New bailiff regulation: what it means for businesses recovering judgment debts

When a debtor still fails to pay, the creditor may need to consider further recovery action. This makes it important to understand the difference between debt collection and formal court enforcement, the options that may be available and the standards expected of any enforcement provider involved.

The Government has recently announced plans to strengthen independent oversight of the private enforcement sector. The proposed changes should offer greater reassurance to creditors as well as better protection for the individuals and businesses facing enforcement action.

What is changing?

The Government has announced that it intends to introduce secondary legislation bringing all private enforcement firms within the oversight of the Enforcement Conduct Board (ECB).

Established in 2022, the ECB currently operates as the independent oversight body for the enforcement sector. Although firms responsible for the great majority of private enforcement activity are already voluntarily accredited, membership has not previously been compulsory.

Under the proposed changes, enforcement agents would only be able to work for or with an ECB-accredited firm. In practice, this would require private enforcement firms to obtain and retain ECB accreditation in order to operate.

The intention is to create more consistent standards across the sector, strengthen accountability and provide a clearer route for complaints when something goes wrong. The announcement has been welcomed by representatives of the enforcement profession and debt-advice organisations.

Debt collection and enforcement are not the same

The terms “debt collection” and “enforcement” are sometimes used interchangeably, but they describe different activities.

A professional debt recovery agency works with a creditor to pursue payment, communicate with the debtor, understand the reasons for non-payment and seek an appropriate resolution. It does not have the statutory powers available to an enforcement agent.

Formal enforcement takes place after the relevant court process and may involve an authorised enforcement provider using specific legal powers to enforce a judgment. Depending on the circumstances, these powers can include taking control of and selling goods to satisfy the debt.

Controlaccount is not a bailiff or enforcement firm. We do,however, recover post-judgment debts and can arrange for suitable cases to be referred to authorised High Court Enforcement Officers when this is considered the appropriate next step. For suitable cases, Controlaccount can manage the entire enforcement referral and liaison process, working only with ethical and reputable enforcement companies that meet the appropriate professional standards.

A judgment is not a recovery strategy

Where a debtor has failed to comply with a judgment, immediately choosing an enforcement method without first considering the wider circumstances can lead to unnecessary cost, delay or limited results.

Before proceeding, creditors should consider questions such as:

• Is the debtor still trading or resident at the known address?
• Does the debtor appear to have income, assets or goods against which action may be taken?
• Is the judgment eligible to be transferred to the High Court for enforcement?
• Is there evidence of insolvency or other creditors already taking action?
• Has the debtor engaged or offered a realistic payment arrangement?
• Which recovery route is proportionate to the value and circumstances of the debt?

Not every CCJ can be transferred to the High Court. In England and Wales, qualifying judgments above £600 can generally be transferred for enforcement, but judgments relating to debts regulated by the Consumer Credit Act cannot use this route. Alternative options may need to be considered depending on the debt and the debtor’s circumstances.

This is why post-judgment recovery should be managed as a considered process rather than treated as a single administrative instruction.

Why professional standards matter to creditors

Much of the discussion surrounding the proposed regulation has rightly focused on protecting people - particularly vulnerable individuals - from intimidating behaviour, unfair treatment or un-affordable repayment demands.

High standards are also important for creditors. An enforcement provider acts in connection with the creditor’s judgment, and poor conduct can create complaints, reputational damage and additional administrative work. Businesses therefore need confidence that any provider involved in their recovery process operates lawfully, proportionately and with appropriate oversight.

Mandatory accreditation should help create a more consistent framework across the private enforcement sector. It should also make it easier for creditors to identify providers that are subject to independent standards,monitoring and complaints arrangements.

Fair treatment and effective recovery should not be viewed as competing objectives. Clear communication, appropriate consideration of vulnerability and realistic repayment arrangements can improve engagement and lead to more sustainable outcomes. Where firmer action is justified, creditors should be confident that it is carried out professionally.

Managing the complete post-judgment journey

The Government’s announcement is a useful reminder that obtaining judgment is not always the final stage of debt recovery. Creditors need a clear process for monitoring unpaid judgments, assessing the likelihood of recovery and selecting the most appropriate next step.

Controlaccount supports businesses with post-judgment debt recovery, including continued debtor engagement and assessment of the available recovery options. Where High Court enforcement is appropriate and the judgment qualifies, we can arrange referral to authorised High Court Enforcement Officers.

High Court enforcement is not the only option available when a judgment remains unpaid. Depending on the debtor’s circumstances,Controlaccount can help clients explore other recovery routes, including an attachment of earnings order, a third-party debt order or a charging order. In suitable cases, insolvency action, such as presenting a bankruptcy petition against an individual, may also be considered. By assessing each case individually, we can help clients identify the most appropriate, proportionate and commercially viable route.

This gives creditors a managed route through the post-judgment process while maintaining a clear distinction between Controlaccount’s debt recovery role and the statutory work undertaken by the appointed enforcement provider.

If your business has unpaid judgments or is unsure about the most appropriate next step, speak to Controlaccount about how we can support your post-judgment recovery strategy.

Sources

• Government introduces secondary legislation regulating bailiff firms – Credit Connect
• Regulation of the debt enforcement sector – Ministry of Justice

‍