Is imprisonment for council tax default unlawful?

[Peterbard]

Out of interest, is there a difference in regard to imprisonment for TV licence non payment and Council Tax ?

 

I believe more people have been sent to prison for refusing to pay for a TV licence,which is bizarre. Given that one is £150 to fund the BBC and the other potentially thousands to fund council services. The UK really is a bizarre place and any foreigners coming to the UK to live must shake their heads thinking how they have got to this position of a TV licence being more important in the eyes of UK authorities than tax for public services.

 

Yes the difference being that not paying a fine is a criminal offence, and as such a penalty can be imposed and that penalty does not have to reflect the losses to the plaintiff(in the criminal case the state.

In a civil action all that can be recovered on judgment are what has been lost by the plaintiff(creditor) and any costs which he incurred due to the breach of the defendant.

Punitive awards like commitment are not permitted.

 

This is why the debtor must be seen to have the capacity to pay, and have made a conscious decision not to(as opposed to being unable to), it is then possible to invoke a criminal sanction, and along with this there must be a criminal level of proof as mentioned earlier.

 

It is a an entirely unsatisfactory arrangement and as said in the article, if examined in detail would rarely pass the test for being truly a criminal act, but magistrates courts unfortunately in some cases do not have the will to use the relavant law as it should be.

[Bailiff Advice]

Are you one of those internet trolls?

 

A very silly comment indeed and one that is not necessary.

[outlawla]

A very silly comment indeed and one that is not necessary.

 

Not a 'very silly comment indeed', rather a deserved one.

[Peterbard]

Why have you posted then if you consider the subject raised to be irrelevant. Are you one of those internet trolls?

 

I dont understand the logic of this statement, I am trying to keep the thread on topic ?

 

As a reminder the subject of the thread is, is the imprisonment for tax default unlawful.

 

Strictly speaking yes it is, however willfully ignoring an order to repay the tax when you have the means available my not be.

[Peterbard]

Not a 'very silly comment indeed', rather a deserved one.

 

Doesn't advance the discussion, so I think silly is an apt description.

[Peterbard]

Ah I see, you are referring to ill informed abusive rants elsewhere.

 

Sorry not taking this thread off track to attempt to educate the FMOTL community on basic law. I would do so on there of course but they won't let me. Wonder why ?

 

Appologies to admin. Will mention it no further.

[mikeymack2002]

Well all of these question regarding debtors going to prison and for what debt I did ask a previous poster to read up about it and they didn't why? the answers to most of the questions are in those documents.

 

 

So has anyone else read about this at all?

[Peterbard]

Well all of these question regarding debtors going to prison and for what debt I did ask a previous poster to read up about it and they didn't why? the answers to most of the questions are in those documents.

 

 

So has anyone else read about this at all?

 

I think most contributors have read the documents on here MM, is there anything in particular which you feel needs re addressing ?

[mikeymack2002]

I just though someone would have posted up when and why and what sentence you can be given for non payment of debt that's all that's the documents that's what I was saying

[unclebulgaria67]

The government are looking to change the law anyway in regard to T V licence non payment sanctions and perhaps they should look at council tax liability enforcement as well. To me it does not make any sense jailing people for either issue, because the cost of such actions is high in comparison to the money involved and they cannot be compared to criminal offences such as theft, vandalism, assault etc.

 

I would scrap TV licences and I would reduce local taxation. Instead central government should collect the taxes and distribute it as necessary. You can have an old lady on limited income living in a large house having to find say £2k a year council tax, when she is not consuming that many local services. Next door in the same size house, you have 6 working people paying towards the same level of council tax. If the old lady cannot afford her council tax, she faces being threatened by an EA that she could go to prison.

[Peterbard]

Well as said imprisonment for being in debt is illegal. However the magistrates court can on application from the authority hand down a custodial sentence if the debtor has not made payment through choice, as opposed to not being able to pay because they hadn't had the money.

 

This has to be examined by the ,magistrates before anyone can be sent to prison, in addition all alternative methods of extracting payment have to be considered.

[Peterbard]

The government are looking to change the law anyway in regard to T V licence non payment sanctions and perhaps they should look at council tax liability enforcement as well. To me it does not make any sense jailing people for either issue, because the cost of such actions is high in comparison to the money involved and they cannot be compared to criminal offences such as theft, vandalism, assault etc.

 

I would scrap TV licences and I would reduce local taxation. Instead central government should collect the taxes and distribute it as necessary. You can have an old lady on limited income living in a large house having to find say £2k a year council tax, when she is not consuming that many local services. Next door in the same size house, you have 6 working people paying towards the same level of council tax. If the old lady cannot afford her council tax, she faces being threatened by an EA that she could go to prison.

 

Yes indeed, there is talk of decriminalising the offence, the BBC understandably are not keen.

 

Parliamentarry report http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06860

[mikeymack2002]

So for clarity can you be sent to prison for a civil debt?

[Peterbard]

So for clarity can you be sent to prison for a civil debt?

 

Depends on how you look at it. The law does not allow imprisonment for a civil debt, however it does allow it for disobeying an order of the court. To do this the debtor would have to be proven to have not paid by choice, rather than through just not having the money.

[mikeymack2002]

There are several defined levels of civil debt including those from the County Court, High Court and Magistrates Court and a few others too.

[Peterbard]

There are several defined levels of civil debt including those from the County Court, High Court and Magistrates Court and a few others too.

 

Indeed one definition of a civil debt is one that cannot incur a penalty on breach, in other words the award of the court can only be for losses incurred by the other side.

[mikeymack2002]

So therefore being sent to prison for a civil debt under the rules of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 is not a debt then? Also being sent to prison for a maximum of 3 months for CT debt and they are not legible for early release either.

 

 

But if committed to prison for non-payment of fines they/others can buy them out early release..

[Peterbard]

So therefore being sent to prison for a civil debt under the rules of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 is not a debt then? Also being sent to prison for a maximum of 3 months for CT debt and they are not legible for early release either.

 

 

But if committed to prison for non-payment of fines they/others can buy them out early release..

 

Wandering off topic but yes the act mentioned can offer criminal sanctions, it also modifies the debt act 1869 which I have mentioned on here before. Yes it is true that sentencing can be reduced upon repayment of the debt with the courts permission, this is not uncommon in cases of refusal to comply with a judgement order, and I think is stated in the legislature somewhere.

[unclebulgaria67]

The answer to the original question posed by the thread is that sending someone to prison would not be unlawful in some circumstances. But the Local authority must go through the requirements stated in regulation 47, before they could ever ask Magistrates to consider jailing someone. Obviously mistakes are made and not all of the people imprisoned should have been.

 

It always reminds me when these topics are discussed as to why FMOTL is taken seriously by some. All countries have taxation systems and civic responsibility, but the UK authorities seem to take pleasure in how creative they are in designing Legislation and procedures that apply to people. Makes me want to leave the UK for a nice island somewhere warm.

[Peterbard]

The answer to the original question posed by the thread is that sending someone to prison would not be unlawful in some circumstances. But the Local authority must go through the requirements stated in regulation 47, before they could ever ask Magistrates to consider jailing someone. Obviously mistakes are made and not all of the people imprisoned should have been.

 

It always reminds me when these topics are discussed as to why FMOTL is taken seriously by some. All countries have taxation systems and civic responsibility, but the UK authorities seem to take pleasure in how creative they are in designing Legislation and procedures that apply to people. Makes me want to leave the UK for a nice island somewhere warm.

 

Know what you mean

[outlawla]

Depends on how you look at it. The law does not allow imprisonment for a civil debt, however it does allow it for disobeying an order of the court.....

 

Wouldn't normally be as obnoxious as this, but if by referring to 'disobeying an order of the court' you mean a council tax liability order, seeing as it's you, you are wrong.

[Peterbard]

Wouldn't normally be as obnoxious as this, but if by referring to 'disobeying an order of the court' you mean a council tax liability order, seeing as it's you, you are wrong.

 

No the liability order simply confirms the debt and enables the authority to enforce.

The order I was referring to was the result of the application by the authority to the magistrates court.

[Peterbard]

Be as obnoxious as you like as long as you remain on topic, otherwise the thread will probably end up closed.

[unclebulgaria67]

No the liability order simply confirms the debt and enables the authority to enforce.

The order I was referring to was the result of the application by the authority to the magistrates court.

 

The application is consideration of committal to prison based on refusing to deal with the liability order ?

 

It confuses me that the court can change the matter from civil to criminal, because of the apparent wilful decision to ignore the court. This is not contempt of court as such, as the debtor may have reasons for not paying the liability and it would be up to Magistrates to decide whether the reasons stop it being a wilful non payment. The 100 that get jailed must be mostly those who say they won't pay or don't turn up to court.

[Peterbard]

It depends I suppose, the court cannot order someone to do something that is impossible because they dont have the funds. If say someone had savings or disposable income the court could instruct the debtor to pay, refusal would be contempt, I think it comes under CPR arround about section 80 I think.

 

Failure to repay installments would probably willful failure to comply with an enactment(local governance finance act)