MP Caroline Ansell has expressed concern Eastbourne Borough Council is using debt collection companies to chase council tax arrears, sometimes for sums as low as £51.
Caroline has become aware the authority is sending in bailiffs from the companies for such small amounts after she was approached by local organisations and people. EBC has subsequently confirmed the policy.
The MP has called on the council to change the policy and implement a higher threshold given the cost-of-living challenges across the town.
Neighbouring Wealden District Council uses its own in-house enforcement team and would usually only visit tenants if the outstanding sum is more than £500 but with a view to secure some form of payment arrangement to prevent further enforcement action.
“I am very concerned the council appears to be acting in this very arbitrary way pursuing people in arrears for very small sums,” said Caroline.
“The challenging situation regarding energy bills and inflation should be prompting the council to act in a more benevolent manner.
“The Liberal Democrats running the council made the front page with their cost-of-living ‘declaration’ all the while it seems sending in bailiffs to struggling tenants for such small sums. This is inconsistent in the least and I think I am being kind when I use those words.
“Those receiving a knock on the door from bailiffs may well be vulnerable and this is an added stress. I ask the council to urgently look at this policy and the harm it is doing and to do all it can to help those who are vulnerable.
"I would also like to know how much it is costing the council to employ bailiffs to undertake this process and why EBC is undertaking this policy when a neighbouring council is pursuing a much more sympathetic one with a threshold for action ten times higher.”
Conservative Councillor Kshama Shore added: “The council needs to collect tax to pay for local services, clearly, and that council leaders have allowed millions of pounds in debt arrears to build up is poor but sending bailiffs in to recover £51, from a potentially vulnerable household, is clearly very wrong. I support the call for change.”
