I have a speeding fine from 2 years ago. Further steps for £569 was sent by the court September 2020. NOE sent by marston 18/11/2020, £489.34, compliance fee £75, total £564.34. Reference number from marston relates to further steps from court. Final notice was posted by bailiff yesterday for £799.34.
I have paid the sum from the further steps from the court of £569 directly to the court this morning. I have an emailed receipt from the court.
My question is, is this debt even enforceable? The fine amount from the court is £569, the fine amount on the NOE is £489.34. Can marston take any further action when the NOE is clearly non compliant? It is definitely the same debt as all the reference numbers are the same. Also do I need to send a copy of the receipt of payment to the bailiff, and inform him is NOE is incorrect?
Thank you
Speeding fine amount on NOE is wrong.
Re: Speeding fine amount on NOE is wrong.
It looks like the court has not communicated your payment into court to the bailiff company.
The court service will send you, what is called the Hereford Template letter.
It’s a boilerplate letter which says the court has given the bailiff company the money you paid into court, so they can divvy-out their fees and pay the remainder back into court, leaving an amount outstanding.
It has already been defeated in legal argument several times now, but the court service continues it to protect the bailiff company’s interests, otherwise, the bailiff company complains that the court is accepting the money and takes the bailiff company out of the loop by ending the enforcement power.
The court cannot refuse the money paid in discharge of a court fine, otherwise, that terminates the enforcement power, leaving the debtor off the hook for the fine.
This article explains more about the Hereford Template.
https://nationalbailiffadvice.uk/R-v-He ... acRae.html
You don't need to take any action if you get a Hereford Template letter in the post from the court service.
The demand sum of £799.34 includes the statutory £75 compliance stage fee, and the £235 enforcement stage fee. They are prescribed in the Schedule to the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014.
When you have paid the Amount Outstanding into court, the enforcement power ends, Paragraph 6(3) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (TCEA 2007).
The Amount Outstanding has a legal definition under Paragraph 60(3) of Schedule 12 of the TCEA 2007, and it is made up of two elements.
The first element is the sum adjudged, the debt being enforced.
The second element is the costs of enforcement.
The expression - enforcement - also has a legal definition, under section 62 of the TCEA 2007 and it states: taking control of goods and selling them to recover a sum of money
In your case, the bailiff has not taken control of any goods, therefore he has not paid any costs of enforcement.
The law also defines and distinguishes between costs and fees.
Costs are a sum that a party has paid, or is liable to pay in bringing or defending a claim or action.
Fees are prescribed in legislation, in this case, the Schedule of the 2014 Fees Regulations.
The case of Kelly vs Marston Group Limited demonstrates this where the solicitor for Kelly spelt out in full the legal argument that differentiates fees and costs, and that Paragraph 60(3) does not provide for bailiffs to include fees in the statutory definition of Amount Outstanding.
There is a catch. When you have paid the Amount Outstanding into court, you must give the bailiff a notice telling him, so that he knows the enforcement power has ceased to be exercisable. Otherwise, if the bailiff takes an enforcement step, he is not liable. Paragraph 59 of Schedule 12 to the TCEA 2007.
Here is a sample "Paragraph 59" notice telling the bailiff the debtor has paid the amount outstanding into court.
https://stopthebailiffs.uk/template-mag ... otice.html
If a bailiff takes an enforcement step after you paid the Amount Outstanding into court, the cleanest and swift way to clear it up through the courts, is to apply for a detailed assessment hearing under Civil Procedure Rule 84.16. A detailed assessment is an application to court to examine the bailiff's fees and charges.
The great thing about detailed assessments is the underlying practice directions don't require debtor-applicants to tell the bailiff company they are applying for a detailed assessment. The bailiff company only finds out when the court serves the notice of the hearing. Some bailiff companies instruct solicitors, but it is too late to save the bailiff company from the costs and damages they owe. Some solicitors representing debtor-applicants reuse the bailiff company solicitors material to rack up further costs by making a 2nd witness statement answering their correspondence.
This article explains more about detailed assessments.
https://stopthebailiffs.uk/reclaim-bail ... sment.html
The bottom line. You are not off the hook for the £310 fees. But, there is no longer an enforcement power in respect of them.
The court service will send you, what is called the Hereford Template letter.
It’s a boilerplate letter which says the court has given the bailiff company the money you paid into court, so they can divvy-out their fees and pay the remainder back into court, leaving an amount outstanding.
It has already been defeated in legal argument several times now, but the court service continues it to protect the bailiff company’s interests, otherwise, the bailiff company complains that the court is accepting the money and takes the bailiff company out of the loop by ending the enforcement power.
The court cannot refuse the money paid in discharge of a court fine, otherwise, that terminates the enforcement power, leaving the debtor off the hook for the fine.
This article explains more about the Hereford Template.
https://nationalbailiffadvice.uk/R-v-He ... acRae.html
You don't need to take any action if you get a Hereford Template letter in the post from the court service.
The demand sum of £799.34 includes the statutory £75 compliance stage fee, and the £235 enforcement stage fee. They are prescribed in the Schedule to the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014.
When you have paid the Amount Outstanding into court, the enforcement power ends, Paragraph 6(3) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (TCEA 2007).
The Amount Outstanding has a legal definition under Paragraph 60(3) of Schedule 12 of the TCEA 2007, and it is made up of two elements.
The first element is the sum adjudged, the debt being enforced.
The second element is the costs of enforcement.
The expression - enforcement - also has a legal definition, under section 62 of the TCEA 2007 and it states: taking control of goods and selling them to recover a sum of money
In your case, the bailiff has not taken control of any goods, therefore he has not paid any costs of enforcement.
The law also defines and distinguishes between costs and fees.
Costs are a sum that a party has paid, or is liable to pay in bringing or defending a claim or action.
Fees are prescribed in legislation, in this case, the Schedule of the 2014 Fees Regulations.
The case of Kelly vs Marston Group Limited demonstrates this where the solicitor for Kelly spelt out in full the legal argument that differentiates fees and costs, and that Paragraph 60(3) does not provide for bailiffs to include fees in the statutory definition of Amount Outstanding.
There is a catch. When you have paid the Amount Outstanding into court, you must give the bailiff a notice telling him, so that he knows the enforcement power has ceased to be exercisable. Otherwise, if the bailiff takes an enforcement step, he is not liable. Paragraph 59 of Schedule 12 to the TCEA 2007.
Here is a sample "Paragraph 59" notice telling the bailiff the debtor has paid the amount outstanding into court.
https://stopthebailiffs.uk/template-mag ... otice.html
If a bailiff takes an enforcement step after you paid the Amount Outstanding into court, the cleanest and swift way to clear it up through the courts, is to apply for a detailed assessment hearing under Civil Procedure Rule 84.16. A detailed assessment is an application to court to examine the bailiff's fees and charges.
The great thing about detailed assessments is the underlying practice directions don't require debtor-applicants to tell the bailiff company they are applying for a detailed assessment. The bailiff company only finds out when the court serves the notice of the hearing. Some bailiff companies instruct solicitors, but it is too late to save the bailiff company from the costs and damages they owe. Some solicitors representing debtor-applicants reuse the bailiff company solicitors material to rack up further costs by making a 2nd witness statement answering their correspondence.
This article explains more about detailed assessments.
https://stopthebailiffs.uk/reclaim-bail ... sment.html
The bottom line. You are not off the hook for the £310 fees. But, there is no longer an enforcement power in respect of them.
Re: Speeding fine amount on NOE is wrong.
Thanks for your reply. Am I right in saying compliance fee and the NOE is non compliant as they it state the wrong amount. The fine from the court is £569, that is stated on the further steps letter. The fine, excluding bailiff fees, on the NOE is £489.34. Surely the bailiff can’t enforce a court fine if the sum they are enforcing is incorrect?
Re: Speeding fine amount on NOE is wrong.
I can't find anything in the enforcement regulations that states the Notice of Enforcement is non-compliant because the specified amount outstanding is wrong.
If the Further Steps Notice gives the sum adjudged (the amount you were fined by the court), then the sum to be recovered when the Enforcement Stage fee is reached, (the sum recoverable) is the sum adjudged plus £310.
There is other legislation that might apply to you, but first, you must identify with the Court Service the true sum you were adjudged to pay.
If the bailiff has made an improper charge then he commits an offence under section 78(5) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 1 on the standard scale.
The police might say the crime is a civil matter, but dismissing a crime as a civil matter opens up further avenues for you to recover restitution against the police force under section 26(5) of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.
You must make written notes of everyone you speak to.
If the Further Steps Notice gives the sum adjudged (the amount you were fined by the court), then the sum to be recovered when the Enforcement Stage fee is reached, (the sum recoverable) is the sum adjudged plus £310.
There is other legislation that might apply to you, but first, you must identify with the Court Service the true sum you were adjudged to pay.
If the bailiff has made an improper charge then he commits an offence under section 78(5) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 1 on the standard scale.
The police might say the crime is a civil matter, but dismissing a crime as a civil matter opens up further avenues for you to recover restitution against the police force under section 26(5) of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.
You must make written notes of everyone you speak to.
Re: Speeding fine amount on NOE is wrong.
Thank you for your reply.