Jump to content
  • Content Count

    687
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

ss002d6252 last won the day on August 1 2017

ss002d6252 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

638 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. What seems to have happened as a best guess* is that at some point you defaulted on the original demand notice and a reminder/final notice was then defaulted on. Rather than go straight to a summons they suspended the issuing of it and gave you another payment arrangement. This arrangement had to be a manual one as its outside of how most council tax systems bill as standard. Once you had, for whatever reason, failed the manual arrangement they then released the summons they had held. The summons would then be issued for whatever balance remained due. * it's permissable but in over a decade of working in council tax I've not known one do it this way as its far too fiddly and can go wrong too easily.
  2. You can certainly dispute with then regarding what you state you were told and ask that they remove the summons but if they don't there's not a lot that can be done. They've do seems to have done it in an odd way anyway by though by the sounds of it as it doesn't sounds like the letter you received was a demand notice but a hand typed arrangement letter (which they made the typo on). For them to rely on this then there, prior to the summons, must have been a reminder or final notice that was defaulted on - the problem comes in that it may have been issued some time ago and they chose not to issue the summons until Feb. When the letters comes through take a good look at the reminder or final notice.
  3. You may be able to dispute the summons on a legislative technicality but it won't remove the fact that the council tax charge would still be due if it was not paid. If the summons could be argued against successfully then they can simply issue a revised demand notice for the outstanding balance.
  4. Originally you had payments due until either Jan or Feb. You contacted the council who clarified that the final payment was in Feb and not 2 due in Jan. When the payment of £89 was due for Feb you stated that you paid £85 so the payment was short by £4, the amount on the summons. What were the payment dates/amounts and what does your bank show for each of these? Unless you'd paid more than was due by the Feb date then you'd be short if you did not pay the full Feb instalment amount to settle the remaining balance.
  5. The problem here though is that you paid short and that is the cause of the summons - although the letter had a typo on the date they still waited until after the February instalment date before they took action - so, in effect, you had longer to pay than your letter suggested. If it had been the other way round then you would have been at a detriment due to their error (i.e if they said Feb for the last payment but it was actually Jan) and had more of an argument. If the payment of £89 had been made by the February date then the summons could not have proceeded but due to the £4 shortfall then it would appear that the council have acted correctly and could proceed with the summons. Depending on what letters you received, and what they said, there may by a technical defence but it's unlikely.
  6. Ah Ok, as it's next year's charge the first payment is due on 1 April - you can pay it earlier but it's not due until that day. Next year isn't an issue for now as it's at least 14 days away before it starts getting at the point where it may start to cause issues. The arrears will continue to cause issues until their either paid or the liability issue is sorted out properly.
  7. It can't be next year's council tax charge as they have to spread it by instalments, starting on 1 April. You need to know what the amount is for.
  8. You need to get some assistance sorting the council tax liability etc sorted as it needs to be taken out of your name. The payment for now will stop the imminent action and the rest is a little way off yet before it becomes a problem (assuming it's next year's bill).
  9. You can still dispute liability with the council. If the council won't budge then you'd need a valuation tribunal to dispute the liability although, in some cases, the LGO can assist with ancillary arguments. If you are not the owner and it was not your 'sole or main residence' then you are correct that you are not liable.
  10. If you can pay in full that would stop any action and it can be later refunded.
  11. If the form is for a carers disregard for council tax (and not something to do with CTR) then you need to note your mother as the person you provide the care for (the fact that she is SMI doesn't remove the fact that she is the adult who you provide care for) . If it's a CTR form then there's nothing you can really do until the council tax liability is sorted.
  12. The 50% discount is the statutory maximum that can be given by way of a council tax discount where each occupier is disregarded.
  13. There are two different issues at play here - until the council tax side is sorted the CTR side can never be correct. Don't get CTR and council tax discounts mixed up - they use different definitions and different rules. Within council tax a (non)dependant has no meaning (except for a couple of non-relevant specific situations) whereas (non)dependants are something that is relevant for CTR calculations. It is clear that your mother and yourself are disregarded for council tax purposes so the 50% discount applies. How the council then treat yourselves for the CTR calculation on the remaining 50% depends on how their scheme treats both of you (and your incomes). If the council are misinterpreting the situation it's far better, in my experience, to go down the route of disputing the legislative decision with them and using the valuation tribunal route if then needed - an MP knows nothing about the correct council tax legislation and so, if the council trust their own interpretation, it's not going to alter it. I very rarely use a phone for my cases because a) it's difficult to speak with councils, b) there's nothing in writing and c) I like to set out the full technical argument so that the path to a tribunal is easier & quicker, if needed. If nothing else, a written medium stops miscommunication and gives the other side something to sit and read, and digest, properly.
×
×
  • Create New...