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.
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.