In March 2015 I was taken to the local magistrates court for certain council tax bills

(briefly, I told the local council where I was living and they refused to update their records

[the house was subject to a compulsory purchase order and the council wanted to pretend that the house was unoccupied] until I took them to a tribunal.

They then updated their records and billed me for 5 years of council tax).

The magistrate refused to grant a liability order for this old disputed council tax.

I have paid recent council tax bills and I have a considerable amount of proof that I have done this

(I even wrote on cheques what I was paying - where appropriate the cheques state it was full and final payment for the relevant year).

The council has reallocated recent payments against the old disputed council tax and, after several adjournments, obtained liability orders for £5k of more recent, undisputed council tax bills in January 2016.

I have stated that I have now paid these bills once and I have sent evidence of this to the council and their bailiffs.

When I get a response it is that their records show a balance outstanding which they would like paid.

The bailiffs are now "preparing papers" for an enforcement visit.

I wont let them in but I am worried that they might take my car which I park on the street.

This is a saga that, together with the compulsory purchase order, has dragged on for a decade.

I would love to put it all behind me and get on with my life.

I've done a Local Government Ombudsman Complaint and written to my MP & local Councillor without making progress.

Any thoughts would be welcome.

judicial review needed. You may have to wait for ombudsma's decision first as you normaly cant have 2 actions running for the same thing.

Thank you for the response.

The Local Government Ombudsman did look at a number of issues but they were not very helpful.

On one issue they concluded that they did not need to investigate because the council had already investigated

- yet they claim to look at issues independently.

I do have the option to go back to them about the council tax though.

A Judicial Review is certainly something that I am researching.

In the short term I have told the bailiffs that they should not be performing debt collection activities after a debt has been paid and when they cannot produce written proof of the debt and, as a consequence, I have withdrawn their implied right of access to my property and I am threatening an injunction if they continue to harass me.

Currently matters have been put on hold for 14 days to allow me the opportunity to make a payment offer. I have offered to promptly rectify any errors that can be found in my first payment of the council tax.

Realistically, I doubt that the offer will even be acknowledged.

The bailiffs will come until they are called off by the council or the court. Theyre only doign what they are told.

Ah, yes. The Nuremberg Defense. I keep forgetting where I am. I will try and be more sympathetic.

Administration of justice act..bailiffs are not causing harassment.

You cannot remove implied rights of access for a bailiff.

The bailiff will continue until the CLAIMANT informs the debt is settled or no longer needs enforcing.

Hi Grumpy. I think that you may be in another country. The UK Administration of Justice Act details both what constitutes harassment and, in section 40, details the punishment for harassing debtors. The punishments will be more severe if the harassment occurs after an injunction. Some injunctions have the power of arrest attached.

I have already removed the implied right of access. Any special privileges given to bailiffs ended when the debt was paid.

sounds like FMOTL twaddle to me

dx

Hi Grumpy. I think that you may be in another country. The UK Administration of Justice Act details both what constitutes harassment and, in section 40, details the punishment for harassing debtors. The punishments will be more severe if the harassment occurs after an injunction. Some injunctions have the power of arrest attached.

 

I have already removed the implied right of access. Any special privileges given to bailiffs ended when the debt was paid.

No. The bailiffs will come until the court or council withdraws them. You need to stop reading and believing fotm stuff as it will land you in deeper trouble. Fotm tells you what you want to hear. None of fotm advice is based on reality

There is a lot of twaddle out there but it's common sense as well as being set out in statute and reputable web sites that debt collection procedures should stop after the debt has been paid and/or if written proof of the debt cannot be produced.

The tone of the letters I've received from the bailiffs suggest that they are not too interested in looking at proof of payment or providing a detailed breakdown of the amount or discussing anything other than getting more money from me. I am expecting them not to follow the rules too closely and to keep pestering me until they are "called off by the court" which is why I am anticipating that I will need to obtain an injunction.

You need to deal with the council. The bailiffs will keep coming until they're called off. Or until you provide proof of what you say so they can contact the council for further instruction.

You're starting to veer off into the realm of what if's etc. Stop it, go to the council and court and provide evidence of what you say. Remember they've heard every excuse there is. So you need to provide complete proof of what you say.

If you keep following fotl info, you're going to end up in a lot of trouble and owe thousands. None of foto I found is based in reality or even common sense. They simply tell you what you want to hear, often charge for that info, then when the muck hits the fan, they block you from their sites and leave you to it.

too right

its only a ctax debt theres no remit for forced entry

and if wrong fees have been charged or are going to be

that's for the council to deal with

not you by some stupid pointless injunction.

Hi Grumpy. I think that you may be in another country. The UK Administration of Justice Act details both what constitutes harassment and, in section 40, details the punishment for harassing debtors. The punishments will be more severe if the harassment occurs after an injunction. Some injunctions have the power of arrest attached.

 

I have already removed the implied right of access. Any special privileges given to bailiffs ended when the debt was paid.

No, I'm in the UK. Might be a different UK on the planet you are on though.

Sadly i think we're going to find he'll end up as just another statistic for Bailiff Advice to quote as a sad end to the OP's ideals. he's going to end up owing thousands and he still thinks the Fotl info is right simply because its what he wants to hear.

Hi Grumpy. I think that you may be in another country. The UK Administration of Justice Act details both what constitutes harassment and, in section 40, details the punishment for harassing debtors. The punishments will be more severe if the harassment occurs after an injunction. Some injunctions have the power of arrest attached.

 

I have already removed the implied right of access. Any special privileges given to bailiffs ended when the debt was paid.

The pathetic websites that you seem to be reading will only give you little snippits of the big picture in order to confuse you. Tye below is taken directly from the act.

Subsection (1)(a) above does not apply to anything done by a person which is reasonable (and otherwise permissible in law) for the purpose—

.

(a)

of securing the discharge of an obligation due, or believed by him to be due, to himself or to persons for whom he acts, or protecting himself or them from future loss; or

.

(b)

of the enforcement of any liability by legal process.

Essentially, anybody acting in the due course of enforcing any sort of court ordered liability cannot be causing harassment.

You need to take your head out of the sand and research what you are being told before you land yourself in deeper water and further financial ruin.

 

Essentially, anybody acting in the due course of enforcing any sort of court ordered liability cannot be causing harassment.

You need to take your head out of the sand and research what you are being told before you land yourself in deeper water and further financial ruin.

 

Thank you for the helpful advice. I'm certainly more inclined to take note of reputable web sites like legislation.gov.uk than some of the dodgy sites out there. There are some sites that pretend that you can post a note on your gate and never have to pay your bills, there's another site run by debt collectors that pretends that bailiffs are above the law.

As stated in my original post, the debt has been paid. I have a considerable amount of proof to support this fact and this has been shared with the bailiffs and the council. The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, for example, is quite clear:

Para 6.3 The property in all goods ceases to be bound when ... the amount outstanding is paid

Para 58 This paragraph applies where the debtor pays the amount outstanding in full - No further step may be taken under the enforcement power concerned.

In an ideal world, you would be able to present a set of facts to a council and they would act on them. Unfortunately, were our council diligent, the issues with my council tax would never have arisen. As stated, the problem arose because, between 2007 and 2015, the council were falsely pretending that I was not living in my house.

Have you made a complaint to the chief executive at your council or your mp. Do you have proof the debt was paid. Are the bailiffs after any fees. We're those fees applied before or after full payment was made

Yes, as stated previously, I have proof that the debt has been paid (9 months ago). I have made many formal complaints to the council. I wrote to my MP who contacted a councillor and promised to write to me again when he got a reply (I'm still waiting). The bailiffs have not yet added fees but are promising to add an amount (they can't decide how much) if they visit.

I am not willing to live for the next few years under the threat of someone taking my car or my property.

have you provided proof to the bailiff? If so, then copy in the council and courts again, but make sure you form a full complaint to the ceo of the council AND your local MP. Perhaps give the local press a call as well.

(briefly, I told the local council where I was living and they refused to update their records

[the house was subject to a compulsory purchase order and the council wanted to pretend that the house was unoccupied] until I took them to a tribunal.

 

They then updated their records and billed me for 5 years of council tax).

The magistrate refused to grant a liability order for this old disputed council tax.

The magistrate was in error - they cannot refuse to grant a Liability Order where the dispute falls under Section 16 of the LGFA92 (an appeal that can be heard by a tribunal) - and I'm surprised the council didn't complain to the court. See Wiltshire V Piggin - http://lgfa92.co.uk/council-tax-liability-and-section-16-of-the-lgfa-1992/

Craig