Bailiff says he has an "arrest warrant"

Commercial bailiff firms lack the authority to detain, confine, or convey individuals in custody.

Marston (Holdings) Limited employ law enforcement-like language in a misleading manner, suggesting to individuals that they possess the ability to arrest and detain them.

In reality, this pertains to a no-bail warrant pursuant to section 117 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980, which solely authorizes the endorsement of bail. It represents an informal avenue for locating debtors who are absconding.

If you see a document like the example below:

Do not respond

Do not sign anything

Never give or "confirm" your name

Never give your current address

Record everything on video using your mobile

Tell them to quietly leave

Marston (Holdings) Limited, uses the section 117 no-bail warrant as a deceptive "arrest warrant" tactic to ascertain your whereabouts and acquire your contact details, including your mobile number. This approach serves as a method for locating absent debtors and is inconsistent with official government directions.

Official Guidelines:

The Government has issued authoritative guidelines titled "Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014," wherein Paragraph 12 stipulates:

Creditors must not issue a warrant knowing that the debtor is not at the address, as a means of tracing the debtor at no cost.

It is imperative that a bailiff refrains from suggesting they possess enforcement powers when they are aware that such authority does not exist.

In September 2016, an incident occurred involving a bailiff from Marston (Holdings) Limited, a private limited company, who attempted to "arrest" a debtor. Subsequently, the debtor restrained the bailiff until police arrives. Although the police detained the debtor initially, he was ultimately exonerated under the grounds of self-defence and received compensation for wrongful arrest. This case bears resemblance to precedents such as Green v Bartram [1830] 4C&P and Ffoulkes vs Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [1998] 3 All ER 705. Presently, the relevant legal provision can be found at section 26(5) of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.

Official Guidelines:

The Government published official guidelines called, Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014, of which Paragraph 20 states:

Bailiffs cannot falsely imply that action can or will be taken when legally it cannot be taken by that agent.

When a Magistrates' Court issues an genuine arrest warrant, it does so pursuant to section 83 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, and its execution is solely within the purview of an on-duty police officer wearing the correct uniform.

The Law:

Section 83 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 states:

Process for securing attendance of offender

(1)A magistrates’ court may, for the purpose of enabling inquiry to be made under section 82 above or for securing the attendance of an offender at a hearing required to be held by subsection (5) of that section—

(a)issue a summons requiring the offender to appear before the court at the time and place appointed in the summons; or

(b)issue a warrant to arrest him and bring him before the court.

(2)On the failure of the offender to appear before the court in answer to a summons issued under this section, or by virtue of Schedule 5 to the Courts Act 2003 the court may issue a warrant to arrest him and bring him before the court.

(3)A warrant issued under this section may be executed in like manner, and the like proceedings may be taken with a view to its execution, in any part of the United Kingdom, as if it had been issued under section 13 above.

Example Marston Holdings fake "arrest warrant"