Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • 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

Why are the council above the law?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4335 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

If other agencies I pay bills to acted like SCC they would be seen as bullies and reported to the FSA. I have today recieved a summons from SCC for the privilege of paying them £150 in April and £150 in May, but as I didn't pay on the day they want it as I pay when I have the money, they issued me a summons and added £48 costs. Year after year I pay in full before the next years bill is due, but that seems to make no difference in how I am treated.

 

I wanted to turn up at court as you would in this situation with any other agency and asked where my papers were to send in a defence. There was no Claim Form or particulars of claim. They really didn't want me to turn up at court, despite saying this was what I wanted to do. They make Dick Turpin look like a pussycat.

 

If I haven't been served with the Claim Form and the Particulars of Claim then they have not effected service on me I am told.

 

I have to write and appeal to have the 'Authority costs' of £45 and 'court costs' of £3 removed. Surely these charges cannot ligitimately be demanded?

 

I am incensed by this action and the fact that they can get away with this and there is no agency that they have to answer to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the council seems to have acted within the law. The Council Tax is either payable in full at the start of the year or in 10 monthly instalments (commonly known as the "statutory instalment scheme"), or alternately the council can, but isn't obliged to, enter into an agreement with the payer.

 

Once two instalments go unpaid, the right to pay by instalments is lost and whole amount of council tax becomes payable within 14 days, after which the council can seek a liability order from the magistrates court. Theres no reason why you can not appear in court, however unless you have a compelling defence the court is obliged to issue the LO and award costs against you.

 

You have a number of recourses if you feel that the council has acted improperly or illegal, such as making a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman, seeking a Judicial Review at the High Court or, making a complaint to your elected County, District or Borough Councillor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not that you have not missed payments but that you did not pay them by the correct date. We'll assume your supposed payment date is 1st of each month - to pay by this date you actually have to pay some 5 working days previously so that you have paid in cleared funds by the 1st. In reality most Councils do allow a little leeway but only by about a week or so. The only thing the Magistrates are allowed to consider is whether or not you are liable to pay Council Tax, your circumstances and ability to pay do not come into it. To object as to whether you are liable or not is very narrow.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Write a formal letter of complaint to the council, give them 14 days to reply and copy it to the magistrates, if possible go to the council office and ask to see a senior maanger - they did that to me last year despite being told they would get paid in full out of my redundancy, and they tried this route but I went in there with paperwork, insisted they listened to the call I had made and read the letter handed in when they first said I had missed a payment and they backed down. I also pointed out I would NOT be liable due to being unemployed from January and they still insisted I had to pay for January to April until otherwise found out - now claiming back that 'overpayment' from them!

 

I live a five minute walk from the council offices so I can hassle them easily should it be necessary!

 

Also did the same with the water board and ended up with the chairman's office dealing with the way they chased for their debts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most if not all councils use computerised systems - reminders and summonses are automatically generated after a certain trigger points. An email or letter to the council should clear up the matter, and withdrawal of the costs.

 

If not you should appear at the Magistrates Court and demonstrate that you paid the instalments each month, or that you paid the reminder notice within the prescribed time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are another a couple of reasons why this might also be happening:

 

1 - The Council use the issue of Liability Orders as another income stream. Average cost to the Council of issuing a LO is £3-00, cost to the ratepayer can be up to £150-00.

 

2 - Your Council may have outsourced all their admin including revenues to a private company like Capita. The issuing then of a LO will be very quickly followed by a visit from the Bailiff - normally Equita or Ross&Roberts - both of which are owned by Capita.

 

This is a very dirty business.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I haven't been served with the Claim Form and the Particulars of Claim then they have not effected service on me I am told.

 

That would be correct if it was for a CCJ but Council Tax uses a Liability Order granted by a Magistrates Court (as per the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) regs 1992)

 

I have today received a summons from SCC for the privilege of paying them £150 in April and £150 in May, but as I didn't pay on the day they want it as I pay when I have the money, they issued me a summons and added £48 costs

 

Thats the way Council Tax legislation works - for it to have progressed to a Summons you mustn't have paid the amount shown on the Reminder within 7 days.

 

I have to write and appeal to have the 'Authority costs' of £45 and 'court costs' of £3 removed. Surely these charges cannot legitimately be demanded?

They can be , when the Liability Order is granted the court will grant the costs - even if you pay all but the costs the costs are fully recoverable under the Liability Order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It also makes the Council look squeaky clean in the eyes of the Government when they can reveal very high collection rates on council tax when it comes to getting their allocation of funds for other areas, making them seem very efficient.

 

In reality it is using the courts as a first line of debt collecting which is against the OFT Guidelines in Debt Collecting, perhaps this could be why the OFT is NOT getting stronger powers to close down delinquent debt collecting firms.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Warrants granted by a court for coucil tax often happen before the claimed debtor is aware.

 

Its not an impartial tribunal, just a rubber stamping job.

 

AFAIR for this reason these 'debts' are not respected outwith the UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality it is using the courts as a first line of debt collecting which is against the OFT Guidelines in Debt Collecting, perhaps this could be why the OFT is NOT getting stronger powers to close down delinquent debt collecting firms.....

 

This is my issue, if anyone else I make regular payments to did this it could be reported to FSA as a bullying tactic and against the fair trading guidelines, but councils appear to make their own laws and can act in whatever way they please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but councils appear to make their own laws and can act in whatever way they please.

 

The council don't make the law, that's down to central government. The council is as bound to work with the law as you are so they can't choose how to apply it other than as how its written.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a few posts recently about people using a sort of "in your face(book)" type protests, where they flood the company's FB and Twitter accounts with complaints - in addition to the guy posting yesterday who bought a car that failed - then sat outside the garage warning potential customers, until the garage called the police - who then told the garage to refund his money (though their cheque bounced).

 

There is no "procedure" for this approach - and I would suspect it could be applied as well to public bodies - and you would have greater control compared to businesses as you can submit FoI requests, which in turn could not be declined as "administration of justice".

 

I suspect the internet, just like it has with this forum, can empower far more people than we have yet realised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The council don't make the law, that's down to central government. The council is as bound to work with the law as you are so they can't choose how to apply it other than as how its written.

 

The only reason that central government can get away with this racket is because there are plenty of people (CEO's of councils comes to mind) who are prepared to screw a large percentage of the council taxpaying public in exchange for their six figure salaries, paid for by those they are screwing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently paying 51% of my income by an attachment of earnings order on my salary to pay back council tax arrears which built up because when I was unemployed and on JSA. I was on "rapid reclaim" which the council determined as being "back to work" though I only had occasional casual work and my income was at benefit level. My beef is that the legal charges are £1600. Has anyone successfully challenged legal charges because this figure seems excessive and unrelated to actual work done? Can they impose punitive legal charges or are they bound merely to pass on the actual costs of legal action? I am considering asking for a breakdown of their bill and taking them to the Ombudsman if they refuse and I would be interested to know if anyone has been down this route. I wish I had been allowed to go to court to argue the "rapid reclaim" point but I was told that I would not be allowed to speak to the judge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never ever believe what the council tell you about court, they do not like people turning up at court as it costs them a lot of money and they would look very very silly if you could prove you had 0 liability for the case anyway.

 

Put a formal complaint into the council to kick start the process and then go to the Local Government Ombudsman, they can look into this, you could also get a full printout of your liability from the council website (so I believe, I've managed to get it for somebody).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently paying 51% of my income by an attachment of earnings order on my salary to pay back council tax arrears which built up because when I was unemployed and on JSA. I was on "rapid reclaim" which the council determined as being "back to work" though I only had occasional casual work and my income was at benefit level. My beef is that the legal charges are £1600. Has anyone successfully challenged legal charges because this figure seems excessive and unrelated to actual work done? Can they impose punitive legal charges or are they bound merely to pass on the actual costs of legal action? I am considering asking for a breakdown of their bill and taking them to the Ombudsman if they refuse and I would be interested to know if anyone has been down this route. I wish I had been allowed to go to court to argue the "rapid reclaim" point but I was told that I would not be allowed to speak to the judge.

 

This sounds as if you have more than 1 Liability Order and have even been summonsed for a Committal Hearing. Be interested to know more. You need to speak to someone at the Council and ask the following

 

questions:

1 - how many Liability Orders they have against you

2 - the dates they were obtained

3 - the addresses they were for

4 - the period of time each covers

5 - how much each one was for

6 - how much is still outstanding

7 - the dates they were passed on for enforcement

8 - the dates & amounts of any payments

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...