Can I get an Attachment to Earnings Order issued against someone paid their salary by BACs not PAYE?

Autumn86

Hello, not sure if this is the correct forum, but hopefully someone can help me.

I currently have a CCJ awarded in my favour against someone who stole £1,500+ from me via embezzlement.

All I know about the individual is the name which they operate under, what they told me is their real name (although that could be a lie), their bank account number & sortcode, and the name of the company which they work for (a TV channel).

The TV channel do not disclose their actual studio address (due to the nature of the channel), instead only publicly provide a PO BOX address to which post can be sent.
But so I issued the CCJ claim against this individual, via that PO BOX address, since it's a 'servicable address' at which all employees of that TV channel can recieve post at.

The defendant ignored the claim, and so the CCJ was awarded in my favour against her by default, 2weeks ago now.


I'm now nearing the stage where I need to get this enforced, but the only viable method I actually have of getting that done is by having an Attachment of Earnings Order issued against them.
However even though this individual works for the TV channel as 'an employee' (in that she is given her monthly rota of what days/time-slots she is working on each month, and is paid her wages by the company at the end of each month), she (and all the other staff who work for this TV channel) are not contractually classed as 'employees',
Instead they are classed as 'sub-contractors', and so instead of being paid their wages via PAYE (and being taxed), they are paid their monthly wages via direct bank transfer.


But so if I instruct the court to issue an Attachment of Earnings Order against this person, sent direct to the TV channel via their PO Box address, could the channel just reject being able to implement the order by saying that because the person isn't paid by PAYE, and instead is 'a sub-contractor not an employee of theirs', that they cannot deduct money from their wages?

sourcrates

Hi,

If you mean by sub contractor, self employed, then you cannot apply for an AEO.

If, they were classed as an employee, if does not matter how they are paid, they would be sent a court form N56 to fill in, if they failed to fill it in within the 8 days allowed, a court bayliff would serve them with an order to fill it in.

If it was still ignored, the court would send notice for them to attend a meeting to ascertain why they had not filled it in.

If they ignored that, and didn’t go to the hearing, the court can issue a warrant for you to be arrested and brought to court or even send you straight to prison for up to 14 days.

Your approach relies on the definition of there employment status.

macman

They are not employees, and they do not receive a salary.
Why is an AEO your only option? Why not bailiffs?

Autumn86

Hello and thanks for your replies.

I personally have no way of finding-out for certain if the person's employment contract states that they are 'a sub-contractor' or 'a employee'.

The TV channel which the person works for is a mainstream TV channel, and I know that they are paid 'their wages' by the company at the end of each month, depending on how many shifts they worked that month.
But I also have it on pretty good authority from someone else who works for that channel that all the girls who work there are classed as 'self-employed contractors' rather than 'employees', so that the channel doesn't then need to pay their pensions/annual leave/sick-pay/NI contributions... ect


The TV channel company itself refuses to disclose their studio's address, instead they simply provide a PO Box address for all postal correspondence.

However I have done some investigating online and foundout that their parent company who actually owns that channel/brand is Cellcast Group PLC.
And Cellcast Group do provide a business address on their website.


If the only address available was a PO Box address the Baliff ofcourse wouldn't be able to serve the notice/arrest the individual,
but so having a business address for the parent company is beneficial.
Although as the debtor (well thief as they simply stole the money from me via embezzlement) would not be based at that address herself, I am concerned about what the baliffs would be able to do then?



This individual does also have other income each month, in addition to her wages from the TV channel, however because its all cash-in-had/direct bank transfers, and she doesn't declare any of her income for tax/nor is registered with companies house, there is no public record of her true income.

macman

There is no requirement for her to register at CH, as she appears to simply be a sole trader, not a company.
Can you not find out her home address, and serve papers on her there?

sourcrates

This is why you escalate to the high court, they trace her home address and visit at 7am, no serving papers, they don’t arrest anyone, they just hopefully get your money back.

This is what I would do.

Forget the AOE that’s a dead duck.

Karen747

sourcrates wrote: »

This is why you escalate to the high court, they trace her home address and visit at 7am, no serving papers, they don’t arrest anyone, they just hopefully get your money back.

This is what I would do.

Forget the AOE that’s a dead duck.

That was not my experience

The HCEO company wrote to me one Christmas telling me that they were coming, just not on what day.

Unlike the TV I did not let them in or open the door, they put more papers through the door and I called the office to make an arrangement to pay but it became unaffordable so I stopped.

They came back again but I think they could see I had nothing so gave up.

I am told that they have to send another of those warrant of control or whatever it was again before they can come because a year has passed, but whoever heard of HCEO following rules!!

Autumn86

Hello and thanks for the replies again.

I have no physical way of finding-out her home address though unfortunately.

I don't even know for certain if the name which she gave me is correct.
As she (and most people in her industry) only operate and conduct all their business under their 'peformer-name', not their real name.
She told me at one point what her real name is, however given that she's a thief, well she could also easily be a liar too.


In regards to my next steps, the CCJ was issued 2weeks ago, and so I have to wait 2 weeks more before I can instruct the court on any further enforcement action.

I was planning on either issuing that order which states that she must attend court to provide the court with her financial details (I would again have that order served on her at both the PO Box address, but also at the address for the TV channel's parent company Cellcast Group PLC).

Alternatively I could have an Attachment of Earnings Order issued against her, servered either to her, or submitted directly to her employer at both those addesses.
If sent to her she will just ignore it like she's ignored everything else, but so I'm guessing baliffs will then be sent to the address of Cellcast to demand that they provide them with her details, so they can then go and arrest her?
Alternatively if the order is submitted directly to the employer, if they have her employed as a sub-contractor, whilst that wouldn't get an AEO setup, hopefully that would open a channel of communication between the court and the employer, by which the court could then request/demand that the employer disclose her name and home address to the court?

If you guys have any advice regarding which of those options would be best, please let me know?


And in regards to escalating it to the high-court, I was unaware of that option being available.
But also was unsure what additional benefits that would provide, compared to what the current available enforcement options are?

As I do know that this person has a CCJ already (she got it 3months ago) so her details would be on the CCJ register, however that CCJ would ofcourse be in her real name, which may not be what she told me her real name is.
The only way to findout for certain her real name plus her home address will be if her employer discloses that information to the court.
But I would of thought that the county-court would have the same ability, if there is such an order, to request/order that information be provided to them, as the high-court would have?
(Although I ofcourse have virtually no knowledge on the powers the different civil courts have).


Thankyou inadvance for your help though guys.

Autumn86

Karen747 wrote: »

That was not my experience

The HCEO company wrote to me one Christmas telling me that they were coming, just not on what day.

Unlike the TV I did not let them in or open the door, they put more papers through the door and I called the office to make an arrangement to pay but it became unaffordable so I stopped.

They came back again but I think they could see I had nothing so gave up.

I am told that they have to send another of those warrant of control or whatever it was again before they can come because a year has passed, but whoever heard of HCEO following rules!!

I am aware that the county-court can issue an order that means the defendant must attend court and provide the court with details of the income.

Whilst I know very little about this individual, I know for a fact that shes not 'poor'.
As she drives a sports-car, went on a luxury 2weeks cruise in June (albeit using the money she stole from me), but she earns £30+ per hour for each TV slot she does each week for this channel, plus she earns upto £10per minute for the 'modelling' work which she does on the days shes not on the TV, so she's not short of income,
simply doesn't declare any of it for tax, as its all cash in hand/payments direct to her bank.

But so basically all that is required to get the debt sorted is for her employer to be forced to provide the court with her home address.

As she could then be served with orders, and arrested directly if she continues to ignore them.

Autumn86

Update-

I have also just discovered the following court form:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-n349-application-for-third-party-debt-order

Which appears to basically order companies who hold money of the debtor's to freeze it and instead pay it to the court/to me, even if the debtor is not an 'employee' of that company?

And so would I be correct in thinking that I can simply instruct the court to serve that order to the company which owns the TV channel the debtor works for, and then payments which would be paid to her as a sub-contractor would have to be frozen and paid to me?

sourcrates

You need legal advice my friend.

On here you will only get opinions.

Try Legal Beagles, the link is in my signature, they are the go to place for free legal advice.