ECB Insight Report 2026: Data on the Enforcement Industry
One of the key benefits of independent oversight of the enforcement sector is the opportunity to gather and publish objective, independent evidence on how this sector is operating and what the impact is on people and businesses.
In 2024 we started this process when we published research that found that the Ministry of Justice’s National Standards were being breached in 6% of doorstep interactions.
We are now sharing a significant new body of evidence in the shape of our first ever Insight Report, which we published on 20 January and is available on our website here.
Key findings
The Insight Report contains a lot of data points and I encourage everyone with an interest in this area to fill up the kettle and allow some time to properly go through and digest its content.
As an evidence-based oversight body, the findings of this report will be informing our future work, in pursuit of our mission to make sure that everyone who experiences enforcement action is treated fairly.
For now, I wanted to share some overarching reflections on what the report shows.
Firstly, the Report underlines the size and importance of the enforcement sector. It shows that in a six month period, accredited enforcement firms received £3.7m cases. And in this same period, they collected more than £527m, the vast majority of which is money owed to public bodies. This is a sector that is making a significant contribution to the public coffers.
The report sheds light on what stage cases are being settled at through the enforcement process:
- Compliance stage – 36%
- Enforcement Stage – 60%
- Sale and disposal – 3%
A fascinating finding is the differences, across firms, that sit behind these headline figures – even for similar profiles of work. For example, for Road Traffic work we found the following ranges across firms:
- Compliance – 17% to 54%
- Enforcement – 41% to 71%
- Sale and disposal – 0% to 10%
Everyone recognises that it is best for creditors and much better for people experiencing enforcement if collection can be made at the compliance stage – without a doorstep visit. There may be good reasons for these differences but it is definitely something we will want to explore further in our future oversight visits.
As for firms’ complaints handling, they received 4,961 complaints in the reporting period. Whilst this may seem a large number, it equates to a complaint rate of 0.1% of all cases. This seems very low – especially given the findings of our 2024 research that 6% of doorstep interactions were in breach of standards. We now provide an independent second tier complaint service, and the report shows that we are upholding (at least in part) a significant proportion of the complaints which are escalated to us. So the evidence in this report demonstrates there is much work to be done to improve complaint handling across the sector.
A concerning finding is how regularly Enforcement Agents are facing threats and even physical assaults (184 physical assaults in 6 months). I am keen to look into what more we can do to support efforts to protect the safety and well-being of Enforcement Agents.
Breaches of ECB standards
Encouragingly, most enforcement firms and agents are following the rules that we set and carrying out their work responsibly.
However, the Report does uncover some concerning behaviours. We have upheld half of the complaints that we have investigated so far. And through our complaints and compliance work, we have found some enforcement agents behaving aggressively, overstating powers, failing to consider health issues and even clamping cars used by disabled people. We have also been addressing the overcharging of members of the public at a large enforcement firm.
The report includes real case studies which illustrate some of the harmful practices we have found and how they impact on people. These examples represent the minority of cases but we are shining a light on them so that everyone can do their bit to ensure that this sort of behaviour is stopped.
It also remains of significant concern to see a finding that Body Worn Video footage was missing in 9.5% of enforcement stage complaints that firms investigated. It is a requirement of our standards for BWV to be working for all visits and we will be taking steps to address this.
Enforcement Agent misconduct
10 Enforcement Agents were dismissed by their firms for misconduct related to enforcement practices, yet only two Enforcement Agents had their certificate revoked by the courts – the other eight may well be re-employed by other firms and back on the doorstep. This is why we believe that the ECB should be given the power to authorise individual Enforcement Agents – so that those who prove themselves unfit to do the job can be stopped from knocking on doors.
I know that some people oppose the ECB taking on authorisation of individual Enforcement Agents but I hope we can all agree that the status quo is not working – allowing bad Enforcement Agents to continue working harms vulnerable people, creditors and the majority of the enforcement industry who are doing things right.
What are we doing in response?
The evidence in this report highlights the continuing importance of our mission to ensure that everyone who experiences enforcement action is treated fairly. In response, we are:
- Scaling up our complaints team to allow us to handle the volume and type of complaints that we expect to see over the coming year. This is essential to ensure that proper action is taken to address complaints and not only deliver redress for directly affected individuals but make sure that systems, processes and behaviour are consistently improved where they need to be.
- Increasing our compliance monitoring team, which plays a crucial role in proactively monitoring compliance with our standards and ensuring we are able to respond effectively to breaches when they are identified.
We are also close to finalising and launching our new standards on Vulnerability and Ability to Pay, which will set a new and higher bar in these essential areas.
The enforcement sector has demonstrated a desire to root out poor practice through supporting the establishment of independent oversight. I am hoping this Report will provide an added incentive for the industry to work with the ECB, including through its trade bodies, to ensure consistently high standards and stamp out harmful practice.
What next?
We’ll be scheduling some workshops with the industry to go through the findings in this report in more detail.
We expect annual Insight Reports to become a regular feature of our oversight and the volume, reliability and value of the data should increase significantly as the volume of complaints that we are handling continues to grow.
It remains very important that the Government deliver on their commitment to give the ECB statutory underpinning. All the evidence in the report comes from the 97% of enforcement companies who have accepted ECB oversight – there are still thousands of people every year experiencing enforcement action by firms who don’t sign up to our standards or accept our oversight. This is unacceptable and we will continue to press for ECB accreditation to be a requirement of working in this sensitive industry.
Look out for the consultation on our draft Business Plan and budget for 2026/27 in February for more detail on our future workplan and what we will be doing in response to the evidence set out in this report.
Catherine Brown
Chair, Enforcement Conduct Board