Bailiff left a document hanging from your door

As a means of locating absconding debtors, bailiffs sometimes employ a practice wherein they discreetly place documents, without knocking on the door, in a manner such as hanging them out of a letterbox or at a communal doorway. This approach is aimed at gauging whether someone retrieves the document or contacts the number provided therein.


Other reasons:

Deception: Utilising tactics to impose a £235 enforcement stage fee without the presence of a certified individual attending and processing payment over the phone.

Phishing or tracing missing debtors: Testing the efficacy of warning about locksmith intervention to prompt individuals to contact the provided mobile number and disclose the debtor's new address.

Crime: Assessing whether the targeted property is vacant or if its occupants are away on vacation.

Official Guidelines:

The Government published official guidelines called, Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014, of which Paragraph 52 states:

Enforcement agents should, so far as it is practical, avoid disclosing the purpose of their visit to anyone other than the debtor or a third party nominated by the debtor, for example an advice agency representative. Where the debtor is not seen, the relevant documents must be left at the address in a sealed envelope addressed to the debtor.

Bailiffs term this practice as a Hit & Run

Refrain from reaching out to any individual mentioned in the document.

Submit the document to the police and file a report online.

The act of distributing such documentation does not align with prescribed enforcement methods, as regulations delineate the standard format for documents bailiffs are permitted to utilise. Therefore, issuing or dispatching a document labelled, for instance, a "Removal Notice," constitutes an improper method of enforcing a demand, and the sender is in breach of the law.


The Law:

Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 states:

Offence of sending letters etc. with intent to cause distress or anxiety

(1)Any person who sends to another person—

(a)a letter, electronic communication or article of any description which conveys—

(i)a message which is indecent or grossly offensive;

(ii)a threat; or

(iii)information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender; or

(b)any article or electronic communication which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature,

is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.

(2)A person is not guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (1)(a)(ii) above if he shows—

(a)that the threat was used to reinforce a demand made by him on reasonable grounds; and

(b)that he believed and had reasonable grounds for believing, that the use of the threat was a proper means of reinforcing the demand.

(2A) In this section "electronic communication" includes—

(a)any oral or other communication by means of an electronic communications network; and

(b)any communication (however sent) that is in electronic form.

(3)In this section references to sending include references to delivering or transmitting and to causing to be sent, delivered or transmitted and "sender" shall be construed accordingly.

(4)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—

(a)on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine (or both);

(b)on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or a fine (or both).

(5)In relation to an offence committed before section 154(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 comes into force, the reference in subsection (4)(b) to 12 months is to be read as a reference to six months.

(6)In relation to an offence committed before section 85 of the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 comes into force, the reference in subsection (4)(b) to a fine is to be read as a reference to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum.


If a bailiff acknowledges using a document provided by their firm for such purposes, it implicates everyone within the firm who is aware of this practice in an offence.


The Law:

Section 993 of the Companies Act 2006 states:

Offence of fraudulent trading

(1)If any business of a company is carried on with intent to defraud creditors of the company or creditors of any other person, or for any fraudulent purpose, every person who is knowingly a party to the carrying on of the business in that manner commits an offence.

(2)This applies whether or not the company has been, or is in the course of being, wound up.

(3)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—

(a)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or a fine (or both);

(b)on summary conviction—

(i)in England and Wales, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or both);

(ii)in Scotland or Northern Ireland, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or both).


You can report the matter as a data protection breach to the Information Commissioners Office online.

To ensure that your complaint is effectively addressed, please adhere to the following guidelines:

Enclose a duplicate of the discarded document.

Provide a photograph depicting the precise location where the discarded document was discovered.

Specify the individuals whose data may have been exposed.

Clearly indicate that the discarded document does not constitute a statutory Notice of Enforcement, thereby exempting it from the provisions of Regulation 7 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013.

Include a copy of paragraph 52 from the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014, which stipulates that the document must be enclosed within a sealed envelope.