Notice of Enforcement – need to nip this in the bud!

[Espresso]

Hi all,

Hoping you can offer some advice!

I had a dispute with a utilities provider about a bill, which degenerated into a stalemate and then resulted in a CCJ – I won't bore you with the details. The debt was then sold to a third party company, which I was notified of but then didn't hear anything for about a year. Then suddenly I got the attached 'Notice of Enforcement'. Questions are as follows:

1. The writ of control which they mention dates from Feb this year. This is the first I've heard of it – no notifications or other correspondence was sent to me. Is that kosher or have they not followed the process correctly?

2. The debt they cite is quite a lot more than the judgement amount. I can't find an explanation anywhere... can they force me to pay more than the CCJ stipulates that I owe?

3. What should I do about this?!
I am certainly reluctant to make a large payment to 'Court Enforcement Services' – a company I have never heard of before – and I can't afford to pay them in any case.

Any advice you can give would be very much appreciated!

Many thanks in advance...

[zeke]

It looks like the claimant does not have locus standi to bring the claim.

You can defend it and require that the signed and witnessed deed of assignment is shown.

To address your questions.

• 1. It is likely that the judgment address is not current. Run a search on your current address on Trust Online (https://www.trustonline.org.uk) and see whether any judgments are there, then compare the claim number with the one on the document you posted below. If there is no judgment at your current address, then you can apply to stop the enforcement and set aside the original judgment under Civil Procedure Rule (CPR) 23:10 and CPR 83.7.
  
  2. The enforcement agent has added fees and charges. Fees are regulated by the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014, in particular, regulation 6.
  
  3. Provided you live in a domestic property, there is no power to force entry to recover a high court writ. The bailiff company is a private limited company, therefore it is not an enforcement agent in the definition of section 62 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. You have no statutory obligation to them as a Ltd company. Only an enforcement agent can take control of goods. That means, if you have a car outside, then it is a sitting duck - unless it's owned by someone else or it is on finance.

Here is an enforcement checklist you can try to see where you can stop the enforcement and revoke the fees and charges.

Checklist 1. https://stopthebailiffs.uk/stop-high-co ... liffs.html

Checklist 2, more detailed: https://stopthebailiffs.uk/high-court-w ... check.html

[Espresso]

Thank you so much, Zeke!

You can defend it and require that the signed and witnessed deed of assignment is shown.

So does that mean that I should contact them and demand a deed of assignment or is that something I'd ask them to do somehow via the court? I have absolutely no previous experience of this kind of thing.

It is likely that the judgment address is not current.

Unfortunately the address is current so looks like that line of defence isn't available to me...

if you have a car outside, then it is a sitting duck

Since this isn't a dispute with a local authority, and the bailiffs don't have access to the DVLA database, how could they determine which car is mine? (short of spying on me that is). It's not parked on a driveway or directly outside the building...

Finally thanks for the checklists – having looked through it, it appears that my best option would be to apply to stay the writ of control and vary the judgment... presumably that will give me the option to pay in instalments. But do you know if those are typically quite large instalments over a short period, or more manageable amounts over, say, several years? As I say, my main concern is that I simply cannot afford to pay this debt...

[Espresso]

Having looked into it a bit, it seems that the Deed of Assignment applies when someone is trying to enforce a debt on another's behalf – in this case, I assume it would be 'Court Enforcement Services Ltd' who would be acting on behalf of these Azzurro people who bought the debt from the original creditor (presumably Azzurro wouldn't need such a deed as they purchased the debt and so now have a right to chase me for the money)... but isn't this standard practice with bailiffs? Surely if it's a good defence everybody would do it... or is there something you've noticed about my case which is a bit different?

[Espresso]

Sorry to make so many posts, but I realised I have made a mistake: the address used is indeed my correct mailing address but I do not live at the property, which belongs to and is lived in by a relative. Does that mean that the enforcement officer cannot take anything from that property? (presumably also including my car if it was there)

[zeke]

The bailiff company doesn't need a deed of assignment.

If the debt arose with someone other than the claimant, then the claimant (Azzurro) must show evidence of the deed.

If Azzurro bought the debt, then they would need to show they have bought it and a deed of assignment would be needed. Otherwise, they don’t have Locus standi to bring the claim against you.

Most people who get common debt collectors who have bought a debt don’t know they can ask for evidence of the assignment.

When a debt collector is asked to show the deed of assignment, the case goes cold and debt collectors move on. They don’t enjoy showing how much they bought the debt for.

In your case, a bailiff is using an enforcement power, so you can ask to see whether the claimant has a right to pursue you for the money.

If the enforcement address is not where you work or live, then the enforcement is invalid in so far as the address is concerned.

If they found there your car, then the chances are they will take it, but you would have a claim for breach of Paragraph 14(6) of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

[Espresso]

Thank you so much for you help Zeke, and for taking the time to reply so thoroughly. This seems hopeful! I have drafted the following letter, which I plan to send via email (to avoid disclosing any other address):

———————————————

Dear Sir / Madam,

I have recently received a Notice of Enforcement from Court Enforcement Services Ltd, a company who claim to be working on your behalf to reclaim a debt. They cite a County Court Judgement against me (claim number XXXXXX), but you are not the claimant who was awarded the judgement. Please can you therefore provide me with a signed and witnessed Deed of Assignment from the claimant, proving that you have locus standi to recover any funds. Without this I am sure you can appreciate that I am reluctant to transfer money to an unknown party who is not listed anywhere in the judgement.

Please also note that the address on the Notice of Enforcement is not the one at which I currently reside, does not belong to me, and none of my property is kept at that address. I have also informed Court Enforcement Ltd of this fact, as well as notifying them that I require a copy of the aforementioned Deed of Assignment.

I am happy for you to correspond with me on this matter using this email address.

Yours faithfully,

———————————————

What do you think?

I am not sure that the address thing is actually going to help that much as it is somewhat complicated, but should I wish to apply to the court about it, do you know which form I should use?

Very many thanks!

[zeke]

I wouldn't bother with the bailiff company. They will mess you about.

Apply to stay the enforcement, CPR 83.7.

Then apply to set aside the original judgment, CPR 23:10 because the address on the bailiff's document is not current.

[Espresso]

Thanks Zeke - it seems I’ve missed the deadline to make an application under CPR 23:10 (within 7 days after the date on which the order was served) so I guess the best option is simply to apply to the court to stay the writ and vary the judgement based on my inability to pay…

[zeke]

You can make a 23:10 but you must show reason for the delay.