Dealing with Bailiffs

How to Recover Exempt Goods and Claim Damages

Key Takeaways

  1. Bailiffs are prohibited from taking control of exempt goods under Paragraph 11(1)(b) of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

  2. A work vehicle with an auction value under £1,350 is exempt under Paragraph 4 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013.

  3. Auction value means the price the vehicle would fetch at a forced sale, not its retail value. This has been judicially accepted in a 2017 case involving Newlyn Plc.

  4. Evidence of auction value can be obtained by averaging recent sale prices of similar vehicles on platforms such as eBay.

  5. Claims to recover exempt goods must be made within seven days of removal, supported by proof of work use and auction value.

  6. If you miss the seven-day window, you may still bring a claim for damages under sections 3 and 4 of the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977.

  7. Damages may include loss of earnings, the cost of a replacement vehicle, and any losses from damage or missing items.

  8. Bailiff companies may issue incorrect forms that do not comply with CPR 85.8. Using the wrong process risks the court refusing your claim.

  9. A compliant CPR 85.8 notice with supporting evidence is the correct procedure for asserting ownership and recovering exempt goods.

Where a bailiff has taken control of or immobilised goods that fall within the category of exempt items, you are entitled to seek their return and to prevent any intended sale. The law is clear on this point. Paragraph 4 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 sets out the categories of goods that are exempt from enforcement, including a vehicle used in the course of the debtor’s employment, trade or profession, provided its auction value does not exceed £1,350. The correct valuation for this purpose is not based on speculative retail pricing but on its auction value, which reflects the amount it would likely realise at a forced sale.

Auction value can be established by referring to the average sale price of comparable vehicles sold through platforms such as eBay within the preceding thirty days. This method has been judicially endorsed. In proceedings involving Newlyn Plc, solicitor Peter Felton Gerber successfully argued before the court in 2017 that auction value should be the determinative measure. The court accepted this position, and it now forms the appropriate benchmark.

If the vehicle qualifies as exempt under the 2013 Regulations and is nevertheless removed or clamped, that enforcement action is unlawful. Paragraph 11(1)(b) of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 prohibits enforcement agents from taking control of exempt goods. A breach of this provision not only renders the enforcement void but also gives rise to a right to claim damages. The proper basis for recovery includes loss of earnings, the reasonable cost of a hire vehicle, and any provable consequential losses arising from the wrongful deprivation of the exempt vehicle.

Importantly, the claim to recover exempt goods must be made within seven days of the removal. This deadline is strict. You must provide contemporaneous evidence demonstrating that the vehicle was in active use for employment or trade purposes, and that its auction value did not exceed the statutory threshold. Should this period elapse without action, you may still pursue a claim for damages under sections 3 and 4 of the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977. This statutory remedy enables recovery for wrongful interference with goods and includes claims for conversion and damage to property. It is also the appropriate route where items have been removed and later returned in a damaged condition or with parts missing.

One must exercise caution when engaging with bailiff companies about exempt goods. It is not uncommon for enforcement firms to provide forms or procedures that fail to comply with the requirements of Civil Procedure Rule 85.8. This rule governs third-party claims to goods subject to enforcement and requires strict procedural compliance. Use of the wrong process, or reliance on documents outside the prescribed framework, may result in the court rejecting the claim irrespective of its substantive merit.

To protect your position, you should gather clear proof of ownership, documentary evidence of the vehicle’s trade use, and recent auction valuations. A well-supported claim served promptly may not only prevent further enforcement but place you in a position to recover full damages for the bailiff’s wrongful act. Given the procedural complexity and the frequency of non-compliant forms issued by enforcement companies, it would be sensible to have a legally correct notice prepared under CPR 85.8 supported by a brief statement of truth and evidence of exempt status. This approach will place you in the strongest possible position to reclaim what was taken and recover any consequential losses.

Remedies

If a bailiff has wrongfully taken control of a vehicle or other exempt goods, there are several remedies available under both statute and the Civil Procedure Rules.

  1. Apply for release of exempt goods: If the goods are exempt under Paragraph 4 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013, you may apply for their immediate release. This should be done within seven days of removal and supported by evidence of work use and auction value.

  2. Issue a claim under CPR 85.8: If the enforcement agent refuses to return exempt goods, you may file a claim under Civil Procedure Rule 85.8 asserting your legal entitlement. This must be supported by a statement of truth and relevant documents. A compliant claim will put the court in a position to order the goods’ return.

  3. Claim damages under the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977: If you miss the seven-day deadline or the goods have been damaged, sold, or tampered with, you may bring a claim for damages under sections 3 and 4 of the 1977 Act. Compensation may cover lost earnings, replacement costs, and consequential loss.

  4. Challenge the bailiff's conduct: If the enforcement agent issued defective forms or misrepresented your legal rights, you may refer to this in support of your claim and seek to have enforcement costs disallowed. Bailiffs who act outside the statutory framework may also be subject to complaint or regulatory action.

  5. Apply for detailed assessment of fees: Where fees have been charged unlawfully or disproportionately, you may request a detailed assessment under CPR Part 47. This may lead to repayment of enforcement fees and the creditor being barred from further recovery through enforcement agents.

In all cases, it is essential to act promptly, keep records of communications, and ensure that any documents sent to court or the creditor are legally compliant. Where exempt goods have been wrongfully taken, the earlier you assert your rights, the stronger your position will be in securing their return and recovering your losses.