Removal for sale fee, when can it be charged ?

[Peterbard]

HCEO use the same procedure to enforce as all the other debt streams of course. All the High court commands them to do is use that procedure.

 

The writ of control merely confers the Power to use schedule 12 to the Officer, the same as it does in all other enforcement steams.

 

62Enforcement by taking control of goods

 

(1)Schedule 12 applies where an enactment, writ or warrant confers power to use the procedure in that Schedule (taking control of goods and selling them to recover a sum of money).

(2)The power conferred by a writ or warrant of control to recover a sum of money, and any power conferred by a writ or warrant of possession or delivery to take control of goods and sell them to recover a sum of money, is exercisable only by using that procedure.

 

Any difference in the procedure related to their particular enforcement is detailed within the legislation. As is Magistrates court enforcement for instance.

[Peterbard]

So you are saying that HCEO enforce under different procedures, and can just ignore the tce, is this correct.

 

I do not believe that this is the wording of a writ being currently used, but even if it was it makes no difference. HCEO must use schedule 12 procedures.

[Peterbard]

No I am not and never have done.

 

We are discussing the scenario in relation to the sale fee.

 

I think you better take 5 minutes to re-read what has been written previously. Hopefully then, you will understand the context of it all.

 

What you believe is unimportant. The writ that I used was one I have from last year.

 

Look stop the silly remarks, they help no one.

 

The action of a bailiff is to take control of goods and sell them, however he must use the procedure in the TCE to do so. As the act itself says. He cannot just go to an address and seize goods and then sell them, he has to send notices etc. this is the procedure he must follow. As I tried to explain to you and tonto the key word is the "procedure".

 

The order you have just says he is to do a thing, the schedule and the legislation says how he is to go about doing that thing. This is the same procedure all enforcement streams must follow, if there are differences they are stipulated within that procedure.

 

 

A difference with HCEO for instance is the way that payment arrangements can be accepted. This is apparent from the way the first enforcement stages are drafted.

The one for HCEO does not permit a bailiff to negotiate payment arrangements without a controlled goods arrangement, ordinary bailiffs can. This has nothing to do with sale.

 

Any other differences a similarly mentioned, there is nothing in there which mentions your interpretation so I am afraid noting exists.

[Peterbard]

High court enforcement officers are instructed to use the procedure contained within schedule 12 of the TCE. In precisely the same way as any other enforcement agent enforcing under any other enforcement stream. The power conferred via the writ confers the ability to use this procedure and nothing more. Although mention of being ordered to enforce my be good TV, in fact it means nothing, because the new regime swept all that away.

 

62

Enforcement by taking control of goods

(1)

Schedule 12 applies where an enactment, writ or warrant confers power to use the procedure in that Schedule (taking control of goods and selling them to recover a sum of money).

(2)

The power conferred by a writ or warrant of control to recover a sum of money, and any power conferred by a writ or warrant of possession or delivery to take control of goods and sell them to recover a sum of money, is exercisable only by using that procedure.

 

Any operational differences due to the nature of the enforcement are specified within the legislation. This is in a similar way that the ability to use force is incorporated under section 19 for Magistrates court fines.

 

The first enforcement stage does not permit any further negotiation after compliance under a High Court enforcement, unless goods are under taken under control. Failure to secure payment or a controlled goods agreement means escalation to e2.

 

In the case of a none HC action the bailiff may accept a payment plan even without securing goods.

 

What this has to do with a sale fee notice is anyone's guess.