Marstons ridiculous fees..

[MJack]

Hi

 

I had a letter from Marstons a few months ago stating I owed an outstanding amount from a fine and marstons fees 82.00.

 

I sent them a ltter asking why the fees are so high,and they just advised thats what the fees are,as from some time last year.I paid the fine immediatly but held back from the fees,as I beleived one letter from them does not cost 82.00.

 

About 8 weeks on,i have just had a doorstop visit by the creeps and they have told me that in no uncertain terms that I now owe them 300.00.Pay up or they will take my car..

 

It was a saturday morn,I was a little intimidated and I paid....I am very uncomfortable and feel very angry that this has happened...arent I suppose to get a warning or letter etc..

 

any help will be greatly appreciated.

 

Mjack

[filrobbo]

Yes you are and they have to have a court order.Did they show you any paper work and did you get receipt for money paid

[wonkeydonkey]

The process, based on assumption as you do not give details.

 

Assuming you received the summons you would have had the option to attend the hearing or, accept judgment in your absence with consideration being given to your financial circumstances (provided you sent an I & E to your financial circumstances) the fine would be imposed and you would be expected to pay it forthwith.

 

If you failed to pay or did not make contact with the Court to explore the possibility of paying by installments you would/should have received by a Further Steps Notice, with this being an opportunity to pay the fine or see it passed to the bailiff for collection.

 

That the fine was then passed to Marston's and to 'administer' the collection of it they charge a fee to notify you they are acting in that capacity.

 

That you paid the fine but not the fees brings up the argument 'are they allowed to chase for their fees using the 'warrant' as leverage' and that is an argument I am not prepared to enter into as it has previously been done to death and I can't see anything new can be added.

 

Take a wander around the forum and you will see all the arguments for/against withholding these fees.

 

 

WD

[MJack]

The process, based on assumption as you do not give details.

 

Assuming you received the summons you would have had the option to attend the hearing or, accept judgment in your absence with consideration being given to your financial circumstances (provided you sent an I & E to your financial circumstances) the fine would be imposed and you would be expected to pay it forthwith.

 

If you failed to pay or did not make contact with the Court to explore the possibility of paying by installments you would/should have received by a Further Steps Notice, with this being an opportunity to pay the fine or see it passed to the bailiff for collection.

 

That the fine was then passed to Marston's and to 'administer' the collection of it they charge a fee to notify you they are acting in that capacity.

 

That you paid the fine but not the fees brings up the argument 'are they allowed to chase for their fees using the 'warrant' as leverage' and that is an argument I am not prepared to enter into as it has previously been done to death and I can't see anything new can be added.

 

Take a wander around the forum and you will see all the arguments for/against withholding these fees.

 

 

WD

 

 

HI WD,thanks for your reply,and I realise that the fee element is a contentious issue,but if the 82.00 initially is deemed disproportionate and they are not instructed by the distress warrent to collect these fees(although they insinuate that the court order includes their fees)then the problem cannot esculate to a visit and then a 215.00 visit fee.

 

For the record...do they need to levy first on my property and give me notice of this in writing?

[MJack]

Hi,can anyone verify if this advice given on another thread 2 yrs ago is still valid?

 

The official advice on bailiffs fees for collecting unpaid magistrates court fines: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex345.pdf On page 3 under Magistrates courts. It says …are not allowed to charge you more than the amount you are fined, however, additional costs fro removing and selling goods may be added to the amount you owe.

 

This literally means, if no goods have been moved by a bailiff then the only amount is the outstanding fine, and if a bailiff tries to tell you otherwise then he commits an arrestable offence under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.

 

The law (Section 92 of the Courts Act 2003) only provides for HM Court Service to tender a contract with a fee agreement for collecting unpaid fines, bailiff companies then tender-bid for these contracts. This allows a bailiff to deduct his fee at the agreed rate out of fine paid. A fine is not the same as a debt, and bailiffs cannot lawfully increase a fine by adding fees. The contract is not legally binding on any convict or defendant unless a magistrate has made a Cost Order against the convict (very Rare!) - and that only happens when the defendant has an opportunity to defend it. A costs order will have the costs amount shown on the certificate.

 

The following procedure currently has a 100% success rate. The letter below asks the bailiff to pass a truth-test about his fees. Three things can happen:

 

1) The bailiff can try to convince you his fees comply with legislation – and you have a written confession he intended to defraud you

2) He can refund you – this is called mitigation the bailiff intended to defraud you, and accepts the opportunity to put things right

3) No reply – you can proceed with litigation against Bailiff Company.

 

 

 

cheers

[tomtubby]

MJack

 

Hi,can anyone verify if this advice given on another thread 2 yrs ago is still valid?

 

The advice given 2 years ago was not correct then and the position is the same today.

 

I will post further details later today ( a very large garden to tend to and blueberry muffins waiting to go in the Aga)......)

[brassnecked]

MJack

 

Hi,can anyone verify if this advice given on another thread 2 yrs ago is still valid?

 

The advice given 2 years ago was not correct then and the position is the same today.

 

I will post further details later today ( a very large garden to tend to and blueberry muffins waiting to go in the Aga)......)

 

That particular advice is not good. Blueberry muffins, mmmmm, my lot are having spicy chicken curry, with fresh chapatis, if I can drag myself away from Saints Row III

[MJack]

bluberry muffins v xbox..hard choice..

 

(I am atm taking on microsoft for the error e74....but will post that thread later...)

 

any advice on marstons TT would be muchly appreciated

 

mjack

[tomtubby]

[brassnecked]

bluberry muffins v xbox..hard choice..

 

(I am atm taking on microsoft for the error e74....but will post that thread later...)

 

any advice on marstons TT would be muchly appreciated

 

mjack

PC gamer myself, but Marstions are likely entitled to the letter fee unfortunately

[tomtubby]

Mjack

 

 

In answer to your post number 5:

 

.

.

Can you post back with a link to the tread.

 

The official advice on bailiffs fees for collecting unpaid magistrates court fines: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex345.pdf On page 3 under Magistrates courts. It says …are not allowed to charge you more than the amount you are fined, however, additional costs fro removing and selling goods may be added to the amount you owe.

 

The EX345 refers to Civilean Enforcement Officer (CEO's). These are employees of HMCS . They primarily execute arrest warrants and community penalty warrants.

The private sector bailiffs who enforce distress warrants on behalf of HMCS are referred to in the contract as Authorised Enforcement Officers (AEO's)

 

This literally means, if no goods have been moved by a bailiff then the only amount is the outstanding fine, and if a bailiff tries to tell you otherwise then he commits an arrestable offence under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.

 

For at least the past 4 years one particular poster (who I suspect started the thread that you refer to) has alledged that the fees charged by these bailiffs is fraudualent. If so, then a report must be made to the police under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.

 

I do not know of one case yet where the police have taken a prosecution against HMCS for allowing such fees to be charged. If I am wrong, then can somebody please provide evidence.

 

That is all that is required. Evidence.

[MJack]

so,if they are entitled to the 85.00 letter fee,then does that mean they are entitled to the 215.00 they charged me when they turned up at my house threatening to remove my car if i didnt pay immedialty?

[unclebulgaria67]

What I would suggest that you do is settle the fine directly with the court. You may be able to do this online or using the machine at the Magistrates court. Then it is a case of whether the bailiff can legally enforce their fees. Once the fine is paid, then send confirmation of this to the courts enforcement manager and the bailiff. Ask the courts enforcement manager for details of the legislation that parliament has passed then enables the bailiff to collect their fees, after the fine has been paid. There is conflicting information as to whether you have to pay the bailiff their fees after a fine is paid.

[tomtubby]

Mjack

 

In order to provide you with a suitable response can you please post back with a link to the thread from 2 years ago that you have referred to in your post.

 

I loof forward to reading the thread.

[Fulhamboy]

I paid off my Magistrates fine off online . Then went to my local Magistrates Court for clarification on this matter . The counter staff would not enter into any dialogue their excuse is that they are not legally trained but told me I had two options , one was to wait and see the duty solicitor upstairs if I wanted to hang around all day. Option two was to pick up the bat phone in the reception to speak to the fines office. So I phoned the fines office and had a conversation alongside eight other people in ear shot. Got confirmation that fine was paid off then asked could you send a written receipt and

" by the way am I liable for the bailiff fees ?" The young lady would not commit her self but insisted ,

pleaded with me to phone the bailiffs for a receipt and answers . So if the fines office wont commit

themselves then I wont pay the bailiff fees

[unclebulgaria67]

Apparently the £85 and £215 fees are not contained in any legislation, only in a contract betweeen bailiff companies and HMCS. Once the fine it paid, there is then no enforcement powers available for bailiffs to purely collect their fees. If HMCS wants bailiff companies to be paid the fees per the contract, then they would need to pass the relevant powers through parliament, perhaps a statutory instrument if this can be done.

[Fulhamboy]

Hello Unclebulgaria

They missed a trick there, beggars the question why wasn. t the bailiff fees regardless of the amount not added to any new legislation.So everyone then gets

a piece of the action. You will probably find that in the near future the all new and improved ! Essex bailiff company using their influence on the judiciary and local govt to have their enforcement fees set in Parliamentary stone

[tomtubby]

What I would suggest that you do is settle the fine directly with the court. You may be able to do this online or using the machine at the Magistrates court. Then it is a case of whether the bailiff can legally enforce their fees. Once the fine is paid, then send confirmation of this to the courts enforcement manager and the bailiff. Ask the courts enforcement manager for details of the legislation that parliament has passed then enables the bailiff to collect their fees, after the fine has been paid. There is conflicting information as to whether you have to pay the bailiff their fees after a fine is paid.[/QUOTE]

 

. .

 

Unclebulgaria67

 

If you read the initial post you will see that the fine itself has already been paid and the query that is being made by the poster relates only to the fees that are being charged by the bailiff company.

 

You will I am sure be aware that there is one particular advice site on the internet where they actively encourage debtors to do precisely what you are recommending to this poster ( ie: pay the FINE only at an ATM type machine etc). Furthermore that site alleges that it is a "criminal offence" to be charging a fee of £300 and the site also frequently allege that the fees are "fraudulent" .

 

If anyone believes that the fees are "fraudulent" or that a "criminal offence" has been committed then MUST call the police and ask that they investigate the matter.

 

Also, that same advice site continually encourage visitors to their site to write very lengthy letters to the Magistrates Court, the Ministry of Justice and even the Secretary of State outlining the SITE OWNER'S reason why they believe that the fees charged are "fraudulent".

 

Given the significant numbers of such letters they boast to have sent I am very surprised indeed that they have not as yet displayed ANY LETTER WHATSOEVER from ANY authoritative source confirming that their opinion is right.

 

Not one such letter has been displayed.

 

.

Edited May 13, 2013 by tomtubby

[MJack]

just to verify

 

I have paid the fine about 2mths ago...and didnt pay the fees. of 85.00

 

marstons then sent their bailiffs to my house this saturday and they advised that in no certain terms that unless the 85.00 plus their visit fee of 215.00 was paid immediatly they would sieze my car......so I paid it.

 

and i am looking for my next step to getting the moneys back as i am sure that masqurading their fees under the banner of they are inlcuded in the distress warrent I beleive is gaining money through deception or gaining moneys through menace etc

 

 

please advise

[MJack]

tomtubby...i dont have the link to the thread that had the advice from 2yrs ago..i just copied and pasted it...sorry.

[unclebulgaria67]

What I would suggest that you do is settle the fine directly with the court. You may be able to do this online or using the machine at the Magistrates court. Then it is a case of whether the bailiff can legally enforce their fees. Once the fine is paid, then send confirmation of this to the courts enforcement manager and the bailiff. Ask the courts enforcement manager for details of the legislation that parliament has passed then enables the bailiff to collect their fees, after the fine has been paid. There is conflicting information as to whether you have to pay the bailiff their fees after a fine is paid.[/QUOTE]

 

 

Yes aware of that. I like to have facts, but have not seen any legislation being quoted that enables a bailiff to charge £300 in fees, after a fine had been paid. If there is no legislation that allows for the fees, then someone could issue a small claims court case against a bailiff to demand the £300 back. I am not saying there is any fraud, just that the bailiff company may be continuing to collect their fees under a misunderstanding of what they are legally entitled to do.

 

If there is legislation, then this can be quoted by everyone in whatever forum and there can be no misunderstanding of what the correct legal position is.

. .

 

Unclebulgaria67

 

If you read the initial post you will see that the fine itself has already been paid and the query that is being made by the poster relates only to the fees that are being charged by the bailiff company.

 

You will I am sure be aware that there is one particular advice site on the internet where they actively encourage debtors to do precisely what you are recommending to this poster ( ie: pay the FINE only at an ATM type machine etc). Furthermore that site alleges that it is a "criminal offence" to be charging a fee of £300 and the site also frequently allege that the fees are "fraudulent" .

 

If anyone believes that the fees are "fraudulent" or that a "criminal offence" has been committed then MUST call the police and ask that they investigate the matter.

 

Also, that same advice site continually encourage visitors to their site to write very lengthy letters to the Magistrates Court, the Ministry of Justice and even the Secretary of State outlining the SITE OWNER'S reason why they believe that the fees charged are "fraudulent".

 

Given the significant numbers of such letters they boast to have sent I am very surprised indeed that they have not as yet displayed ANY LETTER WHATSOEVER from ANY authoritative source confirming that their opinion is right.

 

Not one such letter has been displayed.

 

.

 

Yes aware of that. I like to have facts, but have not seen any legislation being quoted that enables a bailiff to charge £300 in fees, after a fine had been paid. If there is no legislation that allows for the fees, then someone could issue a small claims court case against a bailiff to demand the £300 back. I am not saying there is any fraud, just that the bailiff company may be continuing to collect their fees under a misunderstanding of what they are legally entitled to do.

 

If there is legislation, then this can be quoted by everyone in whatever forum and there can be no misunderstanding of what the correct legal position is.

[MJack]

so,are you suggesting that a letter to the bailiffs requesting that they pursued the fees under a "misundersanding" of what they are legally entitled to do would suffice.

[unclebulgaria67]

so,are you suggesting that a letter to the bailiffs requesting that they pursued the fees under a "misundersanding" of what they are legally entitled to do would suffice.

 

You can try to write to the bailiffs, but whether you get a response that is of any use, I doubt it.

 

Ask the bailiff company under what legislation they have collected the £300 in fees, as you believe that this has not been agreed by parliament.

[tomtubby]

You may wish to read once agin the post that I made a few days ago ( a copy of which is below):

 

.

.

You will I am sure be aware that there is one particular advice site on the internet where they actively encourage debtors to do precisely what you are recommending to this poster ( ie: pay the FINE only at an ATM type machine etc). Furthermore that site alleges that it is a "criminal offence" to be charging a fee of £300 and the site also frequently allege that the fees are "fraudulent" .

 

If anyone believes that the fees are "fraudulent" or that a "criminal offence" has been committed then MUST call the police and ask that they investigate the matter.

 

Also, that same advice site continually encourage visitors to their site to write very lengthy letters to the Magistrates Court, the Ministry of Justice and even the Secretary of State outlining the SITE OWNER'S reason why they believe that the fees charged are "fraudulent".

 

Given the significant numbers of such letters they boast to have sent I am very surprised indeed that they have not as yet displayed ANY LETTER WHATSOEVER from ANY authoritative source confirming that their opinion is right.

 

Not one such letter has been displayed.

[unclebulgaria67]

TT

 

Yes I agree that some of the information posted elsewhere may be wrong in some ways, but so far I have not come across any evidence that bailiffs are legally entitled to charge the £300 in fees. Because this relates to collection of fines on behalf of HMCS these fees must be covered by a relevant statutory instrument or act of parliament. If they are not, then parliament has not sanctioned that such fees can be charged when collecting fines. This is why HMCS when asked about this, won't answer the question.

 

Act of parliament or SI that allows these fees please ?