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

[Conniff]

Well done for bringing it to light.

Edited June 12, 2009 by 42man
Removed at the request of the OP...

[militantconsumer]

It is a local daily City newspaper with a circulation of about 30,000.

 

Although my name has now appeared in the paper, I understand that anonymity is desirable on CAG, so this is why I have blanked out the details.

 

I don't really want my real name to become obviously linked to my "militantconsumer" posting name, as I have made many 'anonymous' posts about friend's debt problems on this site, and it wouldn't be fair if people worked out the identity of those friends.

[42man]

Councils only have one interest at heart - themselves.....try getting something repaired and it takes eons, late with your tax and they are never late !!!

[Conniff]

It is a local daily City newspaper with a circulation of about 30,000.

 

Although my name has now appeared in the paper, I understand that anonymity is desirable on CAG, so this is why I have blanked out the details.

 

I don't really want my real name to become obviously linked to my "militantconsumer" posting name, as I have made many 'anonymous' posts about friend's debt problems on this site, and it wouldn't be fair if people worked out the identity of those friends.

 

 

Fully understand and respect that.

 

I, personally take issue with their statement " But officers defended the council, saying court action was a last resort in such cases and the charges were there to cover legitimate costs."

 

Court is the last resort, but they, (or any council now they know how to grow a money tree), does not use it as the last resort, it is ALWAYS the first choice of action.

Edited June 12, 2009 by Conniff

[militantconsumer]

The way this got into the newspaper was as follows:

 

1. My summons was last week, and I went to court to defend myself, as documented in this thread.

 

2. Independently of this, a local councillor had taken up the cases of many of her constituents, who were worried about their council tax bills but couldn't sort the problem out with the council.

 

3. The paper ran a story about how the council's hotline was jammed and nobody could get through to discuss their financial problems, and some people were getting summons. The councillor was quoted in the article as being concerned about this:

 

Cllr XXXX, who represents XXXX ward on the council, said she had been contacted by people in the ward complaining about how long it was taking to get through to the council's customer service line.

 

Cllr XXXX said: "One XXXX resident gave up after waiting 15 minutes. While the council rightly expects all council tax payers to be prompt, there may well be reasons why a payment is delayed. This may lead to court action incurring additional costs.

 

4. I contacted the journalist who had written the story, telling him I had some useful background information, having been to court myself last week. I sent him an edited copy of this thread.

 

5. He ran the story today (post #50) using quotes from this CAG thread!

 

6. We now wait to find out if this issue will die a death or if it will get picked up by anybody and snowball. The two stories so far have only been on pages 10 and 11 of the paper. But one interesting point is that the head of Revenue Services at the Council was quoted in the first story as saying:

 

XXXX, head of revenue and benefit services, confirmed the council had sent out reminders and summonses, "but no more than usual for this time of the year".

 

He said: "The volume of calls received represents an increase of 300 per cent over what we had expected to receive. This may be due to the current economic climate and taxpayers needing to spend a little longer on the phone discussing payments and their particular situations.

 

I wonder if the claim that there have been no more summonses than usual will turn out to be true???

[Conniff]

As this is your council, why not send a freedom of information request to them and ask how many court summonses have been sent out and how many they had made arrangements with without getting a liability order.

 

I ******* (fill that in yourself) hate councis and their blatant rip offs.

[militantconsumer]

As this is your council, why not send a freedom of information request to them and ask how many court summonses have been sent out and how many they had made arrangements with without getting a liability order.

 

You must be able to read my mind..... that it exactly what I have just been looking into.

 

Watch this space!

[Conniff]

MC have you looked into the likelyhood of your house being in the wrong band?

There are many many thousands that are paying too much tax and you can get it all back.

 

Council tax bills cover-up exposed - Telegraph

 

Council Tax Rebanding: Lower your band and save £1,000s...

Edited June 14, 2009 by Conniff

[militantconsumer]

Thanks for that suggestion Conniff. I did consider this a while back, but I think I'm probably in the right band. In fact, I'm quite lucky, because my part of town has comparatively low Council Tax compared to the rest of the City as it used to be the poorest part of town.

[militantconsumer]

The Council have replied to my Data Protection Subject Access Request today by asking me to phone them to discuss it.

 

I'm not sure I'm under any obligation to communicate in this way, and I don't want to find this leads to any kind of "misunderstanding" in what is discussed over the phone.

 

I think I might just write back and ask them to put their questions in writing, whilst reminding them of their obligation to provide all information within 40 days of my first letter!

[Conniff]

Have a look at phone call recording equipment mc, it's not expensive if you aren't interested in sophisticated stuff.

Then when they call you a liar (or say that particular call wasn't recorded when yu challenge them), during any future conversations, you can tell them 'not to worry', you have it recorded.

[militantconsumer]

Any advice on the best equipment to buy, and if I can attach it to a mobile phone?

[militantconsumer]

More than 3 weeks after the hearing date and I have heard nothing. No document from the Court, no request for payment from the Council. My girlfriend has heard nothing either.

 

Contrary to what was reported in the newspaper article, I have NOT settled this - in fact, I have not paid a penny this year.

 

What I am concerned about now is that they may seek some kind of enforcement without warning, and I will incur even more unneccessary costs. E.g. a visit from a bailiff.

 

Anyone know what is likely to happen next? Or what I should be doing?

[Conniff]

Hi MC. You won't hear from the court, but you should have received a letter from the council telling you they have obtained a liability order and what you should do next.

As they haven't, I would contact them. They should now come to an arrangement for you to pay in installments.

 

There is the very slight chance that their letter has been lost in the post, but more than likely they haven't written. They will just give it to a bailiff (but must give you seven days notification of such).

 

If that should happen and they appear at your door, don't let them in, they cannot force their way in, but can climb in a window or enter through an open door.

[militantconsumer]

Thanks Coniff.

 

As it is the summer, our doors and windows are often open!

 

I think I will contact the Council (and keep proof of sending).

[Jamstar]

Any more of a follow up on this, be great to hear if there's been any progress.

 

'In answer to that, the stamps on no more than three letters - 2 reminders and a final demand.

Secondly nothing, the bailiff charges the customer not the council.'

 

For not costing anything we have to put numerous man hours in to dealing with the resultant queries, paperwork etc that arise from recovery cases, the court attendance costs etc all add up across the year.

 

The costs charged in our area are based on the cost of recovery divided by the L/O's / Summons issued so the costs is realistic - around £40 for each.

 

Cases are often taking 5 or 6 + man hours to investigate even at the Summons stage when full break downs are needed ,often going back years, because someone who hasn't been bothered to pay wants all the relevant information. 5-6 hrs of time is around £60 just for the summons + the normal admin costs incurred in issuing it.

 

If the cost isn't charged to the non-payer then those who do pay have to foot the bill for something they have no responsibility for.

 

This really bugs me. Without getting into some big debate over it, if like you there had been a genuine mistake in not paying, it goes to court and you get slap with a penalty. You pay it. No investigation needed. Why should you have to fork out for the 5-6 hours for someone elses case. You're only responsible for your own case, which was what, a couple of reminders and a summons, all issued by computers with no human input (apart from stuffing a few envelopes).

 

And if it takes 5-6 hours to print off a statement, and i don't care how many years it us, then someone reallt stiffed you on the computer system!!!

[militantconsumer]

Hi Jamstar

 

I haven't made any progress on this as I have been very busy on other projects.

 

However, I have not forgotten about it, and do intend to find out how the £68 was calculated using a FOI request.

 

I will update this thread if/when anything happens.

[militantconsumer]

By the way, when the liability order eventually arrived through the post, I paid it straightaway in full. I haven't heard anything about the small amount relating to the prior year, so perhaps they have given up on that.

[Carningli]

Hello Millitantconsumer,

Well done for bringing this issue to the fore! I believe you are quite correct in your assumption that Councils are now using CT arrears and liability order costs as a form of revenue. I recently received a reminder when I was abroad, rang the Council office to pay oustanding instalments, asked if I was up to date with payments and was informed I was up to date. What they omitted to tell me was that because it was the 11th of the month I also owed for the current month:(. Subsequently received a summons with £38 costs. When I rang the Court to find out on which date the summons was issued, I was advised that although the summons carries the Court Address it was issued direct by Council, if these are not special powers I do not know what is?. Anyhow I paid up to date pror to the hearing and thought I would check with the Council, if the summons had been withdrawn. I was advised that it could not be withdrawn in my case, but I persisted and advised them that a summons could be withdrawn at anytime prior to thecase being heard to which the person I was speaking to on the phone eventually agreed. I then asked to speak to someone with authority to withdraw the summons, eventually I was put on to a Supervisor who agreed to withdraw the summons. Councils seem to be permitted to make up their own rules as they go along. What other matters can they deal with in a like manner?.

[militantconsumer]

Hello Millitantconsumer,

Well done for bringing this issue to the fore! I believe you are quite correct in your assumption that Councils are now using CT arrears and liability order costs as a form of revenue. I recently received a reminder when I was abroad, rang the Council office to pay oustanding instalments, asked if I was up to date with payments and was informed I was up to date. What they omitted to tell me was that because it was the 11th of the month I also owed for the current month:(. Subsequently received a summons with £38 costs. When I rang the Court to find out on which date the summons was issued, I was advised that although the summons carries the Court Address it was issued direct by Council, if these are not special powers I do not know what is?. Anyhow I paid up to date pror to the hearing and thought I would check with the Council, if the summons had been withdrawn. I was advised that it could not be withdrawn in my case, but I persisted and advised them that a summons could be withdrawn at anytime prior to thecase being heard to which the person I was speaking to on the phone eventually agreed. I then asked to speak to someone with authority to withdraw the summons, eventually I was put on to a Supervisor who agreed to withdraw the summons. Councils seem to be permitted to make up their own rules as they go along. What other matters can they deal with in a like manner?.

 

Councils can behave in this manner because of the way that the Council Tax legislation has been written. You cannot win your case except on a technicality - but there are no technicalities based on the way the Council has behaved.

 

We cannot change these rules without taking the UK to the European Court to challenge their legality under the Human Rights Act article about the right to a fair trial. (I brought this point up at my trial but it was ignored - hardly surprising as I had heard the Court Clerk laughing about defendants who bring up the Human Rights Act earlier in the day).

 

So we have to focus on the way that Councils are immorally abusing their position.

 

There are probably two main ways to fight them:

 

1. Obtain the calculation of their "costs" under the Freedom of Information Act and then use this against them in some way. Your costs were £38; mine were £68. Why the big difference? The Council could hire double the number of staff and double their costs. They are employing people with generous final salary pension schemes to abuse the court process, and then charging the tax payer for the privilege.

 

2. Investigate the Council's statements about the ways they behave and then complain about the ways they have broken these promises. (remember John Major's citizen's charter?). There are lots of levels that you can take a complaint to.

[Ruprecht]

Surely the costs in obtaining the Liability Order have to remain at just that?

 

How do they get away with adding other stuff on not relevant to those proceedings?

 

How can they ask for £130,000+ in costs just for printing out a spreadsheet of 2000 names? That's pretty much all they did and send a few quangos on a day out to the court.

 

Frightening!

 

Look out for black mercedes pulling up outside your house in the middle of the night MC!

[Conniff]

How can they ask for £130,000+ in costs just for printing out a spreadsheet of 2000 names?

 

Have you seen the price of ink cartridges lately

[bmwman]

Hi Militantconsumer

 

I have been reading your posts and was very interested to see that you said the council produced a spreadsheet of some 2000 names. I take it that the council used this in your case. Did the council also produce the certificate to prove the computer was working correctly as layed down by law.

 

The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992

 

Section 53 Majistrates Court sub-paragraph 5

[militantconsumer]

Hi bmwman

 

I can't remember exactly. The guy from the Council read some technical notes to the magistrates so I would assume all the regulatory points such as this one were covered considering they do this all the time. I have no way of knowing for certain and didn't get to see the spreadsheet.

 

By the way, I think the spreadsheet was actually just for the absent people as these were all covered right at the end of the case when I was the only person still sticking around in the court room. (Nobody would every have known about the 2,000 if I hadn't stayed to the bitter end.)

[Carningli]

Hi Militantconsumer,

I was very interested to follow up BMWmans link The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992. In this instrument reference is made to costs being reasonable in all cases. Do you feel there is any mileage in challenging a local authority or local authorities as to whether their costs are reasonable or not?. I believe information regarding substantiation of their costs could be obtained via the Freedom of Information Act.

Edited September 13, 2009 by Carningli