Jump to content

Keep Smiling

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. Apologies for the duplicate post, as suggested I move this over to the Bailiff section and things prgressed, slightly. However after a discovery this week I thought I would post my latest find here as this throws every Bankruptcy, Liability Order and Sworn Statement ever made by Wirral Borough Council into question (an exaggeration, you decide). Once again, thank you for all the help and suggestions, sorry it's taken so long to reply on this but I've been very ill. Still waiting on the SAR request, well it's only been a year, and I've only reminded them about half a dozen times. I've come back though because of a (I think) HUGE find this week, but I'll come to that later. The bankruptcy (the 2nd one) was refused by the judge as all the outstanding amounts had been paid, I was ordered to pay WBC's costs (not all as I argued the short service defence and he agreed) but still an extra £800 on top of the 4k already paid. They "still" won't put the Council Tax in my tenants name, and won't give the 25% discount on it, same excuses as always, so for now just living with it. As you may have read in the news a large number of senior WBC staff (most of the people I've mentioned before) have "left" due to various allegations and payments they may have received involving contracts, I believe this is why the local paper didn't run this story when I contacted them as they may have known something was already in the pipeline. This week I received an interesting email from the tenant of the property I was actually made bankrupt for, the first property, the one I don't own or live at but the Council swore I was responsible for, that they had liability orders, in my name for and that they'd never heard of the person who lived there (despite him supplying an affidavit that they did and that they'd visited the property when he was there). Well (you're going to like this), this week the property was having some work done (new kitchen before Christmas) and when one of the cupboards were pulled out they found some letters that had fell down the back. Some of these letters are from Wirral Borough Council, and they include the bill for Council Tax (for the period they say I was responsible for it) and the Summons to attend Court as they are applying for a liability order (the one they told the Judge they had in my name and the basis on which the bankruptcy was made which cost me almost £40k in their fees alone). Two things: 1. THEY ARE NOT ADDRESSED TO ME, THEY'RE NOT IN MY NAME 2. They ARE in the name of the person they claimed/swore on oath, never to have heard of. Yes, it would appear that WBC has REALLY shot themselves in the foot. This means that not only did they know that person, they knew he was there, it was HIM they made the application for in Court and then they just fiddled the paperwork when they found someone else they wanted to pay it and lied to the county court over and over again. I'm not sure if I should march in with this, phone the new CEO and explain politely that I want my money back, or go to the Police with the letters from K. Chan saying that such person does not exist and they have no records about him and bring criminal charges, right now I can't get the smile off my face, because this then calls into question the second bankruptcy application and all of it's costs as well. I need to calm down and decide what to do next, this has been the last six years of my life they have messed about with, a little while longer won't hurt a bit. Be nice if they read this though and it gave them a few night sweats. Suggestion appreciated.
  2. Once again, thank you for all the help and suggestions, sorry it's taken so long to reply on this but I've been very ill. Still waiting on the SAR request, well it's only been a year, and I've only reminded them about half a dozen times. I've come back though because of a (I think) HUGE find this week, but I'll come to that later. The bankruptcy (the 2nd one) was refused by the judge as all the outstanding amounts had been paid, I was ordered to pay WBC's costs (not all as I argued the short service defence and he agreed) but still an extra £800 on top of the 4k already paid. They "still" won't put the Council Tax in my tenants name, and won't give the 25% discount on it, same excuses as always, so for now just living with it. As you may have read in the news a large number of senior WBC staff (most of the people I've mentioned before) have "left" due to various allegations and payments they may have received involving contracts, I believe this is why the local paper didn't run this story when I contacted them as they may have known something was already in the pipeline. This week I received an interesting email from the tenant of the property I was actually made bankrupt for, the first property, the one I don't own or live at but the Council swore I was responsible for, that they had liability orders, in my name for and that they'd never heard of the person who lived there (despite him supplying an affidavit that they did and that they'd visited the property when he was there). Well (you're going to like this), this week the property was having some work done (new kitchen before Christmas) and when one of the cupboards were pulled out they found some letters that had fell down the back. Some of these letters are from Wirral Borough Council, and they include the bill for Council Tax (for the period they say I was responsible for it) and the Summons to attend Court as they are applying for a liability order (the one they told the Judge they had in my name and the basis on which the bankruptcy was made which cost me almost £40k in their fees alone). Two things: 1. THEY ARE NOT ADDRESSED TO ME, THEY'RE NOT IN MY NAME 2. They ARE in the name of the person they claimed/swore on oath, never to have heard of. Yes, it would appear that WBC has REALLY shot themselves in the foot. This means that not only did they know that person, they knew he was there, it was HIM they made the application for in Court and then they just fiddled the paperwork when they found someone else they wanted to pay it and lied to the County Court over and over again. I'm not sure if I should march in with this, phone the new CEO and explain politely that I want my money back, or go to the Police with the letters from K. Chan saying that such person does not exist and they have no records about him and bring criminal charges, right now I can't get the smile off my face, because this then calls into question the second bankruptcy application and all of it's costs as well. I need to calm down and decide what to do next, this has been the last six years of my life they have messed about with, a little while longer won't hurt a bit. Be nice if they read this though and it gave them a few night sweats. Suggestion appreciated.
  3. The story continues: Thank you for the link to WBC's FOI site, I've made a couple of requests to them and we'll see if they reply. On Monday I went over the Administrative Court in Manchester to file for a Judicial Review on the original liability orders. I explained that I realised that I was out of time but used section 7 to show that I didn't know they existed until several weeks ago. I additionally asked for a review under the Human Rights act in that I am entitled to a fair trial, and as I didn't know about these proceedings i couldn't attend and therefore didn't get one and also that I considered this to be a vexatious case as the council already had someone who told them that they were responsible, had proved it beyond all reasonable doubt and still they were persecuting me. "Unfortunately" the rules are slightly different than I remember, they needed FIVE copies of all the paperwork which must be tabulated with each in a ring-binder folder.... and to get the case adjourned I would need to file an application. Not enough time on Monday so got it all done Tuesday (application to adjourn denied as Manchester Court said it was up to Birkenhead to do that pending the Judicial review). Served the paperwork on Wallasey Town Hall (they have there own legal department there full time, but use other solicitors to handle cases, staggering). I attended Birkenhead County Court this morning where I met with their "representative" (a self-employed para-legal type), he said that WBC had forwarded to them a copy of my application for JR, which included bills from my tenant dating back to 2002 (up to present day), a copy of his polling card, at that address, a receipt from WBC showing that they already had copies of all this back in 2009 (BEFORE they swore in court that I was responsible and had the liability orders granted), and a affidavit from my tenant saying that he accepted responsibility he wanted to pay but WBC wouldn't let him and wouldn't give him the 25% single person discount. Their reply: Well this doesn't prove anything (oh really) and we're going to oppose any adjournment today as your JR will fail (I though that was up to the Judge to decide, I sense a God complex) as you're out of time (I'd explained that and it had been allowed) and you've not followed correct procedure. So let me get this right, you're taking me to court for money I don't owe, you know who does and you wont let him pay it but as you got the paperwork right that's okay. I had a feeling that this was going to happen, having dealt with WBC before. I'd tried to pay WBC the money during this adjournment, but no one would accept it, luckily my tenant had an old bill addressed to me and a PayPoint nearby, so I sent him the money yesterday and he paid it this morning (must have give the poor newsagent heart attack handing £4k over) and emailed the receipt to me. I handed it to their representative just as we entered the court (they've done it to me with files before, the process server has filed an additional statement, I've only got it because I found out about it) and it was "interesting" to see a face change colour like that, cue some VERY hurried footsteps and flurry of phonecalls. They then asked for a seven day adjournment as the funds wouldn't be with them yet, I said that I wouldn't be here in seven days and wanted 28 to allow time for the JR to be heard, strangely they didn't want that they wanted it in seven so they could get their costs, the Judge was having none of it and said that as the debt was paid there weren't really any time constraints so 28days was fine (he seemed okay, I wonder if I would have got that adjournment).
  4. Well I gave the Administrative Court in Manchester a call yesterday to ask about getting the Liability Orders overturned. I wont go into full details here (yet) but the information they gave me was "informative", and I think that the next week or two might make WBC want to take a fresh look at these matters.
  5. Latest "News" as Wirral Borough Council Continue to Evade Responsibility. The case has been adjourned until 27th July. I have tried three times to make a SAR, but no one will accept it, the One Stop Shops insist that it should be an FOI request, the main office doesn't know what it is and the SEO's secretary has never heard of it. I have tried to arrange an appointment with the SEO (Mr Wilkie), I was told that someone would call me back to arrange it (they didn't), after much persistence I have now been told that he will not be seeing me as he has been advised by their solicitors not to. My tenant has been to see a solicitor and he has also been in touch with the council, they have claimed never to have heard of him before and that they have had no information from him, when receipts were produced (stamped and dated from WBC) showing that this is completely false and that they have had tenancy agreements from him for years before they said that they would need them again. I'm interested as to how they could make a sworn statement in court to obtain the liability order when they have on file information that there someone else is responsible for it. He has applied for his 25% sole occupier discount, Mrs Chan says he can't have it as he can't prove he lives there. I have asked if I can have the 25% sole occupier discount, Mrs Chan says I can't as I have told them I don't live there (despite this they have made a statement to the court saying that I do) I have asked if no-one is there can I therefore have the 25% empty property discount, Mrs Chan says I can't as I have told them i have a tenant there. The solicitors have still failed to provide me with the affidavit from the process server, although I have managed to get CCTV for the days he claimed to have been there, he wasn't, and it's police monitored CCTV so is sufficient to be used as evidence in court. With regard to the other person who joined this forum with an almost identical problem, when I (almost managed to) make a complaint against Mrs Chan i was told that she was a "well respected.." and "highly regarded.." member of staff and that no one had ever made a complaint against her before, well this person did, and for the same thing, so it appears that lying to the public is endemic within WBC hierarchy.
  6. Further Update: Attended Birkenhead County Court, WBC's solicitors (in Bradford) had appointed an agent (from Birkenhead) to attend on their behalf. It was agreed that the case should be adjourned for a minimum of 28days. I pointed out to their agent that I needed a copy of the process servers affidavit. The judge asked about costs, the agent said that he expected me to pay them, I pointed out that as the main solicitor had delayed so long in sending out the paperwork that an adjournement would have been required anyway due to short service. The agent said that he had no knowledge about this and had not been informed otherwise, the judge kindly pointed out that this WAS contained within the 6.19 and he hoped that he had read it. Costs were reserved until the next meeting. I see that someone else has joined this forum with a similar problem, also with WBC and the same person dealing with it and refusing to give any help or act in a reasonable manner, That pattern seems to be getting stronger, but at least now I know that this is inherrant within WBC and it's not personal
  7. Although I've always suspected that Kit Chan might be acting outside (or exceeding) her authority it wasn't until I actually started to write all this that I realised how many of these roads lead back to her, I'm wondering if I can make a request to ask if she knows me in any way outiside of this matter, if she has had dealings with any of my businesses or if her friends or family are in any way connected with any competition to those businesses. Would WBC have to supply that information ? Interestingly after a search I found her name on the North West Improvement and Efficiency website, a (government funded) site which exists to promote clarity and efficiency within the local area, especially in its contracts. Now Malcolm Flanagan, and a few days ago Neil Pxxxx (he said he wouldn't read external sites so I presumed he would not agree to his name being published) said that Kit Chan had no connection whatsoever with Housing Benefits (this was in connection with my daughter having her benefits removed) and that I had obviously made a mistake and that she only worked within Council Tax, so why, on the http://www.nwiep.org.uk/ website when looking through the contracts archive do I find: https://www.thechest.nwce.gov.uk/procontract/proregister.nsf/fcontent?ReadForm&requesttype=viewcontract&region=REG-NWCE-77WE5K&authority=ORG-NWCE-7UGD9E&docid=CS-DSIN-86EH85&sd=&stype=&rv=authority&start=1&count=20&contentid=1.003 The "owners" name seems very familiar. If anyone can publish that page to here would be grateful.
  8. Update: Went into WBC today to give them the SAR, no-one had ever heard of it before and no-one wanted to take it. They then sent off for somebody "higher" who came in and told me that I must mean an FOI act request, I explained that it wasn't, although I would be making one (or two). He told me that he couldn't accept a SAR, that they didn't deal with money so couldn't take the payment for it, and that I should use the FOI request as that was free, and could be made online, (I sense a few of them being filed). Eventually he phoned the person who deals with FOI requests, apparently they are on leave today (I'm sure the place would burst at the seams if everybody actually turned up one day), but gave me her address and said I should post it to her. I explained that I wasn't going to do that, so he said that if I went back in tomorrow he'd scan all the documents and send them off, but still couldn't take a payment for it (so that's going to get rejected then). I'm going over to Wallasey Town Hall tomorrow, and perhaps not actually tell them who I am until I find someone that isn't on leave. Drydens have read my 6.19 (well, I read it to them over the phone, they agreed to accept electronic service but as "it can take some time for their mail to be routed", they said they'd call back if there was any problem, no call back, no problem). They listened and said that my proposal sounded "reasonable" and they they had no issues with it, hopefully this means that they won't oppose it next week, might take the funds with me just in case (they still wont tell me how much it is in total, just that it's £4k plus fees, although over 1k of that is for the coming year, and 25% should be removed as single occupancy as they can't have it both ways). Should I take cash, or would a cheque book/bankers card/credit card be adequate ?
  9. Well I've served the 6.19 on the Courts and the Solicitors, now I'm preparing to serve WBC with a SAR. Any other suggestions ?
  10. Oh I'm almost certain of it. I brought up at one hearing that I'd never received the Liability Orders, now as I'd never lived at the address this was quite true, in reply the Council over the next few weeks produced over two hundred pages of "evidence" (which had nothing whatsoever to do with what I'd asked but it looked impressive) detailing how many LO's had been applied for (no details on any of them, and throughout the entire 200 plus pages nothing which gave any indication whatsoever that any of them related to anything other than "numbers"), how many had been posted, where they had been posted, who by, what time, what method they had used, how many had been special presented, how many had been returned, how many had been notified as lost in post (if it was lost in the post how would you know you hadn't received it ?), it was just incredible the numbers they could produce and the pages they could fill with absolute meaningless drivel, which in the end boiled down to. We sent out a lot of forms. None of them were brought back to us by the Post Office. We don't know if anything concerning you was in there or not, but we think it was. Maybe THAT's why they need the Council Tax payments so much.
  11. Thank you very much for that, I'll use it as a template and basically ask for everything. The main items I want are copies of internal memos and emails concerning all of these properties. I'm just waiting for WBC to spend the next 40 days looking at it and then saying that I am not entitled to any information on the property from 2006 because I don't own the property and have never lived there. Would anyone like to take bets on this ?
  12. The property relating to 2006 is not a house of muliple occupancy (single bedroomed flat). It did have somebody occupying it (Mr Cxxx Mxxx and his partner, who has told WBC that he lived there) I do not now (nor have I ever) owned it. WBC seem to interpret those rules differently.
  13. I refute my liability for the these orders, and would ask for a short adjournement to enable Wirral Borough Council to consider liability. At this time my tenant has contacted WBC and accepted that he holds responsibilty and officers for WBC have requested additional paperwork which at this time they have not considered. The Bankruptcy Petition being made by Substituted Service must under (r6.18(1) and (2)) have allowed a minimum of 21 days to elapse (normally 14 but an extra 7 for postage under substituted service rules). Although the Court issued the Petition within that time and ordered Drydens to serve such they did not post it (by their own Prepaid Postmark/Frank) until 3rd June 2011. This obviously does not allow this minimum period to elapse for a case to be heard on 21st June. There is a note on the Petition that service may be considered valid 2 days after postage, however (r6.18(1) and (2)) still allow a 21 day grace period before a hearing can be listed. I would also ask for an adjournement on the basis that this amount can be paid in full within 28 days. My tenant has admitted liability and in order to expediate matters it makes financial sense for myself to pay these funds and then allow my long-standing tenant to repay me. The debt is secure in that assets held by myself far exceed that of the amount claimed. The serving solicitors Drydens in this very court only a few month ago made statement that they had a valuation on the property concerned, along with details from my mortgage holder which showed in excess of £40,000 in equity. The bill they provided of £35,000 has been paid and although they are in the process of doing so the lien on the property has yet to be removed so there is no reason to suggest that such equity would no longer exist. Wirral Borough Council, and I would imagine that they have passed this information to their agents Drydens, do have an address for serving documents upon myself, nowhere upon the petition do I see this material fact disclosed and I would also ask if the Court were made aware of these details in the full and frank disclosure required of the petitioner. Dated 14th June 2011 To the Birkenhead County Court court and to Drydens, solicitor for the petitioner.
  14. If only it were that easy, there is actually a considerable crossover in the Council Tax for THIS property and the Council Tax for the property they obtained the bankruptcy for in 2006, when I pointed out that I couldn't possibly be living for several years in two places at once and so one or the other MUST be wrong they told me that I didn't actually need to live there to be responsible for the Council Tax. I thought only teenagers had an answer for everything.
  15. They have had (what I consider) adequate proof of my tenant and his tenancy. They have been provided with my address, but wont send items to it and kept it from the County Court when making a request for substituted service. This is a single occupancy dwelling (incidentally they won't give that discount either) I think the Form 4 was on the basis that charges were made by John Fielden for "attempted service" visits he made on the property, when he had never actually been there (I would suggest) and didn't know where it was. I did ring Arkline today to speak to one of their managers about him and that I didn't believe he had made any previous visits based on him not knowing where the property was and asking in several shops if they were that property, She replied that Mr Fielden had been with them for many years (quite what that proves I don't know) and that he might serve up to ten different addresses each day all over the NorthWest and might not recall every address. I pointed out that he had been into a newsagents asking if they were that property, a chip shop and a phone shop before he was told it was a side door in another street. If he had been there before and served paperwork there before he would remember that, and if not, would know if he'd attempted service on a chip shop or not. She said she would have to read the file and speak to him on his return but they supported their server totally (no shock there then). Apparently Wirral Borough Council have sent bailiffs to the address looking for me regarding this, but the only person they have ever met at the address is the tenant, their paperwork shows that he proved his identity with various bills and credit cards in his name.
×
×
  • Create New...