Theft of Tools of Trade

Luke Charters Excerpts

Wednesday 11th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[Amanda Martin]

I thank my hon. Friend for his work. He is absolutely right: the impact on reputation and on mental health goes way beyond just the tools that are stolen.

It is important to explain the reform that I am asking for. The current sentencing guidelines for tool theft do not reflect the gravity of the crime. Because most tool theft involves tools valued under £10,000, it is placed in harm category 3. Unless the courts actively use their discretion to raise the harm rating, the impact on the victim is downplayed. However, that category does not reflect the true damage, the lost income, the van repairs and the mental strain, which we have heard about from several Members today.

I am therefore asking for two simple but significant changes to the sentencing guidelines. First, I am asking the Sentencing Council to explicitly list theft of tools of trade as an example of “significant additional harm”. That would prompt magistrates to consider placing offences in harm category 2 even if the monetary value falls below £10,000, because that would reflect the emotional, reputational and business damage that these crimes cause.

[Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is a champion for the grafters of this country, who are fed up with having the tools of their trade nicked. Does she agree that the action and sentencing changes that she is asking for must apply to the tools of any trade, be they the GPS on tractors, which we have heard about, or the tools that were nicked from my barber’s? Does she agree that we must look at sentencing for theft of the tools of any trade?

[Amanda Martin]

Absolutely. To me, the issue is tools of trade. We have also been in talks with the beauty industry, because many of its members have had a van driven into their front window and had everything stolen in exactly the same way. Although the theft itself may not cost more than £10,000, having to deal with the window, the loss of work, the damage and the effect on the mental health of employees very much adds to it. The tools of all trades are really important.

The first element that I am asking for is an increase from harm category 2 to harm category 3. The second element is standardisation of the sentencing guidelines language to reflect the total financial losses—plural—instead of just the value of the stolen goods. That includes the van damage, missed contracts and lost earnings, all of which are currently invisible in the sentencing process. Taken together, those reforms would increase the chances that offenders will face more serious consequences that are truly in line with the crime that has been committed and the damage that it has caused.

I make it very clear that this is not just about building more prisons. With prison places, I know that we were left in a desperate hole after the last Government left; I also know that our Government have committed to building more prison places. This is about building more accountability and, importantly, having fewer victims.

I would be supportive of my Bill resulting in strong and meaningful community sentences, with compulsory unpaid work, electronic tagging, alcohol and sport abstinence tags, restrictions on travel, and other community solutions. Those punishments are tough and visible. Crucially, they are rehabilitative. It has been proved that they lead to fewer victims, which is what we need to ensure. They keep offenders out of the revolving door of repeated crime, and they challenge the root causes of reoffending.

Many of these thieves are not masterminds. They are opportunists. They rely on the belief that they will never be caught, or that if they are, they will never be punished. In the case of tool theft, many simply are not. We must break that cycle and restore a basic sense of justice for working people. We must ensure that the true extent of this crime is recognised by the courts.

It is time for us to listen to the people who make this country work: the plumber up at dawn, the roofer out in the cold all year, the carpenter working late, the welder braving the sparks and the painter steady on his or her ladder. They deserve to be able to work without constantly looking over their shoulder in fear of having their livelihood taken away. Reforming the sentencing guidelines to tackle the theft of trade tools is essential to valuing our tradies properly and recognising their contributions to our small business economy and to society as a whole. I urge hon. Members on both sides of the House to join my campaign. It is time we sent a clear message that tool theft will not be tolerated. We need to stand up for our tradespeople and make sure that the justice system does, too.

Regulation of the Bailiff Sector

Luke Charters Excerpts

Tuesday 11th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the regulation of the bailiff sector.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I extend my gratitude to my hon. Friend the Minister for attending this important debate.

I will begin with a story. A vulnerable disabled person answered a knock at the door. He placed the chain on before opening it slightly, only for a bailiff to force their way through. The bailiff treated him, in his words,

“like a waste of life, a loser, scum”.

Worse still, the bailiff went on to wrongfully seize equipment supplied by the local authority to help with his disability.

That is not an isolated case. Today, I will share similar stories that expose the impact of a partially regulated sector, and make the case for urgent reform. My aim is simple: I would like the Government to legislate to introduce an independent regulator for the enforcement sector.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing a debate on this critical issue. There has been a rise in television programming showing people at their lowest being evicted or having their possessions repossessed. Often, we see the despair of ordinary people, and the bailiffs sometimes show a lack of compassion that should not be the standard. Does he agree that kindness and a basic level of respect have to be the foundation? To back that up—he is right—we need the legislation.

[Mr Charters]

I thank the hon. Member for his eloquent words about what is often the most challenging moment in people’s lives. That knock on the door is a cacophony of everything that they are facing, and we have to bear that in mind.

The Enforcement Conduct Board voluntarily regulates approximately 95% of the bailiff sector. However, the 5% who refuse to sign up are responsible, in my view, for the vast majority of the worst abuses. Even within the voluntarily regulated sector, problems persist. With hundreds of thousands of visits, millions of cases and billions collected annually, bailiff enforcement is a massive operation, but according to Citizens Advice, one in three people who have had contact with a bailiff have experienced behaviour that breaks Ministry of Justice rules. Even among regulated bailiffs, 1% of visits were deemed aggressive by the ECB in recent research.

We need a fair, proportionate and efficient collection system, which is why I am calling on my hon. Friend the Minister to set out a timetable to consult on legislation to introduce statutory regulation of the sector. I call on her to put the ECB on a statutory footing—something that charities and the ECB alike support. The fact that the sector is partially unregulated drives rogue bailiffs. I hope I can convince colleagues from across the House of the need for this change. There were some reforms under the May Government, but this is our chance, as a Labour Government, to stop rogue bailiffs for good.

I turn to the link between debt and mental health. Debt does not exist in a vacuum; many people facing bailiff action are also dealing with illness, relationship breakdown or mental health struggles. One person shared their experience of over five years of pressure from bailiffs over council tax debt that they never understood and could not afford. That ultimately led to suicide attempts.

I struggled with whether to mention suicide today, but we cannot ignore these cases. Take the case of Jerome Rogers, a young man whose debt spiralled after bailiffs clamped the motorcycle he needed to work. Shortly afterwards, he took his own life. The coroner identified the debt collection agency’s actions as a contributing factor to his death.

A woman recounted how a bailiff laughed and mocked her when she mentioned her mental health struggles. And Molly, whose name I have changed, was falsely threatened with prison if she did not grant entry to a bailiff—not a permissible threat, by the way. The stress triggered flashbacks of domestic abuse that she had suffered. I know my hon. Friend the Minister does terrific work on that.

Another victim, Poppy—also not her real name—suffered such severe anxiety over bailiff debt collection practices that she had a late-term abortion due to the stress of the situation. These are real stories, and there are so many more. For too long, rogue bailiffs have not met standards when it comes to vulnerability. That is why I dedicate my campaign for bailiff reform to the victims.

The effects of aggressive bailiff practices extend to children. One parent described how bailiffs had knocked so many times that they were left with nothing to take except their young daughter’s cot. It is simply unacceptable for children to live in fear due to a lack of regulation in the bailiff sector.

As a former regulator at the Financial Conduct Authority, I understand the importance of setting clear standards. The last significant changes to bailiff regulations were introduced over a decade ago. It is time for an overhaul.

The Enforcement Conduct Board was established in 2021. It provides guidance but lacks statutory authority. Many firms voluntarily comply, but the absence of legal enforcement means that rogue bailiffs continue to operate with relative impunity. We must introduce statutory regulation to protect vulnerable customers, reduce the burden on the judicial system, improve transparency and provide a level playing field for the genuinely good bailiffs out there. Better standards would level the playing field and support good professional bailiffs to do their work.

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this incredibly important debate. He makes a powerful point about statutory underpinning and giving legal powers to the ECB. We simply cannot have rogue bailiffs marking their own homework and the ECB being reliant on funding from bailiff organisations to clamp down on their actions. Am I right that part of the reason for seeking new powers is to ensure that, instead of just revoking memberships, we can take legal action against rogue bailiffs?

[Mr Charters]

Absolutely. With that statutory underpinning, the ECB would have much greater avenues for enforcement. It has already done quite innovative work on the use of body-worn cameras and so on. Statutory underpinning would support its work even further.

This is not about punishing bailiffs who do their job correctly; it is about removing rogue operators and raising standards across the board. It is important to acknowledge the good work of the Enforcement Conduct Board, but I stress again that it is a voluntary regime, which can create problems as the ECB looks to toughen up standards. On this matter, there are points I would rather discuss privately with Ministers; there are always risks in the long-term survivability of any voluntary regime.

Let me touch on a few specific recommendations. I think we should introduce a vulnerable customers charter. Bailiff action is a distressing event for anyone, but for people with mental health problems it can be catastrophic. Aggressive debt collection leads many to take out high-interest loans, worsening their situation. A vulnerable customers charter would set out minimum standards of care. A bailiff registration service and a centralised register would help the public to verify all bailiffs’ credentials, reducing fraud and ensuring accountability.

On delegating licensing powers to a regulator, currently, bailiffs must renew their licences in court every two years. A regulator such as the ECB could take that on and streamline the process, reducing pressure on our overstretched judicial system. Rather than resorting to aggressive collection, councils should work with debt advice charities to support people before they reach crisis point. I have heard of cases of aggressive bailiff action for debts as low as £10. We should look at introducing a bailiff services compensation scheme, inspired by similar schemes, to provide clear pathways for redress in cases of clear and historical misconduct by rogue bailiffs.

I will close with one final story. Michael, a StepChange client, said of his experience:

“The bailiffs are unregulated. It’s like the Wild West. It’s absolutely unruly.”

I absolutely agree. We cannot allow this to continue. We have the opportunity to bring order to the sector and ensure fairness for debtors and bailiffs alike. Putting bailiff regulation on a statutory footing could save the taxpayer millions of pounds a year by easing the burden on the judiciary. It would immediately raise standards and protect our constituents in the most vulnerable moments of their lives, saving money and lives. I simply urge my hon. Friend the Minister to confirm today that the Government will consult on bailiff reform.

I thank the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute, the ECB, the Money Advice Trust and countless others for their thoughts ahead of the debate. I say a special thank you to StepChange: Vikki Brownridge, Richard Lane, Sophie Morris and hundreds of other StepChange staff do inspirational work to provide vital debt advice at some of the most difficult moments.

My hon. Friend the Minister has been a champion for victims of domestic abuse. Today we have learned of yet another grave injustice, which has remained in the shadows for far too long: the scandal of rogue bailiffs, who prey on some of the most vulnerable in our society. I hope that she and the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Sarah Sackman), who I also deeply admire and respect, will stand with me in ensuring that justice is done in this area.

I came to this debate with one simple aim: for the Government to legislate to introduce an independent regulator for the enforcement sector. I hope that after hearing the points I have made today, the Minister will set out that they are considering doing exactly that.