Dealing with Bailiffs

The bailiff turned up with a TV film crew

It is becoming increasingly common for television crews to accompany enforcement agents during visits to private premises, often with the intent to film interactions for entertainment-based broadcasts. While the resulting programmes are marketed as factual or documentary-style productions, their true purpose is commercial entertainment, and their methods, including the element of surprise, often disregard statutory requirements and individual rights. The presence of cameras is usually concealed until the moment of confrontation, precisely to provoke reaction and thereby create a more dramatic narrative. However, the law provides you with several substantive protections if you find yourself the subject of such filming without your informed consent.

Investors use TV shows to promote a new bailiff company, but your data protection rights remain intact

It is common for investors launching new bailiff companies to collaborate with broadcasters and TV production companies to create shows about bailiffs, using the exposure as a promotional tool to raise their profile and attract business. However, this commercial purpose does not exempt them from complying with data protection laws. Individuals filmed without informed consent retain their rights under the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR, including the ability to object to processing and demand erasure of their personal data. Those affected should promptly serve a formal notice withdrawing consent and requesting deletion of footage. If ignored, they may seek court orders to prevent broadcast and compel destruction of recordings, as well as claim compensation for distress caused by unlawful filming. Early action and legal advice are essential to protect these rights effectively.

Legal framework and your rights under data protection law

The central legislative framework is found in the Data Protection Act 2018 and the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). Section 47 of the 2018 Act empowers any individual to require the controller of personal data – in this context, the production company or broadcaster – to erase their data where there is no lawful basis for its continued processing. Article 17 of the UK GDPR sets out this ‘right to erasure’ or ‘right to be forgotten’, which is triggered where consent is withdrawn and no exception applies.

Consent and the misuse of journalistic exemptions

In the case of a television show such as “Can’t Pay? We’ll Take It Away!”, the lawful basis asserted by the production company is typically either consent or journalistic exemption. Yet, neither withstands scrutiny where the individual filmed has not consented and the footage is used primarily for commercial gain, not genuine public interest or investigative journalism. The Information Commissioner’s Office has previously clarified that general entertainment does not qualify for exemption under Article 85 GDPR or Section 15 of the 2018 Act.

The legal basis for processing personal data

Furthermore, Article 6(1) of the UK GDPR provides that data processing must be lawful, fair and transparent. The most relevant lawful basis is consent, and in the absence of informed, freely given, and specific consent, the processing becomes unlawful. Article 21 gives the individual the express right to object to processing, including for the purpose of broadcast, and the controller must cease processing unless it can demonstrate compelling legitimate grounds which override the rights and freedoms of the individual. In the case of entertainment programming, that threshold is rarely met.

Serving notice and statutory steps you can take

Once consent is withdrawn, the production company and broadcaster are placed under a positive obligation to act. Section 167 of the 2018 Act allows you to serve a notice stating that the processing of your personal data, including visual or audio recordings, is unlawful, that you withdraw any implied or alleged consent, and that you require the erasure of the data. If that notice is ignored or refused without justification, Section 168 entitles you to apply to the court for an order requiring erasure and to seek compensation for any damage or distress suffered as a result.

Examples of damages awarded in similar cases

Compensation is not merely theoretical. Between 2018 and 2021, Channel 5 was compelled to pay substantial sums to individuals filmed without consent. In Ali & Aslam v Channel 5 Broadcasting Ltd [2018] EWHC 298 (Ch), the High Court awarded £10,000 to each claimant. Subsequent settlements have reached £50,000, £60,000 and even £100,000, with costs often awarded in addition. These figures illustrate the seriousness with which the courts view the unauthorised use of private data for entertainment.

Injunctive relief before or after broadcast

If the recording has not yet been broadcast, injunctive relief may also be available. The appropriate route is an application to the High Court for an interim injunction preventing broadcast, supported by a witness statement and the notice served under the Act. If the broadcast has already occurred, your remedy lies in damages and a mandatory order for deletion of the material from all archives and platforms.

Steps to take when writing to the data controller

You may commence such action by writing formally to the data controller of the production company and the broadcaster, identifying yourself, the date and place of the incident, and making clear that you do not consent to any use of your image, likeness or voice in any current or future programming. If no written confirmation is received within a reasonable period, generally seven to fourteen days, you may file a claim in the King’s Bench Division of the High Court, listing the claim in the Media and Communications List.

Locating the data controller and serving notice

To identify the appropriate recipient, search the Companies House register for the registered address and director of the production company and broadcaster. Send the notice by recorded delivery and retain evidence of service. If the producer is an individual or trading under a business name, further steps may be taken to identify their residential address for service, relying on publicly available electoral or financial records if necessary.

Improper enforcement procedures by bailiffs

Where bailiffs have entered without giving a proper Notice of Enforcement as required by paragraph 7 of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, that breach itself may render the entire attendance unlawful. In those circumstances, a separate claim may lie against the enforcement company and instructing creditor for trespass and unlawful interference with goods, in addition to any data protection breach.

Concluding steps and professional assistance

You should therefore act without delay. If approached by a television crew during enforcement action, make your objection clear on camera. State that you do not consent to being filmed and that any footage taken is unauthorised. Follow this up in writing using your statutory rights, and if necessary, prepare a claim for compensation and injunctive relief. If you require assistance, any experienced media and privacy barrister will be able to assist with drafting the requisite notice and proceedings.