Myths and facts about enforcement procedure

Difference between a Judicial Officer and a Debt Collection Agency (“Debt Collector”)

 

Many debtors have encountered demands issued by various debt collection companies prominently labelled with the word “enforcement”. It must be emphasised that these companies have no connection with enforcement activities as regulated by the Enforcement Code and merely use, or misuse, the institutional authority associated with the position of a judicial officer as a public authority. This constitutes psychological pressure on the debtor to prompt prompt payment of the debt.

 

Such entities cannot use any statutory enforcement mechanisms that fall within the powers of a judicial officer.

If the debtor fails to pay the debt even under such pressure, the creditor ultimately has no option but to turn to a judicial officer, as a holder of public authority, to enforce the claim.

 

A judicial officer is obliged, in the performance of enforcement and other activities, to use the designation “judicial officer”. The designation “judicial officer” or “enforcement office”, or any derived forms thereof, or any designation capable of causing confusion with such terms, may not be used by any other person. Any person who does not carry out enforcement of enforceable titles on the basis of law is not authorised to describe their activity as “enforcement”, “execution”, or “enforcement activity”, nor to use derived terms or any designation capable of causing confusion with such activities.

 

Any misuse of these terms or impersonation of a judicial officer, or unlawful performance of enforcement activities, may be subject to a fine of up to CZK 200,000 for natural persons or CZK 3,000,000 for entrepreneurs and legal entities.

 

Powers of Judicial Officers vs. Debt Collectors (Fraudulent “Enforcers” and Collection Agencies)

 

A judicial officer is a person entrusted by the State with an enforcement office. Enforcement is carried out on the basis of a court decision initiating enforcement proceedings and is governed by the Enforcement Code and the Civil Procedure Code. Judicial officers are vested with statutory powers.

 

Where a judicial officer enforces a monetary claim (e.g. unpaid loan, public transport fine, police fine, unpaid maintenance or rent), they may use several enforcement methods, including wage garnishment and other income deductions, attachment of receivables, establishment of an enforcement lien, sale of movable or immovable property, administration of an enterprise, and suspension of a driving licence (in cases of unpaid child maintenance).

 

Judicial officers may also enforce non-monetary obligations, i.e. obligations other than payment of a monetary sum. These include, for example, demolition of an unauthorised structure or eviction of immovable property. Such enforcement may be carried out by eviction, removal of items, division of co-owned property, or performance of works and services.

The activities of judicial officers must not be confused with those of so-called debt collectors, i.e. various collection agencies and recovery companies. These entities have no statutory powers under the Enforcement Code, despite attempts to create such an impression in their communications.

 

They do not have authority to enter premises or dwellings, to inventory movable assets, or to attach wages or bank accounts. They have no legal basis to interfere with any property of the debtor.

Such entities are often non-transparent, charge fees under unofficial rules, and are not subject to any regulatory or supervisory authority.

 

Judicial officers, by contrast, are subject to strict supervision by the Chamber of Judicial Officers of the Czech Republic, the Ministry of Justice, and the courts. They are subject to disciplinary liability and may be removed from office in cases of serious misconduct.

 

Judicial Enforcement vs. Debt Collection Misconduct

 

Judicial enforcement is the exercise of state authority through a judicial officer in the manner prescribed by law.

A judicial officer may only act once there is an enforceable enforcement title, typically a court decision issued in contentious proceedings. Enforcement begins upon a motion filed by the creditor. If granted, the court appoints a judicial officer to conduct enforcement proceedings.

 

Judicial Officers Do Not Decide on the Existence of Debt

 

A judicial officer does not determine whether a debt exists, who owes it, or how much is owed. They only enforce enforceable decisions issued by courts or other competent authorities. The judicial officer acts on the basis of a court appointment.

 

“Judicial Officers Target Only the Poor” – A Misconception

 

It is a widespread misconception that judicial officers selectively target poor persons. The enforcement motion is always filed by the creditor, who selects the judicial officer. The judicial officer does not choose either creditors or debtors and is not aware of the debtor’s financial situation at the time of appointment; this is established only during the enforcement procedure.

 

“Judicial Officers Sell Property Below Value” – A Misconception

 

Statutory rules require that movable and immovable property be sold primarily through public auctions. Exceptions apply only to perishable goods and certain cultural heritage items.

 

Auction rules are strictly regulated by law. Starting prices are set at one third of the appraised value for movable property and two thirds for immovable property, with reductions possible in repeated auctions. Valuation is generally based on expert appraisal.

 

Judicial officers cannot arbitrarily set sale prices. Auctions are published on a publicly accessible auction portal to ensure transparency.

 

Public Authorities vs. Judicial Enforcement Costs

 

Municipalities may enforce claims themselves under administrative or tax enforcement procedures, but often choose judicial enforcement after careful consideration. All enforcement costs are borne by the debtor.

If municipalities conducted enforcement themselves, they would need dedicated staff and infrastructure funded from public budgets regardless of recovery success. Judicial officers, however, are not funded from public budgets; their remuneration is paid from enforcement costs.

 

Judicial Officers Are Subject to Supervision

 

Judicial officers are bound by the Constitution, laws, and court decisions. Supervision is exercised by the Chamber of Judicial Officers, the Ministry of Justice, district court presidents, and enforcement courts in individual cases.

Supervisory authorities conduct regular inspections and review complaints. Judicial officers are among the most strictly regulated professions. In cases of serious misconduct, disciplinary action may be brought before the Supreme Administrative Court, which may impose sanctions or remove the officer from office.