Jump to content

duncanb

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About duncanb

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Dear Filrobbo It is worth reading the The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement Regulations 1992 (the section on enforcement through the magistrates courts), and Bridget Prentice’s report, Councils are allowed to charge for a summons, a nominal fee, and then allowed to chage another fee for court attendance, this is detailed in both of the above documents, the councils have been conveniently adding the two fees together as a one off penalty. Obviously all cases are different but, if you received a summons, and then paid the outstanding and the summons, and did not attend court, it may be worth writing to the council and pointing out the two documents above and requesting a refund of the latter fee. (the court attendance...)
  2. Dear Bailiff Advice, re "I have read Bridget Prentice's document and it does not state that a complaint must be brought before the Justice of the Peace. Instead, she states that the following:" I know the above, but the Justice clerks rules and The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement Regulations 1992 {1992 Part V1 Enforcement 34-(1)(2). do. P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm; } Justice Clerks Rules 2005 (S.I.2005 No.545) The granting of summonses is more than a rubber stamping exercise. The person issuing the summons must be authorised to do so and must scrutinise the information to satisfy themselves that the requirements are met and a summons properly granted. See Tesco Stores Ltd [1981] Q.B.470,DC. ARCHBOLD 4-77 PAGE 177 Magistrates Criminal Practice. (2:q) Note; If a summons cannot be a rubber stamping exercise, one would have to assume neither can the issuing of a Liability Order. Especially 2000+ Liability orders in one rubber stamping action. (2:r) Quote; R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte Preston [1985] AC 835 The House of Lords ruled that if a public body gives undertakings which conflict with its statutory duty, it was in principle entitled to go back on the undertaking. However, if the authority made an assurance and then exercised its statutory power in a manner which caused unfairness, that exercise could be viewed as an abuse of power and the undertaking upheld by the Courts.
  3. On a related note, open question to all, has anyone actually seen a "Liability order" issued from the Magistrates court for council tax. And this is a trick question, because, they do not issue them, the councils just Issue "Liability order notices", the two documents are not the same. One is an official document from the court the other is a fraudulent attempt to make you believe they have a liability order....don’t believe me? check, If you have a "Liability order from a local council for council tax, read it carefully, it will state across the top "Liability order notice", to enforce council tax they need the actual order, that does not exist. ask the council or the court to provide it or a copy, I have waited over a year for this information and it still has not arrived.... Oh and don’t get me onto "bailiffs", a bailiff with regards to enforcing council tax is a "court bailiff" not a jumped up bully who thinks he has the right to harass you, all court bailiffs have to registered with the issuing court, and MUST register the company they work for, No moonlighting allowed.. again check it for your self, link to the Bailiff register. http://certificatedbailiffs.justice.gov.uk/CertificatedBailiffs/ While I understand I may leave my self open for argument, I really did spend two years investigating this, took it to court, and while my results, were not as positive as the Reverends, the local council now leaves me alone...
  4. Dear site team, With regards to Bridget Prentice and the Council Tax fiasco, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm091022/wmstext/91022m0003.htm
  5. Dear DragonFly1967 the procedure you describe is not lawful, it is a sordid arrangement made between the councils and the magistrate courts, read The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement Regulations 1992 {1992 Part V1 Enforcement 34-(1)(2). & The Magistrates Clerk Rules 2005, neither allow for " The council to send the courts a list of people that they plan to bring before the courts. & Someone at the court signs off on that list and then the council send out a summons (with the full permission and knowledge of the court)." this is Perjury. Falsifying court documents or Fake summons is a serious crime in most western countries.A summons must be "heard" see, A summons must be issued in accordance with Justice Clerks Rules 2005 (S.I.2005 No.545) The granting of summonses is more than a rubber stamping exercise. The person issuing the summons must be authorised to do so and must scrutinise the information to satisfy themselves that the requirements are met and a summons properly granted. See Tesco Stores Ltd [1981] Q.B.470,DC. & P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm; } Regina v. Brentford Justices. Ex parte Catlin The closing comments of Lord Widgery C.J "....It must however be remembered that before a summons or warrant is issued the information must be laid before a Magistrate and he must go through the judicial exercise of deciding whether a summons or warrant ought to be issued or not. If a Magistrate authorises the issue of a summons without having applied his mind to the information then he is guilty of dereliction of duty and if in any particular justices' clerk's office a practice goes on of summonses being issued without information being laid before the Magistrate at all, then a very serious instance of maladministration arises which should have the attention of the authorities without delay...."
  6. Dear Bailiff Advice, Try it for yourself, if you receive a summons for council tax, go to the "issuing court" and ask them to review the details, in their log book or similar, The pat answer is (and against the Law) we don’t keep records of this kind of summons...
  7. Dear Bailiff Advice, I have recently spent two years investigating just that, the Courts have admitted the fact, the council involved did the same, so how is it wholly incorrect. English law specifically states for a summons to be issued a complaint must be brought before the Justice of the peace and the complaint must be "heard". sending printed summons from the local councils hired hands, is not applicable with English Law. Search for Bridget Prentice's document regarding this matter on the Parliament.gov web site...
  8. While I would like to offer my congratulations to the Reverend, with his small win, it totally missed the biggest fraud of all, 99% of councils do not apply for summons to be issued as per English law, they print them them illegally, committing Perjury and fraud...
  9. cerberusalert Thank you for that Information, this may really come in handy... Regards Duncan
  10. Hi Again warspite1 thanks for that info I will check on the land reg, your reference to Six years i am a little confused, I don't wish to rain on your picnic. But I am under the impression the statutory time limit for Mortgages is actually twelve years....? its six years for Banks loans etc. check it out I may be wrong.. Duncan
  11. Hi warspite1, Thanks for getting back to me ,, no worries about the delay, its a busy time of year, No I have not performed a land search I assumed this would have changed with the new owners....??? Duncan
  12. Hi Warspite1 I am having almost exactly the same issues as you, I had a Igroup Second charge on my property. Had it taken away 2006, I did at the court proceedings state we believed it was Irresponsible lending...Somthing the OFT may or may not have ruled on...I have sent my SAR to GE Money, just this week. I need to know if it is still possible to take the Mortgage co back to court to fight this, I have been told It would be possible on PPI and probably on Fees added, as we found out this week from DMS that the amount Igroup have claimed for is 54K on a original loan of 33K, 21K in charges Greedy Bar!"*^%)...and they did not even sell the house that was down to the first charge.... Anyone else out there suffering from these scavenging ****. Please keep in touch we may be able to help each other...
  13. Thanks for the Reply Lea, I will not mention the lender but it was a self certified mortgage, I have been looking at trying to take this case to court for Irresponsible lending, I understand this again is quite awhile ago but I have had a breakdown between then and now and Irresponsible lending was brought up at the repossession hearing. any advice.
  14. Can anyone please advise. I was unfortunately evicted from my property 5 years ago... ( I wont go into the full story as It will take forever) anyway. we had the usual Debt Debt Debt... we moved out lived with in-laws (nightmare) started renting. eventually we ended up back at In-laws, now we are in a Housing Association Property.....the Crunch. Our second Charge/Mortgage company who took almost double the value of the mortgage OUT OF THE SALE OF OUR PROPERTY, found us here and is now pushing for more money.... I have made the collection company work hard and they have provided me with a copy of the original contract of the loan...This has not been signed by a representative of the mortgage company, someone has just wrote the "name of the company" even though it clearly states. "Signed on Behalf of the COMPANY NAME" is this Legal ? Is it enforceable ? I already intend to take the company to court for Irresponsible lending, I would really love to be able to Get this Sub Prime lender real good. Please assist regards Duncan
  15. Hi back in 2004 I took out a second mortgage with I Group, I believe it was called a "Self Certified Mortgage" all I had to do was sign, no proof of income and they approved it. I did previously provide them with two years books and was denied the mortgage, they then approached me with the offer of a Self Certified Mortgage...I signed and, Well the long and the short of it was the work dried up (Not that simple, but there is not enough room here to explain the full story) after the first or second missed payment they started court proceedings, (again its a long story as we fought them and the First Mortgage company in the courts) for over a year, my question is. Is this a case of Irresponsible lending, IE offering and issuing a "Self Certified Mortgage" after already refusing a normal mortgage...???? If so where do I start to do something about it ??? and can I after this time House re possessed 2006 regards Duncan
×
×
  • Create New...