Misinformation, disinformation and a contempt for the truth on various websites is seriously harming debtors (many of whom are vulnerable) and this has been categorically proved today when a debtor was arrested and charged under section 68(1) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunal Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 with 'intentionally obstructing a bailiff lawfully acting as an enforcement officer'. I will write about this matter under separate cover but once again, this debtor was given the following incorrect 'advice' on the website: 'Nothing in the regulation enables bailiffs to levy distress for their unpaid fee. They have to seek a civil order under Section 92(8) of the Courts Act 2003 before they can enforce payment of their fees' The same websites also make the following statement: 'If a bailiff wants to recover his fees incurred up to and including the point at which the debt was paid direct to the council, he must take a new civil action against you under Section 92(8) of the Courts Act 2003' The above statements give the (wrong) impression that if a debtor makes payment direct to either the local authority (in cases where a Liability Order has been issued) or to a Magistrates Court (in relation to an unpaid court fine) that the bailiff company may only recover their fees by taking the debtor to court !! The truth of the matter is that section 92 of the Courts Act has nothing whatsoever to do with bailiff fees and instead, relates to court fees payable when either a solicitor, local authority or member of the public files any document or commences any process in either the Supreme Court, County Court or Magistrate Court !!! Examples below: