Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Council tax debt help, please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4448 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Firstly thanks in advance, for any advice.

 

The situation is that I owe council tax from 2004 for a property my husband didn't live in. Two liability orders were issued some time ago, I intend to obtain a copy of them.

 

The debt has been passed to Equita and I have spoken to the council and had a two week 'hold' put on the bailiffs. I'm now dealing with the council tax about this matter and have to provide an income/expenditure form, my question is that should I include my husband's income? I spoke to someone today at the local one stop shop and they said I 'should' include my husband's income. I am not working as we have two children three and under. The only 'income' I receive is tax credits and child benefit.

 

I don't want to take the council's word for including my husband's income as he isn't liable for this debt and it's in the interest of the council to tell me this, the person I spoke to didn't seem sure about this at all. It's not that I don't want to pay this debt but want to pay it at a rate I can afford.

 

Is there a letter I can give to the council if my husband is not liable and I can refuse to provide his income with this letter? I am under the impression (from my sister) that only a judge can compel me to hand over my income details? I'm not trying to be difficult, I just want to know what I can get away with legally.

 

I also understand that this debt is not a priority debt anyway, just priority arrears, is this correct? Does this have any bearing on my next course of action? I will prepare a financial statement for the council over the weekend and have said I will present it on Monday.

 

I won't give the bailiff access to my house or deal with them at all, I hope to make the council an offer and have the council 'take the debt back', which they have done on a previous occasion. Also my husband already has two attachments of earnings for present and previous address, so they cannot take more from his wages.

 

Phew, thanks for reading and any of the fantastic advice Caggers' always provide. :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is that I owe council tax from 2004 for a property my husband didn't live in. Two liability orders were issued some time ago, I intend to obtain a copy of them.

 

Do I assume this is for a property thay you lived in before you were married? If so then your now husband has no liability for this at all. It is solely down to yourself or yourself & A N Other if there was one at the time.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nicbbb,

 

I saw all of the stuff about the legality of Council Tax and other taxes levied on us illegally, it is fascinating and really appeals to the pedant in me, not to mention a feeling of injustice. How we haven't known all these things and that there are so many laws they choose to ignore but continue to use bailiffs, which themselves are an outdated solution, merely because they are old.

 

I admire you for not paying this tax and business rates, I've sent them an offer, but don't believe it will be met receptively as I have included my own limited income (from tax credits) and offered them £5 per week. I think they'll refuse that amount because I haven't included my husband's income. I requested the liability orders and read about them too, it's laughable the stuff we don't know about and happens. I'd say the councils should be ashamed but know better about my local council.

 

If I don't get a good response I won't pay at all, I think I might be brave like you and give the reasons for the council tax not being a legal tax. Thanks so much and good luck with your resistance!

 

Hi

 

the post to which your above response relates has been removed. Please do not act on anything you have retained from it

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The Council Tax has been created by Parliament through the passing of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, and non-payment is enforceable in a court of law.

 

Once a liability order has been obtained, it can choose one of several means of recovery, including Bailifs, Attachment of Earnings or Benefits, Bankrupcy, Charging Order up to and including imprisonment. The council is empowered to ask you for information about your income, etc and the court can fine you if you do not provided it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...