Marstons fees from ccj

[russ295]

Following on from a previous post about a CCJ at my old address.
Quick summary, company obtained CCJ at old address, had a set aside hearing, CCJ set aside on the 1st October. All monies paid to the claimant.

Today I recieved an email from the company with an attached invoice from Marstons for £600+, the invoice is made out to the company, not me.
They want me to pay it or they claim they will "issue a separate judgment torecover the costs"

Advice on how to prceed.

Many thanks

Russ

[Syd Snitkin]

They want their fees from the judgement that was set aside? Tell them to jog on.

[russ295]

They want their fees from the judgement that was set aside? Tell them to jog on.

That was my thoughts!

I've looked for legisation to reference to but I'm struggling to find any.

[zeke]

The fees only apply when the writ is executed. It hasn't, therefore, none are owed.

The legislation you are looking for is regulation 3 of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 which states:

• Application of these Regulations
  
  3. These Regulations apply when an enforcement agent uses the Schedule 12 procedure.

Source: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014 ... ion/3/made

If a bailiff starts pestering you for fees for a writ that has been stayed, then have a detailed assessment. That lands the creditor a novel big bill. It's indemnity costs. The creditor can sue the bailiff company as they are the parties in a contract.

[russ295]

The invoice from Marstons is made out to the claimant, not me. It's for the fees previous to the set aside.

It's the claimant that has asked me to pay it or they will "issue a separate judgment to recover the costs"

[zeke]

The claimant cannot sue you for the bailiff's fees for a writ that has been stayed. They are payable by the creditor because he agreed to them before instructing the bailiff company to transfer up the judgment to the High Court for enforcement.

The only remedy for the claimant is to bring an action against the bailiff company or their indemnity insurance because claimant acted in good faith on the bailiff's advice to transfer up the judgment to the High Court. The bailiff company failed to advise the claimant of the risks because a transfer exposes the claimant to the enforcement costs (and the defendant's CPR 46.5 costs!) if the defendant successfully sets aside the claim and transfers it back down to the county court.

Bailiff companies transfer up claims to the High Court so they can benefit from a higher fee schedule. Since 2014, the regulated enforcement procedures county court and High Court are identical.

Judgment creditors do not benefit in any way by transferring a judgment to the High Court.

It is not uncommon for judgment debtors to obtain costs against a creditor under CPR46.5 of £3,000 awarded by a master. It is for a litigant's work done defending the judgment and applying to stay the writ under High Court jurisdiction along with his time at court, travel expenses etc.

The creditor then has 14 days to apply to set aside the order, after that, it can be enforced against the creditor with a reverse writ. The creditor may recover his loss from the bailiff company for failure to make the creditor aware of the risk.

[russ295]

Thanks for that, even if I was told to pay the claimants costs, ie; the costs to get it to the county court and their solicitors costs at the hearing?

[Syd Snitkin]

Were you ordered to pay their costs?

[zeke]

Bailiffs fees are not ordered against a defendant. There is no procedure for it.

When a defendant applies to stay a writ and transfer down a claim back to the county court, the defendant can apply for costs which the creditor pays.

[russ295]

I had to pay their court costs and their solicitors costs. Nothing was mentioned about bailiff fees.
The judge told me I had 7 days to pay them and the ccj would be set aside.
They were paid the same day to their solicitor.

[Syd Snitkin]

Then you've paid what you owed. They can certainly ask you to pay and they can try to take you to court but they wouldn't win. You're not liable for fees from a contract between the creditor and the bailiff.

[russ295]

I’ll tell them to “do one” then!

Cheers for the advice. It’s been a great help.

[zeke]

If you want to shaft them one, get a copy of the fee demand and have a detailed assessment of the bailiffs fees under CPR84.16. You can apply for costs under CPR 46.5 relieving the claimant of another couple of grand.

[Syd Snitkin]

If you want to shaft them one, get a copy of the fee demand and have a detailed assessment of the bailiffs fees under CPR84.16. You can apply for costs under CPR 46.5 relieving the claimant of another couple of grand.

The bailiffs aren't asking the OP for the fees, the original claimant is asking the OP to pay the invoice from the bailiff. The claimant would need to do the DA.

[russ295]

I've drafted an email to send,

Hi XXXXXXXXX,

The CCJ (sent to my old address) was “set aside”, this means all enforcement and any bailiff fees owed, or previously paid by the defendant are cancelled or refunded.

The invoice from Martons is made out to XXXXXXXX, I am not liable for fees from a contract between a creditor and a bailiff.

My advice would be to bring action against the bailiff company, or claim off their indemnity insurance, if they advised to transfer the judgment up to the high court, and failed to advise of the risks, a transfer exposes the claimant to the enforcement costs (and the defendants CPR 46.5 costs) should the defendant successfully set aside the CCJ.

Regards

XXXXXXX XXXXXX

Does that look ok?

[zeke]

Looks good. Let us know how that goes