I have a couple of fines that need to be paid - bailiffs at my door

[doggone it]

I have a couple of fines that need to be paid and have already been contacted by the Court a few weeks ago to pay. Like a lot couldn't afford it, never contacted them and on Monday got a letter from Bailiffs to say time to cough up or they'll come round to collect. Problem is still don't have the wherewithall to pay it all along with the fees they want. Decided to do a bit of research but have only managed to confuse myself. Above you give an example of how you say it works yet elsewhere others say there isn't any provision for paying extra fees.

 

"Section 1 deals with magistrates courts.

 

Section 3 deals with council tax

 

Section 8 deals with high court enforcement officers. As you can see. under section 8, it amends the HCEO fee schedule and introduces a new fee table in table 2 of the Schedule of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014.

 

Whereas, if you look at sections 3 it has introduced the fees table the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014.

 

Now look at section 1 - magistrates court rules. It does not introduce any fee table for the recovery of unpaid court fines"

 

Now I don't know what to think, I've scraped together what I owe by begging from family but are there really fees to pay 'cos I haven't got that. I've got till next Tuesday to come up with it all before they attend and threaten to come with Police & Locksmiths.

[brassnecked]

Doggone it, the Taking Control Of goods Act is clear, once in the hands of the EA aka bailiff there is the £75 compliance fee to pay if you pay the fine plus that fee before they come out that isit, if they come out they will add another £235. no escaping the fees.

[tomtubby]

doggone it.

 

In your above post you refer (in blue) to information that you have obtained that appears to indicate that there is no provision in the new regulations for an enforcement agent to charge fees when enforcing a Magistrate Court fine. I now realise where you had obtained the information from.

 

In my opening post on this thread I referred to a letter from the Ministry of Justice. In fact, the above letter is one that I copied from the same website (where it features under a thread entitled: FOI/MoJ).

 

Firstly, it is important to note that the person who had published this letter did not provide details of the actual questions raised under his FOI request. That is most unfortunate. It would however seem from his recent posts that his request had centred on the subject of whether or not a bailiff/enforcement agent is permitted under the new regulations to charge fees when enforcing an unpaid court fine.

 

Secondly, it is important to note that the Ministry of Justice has not treated his request as a Freedom of Information request and furthermore; the writer has confirmed that MoJ is not able to' advise or comment' on the legal points raised by him.

 

It would seem that following publication of the above letter (from the Ministry of Justice) a 'debate' has been ongoing with one person in particular continuing to claim that the there is no 'fee table' for the recovery of 'unpaid court fines'. For ease of reference a copy of his post is below and I will reply shortly:

[doggone it]

Following my post yesterday and all your replies I was really mystified and didn't know where to start. Thought it would be easy and rang the bailiffs, all I got from them was verbal abuse as didn't want to pay which was all they wanted. Rang Citizens Advice and they told me the same as you did but couldn't explain about the other info I got. In the end thought there's only 1 way to do this so rang the MoJ, got passed from pillar to post but eventually got a bod that knew about it. It seems as if it was a very badly written request for information and the reply given was not a FOI answer just general information.

 

Asking about specifics got me nowhere as they are not allowed to give out legal advice. The general consensus was that the bit I had seen elsewhere and posted last night appears to have not been understood proper but put there interpritation on it which appears to be wrong, the info given here appears to be correct and that is what I should follow. Several paracetamols later I rang the Bailiffs back, paid what I owed & saved myself £200+ and all is ended.

 

My question has to be why does it have to be so complicated & why cant evryone sing off the same hymn sheet? probably means answers will fit a pinhead.

[*RainbowTears*]

Following my post yesterday and all your replies I was really mystified and didn't know where to start. Thought it would be easy and rang the bailiffs, all I got from them was verbal abuse as didn't want to pay which was all they wanted. Rang Citizens Advice and they told me the same as you did but couldn't explain about the other info I got. In the end thought there's only 1 way to do this so rang the MoJ, got passed from pillar to post but eventually got a bod that knew about it. It seems as if it was a very badly written request for information and the reply given was not a FOI answer just general information.

 

Asking about specifics got me nowhere as they are not allowed to give out legal advice. The general consensus was that the bit I had seen elsewhere and posted last night appears to have not been understood proper but put there interpritation on it which appears to be wrong, the info given here appears to be correct and that is what I should follow. Several paracetamols later I rang the Bailiffs back, paid what I owed & saved myself £200+ and all is ended.

 

My question has to be why does it have to be so complicated & why cant evryone sing off the same hymn sheet? probably means answers will fit a pinhead.

 

Hi Doggone,

You are right, when you get conflicting advice & your at the receiving end off it, you can feel so lost & indeed mystified by it; as all you wanted was a straight answer to your questions.

 

The example TT gave out previously on here, is the most simplest way for you & I to understand how the new EA regs indeed work & the cost implications of them.

 

I can only say that I am sorry you got given a different interpretation elsewhere, but you are here now & judging by what you've posted above, you have now settled your EA issue in full. The pressure is off you now & you can save yourself a few paracetamol...

 

As for everyone singing from the same hymn sheet, again your right, it would be better for all concerned. But you will always find someone's interpretation of a regulation etc will be more about "how they see it" rather "than what it means", Which can & will lead to opposing views.

 

So here on CAG, TT & others are doing their best to get the correct advice out there. By doing so, even if it helps just one person then the time & effort is worth the while.

[doggone it]

I posted originally about this as had some fines to pay but didn't have all the cash. I'd read elsewhere what others advise & do and thought I would do the same. Suppose fortunately for me a family member came good and helped out so paid at the Enforcement Notice stage, since them not heard a peep - what a relief.

 

I have also read some of the goings on there & for me would never make another post if that is how they treat people, looks to me as if there is more than 1 who needs a head test & they reckon they help vulnerable folks, god forbid.