Bailiff demanding fees after debt paid? Assert your rights

Bailiff Pestering for Fees After Debt Paid

When enforcement power ends upon payment

Where the debtor has satisfied the amount outstanding as defined by paragraph 50(3) of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, the enforcement power conferred by the writ of control ceases to be exercisable. This position is clarified in paragraph 6(3)(a) of that Schedule, which provides that enforcement comes to an end when the amount outstanding is paid. It is essential to appreciate that the amount outstanding comprises only two elements: first, the balance of the unpaid debt under the enforcement power, and second, any costs that are expressly recoverable out of proceeds obtained through the taking and sale of controlled goods. The statute does not confer authority upon the enforcement agent to pursue enforcement fees in the absence of proceeds, nor does it allow such fees to be regarded as part of the amount outstanding unless incurred in the course of actual enforcement steps culminating in a sale.

What qualifies as proceeds under paragraph 50(2)

To constitute proceeds within the meaning of paragraph 50(2), the enforcement agent must have taken control of goods in one of the four ways prescribed under paragraph 13(1), namely by securing the goods on premises, securing them on the highway, removing them to secure them elsewhere, or entering into a controlled goods agreement. In the absence of any of these actions, there can be no proceeds and thus no lawful basis upon which fees can be recovered. In circumstances where the bailiff did not exercise any such method and the debt has been discharged, no enforcement costs are due, and the enforcement power is extinguished in accordance with paragraph 6(3)(a).

Issuing notice to the bailiff after payment

Where the debtor has made payment to the creditor or otherwise discharged the amount outstanding and has issued a valid paragraph 59 notice — namely, written notice informing the enforcement agent of payment — then any further enforcement step taken thereafter will be unlawful. Paragraph 59(2) stipulates that the bailiff is only protected from liability if he did not have such notice at the time of taking the further step. Therefore, prompt and provable service of notice is of paramount importance. That notice may be given by email, post, or even text message, but a copy of the message or receipt of delivery should be retained for evidential purposes.

Legal remedies for continued harassment

If, notwithstanding service of the paragraph 59 notice, the enforcement agent continues to harass the debtor, including threats to attend premises, loitering nearby, or attempting to extract money by invoking the lapsed writ, the debtor may seek injunctive relief under section 3 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Additionally, where behaviour amounts to harassment, alarm, or distress, offences under section 4A of the same Act may be engaged. If the conduct includes threats of force or unauthorised interference with property, the bailiff may also be exposed to criminal liability under section 21 of the Theft Act 1968.

Challenging unlawful fee claims

The regulations governing enforcement do not entitle bailiffs to recover fees in respect of enforcement activity undertaken after the enforcement power has ceased. Regulation 17(1) of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 makes this explicitly clear. Any attempt to claim such fees may be challenged by application to the County Court under Regulation 16 for a detailed assessment. This mechanism enables the debtor to obtain judicial scrutiny of whether the fees are recoverable, whether they are excessive or improperly charged, and whether the enforcement steps purportedly taken were lawful. The debtor should support such application with the payment receipt to the creditor, the paragraph 59 notice, and any evidence that no goods were taken into control.

Guidance and standards applicable to enforcement agents

Further, Guideline 31 of the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards issued in April 2014 provides that enforcement agents must not seek to enforce recovery of fees where the enforcement power is no longer exercisable. These guidelines, although not statutory, may be relied upon as persuasive authority supporting the debtor's position in proceedings or complaint.

Right of action where breach occurs

Where a bailiff continues to act without legal authority following the extinguishment of the enforcement power, the debtor may bring an action for breach under paragraph 66 of Schedule 12. The court is empowered to order return of goods wrongfully taken, to award damages for any consequential loss, and to make such further orders as are just. Where the debtor has not yet initiated such action, a pre-action protocol letter should be sent to the bailiff and the enforcement company, setting out the factual background, the legal basis of the claim, and the relief sought, with reference to CPR Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct.

Summary and enforcement options

In summary, once the debt and any permissible enforcement costs have been discharged and the bailiff notified, he has no lawful basis to demand or recover additional fees. Any such conduct is not only without foundation in law but may constitute unlawful harassment or a breach of Schedule 12. The debtor is entitled to protect his position through notice, detailed assessment proceedings, injunctive relief, and civil action for breach, each of which provides effective remedy in accordance with the statutory framework.