Evictions/Bailiffs. Do people really not know?

television.

I thought people had to accept the notice before the bailiffs were sent in.

I've watched a few of the landlord/tenant programmes. I think the final letter is sent by registered mail and a notice is fastened to the front door so they have no excuse.

If addressed to one person in the house (or who is estranged or separated for example) the rest of the house may not know.

If it is from the High Court, often done to speed up the process, there is no notice.

They must know they've not paid their rent or a debt so it can't come as that much of a surprise.

Most are in denial with letters from the County Court giving a date to leave, so they ignore it. If the initiator gets a High Court judgement, which supersedes the previous one, they gate no date and must leave immediately the bailiff turns up.

I don't understand why they don't tell the TV cameras to naff off. Bad enough to have that happen (particularly if it's because of circumstances beyond their control), but to have it televised as entertainment for ghouls must be really humiliating. A lot of channel 5 programming is like that, though - 'documentaries' about people on benefits or the overweight etc. It's cruel.

Two points
1. As Jax said denial is not uncommon in situations involving debts. Years ago in my work with CA I remember visiting a young woman who when I gently asked about other debts ( not just the one she presented with) opened a drawer in her sideboard full of ignored often unopened brown envelopes.
2. Why does anyone watch programmes like this?

The capacity for people to bury their heads in the sand when faced by debt problems should never be understimated.

They get the letters and push them into a drawer unopened, or behind the settee or stuff them in a cupboard,. Occasionally they put them in the bin, although this is surprisingly rare.

They do not attend court, they do not seek help, they just hope that if they ignore it long enough, it will go away. They often just do not know what they can do. Transfixed like rabbits in spotlights.

So when the bailiffs arrive it is a surprise and a dreadful shock, and, as the programme often shows, they are then directed to the srvices that can help them.

They get paid Doodledog

Good point M0nica.

A programme about debt collection is so wrong imo as it is humiliating for the people involved. It is amazing how fast something can escalate from even a single debt and at each stage there are extra fees/charges.

If they have ignored all past warnings ( and they will have had plenty) the High Court does not send letters so by the time you see the programme these are people who would have had many letters or notices and ignored them
High court gives no more warnings it’s straight in
Doodlebug I would expect they are paid well to take part in the programme it’s not just a random filming so they would be welcoming it not telling them to naff off ?

If the TV have asked to film them, and offered payment, they would know the bailiffs were going to arrive.

Perhaps the offer of payment happens afterwards.

Is it real or do you think they are actors?

If they are paid, then I expect that anything they earn will be taken off any benefits they receive because of our punitive means testing system.

It also makes these programmes even worse than I thought - it’s bad enough filming repossessions, but to offer incentives to desperate people to have them televised is beyond the pale. Imagine being so desperate that you would go from hiding things from yourself to public humiliation.

It’s horrible, and I don’t understand how anyone can get pleasure out of watching this sort of thing.

I don’t condone unpaid debt - in fact in some cases I see it as theft - but I also think that the safety net in this country has so many holes in it that it’s not surprising that people fall through it, and watching that happen is not my idea of entertainment.

Doodledog finally something we can totally agree on!

These programmes are depressing and sometimes distressing to watch. Of course people should not ignore debts but the reality for many people is not that simple. Household financial management should be taught in schools from a relatively young age so that young people start to think about managing their money early. Many people are simply not very good at managing their money, and for people on low incomes this can be disastrous.
One of the worst aspects is that the actual original debts were often relatively small but the additional fees and charges added for court hearings and bailiff visits etc often increase the debt to huge and unmanageable levels.
It will be interesting to see how the situation with fines for breaking lockdown rules develops. Court imposed fines are determined in relation to income but lockdown fines had not been so adjusted. I wonder how many of these fines will never be paid, or will be reduced or written off by the courts. A student fined 10k for having a party is unlikely to be in a position to pay it back.

Totally agree with all that are saying it’s awful to have cameras watching these depressing moments in people s lives and I should have googled before I opened my mouth apparently they don’t get paid but there has been at least one successful court case against the programme I m amazed that with all the laws about not filming people how the programme makers can get away with it
Agree with you quercus sometimes it s a smallish amount that grows and grows when it’s ignored

I have only watched one of these programmes - it started with bailiffs turning up at a company which hadn't paid a debt, a bank transfer was quickly made, but then it went on to a woman being evicted from her home and I couldn't watch any longer - how can anyone be entertained watching that kind of distress.

My father was one of those that ignored bills, I remember a bailiff turning up when I was a child, because we lived in a large house he went away! Father went bankrupt in the end, all the money and the houses my grandmother left gambled and drunk away.

It’s worth also sparing a thought for the poor landlord in these sorry sagas.

Yes we all know there are awful rogue ones, letting out dreadfully maintained properties, but the vast majority are decent people letting property to supplement their income.

If a tenant stops paying rent and refuses to vacate the property it can take months for the landlord to get them out through the courts, and in some cases the property is vandalised, incurring more expense for the owner.

We have taken out a rent protection policy for peace of mind in case we should ever be unlucky enough to have a nightmare tenant.

JenniferEccles

It’s worth also sparing a thought for the poor landlord in these sorry sagas.

Yes we all know there are awful rogue ones, letting out dreadfully maintained properties, but the vast majority are decent people letting property to supplement their income.

If a tenant stops paying rent and refuses to vacate the property it can take months for the landlord to get them out through the courts, and in some cases the property is vandalised, incurring more expense for the owner.

We have taken out a rent protection policy for peace of mind in case we should ever be unlucky enough to have a nightmare tenant.

What don’t you start a tgread about landlords then? Renting properties out is a business and all businesses have risks. Tough