Issues of global change in the process of forced execution began to be discussed in mass before the entry into force of the new Law of Ukraine "On Enforcement Proceedings" (hereinafter - the Law). The long-awaited adoption of this Law, which reformed the system of enforcement of court decisions and other bodies, finally enabled us to realize the aspirations of many people for the "bright future" of the forced execution process.
A lot of ordinary citizens were expecting global changes, as well as a large number of people working in the bodies of the state executive service. The first hoped for quick and high-quality implementation, the second - either for unloading, or for the opportunity to change the status and go to work in the private sector.
During the whole period of the adoption of this Law, a significant number of legislators and political representatives sparkled and vigorously debated future changes and staked on global reforms. What actually happened? Did we receive such unnecessary changes as we hoped? Have private executives become a real competition for government executives?
Yes, changes have taken place. However, not as fast as we were promised. After all, setting up any new process requires too much effort and time. Private performers have begun their new private compulsory execution path.
Both ordinary citizens and representatives of big business have chosen the choice between the realm of execution - public or private. There was a possibility to change the state executor to a private one.
It should be noted that, as of today, there has been no global outflow of executive proceeding from the state executive service. At the time of the adoption of the Law, it was felt that, almost the next day, all possible enforcement proceedings, with the exception of certain categories, would be passed on to private performers. But in reality this did not happen. Of course, the process of presenting executive documents to perform to private performers, as well as the transfer of executive proceedings from the bodies of the state executive service to private performers, but in a mass scale, this phenomenon still did not.
In comparing, the following should be noted for further resolution of the issue of enforcement of an executive act between private and public executives.
Prior to the introduction of the private enforcement agency, the burden of enforcement was imposed on state executives. Talking about poor quality and untimely work of the bodies of the state executive service, as well as the unprofessional nature of officials, will not be entirely correct. Of course, in practice there have been repeated situations that confirmed these facts. First of all, this was due to excessive drudgery of state executives, a large number of very young specialists (who lack sufficient work experience), low wages and, in some cases, lack of proper material support for state executive service bodies (lack of brands, envelopes , paper, cartridges for printers, motor vehicles or combustible fuel materials, etc.). Taken together, the specified circumstances and the not very high level of work of some officials of the bodies of the state executive service led to mistrust, antipathy and negative attitude towards the state executive service.
Private executives begin their work on a "clean sheet", first of all, by taking and executing enforcement proceedings on the basis of new (which were not yet in execution) executive documents. Certainly, some of the executions that were executed in the state executive service are also being transmitted, but still the burden of private performers remains significantly lower than the burden of state executives. Thus, the private executor will be able to devote more time, attention and perseverance to the full realization of enforcement proceedings.
The introduction of the Institute of Private Performers provides the opportunity to receive services for forced execution at a higher and more comfortable level. What is this manifestation of? Firstly, in a supportive, calm and respectful attitude towards the recoverers. In this case, the payer (or his representative) acts as not only the party in the enforcement proceedings, but also in the role of the client. It is necessary to consider that the client has the right to choose between a public or private executor and directly between private executors (except for some aspects, established by the rules of the current legislation, when the jurisdiction or category of the case provides for a clearly defined body, for execution to which must be presented executive document).
Secondly, when applying for forced execution to a private performer, you get a lot of benefits: the ability to appoint a meeting at a time convenient for you (of course, private watchers are also installed, but if necessary and free time, a private performer can accept the payer in unpredictable for this time); the absence of any queues; positive and friendly attitude; the absence of additional time spent on the registration of correspondence and the expectation of a certain period (which can usually take from one to several days), until the document submitted for registration comes directly to the state executor (due to the presence of the process of "seeing" the documents by the leaders).
In addition, the private executor can provide advice, for example, on compliance of the executive document with the requirements provided by the current legislation. In the case of certain non-compliance of the executive document with the requirements, the private executor can immediately indicate them and give them the opportunity to apply for their corrections without losing the time for issuing and sending a decision to refuse to open an enforcement proceeding.
Of course, you can apply for advice also to the bodies of the state executive service, but it will be possible to do this only at the reception hours. In addition, it should be noted that before the filing date for the application for enforcement, the taxpayer is not able to get acquainted with the state executor, whose performance will have an enforcement record. Occasionally there are cases when the legal positions of several specialists are very different. Thus, obtaining information (advisory) assistance from one state executor can not guarantee that the position of another state executor, to whom the enforcement proceedings will fall, will be identical.
Lack of time-consuming reporting by private executives gives him the opportunity to spend more time on performance. Also, given that private executives, unlike state ones, do not have rates (wages), and their income depends solely on the effectiveness of their performance (percentage of the amount collected), it can be concluded that private executives are forced, even for the sake of obtaining personal income will make the decision, making maximum effort and time.
When deciding whether to choose a private or public contractor, one important point should be taken into account. Among government executives there are many skilled professionals who have a high level of enforcement due to global experience. At the same time, private executives have a certain number of people who have never worked at the state executive service, so they need some time to develop a new sphere, as well as to obtain enforcement experience and practice.
Posted by Marina Sergeeva
Source: Legal newspaper
(translated using google translate)