Bailiff Fees: What You Can Lawfully Be Charged

This page sets out the three fee stages, when the percentage charge applies, what happens when more than one debt is enforced together, how proceeds are meant to be applied, and how to dispute a fee that looks wrong.

This scale is fixed by regulations that apply only in England and Wales. Scotland has no enforcement agents and nothing resembling this fee structure at all: sheriff officers charge under entirely separate rules of their own. See sheriff officers in Scotland rather than trying to map these figures onto a Scottish case.

The three statutory fee stages

Enforcement fees are charged in stages, and a stage only attaches once it has actually been reached. A case that is paid off before an agent attends attracts one fee, not three.

For cases instructed on or after 1 May 2026, the scale is:

For cases instructed before 1 May 2026, the earlier scale applies instead: compliance £75, enforcement £235 plus 7.5% above £1,500, sale or disposal £110 plus 7.5% above £1,500. That scale was superseded, not repealed, so it can still lawfully appear on an older case. Check the date the case was instructed, not today's date, before assuming which figures apply.

Compliance stage. This covers the period from when the enforcement agent's office receives the instruction to the end of the notice-of-enforcement period. It is charged once the case is instructed, whether or not an agent ever visits.

Enforcement stage. This attaches once an enforcement agent attends in person to take control of goods. It is a single fixed fee for the stage, not a per-visit charge, plus the percentage element on any amount recovered above the threshold.

Sale or disposal stage. This attaches only if goods are actually removed for sale or otherwise disposed of. Most cases never reach this stage because they are resolved by payment or agreement first.

The High Court scale is different

Enforcement under a High Court writ (as opposed to a warrant or liability order enforced through the standard route) uses a different table with two enforcement stages rather than one, and a lower percentage threshold. If your paperwork refers to a High Court enforcement officer or a writ of control, do not use the figures above without checking which table applies, because the compliance and sale fees differ and the threshold for the percentage element is £1,200, not £1,900.

Disbursements, and what cannot be charged

The fixed and percentage fees above are not always the whole amount charged. Regulation 8 of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 allows an enforcement agent to recover certain disbursements on top of the scale, but only where they were reasonably and actually incurred, and the list is short:

• the cost of storing goods that have been taken into control and removed from the premises or highway
• the cost of a locksmith, to gain access to premises when using reasonable force to enter them under Schedule 12, and to secure them afterwards
• court fees on applications the enforcement agent makes in relation to the enforcement power, and only where those applications are granted.

That is the whole of the ordinary list. Anything else charged as a disbursement, an administration fee, a letter fee, a card-payment charge, a visit fee on top of the stage fee, a "removal fee" where nothing was removed, is not recoverable under regulation 8 and should be queried in writing.

Sale costs are separate again. Under regulation 9, where goods are sold the auctioneer's commission may be recovered from you, capped at 15% of the sum realised where the sale is held on premises provided by the auctioneer, and at 7.5% where it is held elsewhere, along with the auctioneer's out of pocket expenses and reasonable advertising costs. An internet auction, or a sale other than by auction, carries 7.5% of the sum realised. Those percentages are calculated on what the goods actually made, not on the debt.

Anything beyond that needs a judge. Under regulation 10, an enforcement agent who wants to recover an exceptional disbursement not otherwise provided for must apply to the court, with the creditor's consent, and the court may only allow it where satisfied that the disbursement is necessary for effective enforcement, having regard to the sum being recovered and the nature and value of the goods. So an unusual charge appearing on your account without a court order behind it is worth challenging rather than paying.

Ask the firm in writing for an itemised breakdown showing what was charged, when it was incurred, under which regulation, and with the underlying invoice attached. A disbursement that cannot be evidenced is not one you should be treating as correct.

Fees where multiple enforcement powers exist

Debts are sometimes combined and enforced together, for example three separate council tax liability orders instructed to the same firm at the same time. The fee rules treat that combination asymmetrically, and the asymmetry is where overcharging happens.

Under regulation 11 of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014, the enforcement agent may recover the compliance stage fee in respect of each enforcement power the instructions relate to. But the fixed fee for the enforcement stage, and the fixed fee for the sale stage, may be recovered only once, regardless of how many enforcement powers are involved, where they can reasonably be exercised together.

So three liability orders enforced on one visit should produce three compliance fees plus one enforcement fee, not three of each. Put in figures, on the scale in force from 1 May 2026:

The gap between those two figures, on this example just under £500, is why regulation 11 is the fee rule most worth checking. It bites wherever one firm holds more than one enforcement power against the same debtor: several council tax years, a batch of parking penalties, or a mixture of warrants passed to the same agent. The test is whether the powers can reasonably be exercised together, which they normally can where they were instructed to one firm and dealt with on one attendance.

Ask for the fees to be set out per enforcement power, not as a single total. If you have been charged the enforcement or sale fee more than once for powers exercised together, that is a recoverable overcharge and worth raising in writing.

The vulnerable debtor fee protection

There is a fee rule specific to vulnerable debtors, and it is far less well known than it should be. Regulation 12 provides that where the debtor is a vulnerable person, the enforcement stage fee, and any disbursements relating to that stage, are not recoverable unless the enforcement agent has, before proceeding to remove goods which have been taken into control, given the debtor an adequate opportunity to get assistance and advice in relation to the exercise of the enforcement power. On a High Court writ, where the enforcement stage is split in two, the same protection applies to the first, or the first and second, enforcement stages as appropriate.

Three things are worth being precise about.

It is not a general exemption. The rule removes the enforcement stage fee and its disbursements. The compliance stage fee, and the debt itself, are unaffected by it.

"Vulnerable person" is not defined in these regulations. There is no statutory list, so whether it applies is judged on the facts. The Ministry of Justice national standards are the usual reference point in practice, and they expect creditors to be prepared to take control of the case back at any time where a debtor is identified as vulnerable, and expect agents to be trained to recognise vulnerability and to know when to withdraw.

The trigger is removal. The condition the agent has to satisfy is giving an adequate opportunity to get assistance and advice before proceeding to remove goods already taken into control. If goods were removed from a vulnerable debtor without any such opportunity, the enforcement stage fee should not be on the account, and that is a specific, checkable point to put in writing rather than a general plea about circumstances.

Say it in writing to the agent, the firm and the creditor, and evidence it as far as you reasonably can. See how bailiffs should treat you if vulnerable for the wider position.

How proceeds are shared out when there is not enough

Where a sale does not raise enough to clear everything, the money is not applied however the firm chooses. Regulation 13 fixes the order.

1. Where the goods were sold at public auction, other than an internet auction, the auctioneer's fees under regulation 9 come out first.
2. The enforcement agent may then recover the compliance stage fee.
3. Whatever is left is then applied pro rata between the sum to be recovered, meaning the debt, and the remaining fees, disbursements and any VAT equivalent on them.

That pro rata split is the part people find surprising. Once the auctioneer and the compliance fee are paid, the enforcement firm does not take the rest of its fees ahead of the debt: the balance is divided proportionately, so a payment that falls short still reduces the debt rather than disappearing entirely into fees.

There is one exception, and it runs the other way. Under regulation 13(5), where the same legal person is both the creditor and the enforcement agent, the pro rata rule does not apply and the fees and disbursements are paid before the debt. That situation arises with some in-house enforcement teams, so it is worth knowing which you are dealing with.

Ask the firm for a written breakdown showing how a payment or the sale proceeds were split, including how much went to the auctioneer, how much to each fee stage, how much to disbursements, and how much to the debt itself. Treat any gap in that breakdown as something to query.

Disputing fees and disbursements

Because the fee scale is fixed by regulation, a dispute about fees is almost always a dispute about whether a stage was actually reached, whether too many fixed fees were charged for combined enforcement powers, or whether a disbursement was actually and reasonably incurred, rather than a dispute about the rate itself.

Practical steps:

• Ask the enforcement firm in writing for an itemised breakdown, stage by stage, with the date each stage was reached and the amount charged.
• Check that stage against what actually happened. A sale fee should not appear if nothing was removed. An enforcement fee should not appear more than once for enforcement powers exercised together on the same visit.
• If a disbursement is charged, ask what it was for and ask for evidence that it was actually incurred, for example a locksmith's invoice.
• If the breakdown does not resolve it, complain to the enforcement firm first, in writing, citing the specific stage or charge you dispute. Then to the creditor, which holds the instruction. Then, for a private firm, to the Enforcement Conduct Board; for a County Court enforcement agent, to HM Courts and Tribunals Service.

The Ministry of Justice national standards expect the debtor to be able to easily find out how to make a complaint, without obstacles being placed in their way, and expect creditors to act proportionately and take account of a debtor's circumstances when recovering a debt.

Beyond a complaint, there is a route to a decision. Regulation 16 provides that, on an application in accordance with rules of court, any dispute about the amount recoverable under the Fees Regulations is to be determined by the court. That is the backstop where a firm will not move on a fee you believe is wrong. Take advice before applying, because a court application carries a fee and its own risks, and it is usually worth exhausting the written breakdown and the creditor first.

Fees where enforcement ceases

Not every case runs to sale, and the stage structure exists precisely because of that: a fee for a stage that was never reached should not appear on your account.

If enforcement stops after the compliance stage, for example because the debt is paid or the case is withdrawn before an agent attends, only the compliance fee should have attached. If it stops after an agent has attended but before any sale, the compliance and enforcement fees may have attached, but not the sale fee. Only a case that proceeds all the way to a sale or disposal should carry all three.

There is also a rule for the case where the enforcement power itself has run out. Regulation 17 provides that an enforcement agent may not recover fees or disbursements from the debtor in relation to any stage of enforcement undertaken at a time when the relevant enforcement power had already ceased to be exercisable. That matters where, for example, the 12 month period for taking control of goods under regulation 9 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 has expired, or where the goods have been abandoned. Work done after the power has gone is not chargeable to you.

Regulation 17 carries one exception in your favour rather than against you: it does not bite where the power ceased to be exercisable simply because you paid the amount outstanding, or because it was recovered from proceeds. Paying the debt does not retrospectively wipe out fees that had properly attached before you paid.

What this page still cannot pin down precisely is what happens where a case stops partway through a stage rather than at the end of one, for example after goods have been listed but before a sale date is fixed. If that is your situation and a fee for a later stage has been charged, ask the firm in writing to justify it by reference to the specific regulation and the date that stage is said to have been reached.

What to check on your own case

1. Which scale applies. Confirm the date the case was instructed, because that decides whether the current or the superseded figures are lawful.
2. Which stages were actually reached. A fee for a stage that never happened is wrong.
3. How many enforcement powers were combined. More than one compliance fee can be correct; more than one enforcement or sale fee usually is not.
4. Whether the percentage element is calculated correctly. It applies only to the portion of the sum recovered above the threshold, not to the whole debt.
5. Whether any disbursement is evidenced. Ask for the invoice, not just the figure.