Can't Pay? We'll Take It Away!

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

As the cost of living is rising and real terms wage increases are proving non-existent, more people around the country are sliding into debt than ever before, and many debts are being left to escalate to the point where it's referred to the High Court. One such HC enforcement group goes by the name of dcbl, which this programme follows the exploits of, as they travel the country, enforcing writs and encountering hostility from many of the debtors.

In this sad, unfortunate world, quality, well written, worthwhile television of the sort that was the norm as recently as two decades ago, has all but evaporated, and the craze for this generation's lazy, easily pleased crowd is the none stop splurge of 'reality TV.' Channel 5 (that, forebodingly, came around two decades ago!) is the main purveyor of this endless stream of cheap, easily made, tackily slapped together pile of programmes that clutter the schedules, and of which Can't Pay? We'll Take It Away (the titles are always similarly lazy and unimaginative!) is one of the more popular examples. But what is even more unsavoury about the existence of these programmes, is the sleazy, voyeuristic thrill we are encouraged to derive from those in desperate, life shattering situations, losing everything and falling into despair, but who are happy to have their personal business broadcast to the public without their faces being blurred, which the generation before would have regarded as nobody else's business, which further shows how far we've fallen as a culture!

While some of the debtors don't have a problem with facing the scorn of society, none of the featured baliffs do, and so we learn of them, their names, and are left to examine the moral ambiguity of them as people, of which some fall far short! A man called Paul Bohill is the most charismatic and surprising of the bunch, still tackling problem debtors and putting himself in potentially volatile situations despite being in his seventies now, but with his age he undoubtedly applies a more calm, reasoned approach to things, along with his frequent partner, the similarly aged Steve Pinner. They are undoubtedly the most shining of the group, but there's also the likes of Brian O' Shaughnessy, who seems to get tangled up with serial killers off screen but, most shockingly of all, the now cancer ridden Delroy Anglin, a former Met police commander who was involved in a scandal involving stolen drugs!

Regardless of whether many of the debtors command sympathy or not, and have only themselves to blame, this is nonetheless still cruel, exploitative television, that invites us to voyeur at people when they're at their lowest and caked in misery, and a shattering indictment of what we as a society now demand as our entertainment. *

I don't know what it is about it, but there's just something about this show (which is obviously most likely schadenfreude) that keeps me addicted to see more of it. I know, not something many people agree with, but regardless I just personally have some sort of interest in what can happen when you're in serious debt and need to pay it off.

The one thing I definitely like about this show is that it shows people in various circumstances and seeing how they would be able to pay off their debt. Most of the time they either manage to or put it on a weekly/monthly plan. I myself (thankfully) have never been put in such a situation, although I can be glad that this show warned me of what could happen with bad financial decisions which can lead to so much trouble.

Now obviously there's a very huge breach of privacy for those who actually do make an appearance on this show. That's something I do have a bit of a problem with. If you were to be in a sort of situation this show portrays, obviously you'd not want to publicise it, would you?

Regardless, when it comes to watching (and in some cases binging) this show, it's rather easy to do so and you do kind of get used to the tactics the bailiffs use in order to get situations resolved. Good learning experience.

I found this a very good show,unlike one of the other reviewers i am looking at it in a more realistic light. Many people end up in debt, the ideal solution is to obviously come to some sort of arrangement but Most of the people in this show come up with such stupid excuses and say so many stupid lies thinking that they will get away with it,i honestly find the people are dealt with in a very reasonable manner considering they have already done the wrong thing. It amazes me to see some of the stupid reactions that the people show when confronted with the debt collectors,treating them as idiots,of course they are not,and they are going to deal with you in a harder way if you treat them like idiots. I would find it very hard to deal with a job like theirs,my hats off to them. And once again it is a great show.

Each episode is split between four cases, usually. The last is typically the quickest and easiest for the agents. They are instructed by the high court to collect debt, seize assets, or evict tenants. Every case begins with a summary of how much is owed and why, while the agents are driving to the location written on the high court writ. The beginning of each case is usually the best bit, as people aren't aware of the bailiffs' powers and think they're trespassing. The initial attitude of the debtor is also how they'll usually act for the remainder of the case, so if they're angry at the start then they'll most likely be angry for the entire case.

The best episodes are those with debtors/evictees that are extremely angry and aggressive. In the earlier seasons, the cases were more varied than later, as they didn't just collect debt, they also evicted people and moved travellers. In season 5 for example, the vast majority of cases are a simple debt collection which adds to the repetition factor. I'm guessing this is down to the show being criticised as classist and morally bankrupt for showing people at their low points; however, the show does have people from all walks of life and the agents are polite, respectful, and neutral. I'll admit that there are more working-class people on this show, but I don't think it takes a genius to figure out that someone with money, privilege, and an increased likelihood of financial sense will be more likely to pay a debt than those who lack it.

This show is repetitive. It was made for a traditional TV channel which means it's chock-full of summaries of what's to come and what already occurred before and after every ad break. The length of these recounts are asinine. I believe some editing to fit every case within a single segment would've been preferable, to be honest. To add to the fatigue, the show highlights and narrates a relevant factoid as an interim between each case. I'm pretty sure a lot of them are repeated, but I wouldn't know as I skip over them every time. God, I don't miss cable TV at all.

Due to the professionalism required and the impersonal structure of the show, all the agents are very similar to each other. However, some have more coloured personalities than others, especially in the initial seasons. Paul Bohill and Steven Pinner are seen as the mascots of the show, due to their empathetic dialogues in the earlier seasons. Thankfully, this is one aspect they reduce in later seasons of which I'm a fan of. It's not that I disagree with them, I just disagree with the repetitive nature of it. Again, my biggest gripe with this show is its repetitiveness. Any reduction in that department is preferable, even if it removes some personality from the agents. You'll notice small differences in the agents' personalities, like how Stuart McCracken is stern and prefers to get crackin' on the job rather than playing the empathy game; or how Gary Ball has as much personality as a thumb. Thankfully his partner is one of my favourites, so his segments aren't so bad.

My advice is to watch season one and if you're really enjoying it then keep going, but eventually around season four-to-five you'll start to get bored and notice how safe they're playing it. It's not a bad show, but it went on too long and diminished in quality.

It's a show that shows you that you have to be responsible for all of your actions in life. From not paying rent and how your old debt can find you.