Knocking on a Locked Door – Regulating Bailiffs

December 4, 2012 6:02 pm

Author:

Share this Article

It’s well known and understood that if you owe someone money they can arrange for bailiffs to seize property belonging to you and for them to sell it to cover the debt.  What is less well-known is that there are different sorts of bailiff, and indeed enforcement officers, and that the law relating to debt collection is complex and often centuries old.

Each year around four million cases are passed to bailiffs with a value estimated at over £1billion.  Non-payment of council tax meant last year there were almost 3 million summons issued with around half of the cases being passed to bailiffs for collection. That’s a lot of people coming in to contact with bailiffs.

But what is a bailiff and broadly what can they do?  Well there are County Court bailiffs and High Court enforcement officers.  Then there are Certificated bailiffs and private non-certified bailiffs.  Generally bailiffs must only use peaceful means of entry – that doesn’t mean pushing past someone.  Then again, in certain circumstances a bailiff can break in.  Bailiffs can seize goods – but not all goods.  Clear?

Complaints are not uncommon, indeed last year alone there were almost 25,000 private bailiff cases referred to the Citizen’s Advice Bureaux, but who to complain to depends upon the type of bailiff and the nature of the complaint.  Moreover, while parts of the enforcement industry are strictly regulated others have only informal regulation through trade associations.  And while some businesses carefully train their staff, others have, shall we say, a less rigorous approach.

There are also sadly too many cases of bailiffs acting aggressively and incorrectly applying these assorted laws.  Anecdotes and documented cases abound about bailiffs clamping vehicles used for work, seizing children’s toys, tricking their way in to a property, claiming there have criminal warrants, and ignoring the cases where people have specific vulnerabilities.

And then there are the fees. It is widely accepted that the current fee structure is complex with each enforcement power having its own costs arrangements.

Still not clear?

Well, it’s hardly surprising.  Bailiffs are covered by a variety of laws, secondary legislation and common law.  This complexity isn’t good for the debtor, the creditor or even the bailiff.  Trying to train a bailiff must be as big a nightmare as knowing if the bailiff at your door is acting correctly.

A big part of the problem is the long history of amending and adding to the legislation governing bailiffs.  More recently an attempt was made in the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 to sort out this mess, but much of the act as it relates to bailiffs didn’t come in to force before the 2010 General Election.

The current government published updated voluntary guidance in the form of the National Standards for Enforcement Agents which sets out behaviour to be expected from bailiffs.  However, critics have pointed out that there are only six small changes from the original document and this clearly doesn’t constitute a major reform of the law.

On 17 February 2012 the government issued a consultation paper, “Transforming bailiff action”, which outlined the reforms being proposed, many of which would be achieved by implementing Part 3 of the 2007 Act.  The consultation closed on 14 May 2012 and yet here we are some six months later still waiting for the government’s response – or better still some legislative proposals.

So we are left asking why given the confused mess that is our bailiff system nothing has been forthcoming.  It can’t be because of the coalition’s rule about not bringing in new laws unless old ones can be removed, given the long list of laws that could be swept away by simplifying the law.  Could it be the workload at the Ministry?  Well observers only need to look at the paucity of legislation before parliament to see that there are opportunities to act.

An amendment has been tabled to the Crime and Courts Bill, currently being discussed in the House of Lords, to be debated today (4 December). It’s a start but is unlikely to provide the solution – what we need is a proper law to bring all the various laws, guides and systems up to date and in one place.

I would hope that given the economic nightmare that is driving more people into the arms of debt collection the government would move swiftly to respond to its consultation and set out a clear framework so if the knock on the door comes it is from an enforcement officer who knows the law, has had proper training, is registered and regulated, and then maybe people can concentrate on the underlying issue of indebtedness, not a system that is fatally flawed.

Rob Flello MP is the Shadow Justice Minister with responsibility for bailiffs

Amendment 111 to the Crime and Courts Bill in the name of Baroness Meacher and Lord Beecham will be debated in the House of Lords today (Tuesday 4th December)

  • http://www.facebook.com/john.seers John Seers

    A very good subject to highlight. A bit of a mystery why they are not very strictly regulated.

  • http://twitter.com/ian_norris เลи и๏яяเร

    Why wasnt the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 process completed you had 3 years? what stopped pt3 in Nov 2008?

  • http://www.facebook.com/jim.crowder2 Jim Crowder

    There’s a lot of stuff that’s suddenly happened since spring 2010, hasn’t it? Was this not sufficiently important before then? What changes in the law have happened since then to make this so important?

    There seems to be a focus on people who don’t pay their bills and debts. Nothing about people who are owed money and never get it back. Shouldn’t we have a discussion about those victims too?

  • http://www.facebook.com/jim.crowder2 Jim Crowder

    There’s a lot of stuff that’s suddenly happened since spring 2010, hasn’t it? Was this not sufficiently important before then? What changes in the law have happened since then to make this so important?

    There seems to be a focus on people who don’t pay their bills and debts. Nothing about people who are owed money and never get it back. Shouldn’t we have a discussion about those victims too?

Latest

  • Featured The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing – and now’s the time to fight.

    The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing – and now’s the time to fight.

    Every day matters. Every single day between now and 7th May, thousands and thousands of Labour activists will be out on the doorsteps fighting this general election one street at a time. But through the cold and the rain and the dark nights, this fight isn’t just about the Labour Party, it’s about the millions of people we got into politics to represent. It’s about the people whose doors we knock on – the young woman worried about whether her […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Future Jobs of Britain: Ensuring everyone has a stake

    Future Jobs of Britain: Ensuring everyone has a stake

    We believe a Britain where everyone can do well for themselves and achieve their aspirations – where the next generation does better than the last – is the right vision for Britain.  We can only realise this goal if we build an economy which raises living standards for all working people, not just a few at the top. We certainly haven’t seen this under a Tory led Government, but we are clear that this is the destination of the next […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour announce they’ll break “the stranglehold” big private bus operators have over services

    Labour announce they’ll break “the stranglehold” big private bus operators have over services

    Labour have announced that they would stop five companies from dominating the bus service market, by making it easier for not-for-profit operators to run services. At the moment, Stagecoach, Arriva, Go-Ahead, First Group and National Express control 72% of local bus services. It’s said, Labour are looking at groups such as Hackney Community Transport – a social enterprise that provides transport to London and certain areas of Yorkshire. Founded in 1982, the company has no shareholders and looks to invest […]

    Read more →
  • Comment ‘I would have been angry too’

    ‘I would have been angry too’

    Labour needs to learn to let go, says Jim McMahon in exclusive interview with Liz Kendall and Steve Reed for their new pamphlet with Progress ‘If we had gone into marriage guidance counselling at that point,’ says Jim McMahon of the relationship between Oldham council and its residents two years ago, ‘the counsellor might have said: “Do you know what, it might just be time to part ways”.’ Oldham was not, says the man who has led it since May […]

    Read more →
  • News Majority of LabourList readers agree with statement from left-wing MPs

    Majority of LabourList readers agree with statement from left-wing MPs

    At the start of this week, 15 MPs issued a statement calling for an alternative to Labour’s current deficit reduction plans, a policy that would see the railways returned to public ownership and a more robust collective bargaining powers for workers, including better employment rights in the workplace. These proposals are not Labour policy and it’s unlikely that they will be before the election (or at least the first two won’t make it into the manifesto). But what do LabourList […]

    Read more →