Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'councils'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 26 results

  1. From the Guardian today. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/10/boot-out-bailiffs-debt-collection-councils-ethical-schemes HB
  2. Sorry for the long post: I have been busy looking for ways to keep as much money as I can in MY pocket. By this I mean I always pay my bills on time and often in credit. I wanted to save money on my water rates and looked in to getting my supply from the water companies directly. Currently my bill is £10.35pw. Not a lot you may think! But this is paying the Council directly as they get a discount for being a huge customer. They appear not to pass this saving on to their tenants.... The interesting point on this matter is that you will be paying a share of other peoples debts and voids. This is explained within the case listed below. Let me explain. 1st of all you need to find out if your LA is overcharging you, how you may ask. This is easy to find out by using a tool most water companies use to decide what your bill could be if on a metered supply. Will you save money? Umm a very good question to ask. Depending on where you live and whom is supplying your area you will need to find this for yourselves. In my area this is Essex and Suffolk water. They have a tool you can fill in and it will give you what you could pay if you changed to a meter. I did this and found out that I could potentially save upwards of over £300pa. A huge saving by any standards. My savings is based on the fact I do not have a bath and a single occupant and that I have a wet room. So I would save by switching supplier and going directly to them and not my LA. Now the interesting part of my post: There has recently been several important cases heard including a hearing at the High Court. The links are as follows. 1. http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co....d=56&Itemid=24 2. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2016/457.html From the long read you may discover that you can ask your LA to allow you to switch supplier. I made this information known to my LA and they are already beginning to filter out letters to their tenants. I am what is known as a block voice for my estate and asked if I could get my supply metered and at a reduced rate from the main suppliers directly. their response was a resounding NO! But then I linked them to these cases above and they had a change of mind. If it turns out that residents may have been overcharged, then they may be able to argue a refund against the different prices you had to pay. This I am currently looking in to and will update as and when anything comes to light. There is so much more to this issue but would make the initial read far to long so have just given basic information this far. What are your thoughts on this subject please? Note to admin not sure if this is the right area to post if not please feel free to move.. Similar thread here >>http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ht=water+rates with no replies MM
  3. Under the 2104 Children and Families Act 2014 Councils have certain Statutory directives regarding children who are not in education, for whatever reason. My daughter has been out of education for three years with separation anxiety brought about by her mother's domestic violence. Under the Act the Council are supposed to have provided 'alternative education' for her. The Act says they must work with schools/colleges to identify children in need and consult with them/their parents and other professional to provide alternatives suitable to their needs. Under the Equality Act and SEN regulations she is now classed as 'disabled and with SEN needs. However to date the Council have not followed any of the statutory directives. They have not even contacted me about her. I have complained to them. No result. I have complained to the Local Government Ombudsman. No result. I have complained to the Ministry of Education, told it was not their remit. How can I get them brought to task and get my daughter compensation for loss of education resulting from their not following the law? All over the UK there are families in the same situation.
  4. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/290903/response/710349/attach/html/2/Green%20response%20FOI%202015%2057.pdf.html https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/money_owed_by_the_british_parkin#comment-62932 Revealed first on the Pranksters comments section: http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/parkingeye-anpr-blunders-again.html#comment-form
  5. Saw this story on the news this morning - http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article/17947/online-news/dcas-in-crackdown-on-foreign-driver-parking-fines But the news piece didn't really give much of an explanation and nor does the above story. So currently, councils cant access foreign car data (unlike our UK DVLA system), but they are going to employ DCAs (who we all know have zero powers even in the UK) to track down these foreign car owners (how ??), and ask them nicely to pay ? I cant see the success rate being very how, surely it will only end up costing councils ?
  6. I received the following via a National Debtline twitter feed link http://www.stoptheknock.org/ Click on the map for your area and it will give you the stats for that particular Local Authority. Out of interest I clicked on Peterborough to see what information would be given. Very interesting. And Oxford
  7. SIGOMA Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities (outside London) within the LGA (SIGOMA) is a grouping of 45 urban authorities in the Northern, Midland and South-Coast regions of England. SIGOMA’s membership compromises of 33 metropolitan districts and 12 major unitary councils with similar characteristics. We are the collective voice across these regions and embody the opportunities and potential of the communities who live there. The combined population of SIGOMA councils amounts to over a quarter of the population of England and its member account for over 25% of English local government expenditure
  8. According to the Telegraph councils are having their wings clipped to prevent overzealous collection and issue of PCNs including possible banning of collection by bailiffs. Sadly it won't prevent Parking Eye, now part of Capita, et.al from ripping people off http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/11453090/Motorists-will-be-given-10-minute-grace-period-when-parking-tickets-run-out.html
  9. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2870900/Councils-raking-parking-profits.html
  10. Hi Hope someone can help. I am reading conflicting accounts regarding councils sending out summons for court appearances re council tax. On one hand, I'm reading it's illegal and, on the other, just came across this piece on the web which seems watertight. Please can someone clarify the situation? Many thanks. "There is no statute which authorises (or prevents) a council preparing a summons on the court’s behalf. Under section 51 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/51), a person can apply to the Magistrates’ Court for a summons. If it is granted, it is customary that the person applying drafts their own summons, which in the case of Council Tax is the Local Authority. There is no statute which authorises a summons to be issued by the Local Authority. The summons is issued by the court when the application is approved and endorsed by a Legal Adviser and the Council informed of the outcome of their application. The summons may then be printed by the complainant and that is now the normal custom in relation to all summonses. It is the responsibility of the person applying for a summons to serve it on the respondent and Rule 99 of the Magistrates’ Courts Rules 1981 sets out how that may be done, which includes by post. There is no agreement between courts and local authorities to do this, as it is the legal duty of the local authority in every case".
  11. Anglia councils plan own bailiff service Seven councils are planning to launch a revenues enforcement service, allowing them to bypass commercial bailiff firms. Breckland, East Cambs, Fenland, Forest Heath, St Edmundsbury, Suffolk Coastal and Waveney Councils. The Cabinet report (Anglia Revenues Partnership (ARP) - Internal Enforcement Agency Proposals) at paragraph 4.6 shows there's a financial benefit of doing away with their contractors.
  12. I stopped in a loading bay at Hammersmith to load items in my car, their traffic management Order states clearly that "if you are disabled or are injured you can stop for as long as it takes to set down or pick up with your bags/luggage, no time limit. The council lied at the tribunal and refused to give a copy of this traffic management Order. The tribunal Judge referred the decision to the council who still wanted the money from me. The tribunal is aware that they lied but will not do anything about it, I tried judicial review but they said the tribunal had no case to answer so they did not deal with it. I have contacted the ombudsman but they said to write to the council again and have this investigated first before they will deal with it, but the council will not investigate because the tribunal has found in their favor so they still want this injustice to continue. They have now applied for a recovery Order again and I need to apply for a TE7 extension of time in order to have this dealt with by the ombudsman. Any one has any help and or advice? TNX
  13. This is quite amusing, and also annoying. After the media just shafted the people of Scotland and god knows what kind of malpractice went on to stop Scotland leaving the UK, now locals councils are saying they are going to chase people for unpaid Poll Tax, based on people who only just signed the electoral register for the first time! Having a bit of a debate with people over whether they have 6 years or 20 years to take you to court over this. Can anyone confirm this? In any case it was abolished >20 years ago and I personally didn't pay a penny of it, which I am assuming means I also didn't acknowledge the debt. I think people need to be informed about this as they will likely send out threatening letters and some people might pay it not realising they don't have to, and there's nothing any council can do to force you to. Right?
  14. Hi Council Tax,anybody any idea how much notice your council has to give you for council tax payment,for example as of today 1st April had no notification at all,although I have checked it online Those councils who want to increase the amount of council tax for the current year,increase it by 1.99% to avoid a local referendum by breaking the 2% barrier,if you live in a rural location the parish council add their requirement to the Council Tax bill which takes my council tax to over 2% increase. I am sure there will be a clause so the council can ignore the parish council element,the question has got to be why can they ignore this. Any idea,s thankyou FS
  15. Well Mr Jones the councillor and I went to see the council yesterday about the Hedder H fee and the Attendance to remove fee being charged the same day as the levy we agreed that the Hedder H fee was a controversial fee and there were different opinions they stated the south Ribble case and agreed that there were several LGO reports saying it couldn't be charged I said it was an advertising fee introduced in 1993 and can only be charged if goods are removed Council said No its not just for advertising its for other expense's couldn't tell us what other expense's or why some bailiffs charge it and some don't but its something to do with the Walking possession agreement I argued my case and said the levy fee covers their expense's I mentioned Regulation 10 of The distress for rent rules 1988 and was told that does apply to council tax only rent I asked if they had taken legal advice and spoke to there solicitors and they said NO they will however consult them now and get back to us there was further conversation about it but that was the jist of it they ask what we wanted and I said if im correct return the money and remove the fee They gave me some paperwork with the information they are relying on to charge the fee (outlawla will you please post it on this thread please) I told them that I still think they are wrong and I wont be going away I then got on to the Van attendance fee being charged the same day as the levy They didn't think they were discussing that today well they thought wrong I asked why Rossendales bailiffs had charged the fee 197 times from 209 and why neither Jacobs or excel had provide the information MR Jones the councillor then commented about the lack of information and why the council cant provide the info asked for information before the next audit committee I was told that as they hadn't planed to discuss it they would have to check legislation on that I stated that there would be no argument with this fee as I know im right and had they read the FOI they would have noticed the comment from Excel who hadn't actually checked there records but state the answer would be none as an ATR fee cant be charged the same day as a levy I went on to say how many bailiffs is this 5/10 more than 10 is it the same few bailiffs Systematically defrauding us because make no mistake that's what it is and it must be looked into and if its the same bailiffs all the time then at the very least I would expect a form 5 to be sent to there certificating court however it is fraud and the police should be involved Council told me I was getting ahead of myself said I wasn't because I am correct there is no contravention as to when this fee can be charged
  16. Hi Hope someone can help with my question. I have been in dispute with my council re council tax and when I asked for a breakdown of years owed, bailiffs charges had been added to individual years as well. In one case, a total charge of roughly £270.00 had been added for bailiff charges for 1 year and in total over £1,000 has been added over a couple of years. Having done some research, I believe bailiffs can only charge a statutory £24.50 for a visit and a second one too. Bailiffs have never gained access to my property and I believe, according to the law, I am only liable for statutory fees and nothing else. There has never been Walking possession or whatever. Yes, I have had the "van" letter about being in my area but again goods have never been seized or taken. I believe these "charges" are unlawful and could be classed as fraud! If you have had any experiences like this, would be very grateful if you could give advice on what to do next! Thank you.
  17. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has criticised local government’s attitude towards protecting personal data, after four local councils were issued civil monetary penalties. Leeds City Council was served a monetary penalty of £95,000, Plymouth City Council £60,000 and Devon County Council £90,000 after separate incidents saw details of child care cases sent to the wrong recipients, while the London Borough of Lewisham was issued a penalty of £70,000 after social work papers were left on a train. The penalties mean that nineteen local councils have now received monetary penalties for breaching the Data Protection Act, totalling £1,885,000. Leeds City Council The case in Leeds saw sensitive personal details about a child in care sent to the wrong person, revealing details of a criminal offence, school attendance and information about the child’s relationship with their mother. When sending internal mail, the council re-use envelopes that have been used for external mail. But in this case the external address wasn’t crossed out, and so the sensitive file was posted to someone who had nothing to do with this case. Plymouth City Council The breach at Plymouth City Council followed a similar pattern, with information passed to the wrong recipient including highly sensitive personal information about two parents and four children, notably allegations of child neglect relating to ongoing care proceedings. The breach occurred when two reports about separate child neglect cases were sent to the same shared printer. Three pages from the first report were mistakenly collected with the papers from the second case, and so were handed to the wrong family. Devon County Council In Devon, a social worker used a previous case as a template for an adoption panel report they were writing, but a copy of the old report was sent out instead of the new one. The mistake revealed personal data of 22 people, including details of alleged criminal offences and mental and physical health. London Borough of Lewisham In Lewisham, a social worker left sensitive documents in a plastic shopping bag on a train, after taking them home to work on. The files, which were later recovered from the rail company’s lost property office, included GP and police reports and allegations of sexual abuse and neglect. Information Commissioner Christopher Graham said: “We are fast approaching two million pounds worth of monetary penalties issued to UK councils for breaching the Data Protection Act, with nineteen councils failing to have the most straightforward of procedures in place. “It would be far too easy to consider these breaches as simple human error. The reality is that they are caused by councils treating sensitive personal data in the same routine way they would deal with more general correspondence. Far too often in these cases, the councils do not appear to have acknowledged that the data they are handling is about real people, and often the more vulnerable members of society. “The distress that these incidents would have caused to the people involved is obvious. The penalties we have issued will be of little solace to them, but we do hope it will stop other people having to endure similar distress by sending out a clear message that this type of approach to personal data will not be tolerated. “There is clearly an underlying problem with data protection in local government and we will be meeting with stakeholders from across the sector to discuss how we can support them in addressing these problems.” The ICO is pressing the Ministry of Justice for stronger powers to audit local councils’ data protection compliance, if necessary without consent. The same powers are sought for NHS bodies across the UK following a series of data protection breaches in the health sector. Link; http://www.ccrmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8240&Itemid=37
  18. Bailiffs are charging excessive fees and not explaining their charges to debtors when acting for councils, the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) has warned. In a report issued today the LGO has warned councils they have to take responsibility for their bailiffs’ actions, and ensure complaints are handled properly. The LGO has not named individual councils or bailiff firms in today’s report but a spokesperson referred to individual cases it has previously publicised, including Blaby District Councll and Slough Borough Council, as examples of a recurring trend which prompted the report. Today’s report highlights other cases that resulted in serious injustice to individual debtors including one case where a debtor was charged three fees amounting to £405 without any explanation. When the LGO obtained an explanation of the charges from the council involved, they found the debtor had been overcharged by £300 plus VAT. In another case, bailiffs charged a ‘van fee’ for attending a property with a vehicle to remove goods, as they are entitled to do, but in this case the van fee was charged when the bailiffs had not entered a property or removed any goods. The LGO has also warned that councils must improve their approach to the use of bailiffs where potentially vulnerable debtors are concerned. “Sometimes a bailiff may be the first person acting on behalf of the council to meet the debtor,” said Dr Jane Martin, Ombudsman and chair of the LGO. “The bailiff may be the first person to realise the debtor is vulnerable. It is essential that bailiffs are alert to possible vulnerability and that they report any concerns back to the council.” The Ombudsman has found fault in a higher proportion of complaints that involve bailiff action than in other complaints about local taxation or parking enforcement. It cited recent figures suggesting 31% of complaints involving bailiffs had a remedy proposed, compared with only 23% of other complaints about local taxation and parking enforcement. The government has issued a response to today’s report. Local government minister Brandon Lewis said: “Councils equally need to show compassion towards the vulnerable and recognise individual cases of hardship. “The use of bailiffs should also be a last resort, they should not be commissioned disproportionately and councils should take direct responsibility for them.” Links: http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article/14619/online-news/councils-warned-on-bailiff-use To read the LGO report in full: http://www.lgo.org.uk/news/2012/nov/lgo-highlights-problems-bailiff-action-behalf-councils/
  19. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-2192993/How-compensation-pothole-damage-car.html
  20. http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article/14089/online-news/councils-acting-illegally-on-bailiff-fees-
  21. http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article/14089/online-news/councils-acting-illegally-on-bailiff-fees- Local authorities desperate to drive down costs may be acting illegally when it comes to debt collection. Colin Naylor, executive committee member of the Civil Enforcement Agency (CIVEA) and managing director of Dukes Bailiffs says council’s policy of “fees last” should be outlawed from local authority tenders. The practice involves bailiffs tendering for local council work appearing to be providing free of charge services to the authority with the fees then loaded onto the debtors after the debt has been paid. Naylor said: “We can all understand the pressure on local authorities to reduce costs but there is no doubt in my mind this type of arrangement falls outside the regulations.” Naylor went on to explain the “worrying trend” has four unwelcome consequences. Firstly, it opens local authorities up to legal challenges on contract awards. Secondly, it loads disproportionate costs onto debtors. Thirdly, it mitigates against bailiffs who are tendering for work on the correct basis. Fourthly, it encourages bailiffs to adopt a more aggressive stance towards debtors, which is strictly against government policy.
  22. £582m to Scottish Councils for affordable homes As well as providing this funding, the Scottish Government has also published a new Affordable Housing Supply Programme guidance below. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/Housing/investment/guidancenotes/GuidanceNotes2012/HSGN201206 With thanks to SG Landscope
×
×
  • Create New...