Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I was obviously clutching at straws on that one! I was putting the repeal together with the information below and considering that as I hadn't heard from the council for over 3 years that this might mean the charge / restriction was not now being pursued, particularly as the SAR disclosure did not show any entry for me from the Finance Dept. I fear I'm back to square one now.   After 1 April 2015 a Local Authority will only be able to recover unpaid care home fees by securing a judgment debt either in the County Court or the High Court (s69(1) of the Act).and The Act increases the time limit for the recovery of a debt comprising of unpaid care home fees from three years to six years from the date the sum becomes due      
    • Absolutely: The Homicide Act was repealed. So, after that they could no longer charge people for murder under the Homicide Act. (Not the greatest of examples, I accept, given murderers just get charged with murder being against the common law- but my point is:)   You can no longer be charged with Murder contrary to the homicide act. That doesn’t mean that those serving sentences for murder contrary to the Homicide Act, having been found guilty, had to be released the day the law was repealed.   Charges / restrictions couldn’t be placed under the repealed legislation (without e.g. a CCJ) once the Act was repealed. The repeal doesn’t mean existing charges / restrictions in force at the day of repeal have to be removed.
    • BazzaS Ah - now that complicates things - just when I thought I'd got my head round it!   I did think b] might be a source of worry for the purchaser. They have just instructed their solicitor yesterday but I haven't found one yet, preliminary enquiries didn't result in any clarity on the questions I posed. a] where do I find a CS who understands this and can share their knowledge with the buyer's CS?   I've no idea what the outstanding balance is as the council has not been in touch. I appealed many years ago and it wasn't resolved. I did do a SAR with the council and nothing came back from the Finance dept. so I was hoping my appeal had been accepted and the debt 'wiped' but they hadn't bothered to contact me. There were lots of changes up to the new Care Act 2014 which came into force on 01.04.15    Repeal: I was relying on the meaning below? Hence again I thought that's why the council hadn't pursued the debt and was just leaving the CO [or restriction] on the register to keep me on my toes!   If a government repeals a law, it causes that law no longer to have any legal force.   Thanks
    • The issue is 2-fold (both related to perceived risk, in a very risk-averse profession): a) will you find a conveyancer who will agree and follow that they needn't worry, and just notify once sold, and b) buyer's wil be put off if their conveyancer says "well, there is a risk".....   The combination of these may be that unless you get very lucky, you'll only get interest in a sale if an undertaking to settle the outstanding sum is made.   As for the repeal : I imaging that it will prevent new charges / restrictions from when it came into force, not revoke pre-existing ones.
    • I have held a Credit Card with Natwest for over 30 years and in the last 6 months or so, I have not used it.     The card is due to expire in a couple of months and I  have had a letter asking whether I still needed a Credit Card.  And that if I did not contact them within a month, they would close the account.  In order to keep the account, apparently I have to phone them to ask them to issue another card on the expiry of the current one .   I have always maintained a Credit Card, just in case of emergencies and if you hire a car for example, they often want details of a Credit Card.   Is this a new policy by Banks ?  First time Natwest have done this.   I have had zero balances near to card expiry dates before and they have not done this.   And this is a warning note to others, that you should never ignore letters from your Bank, thinking it is just advertising information on their services.  Otherwise you may find that the Credit Card  account you thought that you  had, has been cancelled.     
  • Our picks

    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 5 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 7 replies
    • The courier industry – some basic points for customers. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421913-the-courier-industry-%E2%80%93-some-basic-points-for-customers/
      • 1 reply
    • The controversial sub-prime lender says the City watchdog is investigating its practices.
      View the full article
      • 0 replies
vegus

attachment of earnings for CT 2004 - just been told!!

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3983 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi please can some one assist with this one. My mate at work got a letter today saying the council were granted a attachment of earnings in August 2004 for unpaid council tax, which she is unaware of.

She thankfully has kept all records of payments and has clear evidence that she paid all 10 payments in 2004.

She was never summonised to court about this or asked to fill in any forms re her means. This has come out of the blue after five years!!

She was summons to court in 2007, cos she made a payment late and the judge threw the case out - the council ackowledged in a fashion she has made the payment and did ask for confirmation of payments made in 2004 as they could not find evidence of £150 - she sent the copies she has of payments and never heard anything back.

This is serious as she can be disiplined and sacked as she works for the same council.

I have written a letter for her but would like some advice re the following:

1) The attachment was granted when she was up to date with her monthly payments, ie should have paid on the 1st of the month, but paid on 18th - all monthly payments were up to date. I have said the info presented to the court was incorrect and is evidence of fruad on councils part.

2) should she not have been sumonised to court or have received info advising her of attachment in 2004? If this did not happen is it legal?? she received nothing and was not aware until today!

3) On what grounds can they inforce a attachement of earnings five years after it was granted on a debt that did not exist when the order was granted and does not exsist now?

4) Does she have any re course to take this to court in her own right to 'clear her name' and exose the council in question.

I would be quite happy to name them!!!

Please offer advice.

Cheers all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Old_andrew2018

Bump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember that council employees, even those who work in finance are only human and make mistakes like everybody else. To prove this is fraud on the part of the council you need to show a deliberate act, difficult if its an error.

 

No - your friend didn't need to be summoned to court for an attachment order to be granted, but according to the terms of the Attachment of Earnings Act 1971 - she should have been notified and replied to the notfication as failure to reply can result in further action. Its interesting that at the court in 2007, the previous issues weren't mentioned. Again this suggests their accounting isn't up to scratch.

 

How did you friend learn of the attachment order?

 

I'm not a legal expert so can't advise whether or not attachments are still valid after 5 years, but it should be fairly straightforward to sort this out.

 

1 collate the proofs of payment (bank statements, payment book stubs etc).

2 call at the council finance office and show them the payments were made.

4 ask when they will remove the attachment?

3 explain that as a council worker this is at the very least embarrassing and could lead to serious consequences if not resolved quickly.

4 remember to get names of those she speaks to and note times and dates of any conversations.

5 Relax about disciplinary action, it would be extremely difficult for any council to defend sacking anyone on the basis of their own accounting error, especially if the staff member had already pointed it out to them.

6 get your friend to contact personnel and discuss the situation with them before they receive the wrong idea from anyone else.

 

Just as an aside, I have two friends who work for different councile here in scotland. They both pay their council tax through payroll, direct from their wages. It saves any issues like this.

Edited by rickyd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks fr the response - what does bump mean????

She went to the council the next day - They state that they took her to court in August 2004 - 2 weeks after she made her august payment. They didn't notify her of court, so she could attend and then say they took court costs of £60 out of one of her payments. Even if they did this, she would only owe £90, not the amount they state. She was not informed of any of this.

None of this adds up, as they never told her in 2004, 5 6 etc, that she supposdly owed then anything. the person she spoke to did not help.

Does anyone know any law re attachment of earnings? is it usual for coucils to follow this course of action for a late payment?, which was made prior to the court hearing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


    Statutory Instrument 1992 No. 613
    The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992



    Making of attachment of earnings order
    37.—(1) Where a liability order has been made and the debtor against whom it was made is an individual, the authority which applied for the order may make an order under this regulation to secure the payment of any outstanding sum which is or forms part of the amount in respect of which the liability order was made.
     
    (2) An order under this regulation—
      (a) shall be in the form specifed in (and accordingly contain the matters specified in) Schedule 3; and

      (b) shall remain in force until discharged under regulation 41(2) or the whole amount to which it relates has been paid (whether by attachment of earnings or otherwise).

    (3) The authority may serve a copy of the order on a person who appears to the authority to have the debtor in his employment; and a person on whom it is so served who has the debtor in his employment shall comply with it.

    Deductions under attachment of earnings order
    38.—(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), the sum to be deducted by an employer under an attachment of earnings order on any pay-day shall be—
      (a) where the debtor's earnings from the employer are payable weekly, a sum equal to the appropriate percentage of the net earnings otherwise payable on that pay-day; and for this purpose the appropriate percentage is the percentage (or percentages) specified in column 2 of Table A in that Schedule 4 in relation to the band in column 1 of that Table within which the net earnings fall;

      (b) where his earnings from the employer are payable monthly, a sum equal to the appropriate percentage of the net earnings otherwise payable on that pay-day; and for this purpose the appropriate percentage is the percentage (or percentages) specified in column 2 of Table B in that Schedule 4 in relation to the band in column 1 of that Table within which the net earnings fall;

      © where his earnings from the employer are payable at regular intervals of a whole number of weeks or months, the sum arrived at by—
        (i) calculating what would be his weekly or monthly net earnings by dividing the net earnings payable to him by the employer on the pay-day by that whole number (of weeks or months, as the case may be),

        (ii) ascertaining the percentage (or percentages) specified in column 2 of Table A (if the whole number is of weeks) or of Table B (if the whole number is of months) in Schedule 4 opposite the band in column 1 of that Table within which the notional net earnings calculated under paragraph (i) fall, and

        (iii) calculating the sum which equals the appropriate percentage (or percentages) of the notional net earnings for any of those weeks or months and multiplying that sum by the whole number of weeks or months, as appropriate.

    (2) Where paragraph (1) applies and the amount to be paid to the debtor on any pay-day includes an advance in respect of future pay, the sum to be deducted on that pay-day shall be the aggregate of the amount which would otherwise fall to be deducted under paragraph (1) and—

      (a) where the amount advanced would otherwise have been paid on a single pay-day, the sum which would have been deducted on that pay-day in accordance with paragraph (1) if the amount advanced had not been the amount of net earnings on that day; or

      (b) where the amount advanced would otherwise have been paid on more than one pay-day, the sums which would have been deducted on each of the relevant pay-days in accordance with paragraph (1) if—
        (i) an equal proportion of the amount advanced had paid on each of those days; and

        (ii) the net earnings of the debtor on each of those days had been an amount equal to that proportion.

    (3) Where the amount payable to the debtor on any pay-day is reduced by reason of an earlier advance of pay or by reason of the repayment by the debtor of a loan made to him by his employer for any purpose, the net earnings of the debtor on that day shall, for the purposes of paragraph (1), be the amount defined in regulation 32(1) less the amount of the deduction.

     

    (4) Subject to paragraphs (5) and (6), where the debtor's earnings from the employer are payable at regular intervals other than at intervals to which paragraph (1) applies, the sum to be deducted on any pay-day shall be arrived at by—

      (a) calculating what would be his daily net earnings by dividing the net earnings payable to him by the employer on the pay-day by the number of days in the interval,

      (b) ascertaining the percentage (or percentages) specified in column 2 of Table C in Schedule 4 opposite the band in column 1 of that Table within which the notional net earnings calculated under sub-paragraph (a) fall, and

      © calculating the sum which equals the appropriate percentage (or percentages) of the notional daily net earnings and multiplying that sum by the number of days in the interval.

    (5) Where the debtor's earnings are payable as mentioned in paragraph (4), and the amount to be paid to the debtor on any pay-day includes an amount advanced in respect of future pay, the amount of the debtor's notional net earnings under sub-paragraph (a) of that paragraph shall be calculated in accordance with the formula A + BC + Dwhere:

    A is the amount of net earnings payable to him on that pay-day (exclusive of the amount advanced);

     

    B is the amount advanced;

     

    C is the number of days in the period for which the amount of net earnings is payable; and

     

    D is the number of days in the period for which, but for the agreement to pay in advance, the amount advanced would have been payable.

     

     

    (6) Paragraph (3) applies in relation to paragraph (4) as it applies in relation to paragraph (1).

     

    (7) Where earnings are payable to a debtor by the employer by 2 or more series of payments at regular intervals—

      (a) if some or all of the intervals are of different lengths—
        (i) for the purpose of arriving at the sum to be deducted, whichever of paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) is appropriate shall apply to the series with the shortest interval (or, if there is more than one series with the shortest interval, such one of those series as the employer may choose), and

        (ii) in relation to the earnings payable in every other series, the sum to be deducted shall be 20 per cent. of the net earnings or, where on any pay-day an amount advanced is also paid, 20 per cent. of the aggregate of the net earnings and the amount advanced;

      (b) if all of the intervals are of the same length, whichever of paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) is appropriate shall apply to such series as the employer may choose and sub-paragraph (a)(ii) shall apply to every other series, above as it applies in relation to paragraph (1).

    (8) Subject to paragraphs (9) and (10), where the debtor's earnings from the employer are payable at irregular intervals, the sums to be deducted on any pay-day shall be arrived at by—

      (a) calculating what would be his daily net earnings by dividing the net earnings payable to him by the employer on the pay-day—
        (i) by the number of days since earnings were last payable by the employer to him, or

        (ii) if the earnings are the first earnings to be payable by the employer to him with respect to the employment in question, by the number of days since he began the employment;

      (b) ascertaining the percentage (or percentages) specified in column 2 of Table C of Schedule 4 opposite the band in column 1 of that Table within which the notional net earnings calculated under sub-paragraph (a) fall; and

      © calculating the sum which equals the appropriate percentage (or percentages) of the daily net earnings and multiplying that sum by the same number as that of the divisor for the purposes of the calculation mentioned in sub-paragraph (a).

    (9) Where on the same pay-day there are payable to the debtor by the employer both earnings payable at regular intervals and earnings payable at irregular intervals, for the purpose of arriving at the sum to be deducted on the pay-day under the foregoing provisions of this regulation all the earnings shall be aggregated and treated as earnings payable at the regular interval.

     

    (10) Where there are earnings payable to the debtor by the employer at regular intervals on one pay-day, and earnings are payable by the employer to him at irregular intervals on a different pay-day, the sum to be deducted on each of the pay-days on which the earnings which are payable at irregular intervals are so payable shall be 20 per cent. of the net earnings payable to him on the day.

    Attachment of earnings orders: ancillary powers and duties of employers and others served
    39.—(1) An employer who deducts and pays amounts under an attachment of earnings order may, on each occasion that he makes such a deduction, also deduct from the debtor's earnings the sum of one pound towards his administrative costs.
     
    (2) An employer who deducts and pays amounts under an attachment of earnings order shall, in accordance with paragraph (3), notify the debtor in writing of—
      (a) the total amount of the sums (including sums deducted under paragraph (1)) deducted under the order up to the time of the notification; or

      (b) the total amount of the sums (including sums deducted under paragraph (1)) that will fall to be so deducted after that time.

    (3) A notification under paragraph (2) must be given at the time that the pay statement given by the employer to the debtor next after a deduction has been made is so given, or if no such statements are usually issued by the employer, as soon as practicable after a deduction has been made.

     

    (4) A person on whom a copy of an attachment of earnings order has been served shall, in accordance with paragraph (5), notify in writing the authority which made the order if he does not have the debtor against whom it was made in his employment or the debtor subsequently ceases to be in his employment.

     

    (5) A notification under paragraph (4) must be given within 14 days of the day on which the copy of the order was served on him or the debtor ceased to be in his employment (as the case may be).

     

    (6) While an attachment of earnings order is in force, any person who becomes the debtor's employer and knows that the order is in force and by what authority it was made shall notify that authority in writing that he is the debtor's employer.

     

    (7) A notification under paragraph (6) must be given within 14 days of the day on which the debtor became the person's employee or of the day on which the person first knows that the order is in force and the identity of the authority by which it was made, whichever is the later

    Attachment of earnings orders: duties of debtor
    40.—(1) While an attachment of earnings order is in force, the debtor in respect of whom the order has been made shall notify in writing the authority which made it of each occasion when he leaves an employment or becomes employed or re-employed, and (in a case where he becomes so employed or re-employed) shall include in the notification a statement of—
      (a) his earnings and (so far as he is able) expected earnings from the employment concerned,

      (b) the deductions and (so far as he is able) expected deductions from such earnings—
        (i) in respect of income tax;

        (ii) in respect of primary Class 1 contributions under Part I of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992;

        (iii) for the purposes of such a superannuation scheme as is mentioned in the definition of "net earnings" in regulation 32(1),

      © the name and address of the employer, and

      (d) his work or identity number in the employment (if any).

    (2) A notification under paragraph (1) must be given within 14 days of the day on which the debtor leaves or commences (or recommences) the employment (as the case may be), or (if later) the day on which he is informed by the authority that the order has been made.

    Attachment of earnings orders: ancillary powers and duties of authority
    41.—(1) Where the whole amount to which an attachment of earnings order relates has been paid (whether by attachment of earnings or otherwise), the authority by which it was made shall give notice of the fact to any person who appears to it to have the debtor in his employment and who has been served with a copy of the order.
     
    (2) The authority by which an attachment of earnings order was made may, on its own account or on the application of the debtor or an employer of the debtor, make an order discharging the attachment of earnings order; and if it does so it shall give notice of that fact to any person who appears to it to have the debtor in his employment and who has been served with a copy of the order.
     
    (3) If an authority serves a copy of an attachment of earnings order in accordance with regulation 37(3), it shall (unless it has previously done so) also serve a copy of the order on the debtor

    Priority between attachment of earnings orders
    42.—(1) Where an employer would, but for this paragraph, be obliged under regulation 37(3) to make deductions on any pay-day under two or more attachment of earnings orders made under this Part, he shall make deductions only with respect to the one which was made first until it ceases to be in force, and shall then deal with the other order or orders in like manner in the order in which they were made.
     
    (2) Where an employer is or would, but for this paragraph, be obliged to comply at any time with an attachment of earnings order made under this Part and an order made under the Attachment of Earnings Act 1971 ("the 1971 Act") or the Child Support Act 1991[17] ("the 1991 Act")—
      (a) if the order made under the 1971 Act or, as the case may be, the 1991 Act was made first, whilst it is in force he shall comply only with the order made under the 1971 Act or, as the case may be, the 1991 Act, or

      (b) if the attachment of earnings order made under this Part was made first, whilst it is in force the attachable earnings for the purposes of Schedule 3 to the 1971 Act are to be treated as such of the attachable earnings mentioned in paragraph 3 of that Schedule[18] as remain after deduction of the amount to be deducted under the order made under this Part.

    Attachment of earnings orders: persons employed under the Crown
    43.—(1) Where a debtor is in the employment of the Crown and an attachment of earnings order is made in respect of him, for the purposes of this Part—
      (a) the chief officer for the time being of the department, office or other body in which the debtor is employed shall be treated as having the debtor in his employment (any transfer of the debtor from one department, office or body to another being treated as a change of employment); and

      (b) any earnings paid by the Crown or a Minister of the Crown, or out of the public revenue of the United Kingdom, shall be treated as paid by that chief officer.

    (2) If any question arises as to what department, office or other body is concerned for the purposes of this regulation, or as to who for those purposes is its chief officer, the question shall be referred to and determined by the Minister for the Civil Service.

     

    (3) A document purporting to set out a determination of the Minister under paragraph (2) and to be signed by an official of the Office of that Minister shall, in any proceedings arising in relation to an attachment of earnings order, be admissible in evidence and be deemed to contain an accurate statement of such a determination unless the contrary is shown.

     

    (4) This Part shall have effect in relation to attachment of earnings orders notwithstanding any enactment passed before 29th May 1970 and preventing or avoiding the attachment or diversion of sums due to a person in respect of services under the Crown, whether by way of remuneration, pension or otherwise.

    Attachment of allowances orders
    44.—(1) This regulation applies in relation to an elected member of a relevant billing authority or a relevant precepting authority.
     
    (2) For the purposes of this regulation—
      (a) a relevant billing authority is a billing authority other than the Common Council;

      (b) a relevant precepting authority is a major precepting authority[19] other than the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District;

      © a person is an elected member of a relevant precepting authority other than a county council if he is appointed to the authority by a constituent council of which he is an elected member; and

      (d) references to attachable allowances are references to the allowances referred to in paragraph (7)(b).

    (3) Where a liability order has been made and the debtor against whom it was made is a person in relation to whom this regulation applies, the authority which applied for the order may make an order under this regulation to secure the payment of any outstanding sum which is or forms part of the amount in respect of which the liability order was made.

     

    (4) An order under this regulation shall be expressed to be directed to the authority of whom the debtor is an elected member and shall operate as an instruction to the authority to make deductions from attachable allowances payable to the debtor and to pay the sums so deducted to the authority by which the order was made.

     

    (5) An order under this regulation shall remain in force until discharged or the whole sum to which it relates has been paid (whether by attachment of allowances or otherwise).

     

    (6) The sum to be deducted by an authority under an order under this regulation on any day shall be a sum equal to 40 per cent. of the aggregate of attachable allowances payable to the debtor on that day.

     

    (7) Paragraph (3) of regulation 37, paragraphs (1) to (5) of regulation 39 and paragraphs (1) and (2) of regulation 41 shall apply to orders under this regulation as they apply to attachment of earnings orders as if any reference in those paragraphs—

      (a) to an employer or a person having the debtor in his employment, were a reference to such an authority as is mentioned in paragraph (1) above having the debtor as an elected member;

      (b) to the debtor's earnings, were a reference to allowances—
        (i) payable to the debtor in accordance with a scheme under regulations under section 18 (schemes for basic, attendance and special responsibility allowances for local authority members) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989[20]; or

        (ii) in the nature of an attendance allowance, payable to the debtor under section 175 (allowances for attending conferences and meetings) of the Local Government Act 1972[21];

      © to an attachment of earnings order, were a reference to an order under this regulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi please can some one assist with this one. My mate at work got a letter today saying the council were granted a attachment of earnings in August 2004 for unpaid council tax, which she is unaware of.

She thankfully has kept all records of payments and has clear evidence that she paid all 10 payments in 2004.

She was never summonised to court about this or asked to fill in any forms re her means. This has come out of the blue after five years!!

She was summons to court in 2007, cos she made a payment late and the judge threw the case out - the council ackowledged in a fashion she has made the payment and did ask for confirmation of payments made in 2004 as they could not find evidence of £150 - she sent the copies she has of payments and never heard anything back.

This is serious as she can be disiplined and sacked as she works for the same council.

I have written a letter for her but would like some advice re the following:

1) The attachment was granted when she was up to date with her monthly payments, ie should have paid on the 1st of the month, but paid on 18th - all monthly payments were up to date. I have said the info presented to the court was incorrect and is evidence of fruad on councils part.

2) should she not have been sumonised to court or have received info advising her of attachment in 2004? If this did not happen is it legal?? she received nothing and was not aware until today!

3) On what grounds can they inforce a attachement of earnings five years after it was granted on a debt that did not exist when the order was granted and does not exsist now?

4) Does she have any re course to take this to court in her own right to 'clear her name' and exose the council in question.

I would be quite happy to name them!!!

Please offer advice.

Cheers all!

 

I think you need to clarify some points with your friend. You are not summoned to court for council tax arrears, the council will apply to the court for a liability order after they have sent two reminders. You can attend the court, if you want, but will be pointless unless you are not liable for council tax and if you can show that you are not liable, which isn't the case with your friend.

 

A fee is payable to the council for the application and is due ahead of any CT arrears, in otherword, if you owe £60 and the fee should be £60, then your CT is still in arrears by £60 even though you think you have paid them up to date.

 

At this point, having obtained a liability order, the council can enforce payment. The usual first course is to use bailiffs. If they are unsuccessful, they will return it to the council who will then apply to the court for an attachment of earnings.

 

She would not have been summomed to court in 2007 because she was late with a payment. As a liability order only last for the payments for a particular year, the council would have had to apply to the court for a seperate liability order for that year.

 

You should advise your friend to send the council a Subject Access Request (along with a statutory £10 fee). She will then get back all the paperwork held by the CT department including payments made etc; and will them be able to match them to proofs of payment made to see if there are any errors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for the responses.

1) regadless of me stating she did not get a summons, she was not notified in 2004, that the council had applied to court for any action / liability order. This is her main argument, as she did not owe the council any money on the date the liability order was granted. She has all payment confirmation to hand.

2) My question is do the council not have a leagl duty to inform her of impending court action prior to court date? Do they not have a legal duty to inform a 'debter' that there is a liability order in place?

3) There have been no attempts at enforcing any liability order - the first she was aware of this was 5 years after it was granted. Is there also not a legal duty to inforce asap??

CONNIFF, sorry mate, you have got it wrong in respect of saying a council would not take court action for a late payment. They did in 2004 and 07. In 07 she went to court with her paperwork, council workers told her it was sorted, she refused to leave without seeing the judge and he threw it out of court becuase there was no basis for the councils application. She has the letter stating court action withdrawn, which she refused to leave the court without.

She then received a letter saying yes her account was up to date, but they wanted copies of her 2004 payments to 'trace them'. She then sent in all her payment slips and heard nothing back. should she not have been told about the liability order at this point??

Sorry to bang on but the thread of what I am asking for advice on seems to have been lost, ie the council took her to court with out notifying her, when she didn't owe any money and then did not tell her for five years they had a liability order!!

Can anyone point me in the right direction???

 

 

6 etc. so she can confirm that she paid. As I understand she was due to pay on the 1st of each month and payed late.

The

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was she summoned to court for, non payment or late payment??

What were the council applying for, a liability order or an AOE??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I didn't see the response last night.

She was summonsed for non payment of Council tax, for a liability order.

Back in 2004 the council in question council tax department didn't know what it was doing, clearly it doesn't know what its doing now.

As I understand Conniff, you and hallowitch are the bee's knee's - so please spread a little honey my mates way!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I understand what your asking. A liability order only lasts for the one years tax in question, in this case 2004. When that years tax is paid, (even if it overlaps into the next year), they would have to go back to court again for another liability order, so they wouldn't have been able to enforce any arrears of 2005 taxes without going back to court and doing it all over again.

 

When that liability order is dead, so are any collection methods that go with it.

So if she is behind in tax 'now' the council would have to apply to the court for a liability order and then if the payments were not kept up, they could apply back to the court for an AOE, they couldn't use the one from 2004.

 

As for the lack of notification, yes you should have been sent them, first the reminder, then the application to the court and then the result of that application. You should also have been given the method of payments with the result.

 

The best and easiest way out of this and the biggest annoyance to the council is for you to send a Subject Access Request which will cost £10 and they will have to send you everything they have on you including the missing letters and the court applications and result, everything.

 

The liability order would have had a fee of £60 - £150 added to it. When all the paperwork comes back, if the liability order was applied for when she was in fact not in arrears, then you can claim that fee back.

 

I don't think what they did was fraudulent but maladministration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no need to apply to the court for an attachment of earnings - once the liability order is granted the powers a council is given gives them the discretion to issue an attachment without any further request to a magistrate - this is assuming the use the standard criminal route as per council tax (administration and enforcement) regs 1992 rather than the options county court route via CCJ (very rare this route is used).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. But I remain a confused

Conniff you say the Liability order would have been dead after a year, so if it was granted aug 04, it would have expired aug 05.

Are learned friend ss002d6252 is of the view that once a liability order granted, council can convert this to AOE - Is this correct??? and would this have been in force in 2004??

She has all copies of payments she has received a print out of payments the council claim they received in 2004 and interestingly they say she payed £90 in August, the month they took court action - when she has a clear reciept for £150 - they say this is her payment minus the court costs.

I don't agree that this is not fruad - if no money is owed, how can they claim, in a court of law, that it is owed? If I were to do that I would be done for fruad.

I will suggest she sens the £10 for access to info, but pleae can some one clarify the info converting LO to AOE?

Cheers!

 

 

I personaly think the council in question has made a big error - I was in very serious arrears with them for a couple of thousand and I got the bailiffs, but no ccj or AOE. Thnakfully I payed them off over a period of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do I explain.

The CT year starts on !st April and you can pay it in 10 monthly instalments. If you miss an instalment, you should be sent a reminder and if you do not respond to that reminder, the council can do nothing to enforce payment of the arrears unless a court rules that you are liable for council tax,.

 

When that liability order is granted (and only when it has be granted) can the council enforce payment. That liability order and any enforcement action that goes with it is only valid for that years tax.

 

Council will want any arrears paid before the start of the next tax year, but sometimes that is not possible, so the payments will continue into the next tax year, lets say up to August. Meanwhile on 1st April, a new tax year started so you will be expected to pay the new years instalment as well as the payment for the arrears that are covered by the liability order.

 

That liability order and any enforcement action will only cover the arrears and not the council tax for this new year. If you should default on the new years tax, they will have to go to court again and get a second liability order, they cannot enforce the new years tax with last years order.

 

In August you will make the last payment of last years tax and the liability order then ends.

 

If you owe £200 and the liability order fee is £100, you now owe a total of £300, but the fee is now included as part of the liability order, so if you then pay £200, you are still deemed as being £100 in arrears.

 

If an attachement of earnings order is sent to your employer, a copy must be sent to you also. If your friend didn't receive this either, then that is another reason to send a SAR request so you can see if they actually sent you one.

 

If this isn't what your asking, then you will have to spell it out a bit more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks. But I remain a confused

Conniff you say the Liability order would have been dead after a year, so if it was granted aug 04, it would have expired aug 05.

Are learned friend ss002d6252 is of the view that once a liability order granted, council can convert this to AOE - Is this correct??? and would this have been in force in 2004??

She has all copies of payments she has received a print out of payments the council claim they received in 2004 and interestingly they say she payed £90 in August, the month they took court action - when she has a clear reciept for £150 - they say this is her payment minus the court costs.

I don't agree that this is not fruad - if no money is owed, how can they claim, in a court of law, that it is owed? If I were to do that I would be done for fruad.

I will suggest she sens the £10 for access to info, but pleae can some one clarify the info converting LO to AOE?

Cheers!

 

 

I personaly think the council in question has made a big error - I was in very serious arrears with them for a couple of thousand and I got the bailiffs, but no ccj or AOE. Thnakfully I payed them off over a period of time.

 

Once the L/O is granted it does not need to be converted - the granting of the L/O is to give the council greater powers of recovery - its gives the council the option (as their discretion)to either issue an Attachment of Benefit/Earnings or use a bailiff. (once its been to a bailiff then further powers can be used if there's still a balance left).

 

All of the recovery powers used today were granted in the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regs 1992 - regs 37 onwards.

 

You wont get a CCJ if the council have a Liability Order granted by the magistrates court (the standard form of recovery). A CCJ can only be issued if the council chase the debt via the Civil route - the CCJ then allows the council to apply back to the county court for an Attachment Order (this is one of the differences from the magistrates court route.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also was the liability order in 2004 for a previous address? It could be that the council sent the summons to an incorrect address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...