Council tax woes - threatened summons, ignored correspondence etc....

[snotgobbler123]

Hi all,

 

I have this issue that has been on-going with Shepway District Council now for some years.

My long-term partner was responsible for this bill only. Before she left, she stopped paying the bill and used the money to save up a deposit for her own flat - all of this, was of course unknown to me; I was blissfully unaware that I was building up council tax debt until long after she left.

Once I discovered this, I immediately emailed the council, as was told that there were no arrears on the account.

I concluded that I must have been mistaken.

Shortly after this, I received a summons for non-payment. I emailed the council again, asking for all correspondence between us to be forwarded to me so that I could show the court that they had previously informed me that there were no arrears.

This was ignored.

I didn't attend court as I was unprepared by way of not being able to prove anything (due to their ignoring my requests) and I had just started a new job and wouldn't be paid for time off during my probation period (which I have long since passed).

 

I then wrote to the council asking that due to this fact that they drop the extra £100 they added to my bill for issuing a court summons. They ignored this email as well (despite me getting a delivery notification); so I wrote to the Ombudsman - I informed them that what the council had said regarding the arrears and the ignored request for information prior to the court date.

The Ombudsman found in their favour (oddly, they used the line "Whilst we can see that the line in their email, "There are no arrears on the account" could be misinterpreted, it was simply a mistake on the council's behalf and therefore we will not uphold the complaint. I'm not sure how the line was ambiguous, but hey! They all stick together it seems).

 

I emailed several times requesting that we enter into a discussion with regards to me paying the arrears, each time (for the most part) the emails/letters were ignored, or deliberately misinterpreted - e.g. I stated the reason for any arrears being my partner having stopped making payments - they interpreted this as me saying "go after her, not me" - I have repeatedly said that I realise that I am liable and have no problem with this.

 

To date, they have not told me how much is outstanding - I received bills requesting different amounts each time - they have not told me when the payments were missed, and they have ignored all questions about it.

 

This year, I started to pay extra each month to cover the arrears, thinking that this was showing goodwill, and a willingness to pay. This resulted in them simply sending a 'non-payment' letter as the amounts were not what they requested.

I telephoned them, and was informed that if I were to pay £154.00 each month, then this issue would be resolved.

This, I did.

I received a letter from them last week, again, stating that I haven't paid and that I now have lost the right to pay by installments.

I again, emailed them, stating that I have indeed paid and sent details of the payment dates.

I have just received an email informing me that I now have to pay the outstanding amount (for the year) by the end of this month or a summons will be issued.

 

This time, I intend to attend court, and have emailed back asking for copies of all correspondence. I have records of all correspondence I have sent them - including all the letters and emails that were ignored.

 

I doubt, given previous experience, that this request will be fullfilled.

 

So, can anyone advise on what I can expect in court, or, indeed, if there is some way in which I can force them to engage in conversation with regards to repayment - so far they simply say "Pay it all" - without actually telling me how much it is, or for which period.

I believe the period to be 2011-2012 but it's difficult to know.

 

Thanks in advance.

[Consumer dude]

An SAR would be a formal request for information and they 40 days I believe to reply..

[snotgobbler123]

I understand that. Thank you. I tried that before and they simply fobbed me off with excuses each time I reminded them until finally I forgot.

 

Will I have to pay the 100 quid even if I *win* in court?

[Consumer dude]

I understand that. Thank you. I tried that before and they simply fobbed me off with excuses each time I reminded them until finally I forgot.

 

Did you pay the ten pound fee and if so and they have not responded, this could be grounds on getting an adjournment of any court hearing..

[snotgobbler123]

To be honest; the last time they didn't even send the summons to me. I only found out about it after the event.

 

I think that they are in a world of their own - a world where they can act with impunity. I did send a cheque for £10 at the same time. This was never cashed.

 

I'm at the point of just giving up to be honest - I 've been trying to give them money now for nearly 4 years. I even over paid on purpose to try and clear the arrears despite them not even telling me how much it was. That resulted in a non-payment reminder, then a summons.

 

It's quite ridiculous, and as such should be treated that way.

[Consumer dude]

In court, you will be met by council staff sitting at a table who will invite you to sit down and ask how you would like to pay. You could then take this opportunity to air your view and possibly negotiate. If nothing else its a useful experience on how there bluster works..

[snotgobbler123]

I just don't want it to cost me yet another 100 quid. So far, they claim to have sent 3 court summons' - resulting in an extra 300 quid being added to the bill (which I still don't know the amount of).

 

In the 80s, I went to court for non payment of council tax. I'd just turned 18 and had just left school; still to find a job, I recieved a bill for over 300 quid. With no income, I had little choice but to not pay. In court, it was like "Crown Court" from the TV. Clerk dressed in a black cloak and the Maj's had the white wigs on. Is it no longer like that then?

[Consumer dude]

Out of interest, when you sent the ten pound fee, did you send it by recorded delivery for which they signed for..

[Consumer dude]

When's the court date then..

[snotgobbler123]

I didn't send it recorded, no. They did, however, acknowledge receipt via email after much badgering.

 

There is no court date yet, just this in an email from them: The arrears for the current year are £xxx.xx which should be paid in addition to the July instalment of £xxx by the 26 July.

If payment is not received I shall have no alternative but to issue a summons for the amount due.

[Consumer dude]

Try this. Send an email, thanking them for there recent mail and in order that this may be resolved without the need for court action, would they please confirm the following so you may be in a better position to understand any amount that is stated as owning.

[snotgobbler123]

I did that last week, today's email was the one threatening the summons and an amount for this year. They claim that I paid 124 quid, when I actually paid 154 quid, which they decided to use to pay off the previous arrears that I still do not know about, and as such I need to pay the remainder of this year.

 

It's like a farce; they are incapable of entering into discussion about it; prefering instead to issue threats and attempt to bully me into paying an unknown amount...only, when I over pay in an attempt to do so, they send yet another summons.

 

My guess is that they like the extra £100's coming in from the people they do this to.

[Consumer dude]

I did that last week, today's email was the one threatening the summons and an amount for this year. They claim that I paid 124 quid, when I actually paid 154 quid, which they decided to use to pay off the previous arrears that I still do not know about, and as such I need to pay the remainder of this year.

 

It's like a farce; they are incapable of entering into discussion about it; prefering instead to issue threats and attempt to bully me into paying an unknown amount...only, when I over pay in an attempt to do so, they send yet another summons.

 

My guess is that they like the extra £100's coming in from the people they do this to.

 

If you are confident they are wrong, let them take you to court. I know I would..

[snotgobbler123]

I'm going to have to I think. There seems to be absolutely no way to get them entered into a conversation.

 

At one point, I wrote to the head of the council and my MP about this.

 

It's not that they're wrong per se, it's that they won't tell me which payments were missed, how much is owed and what I can do to clear the debt (i.e. I agree to pay extra each month or something, which I'm more than happy to do once I know how much it is for and I've seen evidence that I can match up with bank statements that the payments were actually missed - nearly 4 years ago!).

 

They are hell-bent on simply being as obstructive as possible.

[Consumer dude]

I'm going to have to I think. There seems to be absolutely no way to get them entered into a conversation.

 

At one point, I wrote to the head of the council and my MP about this.

 

It's not that they're wrong per se, it's that they won't tell me which payments were missed, how much is owed and what I can do to clear the debt (i.e. I agree to pay extra each month or something, which I'm more than happy to do once I know how much it is for and I've seen evidence that I can match up with bank statements that the payments were actually missed - nearly 4 years ago!).

 

They are hell-bent on simply being as obstructive as possible.

 

You sound reasonable to me. Go for it, collect evidence and make them work as well..

[snotgobbler123]

Cheers. I already have a timeline of events (ignored/replied to correspondence) in a spreadsheet. They have already lied with regards to replies etc... and were caught out by this a couple of years ago.

 

I have send another SAR (just put it in the work out-box), so will see what comes back this time.

[outlawla]

Apart from intransigent council staff I think some of the issues in your dispute are down to the council's need to limit the number of man hours attributed to dealing with administration. They achieve this via their council tax system where payment allocation is automated but relies on payments exactly matching the instalment amount on the bill (which could be different for different years) or where a special arrangement is made the allocation would also rely on payments exactly matching the agreed amount.

 

If payments don't exactly match, then that money would automatically be allocated to the oldest debt, thus allowing your current bill to accumulate arrears and another summons comes through your door. The fact that this is allowed to happen because of automation is bad enough, but for council staff not to intervene when they are alerted is criminal.

 

Have a read of this Freedom of Information request for more information. Allocation of payments to accounts relating to different years

 

Take particular note of the emails and web links for 3 April 2014 and annotation 14 May 2014

[snotgobbler123]

Very Interesting....thank you very much.

 

How would I find out if the £100s that they added due to the liability orders were a result of them taking the money paid for a different year?

 

If that was the case then I would think that they owe me those back due to their issuing of the orders incorrectly (I.e. in breach of the aforementioned case law).

 

Also, probably a daft question, but if I go to court would the civil case law be relevent as the court would be a criminal court and not a civil court.

[outlawla]

Very Interesting....thank you very much.

 

How would I find out if the £100s that they added due to the liability orders were a result of them taking the money paid for a different year?...

 

The solution to your first question should be simple as in theory the council should simply tell you what payments were made to which account and when. However, as you've found out, nothing is simple with local authorities.

 

.....Also, probably a daft question, but if I go to court would the civil case law be relevent as the court would be a criminal court and not a civil court.

 

If you look at the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 it looks like they have jurisdiction for both Criminal and Civil Procedure.

 

Sections 1 to 50 covers Part I (Criminal Jurisdiction and Procedure) and sections 51 to 74 Part II (Civil Jurisdiction and Procedure). Council Tax liability order application are presumably (although doubtful they conform properly to either) proceeded under part II.

[outlawla]

It might come in useful to download a copy of this: Recovery of Court Costs – Council Tax Liability Orders

[snotgobbler123]

Thank you for this information.

 

After reading around, it seems that it's not legal to charge >£100 for issuing a liability order when the actual cost is £3. Is this 'covered' by the 1912 Lord Dunedin ruling/precedent?

 

Also, is it likely that the council will claim that the differing years are not actually differing accounts and therefore the "Peters v Anderson" case isn't relevant?

 

I had a read through the reply I received in response to the complaint I made to the council over a year ago, and they clearly claim that the 'mistake' made by the council (namely, the "There are no arrears on the account" sentence) was because the clerk thought that he was talking about "this years (sic) account".

 

I'm going to try once more via email (I have read receipts that way) to get them to use some common sense and actually engage in a conversation with regards to sorting out the arrears from 3-4 years ago; rather than them simply choosing where the money I pay them is allocated, and deliberately engineering defaults so that they can profit by another 97 quid.

[outlawla]

After reading around, it seems that it's not legal to charge >£100 for issuing a liability order when the actual cost is £3. Is this 'covered' by the 1912 Lord Dunedin ruling/precedent?

 

Not sure about the 1912 ruling, only that the costs are non compliant with the council tax regulations.

 

Also, is it likely that the council will claim that the differing years are not actually differing accounts and therefore the "Peters v Anderson" case isn't relevant?

 

The council would be grasping at straws if it tried to pull that one. I would say with almost certainty that different year's liability must be treated as separate debts. The council tax demand no doubt specifies 2013/14, 2014/15 etc.

 

This is what it says in the judgment:

 

Peters v Anderson [1814] Eng R 418:

 

A person who is indebted to another on two several accounts, may, on paying him money, ascribe it to which account he pleases.–and his election may either be expressed,-Or may be inferred from the circumstances of the transaction.

 

 

Later on it states:

 

"

It was not equitable that the Plaintiff should increase costs against the Defendant by keeping on foot two causes of action, when he might have done away one action by applying these payments thereto

.

 

You could liken the above to how local authorities deliberately engineer defaults. On the other hand it may just be that it is not cost effective to have staff interfering with the computer system to reallocate payments to another year's account.

[FairplayA]

Council Tax recovery rules seem to have changed a lot in the last 8 years (for worse), because before, we would receive notifications of demand and of court hearings well in advance so that there was time to debate things and agree outcomes, but now it seems they start the summons process very secretly and in my case I received only two week's notice which if one is living in another city can be difficult to plan and attend. Even so I attended the first summons arrangement at the required venue but found that the council's representative approached me to discuss the matter before entering the court hearing. So I was able to show all my documents of affordability and I was granted the reduced instalment arrangement. However when I asked for the same arrangement to be granted for another property on the basis that I could not afford the full tax on that one either, they did not want to make the arrangement because they said I would have to wait for the summons first before they could discuss payment arrangements. This seems to me to be another devious secret policy to make money for private debt collector companies and it had nothing to do with solving the payer's willingness to pay plans. Its as though they want an excuse to increase the cost because it makes money for private company's revenue opportunity (debt collector charges and court charges) rather than ensuring that the tax is recoverable sooner rather than later.

[ss002d6252]

Council Tax recovery rules seem to have changed a lot in the last 8 years (for worse), because before, we would receive notifications of demand and of court hearings well in advance so that there was time to debate things and agree outcomes, but now it seems they start the summons process very secretly and in my case I received only two week's notice which if one is living in another city can be difficult to plan and atten

 

Rules regarding issuing demand notices, reminders, final notices and summons haven't changed in the last 8 years - all that seems to have happened in this case is that the council have used the statutory minimum period.

[snotgobbler123]

Woo! At last...I have a reply. As they moved the funds earlier in the year, if I don't pay those again I'll be receiving a summons for October 16th. It took 9 weeks to reply to my question and in the reply I have been given three days to sort it out. Farce and pathetic are words that spring to mind.

Finally, it seems I might be able to get a conversation going!