§ 20. Maximum limit for debt collection costs

§ 20 is about the cap on debt collection costs. It does not itself say exactly how many kroner you have to pay. It says that the authorities can make regulations with maximum rates. A regulation is a more detailed rule that supplements the law.

This is important because debt collection could otherwise become very unpredictable. If you owe NOK 900, it would be unreasonable if the other party could add NOK 5,000 in “administration” without clear limits. § 20 means that costs can be controlled through fixed maximum amounts.

The section applies to compensation for costs of out-of-court collection. Out-of-court collection means collecting money before the case enters the court system. This can be a debt collection notice (inkassovarsel), a demand for payment (betalingsoppfordring), follow-up from a debt collection agency (inkassobyrå) and other ordinary debt collection handling.

This means that § 20 is not about court fees, lawyers' costs in court or the costs of a lawsuit. Such costs are governed by § 21 and the rules on legal costs (sakskostnader). § 20 applies to the ordinary debt collection phase before the case goes to court.

The rule protects you as a debtor. It also protects the creditor against unclear disputes. When there are maximum rates, it is easier to know where the limit is. The creditor can claim lawful costs, but not more than the cap.

What is a maximum rate?

A maximum rate is the highest amount allowed. It does not mean that the amount can always be claimed. It only means that no more than this can be claimed.

This is an important distinction. If a debt collection agency refers to a maximum rate, that does not automatically mean you have to pay it. First, there must be a basis for liability for costs under § 17. Then, the rules in §§ 9, 10 and 11 must have been followed. Only then does the question become how high the amount can be.

Think of it as a speed limit. If the speed limit is 80 km/h, that does not mean you should always drive at 80. It only means you cannot drive faster. In the same way, a maximum rate means that the cost cannot exceed the limit.

If the claim is wrong, if you had a reasonable objection (innsigelse), or if the debt collector has broken the rules, you may avoid paying the cost in full or in part. § 20 does not on its own give the debt collector a right to money. It only sets an upper limit when costs can otherwise be claimed.

Why can the rates vary according to the size of the claim?

§ 20 says that the rates may vary according to the size of the monetary claims. This means that a small claim and a large claim can have different maximum limits.

The reason is practical. A claim of NOK 350 should not lead to the same level of costs as a claim of NOK 350,000. Larger claims may require more follow-up, more checking and greater risk. But there must be limits for large claims too.

This does not mean that large claims give free rein to charge high fees (gebyrer). The rates must still be set in a regulation. They must be within the system of the law. The debt collector cannot decide on their own that a large claim automatically gives an extra fee because “the case is serious”.

For you as a debtor, this means you should always look at the principal claim (hovedkrav). How much was the original claim? Which rate has been used? Has the cost been calculated at the correct level? If the principal claim is wrong, the cost calculation may also be wrong.

Does § 20 apply to both debt collection agencies and in-house collection?

Yes, the provision can apply to both. It mentions costs of having engaged a debt collector. That typically means a debt collection agency. But it also mentions “other costs of out-of-court collection”. This can cover other follow-up of overdue claims.

This is linked to § 19, which allows fixed amounts for payment reminders (purring), debt collection notices and demands for payment in in-house collection (egen inndriving). § 20 also makes it possible to set maximum limits.

The point is that costs after the due date (forfall) should not be an open field. Whether the claim is collected by a debt collection agency or by the creditor itself, the amounts must have a legal basis. Legal basis means a basis in law. There must be a rule that allows the amount to be claimed.

What happens if they charge more than the maximum?

Then you can dispute (bestride) the amount. You should do it in writing. Write that you dispute the debt collection costs because they exceed the lawful rates, and ask for a calculation.

You do not necessarily need to dispute the principal claim. If you owe the principal amount, you can pay it. At the same time, you can object to the costs. This is often the tidiest solution.

If the debt collector keeps charging excessive costs, this may also be relevant under the rules on good debt collection practice (god inkassoskikk). It can be unreasonable to pressure someone over costs that have no lawful basis.

Always check the statement of the claim. It should show the principal claim, interest and costs separately. If everything has just been combined into one total amount, you should ask for a breakdown.

Look at the dates. When was the claim due? When was the debt collection notice sent? What deadline were you given? Did you pay within the deadline?

Ask for a calculation if you are unsure. Write briefly: “I request an itemised calculation of the debt collection costs and the basis for the rate.”

If you have an objection to the principal claim, you should state it clearly. Do not just write “I disagree”. Explain why. Attach documentation.

Never pay an unclear fee just because the letter looks stern. But do not ignore the letter either. Reply in writing within the deadline.