As mentioned in our conversation with Mr. Van der Meer, the offices in Holland are divided in small, medium and large ones. The training program included acquaintance with the three types. So, we set out for the office of Jacobs van Mehelen in the little town of Zutpen. According to Dutch standards, this is a small office. Its total staff is 13. Mr. Van Mehelen has two assistants.

“All processes in this office are automated. This is necessary because each judicial officer has an average of 13 thousand visitors. For a visit on site 7 pages of documentation are made and this, together with the papers the client presents, means that annually the judicial officer deals with over 200 thousands documents.”
We were told this by Andres Mol, office manager, who presented before his Bulgarian colleagues the computer system of the office.

To handle all these documents in the office they use a program called EUROFIX. The new enforcement proceedings that are initiated at the demand of the clients are entered in the information system. It is linked to other systems, for example the court system. Each court provides daily and freely information on the started enforcement proceedings. The system also has a connection to the debtor’s employer, from where it receives information at the moment of payment of his monthly salary. In Holland there is a minimum income, below which the debtor cannot be imposed takings. This amount is set by the government and at the moment it is about 300 euro.

We are sorry to leave the wonderful town of Zutpen and the Mehelens. Strongly impressed by what we had seen, we set out to our next destination: the so-called medium office of John Wiseborn, an emblematic figure of the Royal Dutch Association not only for his activity as a board member but also because of his owe-striking and uncompromising attitude to violations of the professional standards.

Four partners – judicial officers, 11 assistants, 12 lawyers and a total of 85 employees work in the three offices. The judicial officers act in the territory of the whole country, thus, according to John Wiseborn, the clients shop at one desk.

The office is specialized in the collection of higher sums. Its information system contains 18,000 files. Each electronic document has the status of an official document; after completion of the enforcement proceedings the original documents are sent to the creditor, and digital records are kept at the office. This saves time and saves from felling many trees, necessary for the production of paper, says John Wiseborn. What is more, every client can log in the system and review his files. To see the initial debt, the dates and size of payments, the name of the debtor but not his address. The office gives the debtor a chance to get information electronically too, he has to make an enquiry and the system sends him an automatic reply.

As a member of the board of the Royal Dutch Association, the engagements of John Wiseborn include training of judicial officers and the issues related to professional conduct.

Mr. Wiseborn, as far as I understand, you are responsible for the so-called disciplinary proceedings in the Chamber?
The national organization files complaints with the Disciplinary Court in connection with judicial officers’ conduct, which breaches the professional norms from a purely technical point of view, against which the citizens normally do not lodge complaints. For instance, when personal information of third persons comes to the knowledge of the private judicial officer in the execution of his duties, if this information is made available to other persons this constitutes a breach of professional standards. In such cases, the national organization draws the complaints, but to guarantee objectivity, the proceedings are conducted by an independent lawyer.

How many disciplinary proceedings do you have annually and what are the most frequent types?
Their number is not large – 6 or 7 – and they usually concern the protection of personal information and the undertaking on the part of the judicial officers of obligations they are not in a position to fulfil.

How do you decide which of the complaints you file should go to the Disciplinary Court?
When we receive information of a lodged complaint, we discuss it at a board meeting. If doubt should arise whether certain conduct is appropriate or not, we have a practice to seek the recommendation of the Disciplinary Court and to announce its opinion, because it concerns the activity of all judicial officers.

What danger does the absence of financial control pose?
The existence of a mechanism of financial control is of paramount importance. It guarantees the ministry and the persons concerned that they can have trust and security in the financial activity of judicial officers. Therefore its development is strongly recommendable.

We say goodbye to John Wiseborn, who promises to visit Bulgaria again soon, and we set out to Rotterdam. With its 750 thousand inhabitants, Rotterdam is the second largest city in Holland. It is situated on a branch of the Maas River and its harbour is the second largest in the world after that of Shanghai.

In Rotterdam we will visit the office of judicial officer Miranda Maas, with a staff of 250. Maas-Delta has 7 shareholders – judicial officers, 21 aspirant judicial officers, 11 lawyers, 5 offices and three directors. One of them is Miranda Maas, her field is human resources and professional standards.

In 2006 the office published 90,000 court documents. The system stores over 80,000 files. The main clients of the office are banks, insurance companies, hospitals, municipalities, health insurance funds.

The motto of the office of Miranda Maas is: Our company must exceed the client’s expectations, the quality of service is of extreme importance for the company’s prestige.

Mrs. Maas, as a board member, you were on the working group which developed the quality standards, something very important that you apply in your office. Please tell us a bit more about it.
The development of the professional standards started about 8-9 years ago, when the expansion of the small offices began. Inherent to all organizations in the process of growth is the need for specific rules for this development. Therefore the professional organization asked the board for advice how to regulate the expansion in the branch. We were acquainted with the ISO standards and we used them as a basis. Their introduction in combination with the professional norms was a good beginning. In 2001 we developed a whole set of norms, which judicial officers were to introduce in the practice of their offices and on the basis of which to build up their manual of good quality standards. This is how the process began, and now we are discussing the judicial officers’ uprightness and incorruptibility. The new discussion generated the need of additional rules. Therefore we are presently considering the introduction of new norms regarding solvency, liquidity, etc.

Are there things you have absolutely no disputes about, i.e. what is for example impermissible in the profession?
Last November a large-scale meeting was held, where it was decided it is unacceptable judicial officers to buy debts from debtors. It wasn’t even necessary to discuss it. The decision on this matter stems from the basic requirement for the judicial officers’ work – impartiality and conformity with the law.

In Bulgaria private judicial enforcement is making its first steps. It was received with much public comments. What would you recommend to your Bulgarian colleagues, who are now going into the business, of course they can only dream of having such an office as yours.
I can advise them to resist the temptation and not let money control their business, because they are judicial officers in the first place. And always, before taking a decision, to ask themselves if they are independent and unbiased in their actions.

In the Dutch model of judicial enforcement financial control plays a very important role. The Financial Supervision Bureau carries out current preventive financial control on the notaries and judicial officers. This includes review and analysis of the personal and company financial information of the audited. Judicial officers submit standard annual and quarterly reports of their liabilities to third persons. Based on these documents, the Financial Supervision Bureau distributes the officers into different risk groups and makes inspections on site, if necessary.

Anton Snoeren is an investigating inspector at the Financial Supervision Bureau.

Mr. Snoeren, what demanded the establishment of the Bureau?
The Bureau was founded in the late 1930s, after an unpleasant professional incident at the notary’s office. In 1999 a new law on the notaries’ work was adopted in Holland, the Financial Bureau was officially approved and started functioning as an independent supervisory body, which controlled the activity of the notaries, and since 2001 of the private judicial officers too. I have been with the Bureau since 2002.

We have an independent status and although we are financed by the Ministry of Justice, we are not part of another institution. We take our own decisions.

What is it that judicial officers violate most often?
Two are the most common violations: failure to submit the annual financial statement, and absence of sufficient funds in the special bank account. In Bulgaria, I think, this is provided in Article 25 – Bank Account. This kind of violations occur in the event of insufficient liquidity and solvency.

Private judicial enforcement is a very new business in our country. What would you recommend in the way of financial control? We don’t have such a mechanism yet.
A supervisory body should be set up by all means, whether it will be independent or not is a different matter. It may be part of the Ministry of Justice or a separate institution, but in any case you need to have financial inspectors, familiar with the activity of the judicial officers. The failure to establish financial control may lead to serious perturbations and problems. And the financial problems and misappropriation on the part of one would have a negative effect on the image of the entire profession. This is why judicial officers should be supporting the introduction of financial control, and on the other hand the state, which is responsible for judicial enforcement, should insist on that. The inspectors must know at any time the financial status of the judicial officers. I think this is the quintessence of supervision.

In Bulgaria: financial inspectors shall check the official accounts of the private enforcement agents. This was the decision of the Legal Committee at the National Assembly in the discussion of the bill for amendment of the Law on Private Judicial Enforcement. The financial inspectors shall be with the Judicial Activity Directorate of the Ministry of Justice; besides the special bank account subject to control shall be the private enforcement agents’ bills of interests and taxes.

Reneta Nikolova, November 2006 – February 2007, Holland