Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • 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

A recent local council notification re council tax


eskimoman
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3324 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, I received a very unexpected letter from my local council just recently regarding council tax.

 

I am a single father living in private rented property who has MS.

 

I am on ESA (support group) & PiP (Enhanced mobility & Daily living component).

 

The letter stated that as of now, due to council budgeting, the council could no longer afford to subsidize the council tax

& I was henceforth required to pay approx £200.00 (with offer of installments) to cover my council tax & presumably each year that follows.

 

Now, I am not disputing the money here,

what I am curious about is if this has happened in other council districts,

whereby the council tax has wavered/paid the tax for people

& also why I wasn't aware that this was the case previously.

 

The thing is, for the last few years, they always sent out a council tax bill showing lots of figures then an 'amount you owe=ZERO' at the bottom

so I always assumed I was somehow exempt due to my circumstances.

 

If they have been paying it for the public for some years,

then well yes this is very generous &, most certainly,

one would think would attract voters so a win win for the council.

 

I really do not wish to stir up any problems with my local council who, to be very fair, are very 'automated' in keeping the housing benefit coming

& I hardly hear from them at all, sometimes for years at a time.

 

I am just curious as to if anybody else has come across this recent state of affairs,

whereby the council was subsidizing fully the tax, then perhaps the notification that alas they cannot do that anymore for economical reasons.

 

One other question, is the £200.00 figure per year correct for a single person living alone such as I am in a privately rented accommodation?

 

thanks in advance, i always appreciate this site, it's very existence is like a permanent weight off my mind, you guys do a remarkable job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

prior to april 2013, you would have received council tax benefit - this was under a national scheme whereby central government would meet the cost

 

from april 2013, the government abolished council tax benefit - and told each council to create their own individual council tax support to replace CTB

 

the government claims this was about localisation - however the government also cut the funding provided to the council by 10%

 

so councils had a few choices as to how to meet the cut, such as: -

  • cutting services
  • making up the shortfall from the council's general funds
  • reducing the level of assistance provided (where this happens, people normally have to pay a minimum of between 15% and 25% of the normal charge)

 

it sounds like your council did 1 of the first 2 options for the last 2 financial years, but going forward they are following option 3

 

some councils did option 3 right from the start, so you are luckier than them

other councils may still be doing option 1 or 2, so you are unluckier than them

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I stay in Glasgow and have a Council Tax bill for £243. I receive both ESA and PIP

 

While I can't remember our local council paying my council tax bill, my rent on a LHA house has gone to zero (though until about 2012, I paid less than £10 pcm).

 

It can be a little different in Scotland because even those who receive full CT support generally still have to pay the water charge.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clarifying for me guys.

 

I figured there would be some easy explanation for it.

 

I guess I was quietly kinda hoping it was a political coo & I could have stayed under the radar for a few more years lol. Perhaps not ): Oh well, at least I feel 'in the loop' now, albeit a little broker for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now days its a postcode lottery, each council does their own thing.

 

Personally I have never had all my council tax paid, when I got first moved to the local scheme I had a big increase in how much I had to pay, but after I corrected the council on which ESA group I am in they reduced it again close to the levelsI Was paying on CTB, so it seems in my area the support given between WRAG and SG is quite a bit different.

 

This surprised me as my income was the same in both groups.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@worried33 - Yup it seems it's pretty much an open field to who pays what depending on locale & council policy.

 

@Nystagmite - Yup I have the single person reduction taken off.

 

I think this topic is pretty much done for my query now, thanks all for the help.

Of course if anyone wants to add anything further please do. It is indeed curious though that a tax designed to assist in council budgeting & upkeep can be legislated so diversely in what is meant to be a fair system for the public in general.

 

They should simply abolish this tax, we did without it before it came along just fine, it just adds to confusion I think, especially when it is governed by seemingly separate factions.

That's not me being ungrateful for them paying it when they did of course but I am thinking of all those who had it differently & had to pay full on all the way down the line.

Surely anything assisting a governing body like the tax is supposed to do should assist all, not segregate certain joe public's because they live in different locales. Understandable perhaps in the U S of A but here in Britain? Perhaps we really are becoming the 53rd State after all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My council Barking & Dagenham where charging us 15%, but this year, due to further budget cuts, have decided to hike it up by another 10% to 25% Next year they are planning another hike if their budgets are cut further, by yet another 10% to 30% We are all stuffed here. Whilst my neighbouring borough Tower Hamlets, is protecting all those out of work/sick & not charging, & this is one of the poorest boroughs in the country. Bemused how they can do it but others can't...or won't

 

The local residents were allegedly asked to express their preferred option of how to deal with the council budget crisis, with apparently, the vast percentage of people who replied asked that the working age be made to pay extra towards their council tax. It appears from their polls that very few working age people bothered to vote, & it was the protected elderly in the borough who inevitably decided.

 

I gave my opinion quite vociferously, and also passed my concerns on to my MP who being Labout too, completely ignored them. I have no idea how I'm going to pay this increase. We currently have many thousands in this borough in rent arrears due to this as well as bedroom tax & benefit cap. This is going to cause serious debt problems for so very many.

 

It makes me so angry that the ones who can least afford to pay, are being made to suffer in this way. But we have no choice but to pay, and the council knows that. They have us over a barrel and if it wasn't for the fact I had kids to look after, i would probably have finished myself off by now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My council Barking & Dagenham where charging us 15%, but this year, due to further budget cuts, have decided to hike it up by another 10% to 25% Next year they are planning another hike if their budgets are cut further, by yet another 10% to 30% We are all stuffed here. Whilst my neighbouring borough Tower Hamlets, is protecting all those out of work/sick & not charging, & this is one of the poorest boroughs in the country. Bemused how they can do it but others can't...or won't

 

The local residents were allegedly asked to express their preferred option of how to deal with the council budget crisis, with apparently, the vast percentage of people who replied asked that the working age be made to pay extra towards their council tax. It appears from their polls that very few working age people bothered to vote, & it was the protected elderly in the borough who inevitably decided.

 

I gave my opinion quite vociferously, and also passed my concerns on to my MP who being Labout too, completely ignored them. I have no idea how I'm going to pay this increase. We currently have many thousands in this borough in rent arrears due to this as well as bedroom tax & benefit cap. This is going to cause serious debt problems for so very many.

 

It makes me so angry that the ones who can least afford to pay, are being made to suffer in this way. But we have no choice but to pay, and the council knows that. They have us over a barrel and if it wasn't for the fact I had kids to look after, i would probably have finished myself off by now.

 

I also live in LBBD, am disabled along with my brother and sister.

None of us were asked nor notified prior to the increase. No doubt IT was a "if you can find it" consultation as usual.

 

How about a pertition ? Surely there will be massive support. Maybe the council should cut some of the tops wages first !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

There might be an option to spread the cost over 12 month. My council allows us to do this if we're running into financial difficulty.

 

There is, my monthly payment has gone from £18.... Too £30 !!

 

Looking at £40 next year !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really do sympathise, please don't think I don't but when budgets are cut the money has to come from somewhere. This usually means people that aren't on benefits have to pay more. Do you think that's fair?

 

I'm unemployed and am no longer entitled to JSA as my husbands works, not entitled to WTC as just over the threshold which is quite low as our children have grown up( and no housing benefit at all). Our monthly CT is £129!!!!! On the other hand my daughter pays no rent and her CT is heavily subsidized despite, in real terms, having more money in her pocket every month.

 

 

QUOTE=Nystagmite;4709134]I will have to pay £156 ish per year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

True and I did say I sympathise. However what I say stands, still can't afford it. What do you think the answer is? Keep increasing tax payers bills, some who are as short of money as those not working? I'm not being sarcastic, where do you think the money should come from?

 

 

Your situation is completely different though. You're not single with a severe disability living on benefits.
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very staggered it seems & has gone so completely out of proportion from it's original 'intended' function as to be just now a puzzle for our pockets & brains to chew over.

 

Definitely needs some action I think but then it makes sense that if they are dividing locales/costs in such a way then not enough would be stirred up at anyone time to initiate such action (rather crafty, tactical gov move if looked at from that perspective).

 

Well, I am at a loss with the whole CT issue, as many of us are it seems.

If I had to define the enigma of politics & put it it in one short paragraph, the CT would be the obvious first choice I guess. Very interesting comments all, thanks for sharing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Iv always found it bizarre that you can live next door to someone who pays less than you, all because their house is slightly smaller. You don't get more for your money for paying more do you. Then there's the fact that we are increasingly receiving less services but ever increasing CT bills. I feel very sorry for people who have worked all their lives and paid a mortgage and now have to move because they can't afford their CT bill.

 

I can remember many years ago my parents dismay that water rates were no longer part of the CT bill, and a very small percentage as well. The powers at the time justified this by saying it wouldnt increase the amount paid. Off course anyone who now has to pay for water knows that this promise was rubbish. How many people now struggle to pay their water bill?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...