Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Quash the Liability Order. Suspend Enforcement. Disputing Liabilities. Claim Damages for Misuse of Enforcement Power.
Post Reply
outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#211 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 01 Jun 2016 09:17

From: [outlawipcc]
To: Maione, Tony
Cc: [various]
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016
Subject: Re: False statement to defraud through council tax liability application

Dear Mr Maione,

It doesn't look like it's going to be easy having any of the concerns I've raised addressed regarding the corruption at North East Lincolnshire Council; nobody it seems has the balls to take any responsibility.

You have however confirmed that the statutory function, which as Monitoring Officer you have a duty to carry out, is not being fulfilled in the way defined in law. It is still not known whether you have looked at the papers, although the evidence leads me to think not because on proper consideration you would be left with no option than to take responsibility for dealing with the matter as it is inconceivable what line of defence could be mounted against the claim.

I would like the Monitoring Officer's role defining from the council's perspective because it differs from my understanding. The impression given is the person holding office is expected to provide legal representation for the Council in defence against legal challenge. However, I understand the role should function in a way to ensure that the Council, its Officers, etc., maintain the highest standards of conduct and should report on matters that are, or are likely to be, illegal or amount to maladministration within the council.

If the latter description defines the proper function then it would be your duty as opposed to my right to involve the relevant bodies, be that the police, Court, External Audit etc.

I would like all the matters which have not been addressed that I raised in previous correspondence dealing with and being informed how I can be sure that the matter is being properly addressed.

Yours sincerely

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#212 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 08 Jun 2016 16:34

From: Maione, Tony
To: [outlawipcc]
Cc: [various]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016
Subject: RE: False statement to defraud through council tax liability application

Dear Mr [outlawipcc],

I repeat my point below that if you believe that the Courts, the police, the Local Government Ombudsman, District Audit or any combination of those, and/or any other external scrutiny should be brought to bear it is of course within your right to pursue that.

As I have already confirmed to you, my colleague Mr Hanmer (Internal Audit) has been asked to consider this matter.

The Council’s Constitution includes sections setting out the functions of the Monitoring Officer. The Council’s Constitution is available for inspection on the Council’s website.

I now consider that that this matter is being addressed appropriately and therefore will not be responding to further emails you may send of a similar nature. You will be updated as appropriate of the outcome from Mr Hanmer’s review.

Kind regards

Tony

Tony Maione, Solicitor
Chief Legal Officer and Monitoring Officer
North East Lincolnshire Council

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#213 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 09 Jun 2016 21:24

Another threatening letter from Rossendales. I assume by this that the investigation into the fraud allegations by the council's internal audit committee is destined to be a sham. The police have also finally provided the outcome to its sham appeal process and predictably upheld its original decision not to investigate the crime on the basis that fraud/perjury is a civil matter.


Rossendales

PO Box 324
Rossendale
BB4 0GE

enquiries@rossendales.com

Client: North East Lincolnshire Council - Council Tax
Outstanding Amount: £286.00
Reference Number: 550xxxxx
Our Reference: 28628956
Date: 6th June 2016

  • REMINDER Notice of Enforcement - Please Do Not Ignore
Dear Mr [outlawipcc]

We wrote to you recently advising of the intention to make a visit to your property for the purpose of taking control of your goods for the unpaid amount below, relating to Council Tax and costs outstanding to North East Lincolnshire Council for a court order issued against you on the 30/10/2015.
  • North East Lincolnshire Council amount: £211.00
    Enforcement Costs incurred: £75.00
    Paid £0.00
    Total Amount Due: £286.00
To avoid this action you were required to make contact or make arrangements to pay this account, to date suitable arrangements have not been made and your account still remains outstanding. If you do not deal with this matter now, an enforcement agent will visit your property for the purpose of taking control of goods.

The total amount due shown above needs to be paid in full direct to Rossendales Ltd., NOT THE COUNCIL immediately otherwise further action will be taken to recover the amount due. Additional costs of a minimum of £235.00 will be applicable if we are required to take further action to secure payment, which may include goods being removed and sold. Detai!s of these costs are detailed on the back of this notice
  • Request for Payment Arrangement
If you need extra time to pay, please complete the income and expenditure form sent with this letter and return the information to us immediately. Please note that your offer of payment may not be accepted and we may require you to pay a higher amount than you have offered. We will write to you and let you know if your payment offer has been agreed, or whether it will have to be increased.

For and on behalf of

Rossendales Limited

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#214 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 10 Jun 2016 13:22

outlawipcc wrote:...The police have also finally provided the outcome to its sham appeal process and predictably upheld its original decision not to investigate the crime on the basis that fraud/perjury is a civil matter.
Appeal Outcome - 8 June 2016

HUMBERSIDE POLICE
APPEAL BODY

Police Headquarters
Priory Road
Hull HU5 5SF

This matter is being dealt with by:
Judi Heaton
Humberside Police Appeal Body


Dear Mr [outlawipcc]

8 June 2016

This letter is about your appeal against Humberside Police which was received on 25 January 2016.

Before outlining my decision I should explain that my role is not to re-investigate your complaint but to review the Local Resolution outcome into your complaint.

As part of the review I have looked carefully at:

Complaint File CO/461/15 and associated appeal papers.

After considering all the information available I have now made a decision about your appeal. I have not upheld your appeal and the reasons for this decision are set out in the attached report.

I appreciate this decision will be disappointing for you, however I assure you that the appeal has been dealt with objectively and independently.

You are not able to appeal against the assessment of your appeal. Humberside Police Appeal Body decisions are final. This means that any decision made and communicated to those involved can usually be overturned only by the courts through judicial review process.

If you intend to pursue this course of action you should seek legal advice.

Yours sincerely

Judi Heaton
Humberside Police Appeals body

Encl ...............report continues

Report submitted to Humberside Police on 8 November 2015:

North East Lincolnshire Council produced a false witness statement (thereby committing perjury) with regards a council tax liability hearing at Grimsby Magistrates' Court. The District Judge (Daniel Curtis) was aware that the evidence surrounded a false and corrupt statement, but nevertheless granted the council a liability order to enforce a fraudulent sum which presently stands at £120.00. This sum is likely to increase if the council appoints its criminal firm of bailiffs, Rossendales. My allegations are that the council has committed perjury with the intent to fraudulently obtain money from me by the use of Grimsby Magistrates court and that Judge Daniel Curtis has perverted the course of justice by being complicit to that crime.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13369
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#215 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Schedule 12 » 10 Jun 2016 13:35

If you are going to pursue a judicial review of your claim, then I'd change the word style of the complaint.

Phrases like "criminal firm of bailiffs". The firm hasn't been convicted of anything, and I think the vitriolic tone might get their backs up.

I think a more friendlier approach would work much better setting out how the council perjured itself, and why the police should have its economic crimes unit make an investigation.

If a judge has abused his office to assist another to obtain a money transfer under a false pretence, then this needs to be addressed separately. Again, you need to identify what the judge did and what facts he took into account, or failed to take into account before using court authority to make an order for a money transfer.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#216 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 10 Jun 2016 13:59

jasonDWB wrote:If you are going to pursue a judicial review of your claim, then I'd change the word style of the complaint.

Phrases like "criminal firm of bailiffs". The firm hasn't been convicted of anything, and I think the vitriolic tone might get their backs up.

I think a more friendlier approach would work much better setting out how the council perjured itself, and why the police should have its economic crimes unit make an investigation.

If a judge has abused his office to assist another to obtain a money transfer under a false pretence, then this needs to be addressed separately. Again, you need to identify what the judge did and what facts he took into account, or failed to take into account before using court authority to make an order for a money transfer.
I see you point but I have trouble displaying politeness to these people whose wages I contribute to. The fact Rossendales haven't been convicted of anything just means that the criminal justice system has been negligent by refusing to investigate. Regarding judicial review; to pursue this in the High Court would be futile and just be playing into the force's hands as the payout in the inevitable costs awarded to it would just be seen by the Chief Constable as a means of plugging a gap in its finances.

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#217 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 12 Jun 2016 18:57

I am very familiar with Post #214, e.g. "re-investigate", etc.

Outlaw,

I feel for you. I know exactly what you are going through.

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#218 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 20 Jun 2016 11:58

Hi Outlaw,

I'd be grateful if you could advise on 'timings' and schedule. Please see questions below. I hope you will answer them.

Q1. When did you make the first/original police complaint?
Q2. How long did it take the police to respond?
Q3. Upon receiving the first response, when did you follow up with the appeal?
Q4. How long did the police take to respond to the appeal?

From Post #214 above, it seems that your appeal was lodged on 25 January 2016? Or was this the original complaint?

Please advise. Thanks.

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#219 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 20 Jun 2016 14:30

Oh, to add...

I e-mailed to get an update. Received outcome of my appeal.

Not upheld.

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#220 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 20 Jun 2016 15:58

Superman_Returns wrote: Q1. When did you make the first/original police complaint?
12 November 2015. However, I never officially made a complaint. It was after being advised by the force that that it was a civil matter and to seek advice from a solicitor that I wrote asking that the matter be escalated for the attention of the Chief Constable in order that any subsequent investigation into the person against whom I intended making the complaint would not be undertaken by the force itself. However, the force chose not to comply with my wishes and prematurely took that correspondence as the complaint submission.
Superman_Returns wrote: Q2. How long did it take the police to respond?
Advised in an email on 13 November 2015 to collate all evidence to support the allegations.

It was confirmed in a letter dated 23 November 2015 that the Professional Standards Branch was in receipt of my complaint and the outcome was obtained in a letter dated 13 January 2016. Nearly 9 weeks.
Superman_Returns wrote: Q3. Upon receiving the first response, when did you follow up with the appeal?
25 January 2016.
Superman_Returns wrote: Q4. How long did the police take to respond to the appeal?
Just over 19 weeks (8 June 2016).

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#221 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 20 Jun 2016 16:15

Another threatening letter from Rossendales.

Are they doing it right? I would have thought Rossendales would be called off whilst the council's internal audit committee conducted its investigation into the allegations.


Rossendales

Client: North East Lincolnshire Council - Council Tax
Outstanding Amount: £286.00
Reference Number: 550xxxxx
Our Reference: 28628956
Date: 16th June 2016

  • Notice of Enforcement Agent Visit - Please Do Not Ignore
Dear Mr [outlawipcc]

As you have ignored all previous correspondence on this matter I now inform you that your debt has been allocated to an Enforcement Agent to visit your address to recover the amount detailed below, relating to Council Tax and costs outstanding to North East Lincolnshire Council for a court order issued against you on 30/10/2015.
  • North East Lincolnshire Council amount: £211.00
    Enforcement Costs incurred: £75.00
    Paid £0.00
    Total Amount Due: £286.00
When the Enforcement Agent visits your address, this will immediately result in further costs of a minimum of £235.00 being added to your bill.

To avoid these costs the total amount due shown above needs to be paid in full direct to Rossendales Ltd., NOT THE COUNCIL immediately and before the visit is made.

Any goods that you own are now at risk of being removed and sold, all potential costs are shown on the back of this notice.

The details on how to pay the amount shown are on the back of this notice.

If you cannot pay in full or dispute the amount due then you need to contact us immediately; details on how to do this are shown on the back of this notice.

Please note that any other amounts you may owe to the Council that are not covered by this court order need to be paid as previously advised.

For and on behalf of

Rossendales Limited

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#222 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 20 Jun 2016 17:58

I wouldn't hold my breath.

Too many things working against...

The only way to 'win' would be to come out on top, irrespective of the outcome...

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#223 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 23 Jun 2016 17:14

The only surprise is the Council determining the outcome to its internal investigation so quickly, but other than that there are no revelations, i.e., it's a complete load of bo!!ock$:

From: Hanmer, Peter
To: outlawipcc
Cc: Maione, Tony ; Res - Customer Services
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 4:52 PM
Subject: False statement to defraud through council tax liability application

Dear Mr outlawipcc

As set out in previous correspondence from Mr Maione, the Council’s monitoring officer, the audit team has now reviewed the allegations contained in your email to me dated 22 April 2016 under the auspices of the Council’s whistleblowing policy. A review of all relevant correspondence, court papers and interviews with key officers has taken place as part of this process. It has been concluded that the actions taken by officers regarding your Council Tax account were correct based on the information and correspondence made available to them at the time, and we have found no evidence that any fraudulent activity has taken place.

I note your comments around the complaints policy and the fraud response plan in relation to the handling of complaints involving allegations of fraud and corruption and these will be considered when the Council updates both policies during 2016/17.

Kind regards

Peter Hanmer

Peter Hanmer, Head of Audit and Assurance, Northern Lincolnshire Business Connect
Municipal Buildings, Town Hall Square, Grimsby, DN31 3HU
Telephone (01472) 323799 peter.hanmer@NLBusinessConnect.co.uk

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#224 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 26 Jun 2016 19:42

Complaints, Correspondence and Litigation Team
1st Floor, Post Point 1.4
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

25 June 2016

Dear Sir/Madam

Re: Failure responding to correspondence regarding delivery of ‘case stated’

I understand my complaint should in the first instance be made to the Court Manager; however, the concerns I wish to raise have been ongoing since November 2012 and relate to the court failing to reply, so consider it valid that it is escalated now to the Complaints Handling Team. The complaint surrounds a disputed order made against me by Justices at Grimsby Magistrate’s court which led to an application to the court to state a case for an appeal to the high court.

I have been unable to obtain the case stated, despite making numerous attempts. It is this failure that has prevented the appeal that was instituted on 22 November 2012 from proceeding to the High Court to this day.

The injustice caused extends far beyond that set out in this complaint and so consider it just preliminary information to get an investigation underway. It is intended, on agreement with the team to forward details of the issues that have arisen as a result of the gross failure to enable a comprehensive investigation to be carried out.

Those issues predominantly concern North East Lincolnshire Council misallocating payment to the sum subject to appeal when payment was clearly intended for the year’s council tax account which was current when paid. As the council has been able to engineer payment arrears this has led to recovery being taken through the court each year since with further costs added in the most recent proceedings. That in turn has led to time consuming and fruitless disputes i.e., formal complaints, escalation of issues to the LGO, police, police appeals and entering into a private prosecution against the police for negligence by improperly exercising police powers under Section 26 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.

The issues, as far as those directly relating to HMCTS are evident from the correspondence compiled chronologically appended to this letter, which is referable to the draft document (chronology) prepared for, and intended to be part of the High Court papers for the case stated appeal.

It will be evident on reading the account that the cause of the gross injustice which has protracted so far over roughly three and a half years has been the unwillingness and refusal of the court to cooperate, which in some cases has involved more seriously lying.

Key points

Initial delay

There was no contact made when the Deputy Justices’ Clerk who was initially dealing with the application left HMCTS toward the end of 2012. After several weeks having no update, enquiries were made to find out why there was no progress being made and it was only on this prompt that I was made aware that the Deputy Justices’ Clerk was no longer employed by HMCTS.

Unnecessary Claim for mandatory order

The failure to deal with queries about the recognizance which the Magistrates set at £500 resulted in gross injustice as I had to research judicial review procedures (mandatory order) as it was not reasonable that I appoint a legal professional. It was only by doing this and when the judicial review claim was underway that the Magistrates' Court admitted in the Acknowledgement of Service that 'the question of the appropriateness of the recognizance and/or the amount could have been considered by the court'. Simply answering my correspondence would have meant making the claim for judicial review was not necessary.

Unanswered correspondence to obtain final case

Various correspondence going unanswered from 19 August 2013 when representations were made on the draft case, up until the Justices' Clerk finally made contact on 6 March 2014 stating that either that day or the following the position regarding the case (advising on the next steps) would be set out in writing. Even with that undertaking there was no communication advising on the next steps. Subsequent attempts to find out what was happening elicited no response.
A letter sent 22 April 2014 requested the production of a Certificate of refusal to state a case under section 111(5) of the Magistrates Court's Act 1980 but was never answered, neither was an email sent 9 July 2014 to enquire into whether HMCTS had any arrangements in place to restrict my contact with the court.

Judicial complaint to Humber Advisory Committee

Having no response until 23 February 2016 to a judicial complaint dated 2 September 2014 to the Advisory Committee which was obtained only after engaging the Judicial Conduct Ombudsman. It is claimed that the matter was dealt with on 16 September 2014 and stated that a Certificate of refusal to state a case was not issued by the Justices because the final case was sent to me. Despite this, a copy which has been requested has not been sent nor has the Justices’ Clerk’s undertaking to inform me of the matter by 15 April 2016 been acted on.

Yours sincerely

outlawipcc

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#225 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 27 Jun 2016 17:55

From: outlawipcc
To: Hanmer, Peter ; Res - Customer Services
Cc: various
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016
Subject: Re: False statement to defraud through council tax liability application

Dear Mr Hanmer

It won't come as any surprise that I am completely dissatisfied with your response and consider it wholly unacceptable. Though I anticipated the council's dealing with the matter would be a sham, that makes it no less acceptable.

Of course, you provide no evidence whatsoever to support your decision because it would be impossible to do so as you are contending, without any grounds, the concrete evidence provided you which is not only beyond reasonable doubt but beyond all doubt.

The decision is simply indefensible and the fact that the guilty parties have been protected by the process is evident that the [redacted].

It is the role of the Council's Monitoring Officer to report on matters he believes are, or are likely to be illegal and is responsible to ensure that the Council, its Officers and elected members maintain the highest standards of conduct. Clearly by turning a blind eye in this matter he has failed in discharging his statutory duty, causing not only gross injustice to me as the taxpayer affected by continual harassment of officers pursuing a vendetta, but has also resulted in damaging the reputation of the Council.

Officers should not, but are being allowed to abuse their positions in pursuit of personal vendettas, costing hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money, over a relatively insignificant sum which in any event has been criminally engineered as a debt that is not owed by those officers purely for their own perverse satisfaction. There is no place within a local authority for individuals of this kind and it is of paramount importance that when such practices are highlighted, the person within the council with responsibility acts on the information by dismissing those guilty and has the matter reported to the police.

Separate but related issue

There is another failure of the Monitoring Officer discharging his statutory duty, which until now has not been dealt with, but nevertheless needs investigating as it has had a material impact on the present issues. The matter relates to 2013 when [redacted], as Monitoring Officer was the person responsible for ensuring that the Council's decision making was within the law.

Background

Grimsby Magistrates Court had been obstructing the progress of an application to state a case for an appeal to the high court in the matter of NELC's application for a council tax liability order. It was looking unlikely that the court would produce the document as was required for the case to continue because of the failure to cooperate.

In line with pre-action protocol for a claim for mandatory order, alternative remedies were suggested in an email to the Justices' Clerk with the council copied in on 6 February 2013 (see attached). In the case of the council, the remedy suggested was to apply to the Magistrates court under section 82 of the Local Government Act 2003 to either quash the liability order for £60 obtained on the 2nd November 2012, or apply for a lesser amount than that for which the original order was made that was equal to the sum that had already been paid (in respect of reasonable costs).

On 8 February 2013 (also attached) the council replied stating it was not prepared to apply to the Magistrates Court to quash the liability order as it claimed it had been correctly obtained.

I disputed this in a letter dated 14 February 2013 (attached) on the grounds that the application should have ceased when the aggregate of the sum outstanding and an amount equal to the costs reasonably incurred by the authority was paid. In any event, the letter dated 5 February 2013 attached the email (6 February 2013), pointed out that the court issued a liability order where there was no evidence on which the Magistrates could have found their decision. Consequently, one of the questions in law asked in the application was whether the costs being disputed as unreasonable should have been awarded by the court without evidence from the council to support them.

We now know that they shouldn't have; it was unlawful to award costs without proof of how they had been arrived at. This has been confirmed in the case between Tottenham Magistrates and the Reverend Paul Nicolson (see case attached). It was therefore incorrect for the council to state in its letter of 8 February 2013 that the liability order had been correctly obtained (See para 61 in R (Nicolson) v Tottenham Magistrates [2015] EWHC 1252 (Admin), attached):
  • " 61. This application for judicial review of the decision taken by the Magistrates must therefore succeed. I was told that since the hearing the order for costs against the Claimant has been withdrawn, but that does not render the proceedings academic; as I have said, it raises issues of wider public importance. Had the order not been withdrawn, I would have quashed it. Since it has been withdrawn, I will declare that the order was unlawful, because:

    i) the Magistrates did not have sufficient relevant information before them to reach a proper judicial determination of whether the costs claimed represented costs reasonably incurred by the Council in obtaining the liability order; "
Moreover, the council has since produced a calculation which proves that expenditure it was claiming was not actually incurred by the council in respect of my case. It is evident from the breakdown that those costs were attributable to activities such as officers who engaged with customers (telephone calls etc) to negotiate payment arrangements and to monitor them, and therefore completely irrelevant to my case and unlawfully claimed.

It was the person appointed Monitoring Officer at that time who was responsible for the decision made not to apply to the Magistrates court as suggested in the pre-action protocol as informed in the 8 February 2013 letter on the basis that the liability order had been correctly obtained.

Consequences

This failure to apply lawful and proportionate decision making, hence not taking the correct remedy has led to years of injustice as it has enabled the Council to misallocate payment to the sum subject to appeal when payments have clearly been intended for the year's council tax account which was current when paid. Having balances outstanding for different years and the opportunity that has given the council to engineer payment arrears, this has led to recovery being taken through the court each year since with further costs added in the proceedings considered here. That in turn has led to time consuming and fruitless disputes i.e., formal complaints, escalation of issues to the LGO, police, police appeals and entering into a private prosecution against the police for negligence by improperly exercising police powers under Section 26 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.

Objective

I would like in addition to having a proper response, with names of those involved in the investigation and findings properly documented, that this correspondence serves as a formal complaint about the Chief Executive, Monitoring Officer and all others involved in the investigation process. Naturally as my complaint alleges irregularity, my expectation is that in accordance with the Council's 'Fraud Response Plan' the matter is referred to the Audit, Risk, Insurance and Corporate Fraud team immediately on receipt, despite those who may be referred the matter being some of the officers (elected members) who are the complaint's focus.


Yours sincerely

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#226 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 01 Jul 2016 09:07

From: Hanmer, Peter
To: outlawipcc ; Res - Customer Services
Cc: various
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016
Subject: RE: False statement to defraud through council tax liability application

Dear Mr outlawipcc,

Thank you for your email. I can confirm that a detailed investigation was carried out by members of the audit and assurance team and its work was reviewed by myself. As per my correspondence dated 23 June we have made our position clear, based on the evidence of the review, and will not be corresponding any further on the issue.

Kind regards

Peter Hanmer

Peter Hanmer, Head of Audit and Assurance, Northern Lincolnshire Business Connect
Municipal Buildings, Town Hall Square, Grimsby, DN31 3HU
Telephone (01472) 323799 peter.hanmer@NLBusinessConnect.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13369
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#227 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Schedule 12 » 01 Jul 2016 09:39

What do you want the council to do, i.e. pay a sum, do something, stop doing something, and give the reasons why?

Say how you are exposed to a loss as a result. It doesn't need to be a monetary loss.

I'll see what other steps you can take.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6671
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#228 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Pote Snitkin » 01 Jul 2016 11:56

I think he just wants them to admit they're wrong.

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#229 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 01 Jul 2016 13:43

There are wider issues being uncovered here. The corruption within North East Lincolnshire Council is endemic. Although this tool, Hammer, is refusing to cooperate and therefore not yet confirmed, it's likely that the audit and assurance team which has carried out the sham investigation will be made up of an element of elected members.

You expect underhand behaviour from officers but it's a completely different matter when Councillors claiming taxpayer expenses are the ones stitching up the very people who are paying them. A number of elected members have been in receipt of the correspondence anyway and none of them have made an issue of it or replied other than acknowledged receipt.

It's the Council's solicitor (Monitoring officer) who is responsible for the scrutiny of these negligent Councillors, but I suspect the false witness statement has something to do with the head of legal services himself and was merely signed by the Court enforcement manager.

My formal complaint which the Head of Audit and Assurance is refusing to address is predominantly about the Monitoring officer's negligence in this matter and a previously one when the current Chief Executive was appointed that role.

If the Council's solicitor has been responsible for the witness statement then you can see how it would be in his interest for the investigation to be a whitewash.

I can see the council's recovery staff becoming more confident with a growing sense of impunity, and their next goal will be to apply summons costs for committal hearing and so on. The court has already hinted that they will be agreeable to that.

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#230 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 04 Jul 2016 14:23

Rossendales turned up today. Whoever it was, presumably Keith Grice, managed to get through the security door without me letting him in (flats with security system).

There is no breakdown of debt, fees etc, only a total (£521) and no time of visit. However, he is good enough to allow me (even at this late stage) to pay what I DON'T OWE in instalments.

-----------------------------------------------
  • FOR NON PAYMENT OF COUNCIL TAX / NATIONAL NON DOMESTIC
    RATES / ROAD TRAFFIC TMA
    ENFORCEMENT AGENT ATTENDANCE
I have attended today with the intention of Taking Control of your goods to discharge the above debt.

AMOUNT OUTSTANDING £ 521.0O

If you cannot pay this amount in full you should be aware that even at this late stage with an initial payment of £50.00 you can still pay by installments.

You may pay by Postal Order, Cash, Bank Draft or Debit/Credit Card.

Payment should be made direct to the Enforcement Agent below to avoid unnecessary action

  • DO NOT DISREGARD THIS NOTICE
Enforcement Agent in Charge: KEITH GRICE

Contact Number: 07515050577
-----------------------------------------------

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13369
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#231 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Schedule 12 » 04 Jul 2016 14:44

What action do you want to take?

The bailiffs NOE does need to give enough information to identify the origin of the debt and how the fees are made up.

Regulation 7: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013 ... ion/7/made

I'm not familiar with the regulations that prescribe the document you have posted.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#232 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 04 Jul 2016 15:09

I'll be writing to the leader of the council some time soon with some serious allegations amounting to criminal activity, i.e., officers abusing public office as a means of engaging in their own personal vendetta. The CEO and monitoring officer are complicit as they have evidence but endorse it.

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#233 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 05 Jul 2016 04:12

outlawipcc wrote:I'll be writing to the leader of the council some time soon with some serious allegations amounting to criminal activity, i.e., officers abusing public office as a means of engaging in their own personal vendetta. The CEO and monitoring officer are complicit as they have evidence but endorse it.
A simple question to show that they indulge in collusion and corruption. Make an FoI request. Ask what the top brass at your council earn? Ask what percentage of council tax goes to salaries + pension? Pension alone? Etc.

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#234 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 05 Jul 2016 04:30

i.e., officers abusing public office as a means of engaging in their own personal vendetta.
I was unlawfully arrested. There was no reason to arrest me. Yet, they did this... and more! Why? Purely out of spite.

They took more than a year to drop the charge. Further to my complaint to the CPS, it was stated that the charge was dropped because they could not trace the 'key witness' (i.e. the purported bailiff) despite taking more than a year to do this. Upon reading the letter, I went online I found him in minutes. Nope, I think in under a minute! I have everything in writing.

They did all these things (they = 4 Horsemen = police, council, court, cps) out of spite - no more, no less.

LOL! This person is such a 'paragon of virtue' that he did not even have the balls to face me in court. You all know his name. Remember that I was the one facing an obstruction charge. Yes! I was racially insulted, assaulted, arrested, charged and had to defend myself in court. Nope, this is not the script of a Hollywood blockbuster!

So, Outlaw, in response to your remark above, the UK is an extremely corrupted country. The country presents this veneer of moral superiority, but it is simply that - a facade. Your experience (and mine) show that this inherent nature permeates every layer of government / civil service / council.

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#235 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 05 Jul 2016 04:35

Pote Snitkin wrote:I think he just wants them to admit they're wrong.
This is what I wanted. But we will never get this.

At least the CPS apologised. Not directly for the case, but you could sense it from the letter.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6671
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#236 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Pote Snitkin » 05 Jul 2016 08:21

Go to bed Cam.

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#237 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 06 Jul 2016 09:11

Incidentally, it should be noted that no element whatsoever of my payments made since the account has been with Rossendales has been diverted to the £310 which has accrued so far in bailiff charges.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13369
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#238 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Schedule 12 » 06 Jul 2016 09:32

Regulations only apply "proceeds" to be apportioned between bailiff and creditor when the money raised is less than the amount outstanding.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#239 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 07 Jul 2016 06:10

Dear Jason,

Given that Outlaw's CT account is with Rossendales, does this not indicate a CT amount that is outstanding, which has been passed to a bailiff company (I assume that LO costs are included)? Since the account is with Rossendales, why are payments made by Outlaw (from the point the account was allegedly passed to Rossendales) not apportioned to cover fees?

Please advise.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13369
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#240 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Schedule 12 » 07 Jul 2016 07:52

Because paragraph 50 (3) of Schedule 12 that introduces the regulations how proceeds are apportioned only apply to "proceeds" of enforcement.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#241 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 07 Jul 2016 09:02

To clarify the situation, payments have been made via internet banking which have matched the current years instalment amounts. That means by the council's own definition (specified payments), I had elected to pay this year's Council Tax, thus it would be unlawful if the council allocated those payments to last years' debt (the engineered debt which Rossendales is wasting its time chasing).

However, had I made payments which were just 1p over the instalment amount, the council would have allocated it to the previous year's debt. What the consequences of that would have been regarding Rossendale fees is anyone's guess, but regardless of that they would be starting the recovery process over again for this years account because of the shortfall due to the council allocating payment wrongly.

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#242 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 07 Jul 2016 10:27

Thanks for the explanation, Jason.

It seems that there is a specific definition of "proceeds".

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#243 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 12 Jul 2016 10:23

From: [outlawipcc]
To: enquiries@rossendales.com
Cc: Various
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016
Subject: Council Tax - North East Lincolnshire Council, Reference Number: 28628956


Dear Sir/Madam

Re: Council Tax - North East Lincolnshire Council, Reference Number: 28628956


Recovery Officers at North East Lincolnshire Council have engaged in a vendetta that has and continues to waste resources of numerous public services costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds. Those responsible are clearly abusing their positions and wouldn't think twice about using any means available to further their campaign. Clearly they see Rossendales as a way of doing this by having its bailiffs harass me to attempt recovery of a debt which the council only has permission to enforce as a result of misleading the court by submitting false evidence.

It is worth pointing out that the vendetta was sparked off by my objection to the council's mishandling of a complaint a number of years ago into Rossendales application of several hundred pounds in fees for such things as phantom visits, levying randomly on a vehicle in a residential car park (surprisingly not owned by myself) and negligently handling sensitive personal information relating to enforcement.

North East Lincolnshire Council has appointed Rossendales knowing full well that none of its bailiffs will be successful in obtaining any monies from myself and so the work undertaken amounting to £310 accruing so far in fees will have to be written off.

Despite not owing the debt, I do happen to know that the success of a bailiff obtaining fees from the debtor relies solely on the taxpayer being unaware that there is no obligation to engage with the enforcement company.

I suggest that if Rossendales want to recover its losses it does so by demanding compensation from those officers at the council who have abused their position by instructing Rossendales to further their personal vendetta.


Yours sincerely

outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#244 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by outlawipcc » 14 Jul 2016 17:17

Another threatening letter Rossendales FINAL REMINDER - DO NOT IGNORE

I take it that because the police have orders from the top to turn a blind eye to whatever local authorities gets up to they think they can get away with adding spurious fees (or threatening to). That's why even though no goods have been taken control of (unless a random car has), they're threatening that i'll be immediately liable for further enforcement costs (£110) when the Enforcement Agent attends (£420). With the £120 unwarranted summons costs the total dodgy demand is £540).

Rossendales

PO Box 324
Rossendale
BB4 0GE

Client: North East Lincolnshire Council - Council Tax
Outstanding Amount: £521.00
Reference Number: 550xxxxx
Our Reference: 28628956
Date: 11th July 2016

Dear outlawipcc

  • FINAL REMINDER - DO NOT IGNORE
[/b][/size]
  • North East Lincolnshire Council amount: £211.00
    Enforcement Costs incurred: £310.00
    Paid £0.00
    Total Amount Due: £521.00
Despite previous correspondence you have not made payment to clear the overdue balance above.

When the Enforcement Agent attends with the intention to take control of and remove your goods for the purpose of sale you will be immediately liable for further enforcement costs as detailed on the back of this letter.

In order to avoid the removal of your goods you must contact us immediately on 0844 701 3980
  • NO FURTHER REMINDERS WILL BE ISSUED
Please ensure that all correspondence/payments quote our-reference number and your name and address.

Yours Faithfully

Enforcement Agent Manager

Superman_Returns
Posts: 51
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

#245 Re: Summonsed for Council Tax account being in credit

Post by Superman_Returns » 15 Jul 2016 12:12

outlawipcc wrote:From: [outlawipcc]
To: enquiries@rossendales.com
Cc: Various
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016
Subject: Council Tax - North East Lincolnshire Council, Reference Number: 28628956


Dear Sir/Madam

Re: Council Tax - North East Lincolnshire Council, Reference Number: 28628956


Recovery Officers at North East Lincolnshire Council have engaged in a vendetta that has and continues to waste resources of numerous public services costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds. Those responsible are clearly abusing their positions and wouldn't think twice about using any means available to further their campaign. Clearly they see Rossendales as a way of doing this by having its bailiffs harass me to attempt recovery of a debt which the council only has permission to enforce as a result of misleading the court by submitting false evidence.

It is worth pointing out that the vendetta was sparked off by my objection to the council's mishandling of a complaint a number of years ago into Rossendales application of several hundred pounds in fees for such things as phantom visits, levying randomly on a vehicle in a residential car park (surprisingly not owned by myself) and negligently handling sensitive personal information relating to enforcement.

North East Lincolnshire Council has appointed Rossendales knowing full well that none of its bailiffs will be successful in obtaining any monies from myself and so the work undertaken amounting to £310 accruing so far in fees will have to be written off.

Despite not owing the debt, I do happen to know that the success of a bailiff obtaining fees from the debtor relies solely on the taxpayer being unaware that there is no obligation to engage with the enforcement company.

I suggest that if Rossendales want to recover its losses it does so by demanding compensation from those officers at the council who have abused their position by instructing Rossendales to further their personal vendetta.


Yours sincerely


I can totally relate to this.

Post Reply