I posted in detail about how on moving I muddled my Council Tax and was astonished at the speed with which Edinburgh City Council set the bailiffs upon me. Through my local MP I have now received clarification that Edinburgh City Council take people to court as soon as their payment is 42 days late.
I find that absolutely incredible. People are human, they make mistakes, they may be temporarily short of cash. I cannot think of any other body that is so aggressive in subjecting people to the judicial system for a small delay. No commercial company would dream of taking people to court for just being 42 days late, the utility companies and banks would in fact not to be allowed to do so by regulators and the inland revenue certainly are much less predatory.
Do not misunderstand me. People should pay their tax, on time. I tried to pay mine 46 days late for which I apologise and am happy to accept a late payment penalty. But I can think of absolutely no reason why it was necessary to take me to court for paying my Council Tax in May instead of April.
Actually I can think of one reason – to make enormous money for Scott & Co, the bailiffs. I tried to pay by online direct debit on 25 May, not knowing that on 19 May Edinburgh Council had already referred me to court. My payment appeared accepted and I got a confirmation number from Edinburgh City Council. Three days later, on 28 May, they obtained a court warrant against me. Edinburgh City Council have not taken any payment from my direct debit and they refuse to take any payment from my direct debit. They both refuse to take the payment and at the same time continue to harass me for non-payment.
The reason is they have no interest in collecting my tax. What they want is to make money for Scott & Co., a private company owned by an extremely wealthy husband and wife partnership. I cannot now pay Edinburgh City Council but have to make the payment to this private company including their exorbitant fees.
I have no objection to paying any late penalty to Edinburgh City Council, but when any City Council in Scotland is primarily interested in channeling money to a private company and making millionaire parasites richer, then I look at the size of the houses and value of the cars of councillors, ex-councillors, and senior officials and I ponder, deeply.
But I guess responses are not supposed to address certain issues, in the eyes of a certain commenter whom I am not allowed to call what I would prefer to call him, and have in the past.
FYI bailiffs operate in England but in Scotland it is Sheriff Officers. The difference is that Sheriff Officers must be approved by the courts and fees are set by Act of Sederunt. Bailiffs are unregulated.
If a Summary Warrant is obtained it will only be notified ‘on the walls of the court’ and it will not affect credit ratings.
For the most part warrants will be obtained and then held back whilst time to pay arrangements are completed, enforcement only if they break down.
Local authorities were always most anxious to proceed with legal action. In the final year of ‘poindings’ Inland Revenue started 36k (approx) warrants with only SIX going to sale. It was effective and yet not overused. On the other hand, the entire reason for revamping the law was local authorities being too quick going to sale. They’ve still not learned their lesson. I also fell victim to this over zealous practise from Inverclyde Council, there is bad practise across most councils.
“My response did address Dale’s problem. I meant to suggest Dale would have trouble winning redress against such powerful people.”
___________________
You’re still being cute, Lysias.
Do you think that Sir John Kerr was personally responsible for Dale’s problem?
Could the Resident Invigilator please be reminded that he is not a moderator and to mind his own business.
Whether or not Kerr was personally responsible, his attendance at the Bilderberg meeting illustrates the power of Scottish Power.
“But I guess responses are not supposed to address certain issues”
___________________
My objection is not to genuine responses, Lysias, but to the irrelevant bollocks you so often come up with.
So , you see, your “guess” is also bollocks.
Are you serious or are you just trying to show us how clever and “in touch” you are?
Mary, in this case the Resident Invigilator’s complaints defeat his purpose. He means to divert us from thinking of the Bilderberg meeting. But every complaint of his only serves to remind us again of precisely that, and of the power of the people who attend those meetings.
—
[ Mod: That’s enough about the Bilderbergs, Illuminati etc. for the first page or so of the latest thread. Thanks. ]
[ Mod: This addresses other posts about the Bilderbergs, Illuminati etc., which are unwelcome and O/T ]
[ Mod: Kindly conduct O/T discussions further away from the first page on a new thread ]
Sometimes I despair with you. You can remember ad verbatim a speech you made 20 years ago, but forget the council tax ?..Best way to do it mate is to set up a standing order with the bank. Even if you have no money, you can blag it was a bank glitch that it was not paid. Don’t forget that you are dealing with computers most of the time and they just spit out a notice to a human that you have not paid by a certain date, and they just follow a procedure to get the cash back for the council…bunch of sheep really. Suggest u contact the Council direct..they can set up a weekly payment scheme for you and call off the mad dogs of the repo men. Or move to Pilton. No bugger there has paid council tax in years ! Luck.
Craig: You might or might not be aware of the following: Most councils do not actually issue a proper summons related to anything “official”. They simply hire a room at a magistrate’s court and then hold, or threaten to hold, a session during which multiple cases for non-payment of council taxes are heard. In fact a great many of these hearings have no legal basis at all. But defendants are persuaded that these hearings are official. The letter you are sent for such hearings will reveal on close inspection whether they are issued by the court or simply by the council pretending it is a court document. In at least 75% of cases the summons is not a summons at all, but a standard letter issued by the council without any sanction of the court.
The magistrates courts are however complicit in this deviation from proper due process. If you challenge this anomaly the court is obliged to back down. A summons MUST be issued by the court service, NOT the council. Most council “summons” are simply a letter purporting to be an official document. Councils issue them in bulk and they cost around 50p-£1 each to process, which is why councils favour them.
A Bailiff who merely writes you a letter based on the above bogus hearing has ZERO status and indeed in many cases such letters are a breach of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, and possibly the Malicious Communications Act of 1998 (and subsequent amendments.
Moreover, if you offer payment direct to the council, they cannot refuse your payment. The claimed bailiff/legal fees are superfluous and if you can demonstrate that you offered payment and it was refused that is in your favour. You can also contest the court fees and bailiff’s charges, but that can only be done in a “proper” magistrate court in front of a serving magistrate, not in a room booked by the council purporting to be a court. Most council tax hearings are bogus and not legal hearings at all. They are designed for quick processing of claims by them against tax payers who are not aware that the “court” they are in is not actually a court.
Not all, but most, councils, take this line in aggressively claiming council tax arrears.
Only a proper magistrate hearing can decide whether the costs (of bailiffs or solicitors) is reasonable. No letter you receive as to costs is valid prior to a proper court hearing, because ONLY the court can decide whether they are reasonable. Therefore you can offer payment and at the same time request that the matter of costs should be decided in court. If you do this the lawyers, debt collectors and bailiffs are now on their back feet, and the likelyhood is that they will adjust their costs to a level that a court would decide is “reasonable”.
If you google search this subject you will find many reports of bogus council tax hearings, some of which are utterly misleading and in themselves a breach of proper procedures. Good luck.
Craig/others/lawyers
Could it be that the Council could sell their debts (in such a short period) to these scoundrels, Scott & Co.?
It would be very worthwhile to scrutinise the Councils procedures for appointing said Scott, and the contract between them.
I agree with commenters who have suggested that you, Craig, take this to Court after appropriate counsel from solicitors. I would be more than delighted to contribute to a legal process and proffer a hundred quid initially and immediately.
You’ve done nothing wrong Craig, au contraire…
You don’t have to recognise the court and you certainly should not fear the Bailiff… he’s a paid torpedo.It’s a scam.
If you have the time or inclination you could keep it going ad infinitum and should the Bailiffs make a move,YOU could call the Police. The law is on your side.
Just saw Leonard Youngs post… he’s right Craig..
Oh, And I think Mary is doing a sterling job. If I was the moderator, I would have a lot less patience..
It is hard to be sympathetic if the person complaining is generally a supporter of big government and high taxes (eg. the EU, NHS).
I can see why councils do this. The Council Tax is difficult to collect comparted to VAT and PAYE income tax, I have no doubt that there is widescale evasion of it and once somebody falls behind the arrears build up quickly.
I am not a lawyer, but the phrase “duty to mitigate loss” comes to mind. If I have a contract with Craig (say) and I fail to carry out my end of the deal, causing extra expense for Craig, then Craig is entitled to claim that extra expense from me, but he also has a duty to mitigate the loss – for example if he is forced to rent a car by my failure, then he can’t claim for a big new Mercedes if he normally drives an old Focus.
By the same token, as far as I can see, the council has a duty to minimise the costs it incurs in collecting late payments. Might be worth pursuing an argument along these lines, esp if you can do so as part of a large group of council tax payers.
Craig, to add to what Leonard Young has said above, check the warrant you’ve been issued very carefully: if they’ve spelt your name slightly wrong, or get any other of your details slightly wrong, the warrant is legally invalid.
This happens very frequently with warrants issued by baliffs.
Frazer
25 Jun, 2015 – 10:12 pm
Oh, And I think Mary is doing a sterling job.”
Frazer, by whose appointment has she been awarded this ‘job’. She certainly reports for the ‘job’ with exemplary regularity.
Anyhow, your friend has set the imminently sensible house rules — is she above it?
“If I was the moderator, I would have a lot less patience..”
Meaning?…. And therefore?
Leonard, someone made very similar points about the kangaroo ‘courts’ when Craig first raised the issue. Perhaps it was you?
Unbelievable in this day and age — absolutely shocking!
@ Villager..Let me answer your second question first. I am not as tolerant of trolls or idiots as you may be. Mary is not my friend as you state, I have read her extremely interesting post over the last few years and have respected her opinion and debating skills when replying to people such as yourself who wish merely to cause misdirection and cuts out comments from all the idiots on this blog… Craig appoints moderators to ensure the usual trolls and loons and racist lunatics are kept away and indeed, deflected to other extremist blogs, such as Mary does, and a few moderaters before her..you just have to delve into the archives to see the proof of this…Anyway…as you are a Newbie to this blog, please respect the moderator …Your comments are welcome and will be read..
[ Mod: Abusive comments deleted. ]
A very subtle nepotism seems to be operating here. If it continues one will certainly need to accept Craig’s invitation to use the contact button.
A word of advice to the Mods: you seem to be swinging the pendulum the other way; kindly be self-aware of your new-found ‘power’. The macrocosm of the abuse of power in the real world, seems to be being supplanted in this microcosm!
—
[ Mod: You are free to use the contact button whenever you wish. Your abusive comments to Craig’s friend Frazer will, of course, be viewed in context with your complaint. ]
I know a very good lawyer (allegedly) who will be pleased to help you, Craig. Mind you, it would be helpful if you were a rich war criminal….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-33276660
Kagame’s nasty aide, Karake was recently arrested under an international arrant alleging war crimes, on behalf of Spain. He has just been released on bail of £1M, negotiated by the founder of recently-collapsed Mee Healthcare. He-whose-name -we-do-not-speak’s wife. (He-whose has been very close to Kagame for some years, and reports from Rwanda strongly suggest that Karake was instructed to test the ICC system. If so, Cherie, plausibly, was handed the contract before Karake was arrested. Course, if he jumps bail, Scott’s rep in Africa will probably need a small army to distrain….
[Deleted]
[ Mod: Any more of this and you’ll be on pre-mod (at best) ]
DON’Tever fucking threaten me! If you want to corrupt this place with your petty power, that’s Craig’s loss not mine.
—
[ Mod: Fine – you’re out of here. (That’s not a threat, by the way.) We’ll just have to live with that loss. ]
Speaking of petty power trips, it seems to me that it’s the complainer who’s doing the threatening.
Villager’s friend the Resident Invigilator also just used the F-word (in a deleted comment on this thread). These guys seem awfully fond of foul language.
Lysias; “These guys seem awfully fond of foul language.”
Yes I’ve notice that with the pro-Establishment lot, they do use a lot of profanity; guess it comes with the terriorty, always angry at the strain of trying to square their reality detached world view with commonsense reality !
—
[ Mod: Please take O/T comments to earlier threads, particularly the “free-fire” zone of https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/06/some-rules-for-comment-moderation/
We would like to keep the first page or so of the latest post on-topic. Thank you in advance. ]
Yeah.
I’ve seen people using foul filthy swear words as well. Old vulgar Anglo-saxon words, long ago replaced with gentilesse.
Could be part of one of those Nordic right-wing groups, I suppose.