What is the difference between CIVEA and the ECB – and why are both needed?

What is the difference between CIVEA and the ECB – and why are both needed?

The launch of the Enforcement Conduct Board (ECB) in 2022 was the culmination of a ground-breaking partnership between the enforcement industry and the debt advice sector. The establishment of the ECB was heralded as a landmark moment and the next step towards an independent, industry oversight body. But why was this required when CIVEA, the trade association representing civil enforcement, exists – and what role do both now play in the future of enforcement?

History and formation

CIVEA is the principal trade association representing civil enforcement agencies employing around 1500 certificated enforcement agents in England and Wales. The organisation represents approximately 40 companies that make up more than 95% of the entire enforcement industry. CIVEA’s members work to enforce civil debt on behalf of local authorities and His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) including council tax, business rates, road traffic and parking penalties, magistrates’ court fines, employment tribunal awards, child support payments, B2B and commercial rent arrears.

CIVEA was a founding member and driving force behind the Enforcement Oversight Working Group, which brought together representatives of the industry and debt advice sector in a unique partnership, building on common ground and shared objectives for people with problem debt. In May 2021, a report informed by the working group called Taking Control for Good, included a framework document for an industry-funded, independent supervisory body for enforcement agents. This collaboration ultimately led to the formation of the Enforcement Conduct Board (ECB).

The ECB has been tasked with driving up standards in the enforcement sector, building on the National Standards, monitoring performance and conduct in the enforcement industry and issuing firm and proportionate sanctions for non-compliance. It aims to increase accountability across the enforcement sector, primarily through supervisory activities and reviews submitted to the Secretary of State for Justice. The ECB is now involved in the complaints process across the enforcement sector, issuing guidance to enforcement agencies to ensure consistency in complaints handling and redress, as well as driving improvements in the treatment of vulnerable individuals, building on work already undertaken throughout the industry.

The ECB is not an economic regulator like Ofgem, Ofwat, Ofcom or the regulator for rail companies and airlines. It has no remit to influence commercial arrangements or market forces. It is an adjudicator to ensure fair treatment of all those involved in the enforcement process. It’s not an easy role.

How is CIVEA distinct from the ECB?

The role of the ECB is akin to the Lending Standards Board for the financial sector, which has been very successful and is the model that the working group had in mind when discussing an independent oversight body for enforcement firms. The finance sector is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, but the Lending Standards Board complements the work of industry regulators, rather than duplicating it. This balance also exists between CIVEA and the ECB.

The role of CIVEA remains to represent the interest of the industry and unlike the ECB, it can be partisan in this remit. CIVEA aims to create the best market and level playing field on which its members can compete and grow their businesses. We have a specific challenge to inform and lobby an incoming government about the challenges we face with revenue collection for public bodies. The ECB has no obligations to this agenda.

CIVEA also has a unique role as a communication channel for the industry with government officials. Unlike the ECB, which succeeds through its impartiality, CIVEA aims to ensure that Ministers recognise how essential enforcement is, to ensure that social justice is maintained and local taxation is effective. We have a specific lobbying objective to address the unfair use of social and added value in public procurement (Civil enforcement is subject to fixed fees and cannot flex the costs of delivery. When firms are asked to commit to hundreds of thousands of pounds of cost to secure a contract, there is no direct benefit to people who owe the council and is anti-competitive in a fixed-price market.).

For too long, the enforcement industry has been judged on unsubstantiated and unverified anecdotal evidence. Previous Ministry of Justice (MOJ) reports that have reviewed the industry typically state that most firms are performing well and meeting conduct requirements. But the minority of cases, are often wrongly used to define the majority.

Why was the ECB necessary when CIVEA already existed?

Collaboration is key to industry reform and CIVEA is responsible for stakeholder engagement and education to improve knowledge and perception of the industry. It is still the role of the trade association to balance regulations with flexible responses to individual needs. But the ECB is in a unique position where it can collate and present evidence about the enforcement process without being perceived as biased. A clear strategy with foundations rooted in collaboration can only be good for the industry and CIVEA is excited to continue supporting this mission.

The ECB is not a consumer champion or an industry ambassador, it has no obligation to promote the industry market. That is a crucial role of CIVEA, challenging public, political and media misconceptions in support of its member firms. The ECB simply presents facts according to the evidence it obtains. It must interpret any data impartially, whereas CIVEA will seek to analyse and use data to challenge outdated narratives, shining a light on industry developments.

The ECB has a fundamental role in monitoring standards in the enforcement industry by supervising conduct and reporting on the evidence it attains. Trust is essential to these aims and this can only be built through strong relationships with enforcement firms. Civil enforcement is complex and nuanced work, which the ECB should always seek to understand before seeking to intervene.

CIVEA drives the strategic direction of industry reform and will continue to lead initiatives to professionalise the enforcement sector. For example, addressing the shortfall in EAs and the challenges of recruitment and retention. CIVEA is tasked with ensuring that training standards remain high and that the industry represents contemporary attitudes in society in terms of diversity, environment, social and governance.

The ECB cannot be a crusader for higher standards, rather, it must offer a neutral voice that comments only on the facts. CIVEA on the other hand can and will champion the industry, providing opposition to unfounded critique in ways that an independent oversight body cannot. As an industry, we must support the ECB to ensure that the evidence it obtains is robust and complete. From its formation, the ECB represented a rare partnership of the enforcement industry and the debt advice sector, with support from the Centre of Social Justice (CSJ). To succeed, it must now continue to operate impartially in the space in between.

To learn more about CIVEA and the role the trade association has in shaping the future of the enforcement sector, please visit https://www.civea.co.uk/