Call the bailiffs: Time to pay up [Channel 5]

[Justanotherperson]

Morning,

So I noticed C5 aired a new bailiff programme the other day so I was curious and decided to watch it - they've obviously changed some of the format from Don't Pay I assume to avoid further litigation. Anyway, not sure if you watched it but one thing stuck out to me and that was when the bailiffs were attending a commercial premises (think it was a unit in a shopping centre), they told the owner that they would seize goods and would also be getting out a locksmith to change the locks.

Is there any authority to allow them to change the locks of a commercial premise when seizing goods? Seems to me that they were acting beyond their powers of seizing goods. To me, changing the locks of a premise without a court order or some other authority, would amount to taking possession of the premises i.e. an eviction. Am I right or wrong?

Also separately, I understand a bailiff cannot seize property on someone else's private land and from what I read online they require an order of the court. Is that set out in the legislation or any guidance? I vaguely remember on Don't Pay that they were trying to get the landowners consent, so I'm curious as to what the actual position is.

[zeke]

They can change the locks when executing a possession order, and they can use "reasonable force" when entering commercial premises to take control of goods.

The warrant (biz rates) or writ (judgment) is the authority to enter premises, but this is rarely exercised in taking control of goods, because it exposes the creditor to a claim for damages if security is breached, or property damage is claimed. so it's the domain of possession orders.

Its Paragraph 20 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

The expression reasonable force is widely interpreted from pushing and shoving someone aside to breaking and entering.

If it's a TV entertainment show, the probability of artistic license clouding reality is very high as viewing ratings are more important than successful enforcement.

I did a lot of Can't Pay clients and sent them into court and they all got large payouts, but their solicitors all pursued Channel 5, leaving Channel 5 and Brinkworth to settle their own differences. Accordingly, Brinkworth hasn't had any new TV shows. It gave DCBL a launch into the enforcement sector but when the show was pulled, the momentum of new business dried up. Now they dabble in private parking tickets and common debt collecting.

Bailiffs cannot seize land using Schedule 12 enforcement procedures. The creditor must apply for a warrant of possession and the bailiff executes it as taking possession.

A landowner cannot give consent to bailiffs to enter land to take control of goods belonging to a debtor.

The correct procedure is a N244 application to court under Section 15 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act, which must be accompanied by a statement of truth.

If a landowner gives bailiff permission to enter land to take a debtor's goods, the debtor can sue the creditor for breach of Paragraphs 14.6 and 15. It lands them a big bill.

[Justanotherperson]

Thanks for the clarification.

Shop was open at the time, so no reasonable was force necessary. I don't know which bailiff company they are on this programme because it doesn't say, but when the debtor wasn't prepared to pay one of the bailiffs then proceeded to tell the debtor that they're going to shut the shop and he called a locksmith to have the locks changed which said bailliff mentioned would add additional costs - debtor paid in the end. Just sounded very off with me and never heard it used before.

I understand the section 15 point but I was wondering what the principle is behind it e.g. if there is something specific in the law or guidance that prohibits this. Or is the principle simply that they can only carry out the seizure of goods at the address listed on the writ and since the third party private land is not that address they can't take anything from it, even with consent?

[zeke]

What you are describing is words like change the locks, which is done when executing a possession order.

It's not something worthwhile, costs wise, when taking control of goods.

Bailiffs prefer vehicles, and shop goods have little material auction value these days.

In Schedule 12, the enforcement provisions enable bailiffs to take control of goods where the debtor usually lives or trades - Para 14(6) or any highway - Para. 9(b) in England and Wales.

If a bailiff wants to take control of goods at any other address, e.g. a neighbours driveway, he must make an application under provision 15 of Schedule 12.

A bailiff cannot ask a landowners' (landlord’s) consent, because the landowner does not have authority to give consent to bailiffs to enter and take control of goods. Otherwise, the debtor (owner of goods) can sue by making an application under CPR 84.13 for breach of Provision 15 - failure to apply for authority to enter premises.

There is case law as well, but post schedule 12, it's no longer needed. Miller vs Curry 1893. Bailiff, a Mr Miller, got a key from the debtors landlord to seize Curry’s goods, and Curry sued.

[Amy]

I caught one of these the other night and I particularly liked the fact the bailiff had Jack Bauer’s ring tone…!