Regarding bailiffs calling at "unreasonable" times. Their is a Code of Practice published by the Lord Chancellors Department (now the Department for Constitutional Affairs) that recommends that enforcement does not take place before 6 a.m. or after 9 p.m. Therefore anytime after 6 a.m. is presumably regarded as reasonable. Most people are not in 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. so naturally bailiffs make a number of calls early morning and late evening in order to catch people when they are in. A great many of their clients insist that they do this. When the bailiff calls between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. and no one is in, the debtor gets charged for the visit and the bailiff is accused of calling at a time when it is likely that no one is in, just to inflate the charges. Damned if you do and damned if you dont !

I am sure that the Council will have applied your money to clear their debt and will not have passed any money on to the bailiff. Therefore, from their point of view the debt is paid in full. Nevertheless, the money is supposed to be used to discharge the fees first. This means that the bailiff is still entitled to pursue LEGITIMATE fees which in this case I do not see can amount to more than a first and second visit. If I were you, I would now be complaining to the court where the bailiff is certificated (assuming that he / she is certificated) regarding the apparent attempt to charge around £160 in illegal fees.

The legislation provides that "fees and charges" are dischargede first so in fact what you have done is to pay part of the fees and charges and the Council Tax itself is still outstanding. However, the point is - are the charges legal? If the bailiff has not gained access to your property and has not levied on anything then all he can charge is for the first two visits (£24.50 for the first one and £18 for the second). He cannot levy or take walking possession by posting something through the letterbox. If he is trying to charge you £200 without having levied he is acting illegally and I suggest you make a complaint against his certificate.

There is no point in an uncertificated bailiff delivering letters because no charge can be made for doing so. A bailiff can only call (and leave a letter if no one is in) with "the intention of levying distress" If the bailiff is not certificated then he cannot have this intention. He can visit and leave you a letter but cannot charge for it.

I stand corrected. However, I think my points regarding incorrect paperwork are still valid.

A couple of points:- The paperwork shows the bailiff is certificated at Northampton County Court (if you have reproduced it accurately). Northampton is the Traffic Enforcement Centre for the whole country and as far as I am aware do not issue bailiff certificates. Only some County Courts do this. This makes me think he is not certificated. You have been issued with a "Notice of Seizure" but you have been charged for "Removing/Attending to Remove". Charges for removing etc. should be detailed on a "Notice of Expenses for Removing" etc. and if this has not been issued the paperwork is wrong. This gives you grounds to complain to the court where the bailiff is certificated (if he is) and if not - then the whole thing is illegal & you should be able to get a full refund