Yes they did send me a further steps notice, but I am no longer living at the address they sent it to. So the bailiff had already sent their £85 letter before I received it. I only work 10hrs a week and do not claim any benefits, so while I was trying to sort out paying Excel in instalments (which they refused) they called to my old address and added a further £215 So the total they are now asking for is more than I earn in a month and they will not accept any form of payment except the full amount in one go.

Thanks yet again Old Bill So with that in mind.Although I think it is wrong because the contract is between HMCTS and Excel not me, I am liable for the fee's to Excel. It leads me to another question. Are Excel still permitted to gain entry to my home, under the Distress Warrant once the fine is paid to levy for their fees or does it become a civil matter due to the fact that the Distress Warrant was issued to recover the fine. Maybe I am reading or understanding the extract from the warrant that keeps being quoted ie You may take goods and money belonging to the defendant to the value of the money owed and any costs of carrying out this warrant. I refer to the 'costs of carrying out the warrant'. It is my understanding that they have not carried out the warrant, as they have not entered my home and I have made no arrangement as yet to pay them. But can they still carry out the warrant for their fees alone? I will speak to the HMCTS enforcement Manager as you suggested. Many thanks again Old Bill. xx

The offence was no TV Licence. It was the only fine I had and have ever had.

Does anyone have any advice on fees charged When the fine has been paid after the distress warrant has been issue. I have got the same response from the court stating that I owe the Bailiff his fees and have written a formal complaint to them also. Am I wasting my time?

the reply I got : I refer to you letter of 17th September 2012 in which you complain that the bailiff (Mr ******) has made a malicious communication regarding forced entry. You have also complained regarding the cost of enforcement and believe we have no madate to enforce payment and that it is a civil matter. On the first issue regarding the notes to forced entry, I have to say that the Domestic Violence Crimes and Victims Act 2004 enables us, when executing a warrant of distress or arrest for criminal penalties issued under section 76 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 to enter and search any premises in order to execute the warrant and to use reasonable force in order to do so. The act provides a defence to any civil or criminal liability that might otherwise arise. As the bailiff threatened to do something which he could do, then any statement in that context is not malicious. Notwithstanding that, I would be grateful if you could forward me any notice comments. The reason is that while forcing entry is perfectly legal under the circumstances, we have policies and procedures regarding these matters which do not include adding [ personal ] comments to pre-printed notices or using inappropriate language to convey certain messages. I Mr ****** has broken our own rules, I would very much like to take that up with him. On the second issue of enforcing the fees (after the primary debt has been paid), I am afraid the advice you have received is incorrect. A warrant issued under Section 76 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 is subject to the Magistrates Courts Rules 1981, which permit the ‘person charged with execution’ to retain the ‘proper costs and charges of the execution of the warrant’. However neither the Act nor the Rules provide a statutory fee scale. According, when appointing the current four contractors to enforce HMCTS matters, the Ministry of Justice set out the fee scale, which it approves and which all four contractors must adhere to Although we do not hold warrants as they are maintained by HMCTS and available for your inspection at the Port Talbot Enforcement Centre (we are not legally bound to have the warrant in our possession in order to execute it). I have set out the relevant extract from the warrant regarding costs. Directions 1. You may take goods and money belonging to the defendant to the value of the money owed and any costs of carrying out this warrant. Your further claim that we are unable to continue enforcing the warrant once the primary debt (fine) has been paid. This is not the case and the Ministry of Justice some time ago, through the Treasury Solicitors, confirmed that a distress warrant issued under Section 76 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980 can continue to enforce even after the original sum is satisfied. In other words, the fees applied in execution of this warrant become as enforceable as the original sum under that warrant. You will need to approach the Ministry of Justice, for any correspondence relating to this as I do not have anything to hand. I cannot therefore uphold you complaint as there is no evidence of any breach of any rules, regulations or law. I am, of course duty bound to advice you that while we placed matters on hold to deal with your complaint, that hold will now be lifted and unless the outstanding sum of £ *** Is paid forthwith, we will execute the warrant as the law directs. This may involve additional costs in relation to the removal of goods I trust this clarifies our position. Yours sincerely.

I know this is what companies like Excel do but they are now beginning to make me question whether I am right about this or not. The keep stating that I am liable for the fee they incurred when executing the warrant. I looked up the definition for the term execute and got to finish, complete, or perform as required, as in fulfilling one's obligations under a contract or a court order. 2) to sign and otherwise complete a document, such as acknowledging the signature if required to make the document valid. 3) to seize property under court order. 4 TO EXECUTE. To make, to perform, to do, to follow out. This term is frequently used in the law; as, to execute a deed is to make a deed. I don't know whether I am allowed to do this on this site. But I will post the letter I sent them and the reply I got from them. Because I really don't know if I am missing something or am completely wrong. BY POST AND BY EMAIL 17TH September 2012 Re Dear Sir FORMAL COMPLAINT I received a letter from your enforcement officer through the door of ************ on 12th September 2012 to collect an unpaid fine of £*** for HMCTS.. Please note this letter had the added text ‘ Returning at 14.00pm to break entry’ ‘locksmith being called’ I also on the same date received an answer phone message from your bailiff stating that he‘ Was returning to 8 ***** ***** to force entry and If I was not at home he would kick the door in’ I have reasonable cause to suspect that you bailiff has committed an offence under Section 1 (1)(a)(ii), Malicious communications Act 1988 in that he left me both a letter and verbal communication that contains a threat which he has no lawful authority to make. I understand that this may also be an offence under Section 2 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Relating to the fine which is paid. I have been led to believe by both your bailiff and an email received by your company dated 14th September 2012 that the fee made by you are part of the Court Order and you also indicate that the Distress Warrant makes me liable to pay you those fees. I understand that those fees are set by the HMCTS Enforcement Service Contract and there is no clause that make me Liable for your fees and charges unless you have taken control of my goods and sold them, which you deduct your cost from the proceeds of sale. I now understand the warrant for distress was issued under Section 76 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 only enables the recovery of the sum I am adjudged to pay and Leaflet EX345, published by the Court Service says Page 5 ‘They do not charge me for the work they do’ and I confirm no distress, or sale of my goods took place. I believe both your bailiff and call centre representative misled me about this,when they stated that there was a cost order against me.but incase of a genuine error please send me a copy of the order or adjudgement that was relied upon to place a liability on me to pay you bailiff fee on top of the fine. Please don’t send me the Distress Warrant including a schedule of fees printed on it because nothing on that document actually says that I the defendant is liable to pay those fees. COMPLAINT RESOLUTION To resolve this complaint, No further contact with the Bailiff that left Malicious Communications. Receipt of a warrant that commands the bailiff to recover the sum stated on the document and makes me liable for bailiff’s fees, without Distress being carried out. Receipt of a cost order being made against me by the Magistrate Court. Yours faithfully

Thank you for the advice Old Bill I did know about the Malicious Communications Act but not about the others or the option to complain to the District Judge at the court of who issued their bailiff certificate. I was given all the information on the courts that issued their certificate, by Excel, when I asked for their bailiffs name because nothing received from Excel or the Bailiff contains a name. But other that requiring a name for a complaint to the police, it didn't know what to do with the rest. I will of course take yours and WD advice regarding the Form 4 complaint and wait for the response on both what you have advised and other avenues I have pursued. It does seem that if you are a bailiff working under a contract with HMCTS, you think you are above the law and will admit I would pursue this even if the charges were not as excessive as they are. I think the way they get away with bullying people and making them feel unsafe in their own home is wrong on so many levels. Thanks again for the advice it is very much appreciated. hope xxxx

I really don't know, what it means Bigshoes In this email, it is my understanding that Excel has committed an offence by stating that have a legal document that they don't have. ie a DW including cost to them. I suppose what I want to know is if I pursue this along those lines, will I come up short because of the email heading.

Thanks for that advice Brassnecked Excel have 7 to 10 days to reply to the Formal Complaint I made, but I didn't know where else to go with a complaint against them It does seem that everyone I have spoken to sides with Excel. HMCTS just quotes the contract they have between themselves and Excel. The police told me it was a civil matter until I researched further and quoted the law on Malicious communications to them but with what I have, unfortunately that only covers the Bailiff himself and not Excel. Thanks again for the advice hope x

I think I am doing ok with it at the moment. I have made a statement to the police because they put a note through my door including a threat to break entry or arrest me to which they have a warrant for neither. I have written a complaint to HMCTS to state that the Distress Warrant does not include an order for cost and as no distress was carried out by the company, I believe no payment is due. And I have made a formal complaint to Excel for both the Malicious communications and mis representation by their company. I have also complete a Form 4 compliant about the bailiff. The reason I asked about the word spam in the subject line is because I had a reply for Excel on friday and it state that there is an Order for cost to a themselves against me. But I have received a reply this morning from HMCTS stating that there is no cost order as such. Just the costs are agreed in the contract with the bailiffs. So I was just wondering if it makes the false statement email made by Excel any less valid because the included the word spam in the subject line. I think I covered everything that I can do but if there is anything else you can suggest I'd be grateful many thanks hope

I forgot to add. I am more than happy to post about the dealings I have had with this company, and the outcome once its resolved, if it would help anyone else. hope xxx

Hi. I seem to have got myself into a dispute with Excel Civil Enforcement and their Bailiff about a Magistrates court fine and the charges imposed by the company. The fine has been paid and the dispute is about the charges Excel are trying to collect on a Distress Warrant when no Distress has been carried out. Anyway although I can deal with this myself. I was just wondering if anyone knew why Excel would send me a reply email to an enquire I made regarding the costs marked. *****SPAM***** They inserted this heading themselves and I can only think that they would do this because they can actually lie under that heading?? Can you lie if you yourself mark emails as spam or Does anyone know of another reason why they would do this? thanks hope

Just to update this post that I started at the end of last year. After I appealed against the decision made by the DWP. I went before the appeals tribunal on 13th March. It was heard by one judge and I had made the decision that I did not want legal representation with me on that occasion. The whole process took about 4 hours and although the DWP had provided the tribunal with all the relevant paper work they did not sent anyone on the the day of the tribunal. A decision was not reached on the day. But about 8 day later I received written confirmation that the Judge had ruled in my favour and concluded that there was no over-payments due. As He saw no evidence as to why my benefits had been revoked and that it should still stand. The DWP had 30 day to appeal this decision. The time has now lapsed and no appeal has been brought. I then received a court date for 29th April 2012. Which was for 4 counts of obtaining monies dishonestly and 4 counts of failing to notify changes to my circumstances. I contacted a solicitor and informed him of the decision that the appeals court. He informed me that they are both 2 different cases but it still held in good light that I had already won 1 case. I also stated that I intended to plead not guilty to all charges and wish for the case to be heard in Crown Court. I arrived at magistrates court on 29th April 2012, to be told that the case had been dis-missed through lack of evidence. I received a letter of the solicitor working for HB and the DWP this morning informing me that no further action will be taken. While being totally relieved that this is eventually all over. I can't help but feel a bloody angry at it all. Before the tribunal hearing date was set I was on the verge of declaring myself bankrupt due to the fact that there were thousands of pound worth of bills coming through my door. I must admit that Council Tax is one of the worse. They refuse to accept that you are waiting for appeals and court. The obtained 3 liability orders for the said overpayments and where in the process of sending the balliffs to my property.. If both the tribunal date and court date hadn't come through when they did, I would have had no other option. Surely the law should be change to allow the tribunal and court to hear these cases before all this action is taken. What is the bailiffs had removed good and what if I had gone bankrupt. I would have been for nothing. Anyway I am still receiving bill from the DWP. They say it is because they are issued by a different department and it take a while for all department to be informed. Strange that. It doesn't seem to take so long when they stop you benefit and issue overpayment bills. Oh and although the tribunal Judge stated in his decision that I should now be paid any benefit that was on going to date. They have informed me that they stopped my benefit in September 2011 and I my sick certificate ran out in Nov 2011. I did not provide any further certificates after that date, so no payment would be made. Ha Ha. Why am I not surprised. Sorry providing certificates for a benefit they said I wasn't entitled too slipped my mind. I am only mentioning it because if anyone is on ESA and they have had there benefit stopped due to allegations of fraud that are unfounded please remember to still provide them with sick certificated until the case is over because when you win both cases you may then have you money back-dated. That is unless another loop hole is found. I am relieved this is finished with, but feel it will take a little while longer to tie up all the lose ends and completely stop bills arriving at my door. I wouldn't wish the last year on anyone and wish everyone going through this process luck. If you haven't done anything wrong, it has to go you way in the end. xxxxxx

I don't think I explained it very well. I don't want to complain to the Fraud Manager. The fraud team are just following the process and guideline that they are given. Its the process itself that's a joke.The fact that they can work on probability and it can take 18 month to go to tribunal and until them you can do nothing. I was asking if the DWP are governed by anyone other than themselves. How can something be inevitable if it is not true. As for joint finances our joint bank account was closed when he left. I agree that his sole bank statements continued to come here. The loan is in his name and and I have no connection and knowledge of that until they told me. I would have changed a lot of things If I had known what I know now. But like a lot of people I work on the basis of right and wrong. There is a probability of a lot of things. it doesn't make them true. Thanks it was very helpful

As I have written in another post. I am going through an investigation for benefit fraud. I spoke them today to ask about their complaints procedure and was told the investigation was not concluded yet. So does that mean I cannot complain until the investigation is complete, although they can chase me for the overpayment before it is? Surely the benefits agency cannot be totally governed by themselves? Who is there to complain to above the DWP. Is there an Independent Organization? They must surely have to answer to someone!!!