Equita Charges Now The Debit Is Clear

Danjames90

I'm hoping someone can help me with this. I got behind with my council tax and they handed it to Equita. I squared the £400 bill with the council but by that time it had already been handed to Equita. Now they are chasing me for £424.60 for their fees despite the bill being settled directly with the council.

Can they do this?

On advice from another site I sent them a letter asking for a breakdown of the charges and they came back with the following.

Further to your recent correspondence I write to confirm the breakdown of your account.

Debt £424 (now cleared and paid directly to the council)
Compliance fee £75
Enforcement fee £235

Balance outstanding £310

Please be advised that any costs incurred on your account are set out in the taking control of goods regulations 2014. These can be viewed via the internet.

I can confirm that two different enforcement agents that have been allocated to your account and have attended your premises.

I would urge you to contact our office immediately with regards to settlement.

Can they do this and do I have to pay?

Any help greatly received.

CakeCrusader

I think it depends on whether they actually sent anyone out to your home to try and get money from you. Equita are a nightmare to be honest. I got into problems with my council tax, and the council passed it on to Equita. They claimed (and charged me) for a levy, but they didn't actually do one unless they have the ability to see through walls and a door with no window (and a thick blind). I tried to call then bailiff to arrange to pay and I could hear a woman screaming in the background so I complained to the council and paid them directly, and the council removed the charges (lucky I called them, but poor woman!)

You can see the charges here; http://www.civea.co.uk/bailiff-enforcement-agent-charges-fees.htm

"If you fail to make contact with the enforcement company, or fail to adhere to the payment arrangement that you have made with them, the matter will then move to the enforcement stage. This will entail a visit, or a series of visits, from an enforcement agent, a further fee of £235 (plus 7.5% of the value of the original debt that exceeds £1500) will be added to your account and you risk having your possessions seized by the enforcement agent and subsequently removed and sold, if full payment is not made."

The compliance fee is added when the council pass your debt to them, so you'd need to work out if you'd paid before it was sent as you wouldn't have to pay this if this was the case. I think the enforcement fee is charged if they need to visit your home and do a levy. If they've not been out to see you, they can't charge you for it. If they received your details before you paid, and if you've had visits from them, it's going to be a problem. You may be better off calling your council as they can contact the bailiffs for you and sort out the charges.

I hope this helps.

Danjames90

What a joke. No wonder people get into trouble. They've basically doubled the bill. I have no proof they sent someone to my house but I guess it's my word against theirs.

I wonder if I can ask for evidence?

I think I paid after it was sent but it was just bad timing I think.

CakeCrusader wrote: »

I think it depends on whether they actually sent anyone out to your home to try and get money from you. Equita are a nightmare to be honest. I got into problems with my council tax, and the council passed it on to Equita. They claimed (and charged me) for a levy, but they didn't actually do one unless they have the ability to see through walls and a door with no window (and a thick blind). I tried to call then bailiff to arrange to pay and I could hear a woman screaming in the background so I complained to the council and paid them directly, and the council removed the charges (lucky I called them, but poor woman!)

You can see the charges here; http://www.civea.co.uk/bailiff-enforcement-agent-charges-fees.htm

"If you fail to make contact with the enforcement company, or fail to adhere to the payment arrangement that you have made with them, the matter will then move to the enforcement stage. This will entail a visit, or a series of visits, from an enforcement agent, a further fee of £235 (plus 7.5% of the value of the original debt that exceeds £1500) will be added to your account and you risk having your possessions seized by the enforcement agent and subsequently removed and sold, if full payment is not made."

The compliance fee is added when the council pass your debt to them, so you'd need to work out if you'd paid before it was sent as you wouldn't have to pay this if this was the case. I think the enforcement fee is charged if they need to visit your home and do a levy. If they've not been out to see you, they can't charge you for it. If they received your details before you paid, and if you've had visits from them, it's going to be a problem. You may be better off calling your council as they can contact the bailiffs for you and sort out the charges.

I hope this helps.

CakeCrusader

Danjames90 wrote: »

What a joke. No wonder people get into trouble. They've basically doubled the bill. I have no proof they sent someone to my house but I guess it's my word against theirs.

I wonder if I can ask for evidence?

I think I paid after it was sent but it was just bad timing I think.

They should have put a letter through your door. They can't just say they've turned up It's an absolute joke. My bill was for £181 and they added around £300+ to it by lying basically. I received a letter, then someone pushed a letter through my door saying they'd attended and had done a levy, so you now owe us £££. If you don't pay within X days we'll come and take the items. I couldn't see how they had done this as I'd certainly not let anyone in and there's no way they could have seen what was in the house. The bailiff hadn't even knocked the door as I was in the house when the letter came through the letter box. There's some awful reviews online about this company.

If you've not received a letter pushed through your door, it's really unlikely that they've attended. They also have to give you time to respond after their initial postal letter. The council will have a breakdown of the costs and they will go through it with you.

Herbie21

Danjames90 wrote: »

I'm hoping someone can help me with this. I got behind with my council tax and they handed it to Equita.

I squared the £400 bill with the council but by that time it had already been handed to Equita. Now they are chasing me for £424.60 for their fees despite the bill being settled directly with the council.

Can they do this?

Any help greatly received.

What has to be determined, is the precise date that you made payment to the council and the date that the council passed your account to Equita. You need to contact the council for this information.

What prompted you to make payment to the council direct?

Even after making payment direct, you should have received a Notice of Enforcement from Equita to advise you of the debt. A compliance fee of £75 would have been added to the debt at this stage.

Did you receive this notice?

Did you contact the council on receipt of the letter?

CIS

To add to Herbie's post:

If the case has progressed to Equita correctly then in respect of your payment, unless the council decided to withdraw the case, then the it's not as simple as paying the council the value of the council tax outstanding. There are (in an over-complicated way) requirements that payments be proportionally split between the fees and the council tax balance rather than just clearing the council tax charge.

I have seen some argument though over apportionment of 'direct payments' although I don't think it's actually been challenged in court yet.

Herbie21

CIS wrote: »

To add to Herbie's post:

If the case has progressed to Equita correctly then in respect of your payment, unless the council decided to withdraw the case, then it's not as simple as paying the council the value of the council tax outstanding.

There are (in an over-complicated way) requirements that payments be proportionally split between the fees and the council tax balance rather than just clearing the council tax charge.

I have seen some argument though over apportionment of 'direct payments' although I don't think it's actually been challenged in court yet.

In the vast majority of cases (possibly not in this particular case), payments that are made direct to the local authority or magistrates court (in the case of criminal court fines) are done so in order to avoid paying bailiff fees.

In the early days of the regulations, most local authorities were very confused with the 'pro rata' distribution and coupled with software challenges, it was not uncommon for them to retain the whole payment. Over time, the way in which these 'direct' payments are administered has meant that avoiding bailiff fees is now much more difficult.

The 'pro rata' distribution of payments is explained in detail on the following page from our website.

http://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/latest-news/can-i-avoid-bailiff-fees-by-paying-the-council-or-magistrate-court-direct


Bailiff Advice Online

Oldwood

Herbie21 wrote: »

In the vast majority of cases (possibly not in this particular case), payments that are made direct to the local authority or magistrates court (in the case of criminal court fines) are done so in order to avoid paying bailiff fees.

In the early days of the regulations, most local authorities were very confused with the 'pro rata' distribution and coupled with software challenges, it was not uncommon for them to retain the whole payment. Over time, the way in which these 'direct' payments are administered has meant that avoiding bailiff fees is now much more difficult.

The 'pro rata' distribution of payments is explained in detail on the following page from our website.

Herbie21, you cannot keep repeating this misinformation, then provide links to your own commercial site. It's not fair on the debtor to be told that their payment will be split.

You say 'most' councils split payments yet you don't have any statistics to back this up. This is advice that Paul Caddy, the MD of a bailiff company, has tried to push and it is wrong.

The pro-rata split can only come into play when an EA has taken control of goods and sold them. There are simply no other provisions.