DOORSTEP DEBT COLLECTION MUST BE STOPPED WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT. There must be an overhaul of current methods to settling debts.

ALTERNATIVE ENFORCEMENT ACTION: Organisations should have the authority to obtain attachment orders to take a reasonable capped amount from the individual's wages or benefits as an enforcement option. 

Such measures should factor the individual's current financial situation, mental health, age and family dynamics.

DEBT RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION : The courts currently have the authority to award litigants the full sum owed immediately and then arrange for the debt collection order be due to the court.

This model then could be easily implemented as an alternative resolution to debt recovery when dealing with vulnerable individuals.

The litigant is awarded the sum in full without delay and the individual repays the court/ acting agency over time where appropriate. 

REGULATORY FUNCTION: Organisations should be heavily regulated, impartial and offer advice to both the litigant and the individual. They should also work closely with existing debt solution and financial advice agencies. They should exist as 'not for profit' organisations only.

WHY: The current system is dated and attracts private businesses to PROFIT from financial difficulties. NO COMPANY SHOULD PROFIT FROM THE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP OF OTHERS. It is unethical at it's core.

It is fundamentally wrong and conceptually unlawful that one can simply take another's belongings to settle a financial debt.  It's a practice that would be deemed illegal if all people were to adopt this method of settling debts in everyday interactions.

The current practice can be extremely intimidating to individuals and often, it evokes emotions of fear, anger and anxiety.

VULNERABLE INDIVIDUALS : The onus remains on the individual to seek advice and help from external agencies that may not have the capacity to take on sometimes quite complicated debt cases. 

There is then a risk that these particular individuals are less likely to deal with their debts if adequate support isn't provided within specific timeframes set by debt collectors often due to feeling overwhelmed.  Individuals may then resort to avoiding  the problem and then unintentionally become victims of increasing cost set by private for profit organisations. 

EXPLOITATION AND INTIMIDATION :It defies logic that a private organisation or council can currently exploit one's financial difficulties for profit. That is - levy additional sometimes extortionate costs for non compliance to unilateral demands for payment.

Debt collection shouldn't be a business which exploits financial hardship. Nor should it be used as a means to raise funds for local councils. Doorstep enforcement visits are an outdated practice. It can be both dangerous for all involved and incredibly unnecessary.

There have been several reports that some enforcement agent's have become aggressive and even violent with individuals who do not comply with demands. There are also many allegations that some doorstep enforcement agents routinely bypass the intial  fixed cost compliance stages of their visits to quickly escalate the amount owing for profit. The burden to prove this unlawful practice is left to the individual.

OTHER PROPOSED SANCTIONS: Doorstep intimidation tactics should be outlawed and replaced with procedural sanctions which as a last resort impact on an individuals ability to obtain CREDIT. This would then prevent the individual from getting into further debt with other agencies in the future and reduce the risk of face to face confrontations.

SOLUTION VS INTIMIDATION: Doorstep enforcement action should be completely replaced with DEBT SOLUTION agencies where the approach is to SUPPORT vulnerable clients throught their financial difficulties whilst facilitating a repayment plan where appropriate. The sale of assets to repay  debts should be optional. Only then should reasonable fees be applied  for this particular service of selling goods for settlement.

PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE:  It is fundamentally wrong and conceptually unlawful that one can simply take another's goods to settle a financial debt without negotiation. Most people do not want to fall into debt.

The current doorstep enforcement practice  for profit is unethical, exploitive and intimidating to vulnerable individuals. It can also be dangerous for all involved and therefore this must be changed with immediate effect.