---

Collection of Fines (Final Scheme) Order 2006

rose to move, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Collection of Fines (Final Scheme) Order 2006 [25th Report from the Joint Committee]. The noble Lord said: The Collection of Fines (Final Scheme) Order will bring into force the final fines collection scheme, which offers a radically improved structure for the collection of financial penalties in the magistrates’ courts. It makes bold changes to the way that fines are enforced, with new roles for courts staff and new sanctions to ensure that offenders comply with the orders of the court. The Government have improved the enforcement of criminal penalties, making fines a credible sentence. More than a million fines are issued each year in the magistrates’ courts and so it is essential that the judiciary, public and offenders believe that they are effective. Magistrates need to be confident that fines will be paid and rigorously enforced so that offenders are suitably punished for the crimes that they have committed. The new scheme, together with other projects, has already brought about significant improvements to fines collection during piloting and the first few months of national implementation. We have also given the magistrates’ courts better ability to trace defaulters through access to the Police National Computer, the DWP customer information system and the credit reference agency Equifax. We are creating a national enforcement service to introduce a framework for improved enforcement and compliance with orders of the court, with a distinct and clearly identifiable body of enforcement professionals that will focus on improving performance across all aspects of criminal enforcement. Over the past few years, the collection of fines has improved significantly from a payment rate of 55 per cent in 2002–03 to 83 per cent in 2005–06. This means that in 2005–06, the net figures were £282 million in fines imposed and £234 million in fines collected. The new scheme will help to continue and sustain that improvement and ensure that fines are paid, and compensation is collected and paid out to victims promptly. The scheme includes a number of important changes to the way in which financial penalties, including compensation and costs, are enforced. The entire process of enforcement has been restructured, with a greater focus on up-front enforcement to encourage payment. A key part of that is the new role of the fines officer, who manages the enforcement process and makes use of new powers: to set time to pay conditions after the offender is sentenced; to vary payment terms in favour of the offender; to decide on the most appropriate sanction or next step in the case of non-payment; and to refer cases back to court, as appropriate. As the majority of these responsibilities were previously undertaken by the magistrates in a ““fines court””, there will be considerable savings in court time, allowing the Bench to deal with more serious or complicated cases. This supports the Government’s belief that once the court has imposed the fine, the enforcement of it is primarily an administrative process. By making enforcement decisions themselves, fines officers will ensure that those who attempt to dodge their fines will be dealt with quickly and forced to pay with new and strengthened sanctions. And for those who genuinely cannot pay, the fines officer will be able to vary payment terms in their favour or refer them to the court in order to make an unpaid work order in lieu of their fine. A number of new and improved sanctions are available for the fines officer and the court to use. If an offender has already defaulted on an existing fine, the court when sentencing must consider making an attachment of earnings order which instructs their employer to make deductions from their salary to pay the sum owed. Alternatively, if the offender is receiving benefits, the court must consider making an application for deductions from benefits. This means that deductions from benefits of up to £5 a week can be taken by the Department for Work and Pensions from jobseeker’s allowance and income support to pay the fine. These two methods of deduction can also be made with the offender’s consent. In fact, many offenders ask for deductions as they find it an easy way to structure their payments. Sanctions can also be considered by the fines officer if the offender subsequently defaults on the fine. Before the Courts Act these measures were used infrequently, but during piloting they have proved to be cheap, simple and popular ways of ensuring that offenders pay their fines and compensation. In addition to these enforcement measures, the fines collection scheme includes new sanctions which the fines officer can apply if the offender fails to pay. Their vehicle can be clamped and, if necessary, sold to pay the fine. Piloting has shown this to be very effective. Often the mere threat of clamping, which applies regardless of whether the original offence was related to motoring, will elicit payment from the defaulter. Their name can be added to the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines, which may affect their ability to obtain credit and access to other services or employment. Again, in piloting this has been a useful sanction, with the threat of registration being significant for many defaulters to pay their fine in full. Existing sanctions are also available to fines officers, such as the issuing of a distress warrant to seize an offender’s goods to the value of the fine. However, if the fines officer has exhausted all these options and the payment is not forthcoming, he can refer the case back to the magistrates for further enforcement action. This could be to increase the fine or to consider whether imprisonment is appropriate for the most serious and wilful defaulters. As I mentioned, these changes have all been extensively piloted. From March 2004 the fines collection scheme was piloted in five areas: Cambridgeshire, Cheshire, Cumbria, Devon and Cornwall, and South Yorkshire. The purpose of the pilots was to test the measures in the scheme and to assess their impact on enforcement prior to national implementation. The pilot evaluation shows that they were a resounding success. Halfway through the six-month pilot, the payment rate in the pilot areas was 95 per cent compared with a rate of 80 per cent for non-pilot areas. At the end of the pilot the payment rate had risen to 100 per cent, whereas the non-pilot rate was 78 per cent. Aside from improved levels of collection, there were further qualitative benefits. Court time has been saved through the transfer of business from fines courts to fines officers; financial means information is now of much better quality, enabling improvements in subsequent enforcement; and enforcement is more structured and rigorous thanks to new sanctions and fines officers’ powers. Finally, fines officers are able to help defaulters by pointing them towards debt advice if necessary. The order also contains new provisions specifically to speed up the payment of compensation to victims. When sentenced, if an offender is ordered to pay compensation, the court must either make an attachment of earnings order or a deduction from benefits if appropriate. This differs from the existing scheme in that it is made regardless of whether the offender has defaulted. The purpose of this new proposal is to ensure that victims receive compensation payments more quickly and with greater certainty. It will make a significant contribution towards achieving a key government priority of the criminal justice system in which the needs and concerns of victims and witnesses are central. This new scheme has proved to offer a new and better way to ensure that more fines are collected in magistrates’ courts. It will also ensure that compensation is paid to the victims of crime more quickly. I am pleased to tell the Committee that the scheme has the enthusiastic support of the magistrates’ courts and their enforcements teams. I commend this order and I beg to move. Moved, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Collection of Fines (Final Scheme) Order 2006 [25th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Evans of Temple Guiting.)