoG regulations

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

sorry they can.

Also have a look at these CAG links:

https://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

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?453292-Bailiff-enforcement-A-Simple-Guide-to-the-Taking-Control-of-Goods-Regulations

The magistrates court act was superseded by the taking control of goods regulations 2014 on fine defaults.

There I no such thing as a distress warrant anymore and has been so for 4 years now.

Its a warrant of control.

Please be advised that the enforcement agent ( not bailiff, there is no such thing anymore) CAN force entry to the address on the warrant to ascertain if the defendent has assets. The warrant of control automatically grants this.

Also Te enforcement agent does not have to have a paper copy of the warrant with them. Only the knowledge that It excists, much the same as the police who enforce an arrest warrant.

The EA(Bailiff)enforce the warrant using the TCE 2017 as said.

The adjudged sum is combined with costs and fees in part 50 of Schedule 12 of that act, and becomes the "amount outstanding".

This is the amount the EA is authorised to recover.

That is it basically, minutia has been covered many many times and confirmed in court many more.

so in plain english, because you binned the letter. A legal letter that was no concern of yours, you just landed your son with an extra 200+ charge to pay. And they can recover it by any means the court deems necessary.

I'd also advise you keep the FOTL arguments out of this. Or youll get yoru son in even worse trouble, simply because you dont know what you are doing, and wont admit it. I mean, youve already landed him with an extra £235 charge for absolutely no reason at all.

no £310

my mistake. I didnt add the 75 letter charge. But i hope he understood what i meant. He's made this much worse for his son.

The Costs were already mentioned in post#2 and just to clarify:

Notice of Enforcement - £75 + Attendance/Visit to property - £235 = Total Costs £310

If you do not pay these it will increase as they take it further with more costs on your son

FMoTl or those other stupid sites...

feel for the OP but should have come here 1st rather than read elsewhere

Forgot to mention I would also ask your Son checked his Credit File.

Noodle: https://www.noddle.co.uk/

Clearscore: https://www.clearscore.com/

You are wrong

 

A warrant of control for the recover of unpaid magistrates;' courts fines is issued under section 76 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980; which states;

 

Subject to the following provisions of this Part of this Act, and to section 132 below where default is made in paying a sum adjudged to be paid by a conviction or order of a magistrates’ court, the court may issue a warrant of distress for the purpose of levying the sum or issue a warrant committing the defaulter to prison.

 

The warrant only confers an enforcement power to recover the sum adjudged.

 

Bailiffs cannot enforce unpaid fees because they are not the sum adjudged.

You have made two errors:

One was to ignore the statutory notice (the Notice of Enforcement) and throw it away and the second was to believe fairy stories written online about only paying the 'sum adjudged' in respect of a criminal court fine.

Earlier this week the Ministry of Justice released the findings of the One Year Review of the Bailiff Reforms and the following two comments should be noted:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/695833/one-year-review-bailiff-reform-web.pdf

Item: 4.1

Another issue raised by most stakeholders, not directly driven by the reforms but potentially exacerbated by the extra transparency offered, is a proliferation of social media sites which claim to help debtors evade enforcement action. These often contain misleading or incorrect information about actions debtors can take, which in reality may lead to higher fees being charged because the next enforcement stage is triggered. Some forums encourage debtors to make false complaints and claims about their status, and a minority advocate aggressive action towards agents.

In relation to your point about 'sum adjudged', the following should clarify the position:

Item: 4.7.3. Direct payment of debt

One issue raised by enforcement agents is that debtors are sometimes erroneously advised (mainly by informal online sources) to pay their creditor directly after receiving notice that the enforcement process has begun, in an attempt to avoid the enforcement fees.

 

In this situation, the creditor is supposed to pay the compliance fee to the enforcement agent out of the debtor’s payment and the shortfall remains outstanding. If the debt has reached the enforcement stage it becomes more complicated as the enforcement fee is paid pro rata from the amount paid off. This leads to an administrative burden on the Local Authority as they have to separate the fees and a portion of the debt still remains requiring enforcement.

 

Although the simple solution to this problem would be to reject direct payments, many Local Authorities have systems that do not allow a payment to be rejected, particularly when the debt is paid online. Some have said that the extra burden of dealing with this has equated to a full time member of staff.

 

The warrant only confers an enforcement power to recover the sum adjudged.

Not it doesn't . By way of evidence, a copy of the warrant of control in relation to an unpaid magistrate court fine can be viewed here:

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462907-Court-Fines-Warrant-of-Control-does-NOT-cease-when-sum-adjudged-is-paid-to-the-court-!!&p=4890303&viewfull=1#post4890303

As can quite clearly be seen, the official Warrant of Control has the following wording:

To: Enforcement Agent

 

Warrant number: Warrant No.

 

Defendant:

Defendant's Name

Defendant's Address

Address Line 2

Address Line 3

Address Line 4

Address Line 5

Post Code

 

Money owed: £ Total Balance

 

 

Division: Accounting Division

Account number: Account No.

[Case number: Case Number]

[born: Date-of-Birth]

 

 

Directions

 

1. You may take goods belonging to the defendant to the value of the money owed and any amounts in respect of costs of enforcement related services which are recoverable in accordance with regulations under paragraph 62 of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

 

2. The goods may not be sold without giving at least 7 days clear notice unless the court has ordered otherwise or the goods are perishable.

 

3. If the goods are sold you must pay the money owed to the address at the top of this order. You must give the court a statement of any costs on the attached sheet.

 

 

Conditions

 

 

1. If the money owed and the costs are paid, you must not take control of and sell the defendant’s goods.

 

2. You must not take goods which are exempt under regulations made pursuant to Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

Yes as said the warrant confers the power to enforce "using the procedure contained within sched 12". The allocation of fees (fees regs) are made under section 62 of that act.