Baliffs collection times

[ss002d6252]

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.

[ss002d6252]

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.