Summons - how can I get my own back on them?

[militantconsumer]

I have a summons for non-payment of council tax. The reasons that this has happened are:

1. I forgot to pay it

2. They never sent me their normal "final notice" so .... I forgot to pay it

 

It is for £1,2XX for 09/10 plus also £18 for the prior year plus another £68 for their "costs".

 

Luckily, I CAN afford to pay this all now.

 

But I am very annoyed because they are so rubbish at sending bills for the right amounts, and have just rushed to this summons without any attempt to remind me to pay.

 

They also sent an identical summons to my girlfriend, who only moved in here in February this year - so it is hardly her fault that there is £18 from the prior year, even though she was here for a few days of that old period.

Edited May 25, 2009 by militantconsumer

[militantconsumer]

So what I want to know is, how can I cause the maximum annoyance to the council, and hopefully avoid paying the £68 "costs".

 

In the meantime, should I pay all the £1,2XX and see if they still go for the liability order for the remaining £18 + £68?

 

And to think how reasonable I was a couple of weeks ago when they didn't even collect my rubbish!

Edited May 25, 2009 by militantconsumer

[militantconsumer]

I read somewhere that a subject access request tends to annoy them.

 

Also, can I find out how much money they've made out of these liability order hearings in "costs" via the freedom of information act?

[ss002d6252]

If you ordinarily get a final notice then it means that you have had 2 previous reminders asking for payment of the missing instalment within 7 days and you have paid then within that time period.

 

If you haven't had a final notice then a first or second reminder has been issued asking for payment within 7 days and you haven't made the payment within those 7 days. In these case then there is no legal requirement to use a final notice rather than the summons.

 

Legally the council can pursue the liability order for costs only.

[militantconsumer]

If you ordinarily get a final notice then it means that you have had 2 previous reminders asking for payment of the missing instalment within 7 days and you have paid then within that time period.

 

If you haven't had a final notice then a first or second reminder has been issued asking for payment within 7 days and you haven't made the payment within those 7 days. In these case then there is no legal requirement to use a final notice rather than the summons.

 

Legally the council can pursue the liability order for costs only.

 

Thanks for your input. I have received no final notice for the year 09/10. I have received final notices in the past. So I don't know whether what you have said is appropriate to my case or not.

[militantconsumer]

To put it another way.....

 

I have read on this forum that Councils have special powers to recover unpaid council tax, and these liability order hearings cannot be argued against on any grounds except if you are not the person responsible for paying the tax.

 

Question - in that case, why don't the Council just proceed to the liability order against ALL council tax payers?

 

Answer - because there must be a legal procedure that they have to follow.

 

Have they followed it in my case or not?

[militantconsumer]

I am getting more and more angry the more time I spend on the local authority council tax pages of this forum.

 

They are so heavy handed and they are abusing their powers.

 

I am neither trying to avoid paying, and nor am I unable to pay. I just forgot, and they never sent me a final reminder, rang me up, sent an email, or anything.

 

And the £68 is total rubbish, they are making it up, it never costs them £68 to send me that letter, and I don't believe the court fee is £68 either.

[Conniff]

The fee for a liability order is £3, the remainder is their costs. They will not tell you under any circumstances how this is made up, (probably as they have no idea and just plucked a number out of the air). I varies across the country with some councils charging £40 and other up to £160.

 

When you pay CT arrears, the court costs are taken before any council tax, so if you owed £50 and the costs were £50 and you paid £50, that would be taken as the costs and you would still be in arrears with your tax payment by £50.

 

How to get back at them I wouldn't know as even setting fire to the finance department would probably do no good as they most likely, (or should), keep a backup in another building away from the revenue office.

 

Councils have found a good way of suplimenting their income by using liability orders and there is no way they will stop now that they know they are on to a good thing.

 

_________________________ ___________________

 

If my posting has been of any assistance - please tip my scales.

_________________________ ___________________

 

Foreign Aid - taxing poor people in rich countries for the benefit of rich people in poor countries.

_________________________ ___________________

Edited May 25, 2009 by Conniff

[militantconsumer]

I spoke to the guy who works for the Council but who attends the hearings.

 

I asked why they didn't issue a final notice, email me, call me, etc.

Answer: "No need to"

 

I asked him whether they had actually paid the £68

Answer: "No"

 

I asked him how much the fixed fee is that they paid to the court.

Answer: "£3"

 

He also told me that he would welcome my attendance at the court to put my arguments before the magistrate.

 

He is a cocky ****hole and he knows that if I said what I told him on the phone then he will win.

 

So my two choices now are:

 

1. Don't pay, find some old paperwork or emails to support a legitimate reason why I wouldn't be liable for this, so the liability order won't be granted.

 

2. Pay, and then find a way to try and get the costs back e.g. small claims court (if they have jurisdiction) or just generally annoy them through Data Protection Act and Freedom of Information Act.

 

It really winds me up that they deliberately don't try very hard to collect payments because they know they are backed up by these ridiculously draconian laws that allow them to make another £65 for every council tax payer who forgets to pay.

 

Having said that, I think I read somewhere that there is nothing to be lost by attending the hearing, so perhaps I will go along anyway.

 

They will get nothing out of attachment to earnings because I do the payroll at my company! But I could do without the bailiffs coming round the house.

[militantconsumer]

The Valid Defences are:

 

• An unauthorised officer of the Council is attempting to obtain the Liability Order.
  
• There is a defect in your payment instructions (your bill has been calculated incorrectly).
  
• Less than 14 days has elapsed from the issue of your demand notice and your first instalment falling due.
  
• Payment has been made in full.
  
• No reminder notice was issued.
  
• The Council has defective computer evidence.
  
• You have an Administration Order in progress through the County Court, which includes your outstanding Council Tax.
  
• Documents have been served incorrectly.
  
• You are not joint and severally liable for the period in question.
  
• You are subject of bankruptcy proceedings that have been commenced against you.
  
• The debtor is deceased.
  

[militantconsumer]

Anyone think there is a Human Rights Act case in relation to this?

 

-------

 

Article 6: Right to a Fair Trial

 

1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly, but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interests of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.

 

2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.

 

3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights -

(a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he or she understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;

 

(b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence;

 

© to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;

 

(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;

 

(e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.

 

Article 6 is an absolute right. It guarantees your right to a fair hearing in civil and criminal proceedings. It sets standards for the way that proceedings are run. Although you may feel that you have not had a fair trial if you lose your case, there will only be a breach of Article 6 if these standards have not been met.

 

Criminal proceedings are when someone is prosecuted for an offence. Under Article 6 criminal proceedings have a wider meaning than they usually have in English law. Under Article 6 cases against people for contempt of court or for not paying their council tax count as criminal proceedings.

 

In addition to criminal proceedings, article 6 applies to the ‘determination of your civil rights and obligations’. This includes civil proceedings, such as a claim for damages, or tribunal proceedings, such as a claim for unfair dismissal in the Employment Tribunal, or an appeal against an immigration decision in the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal

 

It can also include other situation where there is a dispute about your civil rights or obligations and where the outcome of that dispute is going to be decisive. So for instance, in Le Compte v Belgium, the ECHR held that a hearing before a medical disciplinary panel engaged Article 6 because the panel had the power to permanently revoke the applicant’s licence to practice medicine, which would amount to a decisive determination of his civil right to practice medicine.

 

Certain standards apply in both criminal and civil proceedings. These rights include:

• The right to a trial within a reasonable time.
  
• The right to an independent and impartial judge or tribunal.
  
• The right to a public hearing (although there are circumstances when the public can be excluded)
  
• The right to a public judgment (although this may be restricted in certain types of cases, e.g. family cases.)
  

In civil proceedings Article 6 also protects the right to take court proceedings to settle a dispute, although this right may be restricted in some circumstances. It may also give the right to legal aid where the dispute is very complicated and you are at a disadvantage because you cannot afford a lawyer.

 

There are further rights in criminal proceedings. These include:

• The right to be presumed innocent until you have been proved to be guilty.
  
• The right to be informed at a very early stage what the accusation against you is.
  
• The right not to be forced to answer questions, although the court may be able to draw conclusions from your failure to answer questions.
  
• The right to adequate time to prepare your defence.
  
• The right to have legal aid for a lawyer if you cannot afford one and it is in the interests of justice for you to have one.
  
• The right to be present at your trial.
  
• The right to put your side of the case at your trial.
  
• The right to question the main witnesses against you and to call witnesses of your own
  
• The right to an interpreter if you need one.
  

Relevant sections:

• How to enforce your rights
  
• The rights of defendants
  
• The rights of prisoners
  
• The rights of people detained under the Mental Health Act 1983
  

[militantconsumer]

I was thinking in particular that I just have to accept their evidence from computer printouts and I have no right to call to any witnesses, nor to cross examine their staff who dealt with the Council Tax.

 

Also note this from the above:-

 

Criminal proceedings are when someone is prosecuted for an offence. Under Article 6 criminal proceedings have a wider meaning than they usually have in English law. Under Article 6 cases against people for contempt of court or for not paying their council tax count as criminal proceedings.

[militantconsumer]

The right to have legal aid for a lawyer if you cannot afford one and it is in the interests of justice for you to have one.

 

My girlfriend certainly cannot afford a lawyer. I'm not sure how you can prove that "it is in the interests of justice for you to have one" - though I don't see why it wouldn't be!

[militantconsumer]

As soon as I first received the summons, I sent a fax to the Council saying I disputed this. That was before I fully understood their incredible special legal powers and how you basically aren't entitled to any legal defence at these cases.

 

Anyway, today the Council sent me an email with a PDF letter attached to it, in response to that fax. This letter did not come in the mail today (it's actually dated today) so I suppose I am meant to receive it tomorrow when I get home from work (i.e the night before the hearing!). Well, at least they have emailed it to me.

 

Nothing was sent to my girlfriend, however, who has also been sent the same summons - which hardly seems fair! But then again, it hardly seems fair that ONE copy of a bill and ONE copy of a reminder is deemed sufficient warning that TWO people are due to receive a summons to appear at the magistrates court.

 

Now, the interesting thing is that the Council seem VERY keen to make sure all disputes have been "explained" prior to the hearing. I wonder why that could be - perhaps they don't want any nasty surprises on the day.

 

I won't post any more information on here until Thursday, just in case anybody has been lurking on here (unlikely, I know).

[militantconsumer]

All I will add is to say that I am in a very fortunate position because, if I lose, I can afford to (and will) immediately pay the full year's tax, including the £68 of costs.

 

Let's call it a tactical withdrawl before the real fun starts!

 

If I win I will come back on here with a BIG smile on my face.

[Conniff]

There is only one question to ask - 'are you exempt from paying council tax in accordance with the exempt list ie; all under 18 or all students etc;

 

If the answer is no, then you have lost and the liability order will be issued.

The court hearing is to establish if you are liable for council tax or not, no ifs, no buts, just yes or no.

 

You can enter 'no' on the summons or go to court and say 'no' and no judgement will be entered either way, you and the council then go away and argue the fact.

If you can show you have no liability to council tax then that is the end.

However, if the council does not accept your arguement, then another summons will arrive where you can go and argue the point in court.

 

You mentioned something about special powers of the council. They have no special powers and must go through the court the same as anyone else.

When they have a liability order, they can then use lawful means to collect ie; bailiffs or taken direct from you wages or if there is no hope of you being able to pay but own your own house, then have a charging order placed on that.

 

One thing to keep in mind is that council tax must be paid in advance whether that is one lump sum or monthly.

 

_________________________ ___________________

 

If my posting has been of any assistance - please tip my scales.

_________________________ ___________________

 

Foreign Aid - taxing poor people in rich countries for the benefit of rich people in poor countries.

_________________________ ___________________

 

Make a Report to Consumer Direct Here

[militantconsumer]

There is only one question to ask - 'are you exempt from paying council tax in accordance with the exempt list ie; all under 18 or all students etc;

 

If the answer is no, then you have lost and the liability order will be issued.

The court hearing is to establish if you are liable for council tax or not, no ifs, no buts, just yes or no.

 

In my post#10 above I quoted the acceptable defences, which I obtained from here:

North Warwickshire Borough Council - Defence Against a Liability Order and Payment

 

Are you saying that I cannot use any of these defences when I appear in court on Thursday?

[militantconsumer]

You mentioned something about special powers of the council. They have no special powers and must go through the court the same as anyone else.

When they have a liability order, they can then use lawful means to collect ie; bailiffs or taken direct from you wages or if there is no hope of you being able to pay but own your own house, then have a charging order placed on that.

 

One thing to keep in mind is that council tax must be paid in advance whether that is one lump sum or monthly.

 

By "special powers" I mean that, if you compare this to credit card debt, you really don't get treated very fairly. One reminder (deemed to be received by EVERYONE at the property) is all it takes and they can follow it up with the summons, which then entitles them to deduct money from your salary and take things from your house.

 

This is why I mentioned Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights which, love it or hate it, must be incorporated into UK Law.

 

Now, a few years ago nobody thought that bank charges could be challenged, but then people started questioning it and it was decided (subject to appeal) that the Unfair Consumer Contracts Regulations applied. Imagine what would happen if these "costs" (mine includes a profit of more than 2,000%) went the same way.

 

I have nothing to lose by going along to the hearing and, like I said, if I lose I will immediately pay the whole year's tax in advance, and the £68 of "costs".

 

But I WILL get my own back on them. And revenge is a dish best served cold - so it won't all happen on Thursday.

Edited June 2, 2009 by militantconsumer

[Jamstar]

And the £68 is total rubbish, they are making it up, it never costs them £68 to send me that letter, and I don't believe the court fee is £68 either.

 

The fee for a liability order is £3, the remainder is their costs. They will not tell you under any circumstances how this is made up, (probably as they have no idea and just plucked a number out of the air). I varies across the country with some councils charging £40 and other up to £160.

 

This is quite interesting, I friend of mine is in the same boat, in that he forgot to pay his c/t and is now faced with with an additional one months council tax as "costs"

 

Can this be right? Can we not challenge this cost as not being a true reflection of what it actually costs them to issue the summons? i.e. like what is being done with the bank charges?

 

I mean can it "vary" how much it costs to issue a summons anyway, should this not be a fixed fee (regardless of how extortionate it is), i mean it doesn't cost more to issue just because you live in a bigger house right?

 

Anyway, your thought on this would be appreciated. I mentioned the bank charges case to him and he wondered if the same could be done for this.

 

thanks in advance

[militantconsumer]

Anyway, your thought on this would be appreciated. I mentioned the bank charges case to him and he wondered if the same could be done for this.

 

Not using the same area of law (Unfair Consumer Contract Regulations).

 

However, when something doesn't "feel" fair, you often find that it isn't.

 

This is, after all, mainly a tax on the poor to subsidise local authorities.

 

In my opinion they are deliberately taking legal action to make a profit. In most legal areas, the law is concerned with returning the situation to how it would have been if nothing illegal had taken place.

 

Not here.

 

I may ask a question in the legal issues part of the forum later. And I may start a mini-campaign. And I may try to use the Freedom of Information Act to get them to justify their charges.

 

But all that will have to come later - I have a summons to answer this week!

[Conniff]

An unauthorised officer of the Council is attempting to obtain the Liability Order.

That wouldn't happen.

There is a defect in your payment instructions (your bill has been calculated incorrectly).

Only if they won't admit the bill is wrong but you can show it is.

Less than 14 days has elapsed from the issue of your demand notice and your first instalment falling due.

Unlikely, they are very carefull to make sure bills are issued on time.

Payment has been made in full.

Not relevent in your case.

No reminder notice was issued.

How do you prove this. Only a proper examination of their computer can prove it wasn't. You have a right to a printout of your account. That doesn't mean that the recorded record of issue was on the correct date or at all, you would need to look at the operating system timestamp.

The Council has defective computer evidence.

Could happen but how would you know unless they have not taken any notice of information you have sent them. They can also use the excuse as above, not received.

You have an Administration Order in progress through the County Court, which includes your outstanding Council Tax.

Not relevent in your case - well you haven't indicated your are under an admin order.

Documents have been served incorrectly.

Very unlikely, they are too well practiced.

You are not joint and severally liable for the period in question.

You haven't indicated this to be the case either. Should be in the case of your girlfriend.

You are subject of bankruptcy proceedings that have been commenced against you.

You haven't said this is in effect.

The debtor is deceased.

You can't get a better reason than that.

[Conniff]

By "special powers" I mean that, if you compare this to credit card debt, you really don't get treated very fairly. One reminder (deemed to be received by EVERYONE at the property) is all it takes and they can follow it up with the summons, which then entitles them to deduct money from your salary and take things from your house.

 

This is why I mentioned Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights which, love it or hate it, must be incorporated into UK Law.

 

Now, a few years ago nobody thought that bank charges could be challenged, but then people started questioning it and it was decided (subject to appeal) that the Unfair Consumer Contracts Regulations applied. Imagine what would happen if these "costs" (mine includes a profit of more than 2,000%) went the same way.

 

I have nothing to lose by going along to the hearing and, like I said, if I lose I will immediately pay the whole year's tax in advance, and the £68 of "costs".

 

But I WILL get my own back on them. And revenge is a dish best served cold - so it won't all happen on Thursday.

 

I don't quite see where the human rights come into this. Legislation says they will send you a reminder and give you seven days, if you haven't paid by the end of that seven day, then after a further seven days they can apply for a liability order.

 

There is no need (and I wouldn't) to pay the whole lot off in one. You will be able to make an agreement to pay by installments for the remainder. Let them wait.

[Conniff]

This is quite interesting, I friend of mine is in the same boat, in that he forgot to pay his c/t and is now faced with with an additional one months council tax as "costs"

 

Can this be right? Can we not challenge this cost as not being a true reflection of what it actually costs them to issue the summons? i.e. like what is being done with the bank charges?

 

I mean can it "vary" how much it costs to issue a summons anyway, should this not be a fixed fee (regardless of how extortionate it is), i mean it doesn't cost more to issue just because you live in a bigger house right?

 

Anyway, your thought on this would be appreciated. I mentioned the bank charges case to him and he wondered if the same could be done for this.

 

thanks in advance

 

Fully agree and yes I would think you could challenge it, but like the banks, they will not let on and the banks to this day have not said how much it cost or how they arrive at their fees, and non of the court cases has established that either, just that they are unfair.

 

The fee for a liability order varies a great deal over the country, so like you say, it is plucked from the air or they would all be the same.

[militantconsumer]

Thanks for your input, Conniff.

 

Looks like I will have to show the bill is wrong!

 

Any idea if I can represent my girlfriend in court? She may be unable to attend. I don't want to win and then find she is liable!

[Conniff]

Not using the same area of law (Unfair Consumer Contract Regulations).

 

However, when something doesn't "feel" fair, you often find that it isn't.

 

This is, after all, mainly a tax on the poor to subsidise local authorities.

 

In my opinion they are deliberately taking legal action to make a profit. In most legal areas, the law is concerned with returning the situation to how it would have been if nothing illegal had taken place.

 

Not here.

 

I may ask a question in the legal issues part of the forum later. And I may start a mini-campaign. And I may try to use the Freedom of Information Act to get them to justify their charges.

 

But all that will have to come later - I have a summons to answer this week!

 

Completely agree - they go by the letter of the law and issue the summons the second the 7 days are up. They have no interest at all in your ability to pay.