header-logo header-logo

LNB news: MoJ publishes response to alignment of online and paper civil possession fees

09 March 2021
Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has published the government’s response and impact assessment to the MoJ’s consultation on the subject of the alignment of the fees for online and paper civil money and possession claims, with 22 respondents replying to the consultation

Lexis®Library update: The consultation response notes that a ‘majority of respondents, namely those from the legal and credit sector…disagreed with the proposed alignment’ on the grounds that ‘the proposed fees do not represent the costs of proceedings’ and that the alignment is  ‘unjustifiable in relation to the quality of the service provided’. Indeed, a majority of respondents opposed the principle of enhanced fees.

Despite this, the government has responded that it believes that there is ‘a strong justification to proceed with the alignment of the fees for online and paper civil money and possession claims’. However, as a result of the concerns raised by respondents to the consultation with regards the quality of the county court bailiff enforcement service, especially in relation to ‘the difficulty users of the service currently experience in enforcing warrants in a timely manner, and the potential for increased debt to be passed on to debtors’. As a result of these concerns, the government has decided not to align the £77 online fee with the £110 paper fee for Fee 8.1. Instead, the government intends to introduce a 7.7% inflationary increase backdated to 2016. Online and paper fees will instead be consolidated at £83.

Consequently, the government has decided that fees will be aligned to their correspondent paper level as set out in the consultation, with the exception of Fee 8.1.

The government’s response can be found here.

The impact assessment can be found here.

Source: Alignment of the fees for online and paper civil money and possession claims

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 8 March 2021 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Set creates new client and business development role amid growth

Kingsley Napley—Tim Lowles

Kingsley Napley—Tim Lowles

Sports disputes practice launchedwith partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Tom Evans

mfg Solicitors—Tom Evans

Tax and succession planning offering expands with returning partner

NEWS
The rank of King’s Counsel (KC) has been awarded to 96 barristers, and no solicitors, in the latest silk round
Can a chief constable be held responsible for disobedient officers? Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth, professor of public law at De Montfort University, examines a Court of Appeal ruling that answers firmly: yes
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
The Ministry of Justice is once again in the dock as access to justice continues to deteriorate. NLJ consultant editor David Greene warns in this week's issue that neither public legal aid nor private litigation funding looks set for a revival in 2026
Civil justice lurches onward with characteristic eccentricity. In his latest Civil Way column, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist, surveys a procedural landscape featuring 19-page bundle rules, digital possession claims, and rent laws he labels ‘bonkers’
back-to-top-scroll