Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Should this ever happen to me, I will make an appeal at the first stage to avoid any problems that may occur at a later stage. Although, any individual in a similar position should decide for themselves what they think is an appropriate course of action. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Balliff Arrived Yesterday asking for £3068 from my wife in unpaid council tax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5676 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

 

I am looking for some advice.

 

Yesterday a balliff arrived at my door asking for £3068 in unpaid council tax bills (and charges!!!!) from my wife from 6 years ago!!!!

 

Apparently this was unpaid arrears for a flat that my wife had been living in for 4 years.

 

Now according to my wife the agreement with the landlord was that he would pay all bills for the property. IE The the rent constituted an all inclusive amount, and that seems to have been honoured for every other bill, electricity, water rate etc.

 

I talked to the council yesterday stating that and that my wife never received one bill (apparently numerous bills/reminders/summons were sent to the original property!!!!!). However my wife never received any bills at the time.

 

The flat that my wife had was one of two in the house. Post generally went to the other flat as that had the postbox. The tennants of that flat would then post through my wifes door. However not one council tax bill or associated correspondance ever arrived.

 

The council advised us that Landlord had put the liability in my wifes name on the day she moved in. This seems unbelivable. So my wife became liable for a bill that she hadn't agreed to without anybody checking with her (To my knowledge you can't do this with any other bill you must get identification.)

 

It seems to me that this is a con. The landlord makes out that the rent is one price to the tennant (which is attractive so they will stay) and then tells the council something else. It then takes six years for them to get themselves sorted out.

 

I would really like to hear the advice of the forum on this. I am keen to know how to proceed, because as far as I am concerned we don't owe the council 1 penny. The landlord does. :evil:

 

Your help is really appreciated forum.........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Council Tax liability cannot be removed solely by the wording of the tenancy agreement except in a situation where the property is deemed to be a house in multiple occupation.

 

There was no need for the council to check liability if informed by the L/L as he would have supplied sufficient evidence, tenancy agreements etc , to the council.

 

In any case your wife is not disputing that she lived in the property so any argument over her name being on the bill is not an issue for the council as they have done so correctly under the info they hold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I rang the council. No evidence was requested to check liability. Is this allowed. I could not do this for Water Rates (as an example). I would need to provide proof.

 

Another thing £3068 for the coucil tax on a tiny 1 bedroom flat in Nottingham seems VERY VERY high even for 3.5 years. Could the landlord have said that my wife was responsible for the whole property??????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks really helps.

 

Strange thing here the address for the property is Grd Floor Flat when as the actual address is 35b. I think that the bills have definitely been sent to the wrong address.

 

I also still strongly suspect that the landlord was withholding all this correspondance so that my wife was never aware.

 

I need to find out when the first balliff/council tax officers was sent out

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can challenge the council on the address they were using, and they can check with their building control section to see what the correct address actually is.

 

If it turns out that the mail was issued incorrectly and the council were culpable, they will have to withdraw the court summonses and if the debt is more than 6 years old, they cannot proceed through court again.

 

You say that the L/L may have been holding back the mail. This is possible, but how would he have got it if it was issued to the Gnd floor flat (unless he lived there).

 

The L/L would not need to provide proof when he initially registered your wife. Some council's ask for proof as a matter of good practice, but there is no legal requirement. As far as I am aware however, there is a legal requirement for a tenant/owner/agent to inform the council of occupation within 21 days of said person occupying.

 

Personally I think the council will have all of the bases covered. If so, I would go through the council's complaints procedure and then go to the the ombudsman if not happy. The ombudsman will conduct a thorough investigation and any areas of bad practice from the council will be highlighted. In the meantime you may need to make an affordable arrangement to prevent further costs or bailiff visits.

 

Good Luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...