Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Debt Collection Options
I have a CCJ against a company who are not intending to pay, we're looking at whether to contact the court to collect the money or use a debt recovery agency, is there any advantage with either one?
Answers
1 to 7 of 7
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ck1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
My friend got a visit from Marstons about her landladies debt and she said if ever the need arose she would use them because they were scary as hell (not intimidating just firm and persistent) and I am in the process of getting them (via their sister company) to serve papers on my debtors.
When the time comes I will probably use them. Apparently they get better result than the courts because they are on commission so have more of an insentive.
When the time comes I will probably use them. Apparently they get better result than the courts because they are on commission so have more of an insentive.
send in the bailiffs
or if the judgement is for more than £500 - then'convert' it to a debt the sheriffs' office can recover. £75 quid I think
they charge lawfully between £250 - £500 a visit
an intransigent debtor who owed me £600 - had it balloon to £2000 in three or four months. Even my eyes watered at the costs involved. She has now gone under in the sum of £29 000.
I think about half must be ignored extra costs for non payment
or if the judgement is for more than £500 - then'convert' it to a debt the sheriffs' office can recover. £75 quid I think
they charge lawfully between £250 - £500 a visit
an intransigent debtor who owed me £600 - had it balloon to £2000 in three or four months. Even my eyes watered at the costs involved. She has now gone under in the sum of £29 000.
I think about half must be ignored extra costs for non payment
The OP is talking about a CCJ. The only way of getting a bailiff to act for a CCJ is through the Court. The creditor cannot do it him/herself.
If a firm such as Marstons – who do act as bailiffs - are appointed by the creditor they are acting only as debt collectors – not bailiffs. They do not have the same powers as bailiffs and, if the debtor is aware of their lack of powers, they can simply refuse to have anything to do with them. On occasion their results may be got by threatening and sometimes illegal behaviour, (although this can also occur when they are appointed as bailiffs). I’ve no objection to “firm & persistent” but would draw the line at over-aggressive behaviour aimed at misleading and frightening the debtor about what they have the power to do. For example, if they are acting only as debt collectors there are no circumstances in which they would have the power to enter the debtor’s property or to clamp & take effective possession of the debtor’s vehicle.
If a firm such as Marstons – who do act as bailiffs - are appointed by the creditor they are acting only as debt collectors – not bailiffs. They do not have the same powers as bailiffs and, if the debtor is aware of their lack of powers, they can simply refuse to have anything to do with them. On occasion their results may be got by threatening and sometimes illegal behaviour, (although this can also occur when they are appointed as bailiffs). I’ve no objection to “firm & persistent” but would draw the line at over-aggressive behaviour aimed at misleading and frightening the debtor about what they have the power to do. For example, if they are acting only as debt collectors there are no circumstances in which they would have the power to enter the debtor’s property or to clamp & take effective possession of the debtor’s vehicle.
1 to 7 of 7
