Browse All Tribes or choose a Tribe below:
By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google
By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Don't have an account? Sign Up
To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.
I heard on the radio today that the ministry of justice are about to have another consultation on bailiffs, I would guess along a similar line to the previous one...
I'm thinking we should all jump on this and respond by saying "we wouldn't need bailiffs for debt enforcement, if the civil debt enforcement system was fit for purpose"...
...i.e if you have a judgement and NI number, then you should be able to get the debt collected via PAYE / benefits system.If debtors knew that they didn't need to be physically 'caught' to be made to pay then they might not bury their heads and run away so often.This isn't just about landlords, it's any small business that is trying to enforce a debt judgement.
What do we all think ?
DISCLAIMER just my personal opinion - for legal advice consult a qualified professional grown-up.
Would never work. It would be abused by all sorts of small businesses and dodgy landlords trying to take money from peoples wages. People would then respond in bad ways to landlords. It would be a mess.What is needed is a faster way to deal with non payers to move them on. Landlords should also have insurance for non payers so chasing debts would not be needed by the landlords as such as they would have their money.
How could it be abused ?
Note I say "if you have a judgement" - ie. you've had either a small claims judgement or possession order granted by the court and you're just trying to enforce it.
Rent g'tee Ins is contingent on tenant's finances showing affordability - which the 30% LHA claimants in PRS would fail on
Did you not have the relevant insurance in place in case the tenant stopped paying?
It is impossible to have insurance for most tenants who have no chance of qualifying for RGI.
Only in cases of rent default should a tenant be booted out by police with no court or baliff intervention required.
If it turns out that the tenant did in fact make a cleared rent payment then the LL should face a RRO for the full term of the most recent tenancy agreement.
Bailiffs are usually only required for rent default; criminal damage and theft.
But you can't get blood out of a stone irrespective of bailiffs.
The civil recovery process in the UK is a joke which is why most LL don't bother with it.
This of course allows wrongun tenants to persist in their wrongness.
They will inevitably find another mug LL to rip off.
Bailiffs won't achieve a thing.
We should start a petition.
It is not fair that we (claimants) have to pay fees over fees when we are trying to enforce a judgment, while the Judiciary does nothing to help us to recover the loss.
We should ask that application and enforcement fees are refunded when our enforcement attempt is not successful.
As it is now, the system is completely biased in favour of the respondents that have lost the case.
If the judgement is in our favour, why does the tribunal acts laying obstacles (enforcement fees) on our difficult path to retrieve compensation?
I am sure that there is some law in support of a similar petition. Any lawyer is reading this?