Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Avg. Content Per Day

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


ss002d6252 last won the day on May 19

ss002d6252 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

643 Excellent

About ss002d6252

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If you clear the council tax + costs then, if there are only the enforcement agent fees remaining, the agent can take civil action against the fees if they so wished.
  2. It's all very confusing. In respect of withdrawal of liability orders then it is only strictly speaking available on application by the council under s82 of the LGA2003, in which case an order can be quashed. The other way would be to ask the court to re-open the hearing and decide again whether or not the order should be granted (effectively restarting the hearing) so not technically withdrawing anything. (Apologies for the any typos- my keyboard is knackered and doesn't like fast typing (something has been spilt on it I think as the keys are sticking) ).
  3. Possibly. 'Withdrawal of offences' is not terminology that would be used with liability orders (unless it had perhaps been taken for committal& withdrawn - in which case only the committal action is ceased, not the actual liability order itself) . There's something odd abut this one nut unless the OP comes back to provide far more details the I'd say we're at a standstill.
  4. The balance on the liability orders is a provable debt (without a liability order that debt is not provable) - whether or not there is enough other debt under the Insolvency Act to top it up to £5k or more is another matter (it's possible that he has other debts that can be rolled in from the council etc). There is no time limit on enforcement on a liability order once it's been obtained so there's no time limits in respect of the Limitation Act 1980 (That's already been considered and dismissed by the courts). As long as the original liability orders were obtained within 6 years of the amount being billed for then there's no issue i respect of the liability orders being obtained in the first place.
  5. Reg 49 states that " For the purposes of this regulation the amount due is an amount equal to any outstanding sum which is or forms part of the amount in respect of which the liability order was made " so it's very woolly but it should include the liability & summons costs. It is silent on bankruptcy costs. As council tax legislation does not set any limit on the amounts that can be claimed in bankruptcy (and effectively only provides that a liability order is to be considered a provable debt) I would expect that the standard Insolvency Act rules would apply as to whether or not costs can be added to the debt or not etc etc. Until the OP clarifies what's in place and what isn't then it's difficult to say more.
  6. Even if they wanted to try the general bankruptcy route for a debt then council tax legislation would not allow it. Section 14 & Schedule 4 of the 1992 Act specifies the details of council tax recovery and how that can be undertaken (finer details provided via subordinate legislation). Reg 49 of the Administration & Enforcement Regs 1992 provides that council tax enforcement requires a liability order is in place for bankruptcy. Trying to recover via another route would be outside of their powers.
  7. The bankruptcy application of the back of the Stat Demand would require a liability order. In theory a Stat Demand could be completed and sent without one but it's unlikely the council are going to do so over £4k without having the powers to follow through on the threatened bankruptcy (otherwise they're left high and dry in that respect). The bankruptcy application following the Stat Demand would need a liability order.
  8. The council website will only show their fees and not any from the enforcement agents.
  9. Depends on when the demand notice was issued as to when the 6 year period under regulation 34 starts - it is not always the same date as the period the charge is from. My bigger concern would be, if liability orders had been withdrawn, why a stat demand is in place. A stat demand would require a liability order to be in place before the application could be made.
  10. Usually there is no notification from the Magistrates that a council tax summons has been withdrawn (in well over a decade of working in council tax I've not come across a court who does so) - had the council been looking at taking some other legal action against you (fraud by misrepresentation etc) as that notification sounds more like you'd receive from that ? If so, then these actions are entirely separate to the pursuing arrears via council tax legislation. Why is the council tax outstanding ? Stat Demands are a pain and not always correct - I dealt with one earlier this year who'd been issued with one for £16k and the council had refused to budge. After about 3 months we finally got them to admit the whole of the council tax charge was wrong and they withdrew the action ! I'd hate to see how much cost the council for their mistake.
  11. The standard process is that one demand notice covers April to March so the reminders are based off that demand notice - if an amended demand notice was issued during the year it resets the counts but otherwise it's a maximum of two reminders in any one council tax year. Keep in mind that if either of the reminders are complied with then you lose the right to instalments (therefore you don't always get two reminders as a warning.).
  12. Prior to a summons there has to have been a demand notice and at least one reminder/final notice at some point. Depending on the specifics though these can be have been issued some time prior to the action and, if you've already had 2 reminders during the year then there is no requirement to issue a third before a summons is issued,
  13. In that respect there have been no changes to the relevant part of the Act since around 2002 he's relatively safe on that one.
  14. It's quite common for them to have little, if any, training - to put it simply , if they knew their stuff and did it properly .The argument over SMI & liability is an old, and very misunderstood one.
  15. The council cannot override statue although some try - I spend all day, every day, battling with local authorities and it can get frustrating, even for those who know the system. I had an email today from someone who had been arguing with the council for month over a similar issue, it was only once I got involved that they backed off and acknowledged she was correct. It shouldn't take a person to have to get help to sort what should be a relatively easy issue. The simple point is that liability does not drop down-over just because a person is SMI, SMI status only works where a person is jointly liable and that other party is resident (or neither party is resident) in the property. It would appear that the local authority do not understand council tax liability and based on what you say they are clearly wrong in how they are attempting to implement liability under s6.
  • Create New...