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: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 16 Jul 2016 13:01

Here's a complaint acknowledgement from Rossendales – complete surprise as I haven't submitted one to them. They obviously mistook advice to claim compensation off NELC as a complaint.

Date: 13 July 2016

Dear Sir/Madam,

North East Lincolnshire Council C Tax - TCE

Thank you for letting us know about your concerns.

We are sorry to learn that you are not happy. We take the concerns you have raised very seriously and will look into them carefully.

We will give your complaint our full attention and make sure that it is dealt with by someone with the right knowledge and experience.

We will investigate your concerns and we may contact you to gather further information. We will ensure that we can answer any queries and address your complaint in full. Once we have completed our investigation we will provide you with a resolution.

Full details of our complaints procedure which details how we deal with complaints and the steps we follow, can be found at http://www.Rossendales.com.

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us on the number above.

Yours faithfully

Complaints Manager

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6012
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

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

Post by Pote Snitkin » 16 Jul 2016 13:52

They must assume any correspondence is a complaint. They obviously don't bother to read anything they receive.
It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority. - Benjamin Franklin

On 22/2/17, Peterbard said "taking control of goods and selling them does not actually mean taking control of goods and selling them." Discuss.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 16 Jul 2016 14:10

It could have been worse. They might have sent one of their generic letters thanking them for the compliments.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 20 Jul 2016 14:15

Rossendales has completed its investigation and provided a resolution.
  • 14 July 2016

    Thank you for your email dated 12th July.

    As you are aware we act upon the instructions of NE Lincs Council to recover monies owed for unpaid Council Tax after a Liability Order was issued against you in a court of law. As I'm sure you can appreciate when a matter has reached this stage our client requires us to execute the Liability Order and recover a debt promptly and effectively.

    We wrote to you on 11th May to advise of our involvement and offered a 14 day grace period in which the matter could be resolved without incurring statutory fees. As we received no reply the 'Notice of Enforcement' that was served upon you on 25th May advise further of our lawful involvement, the fee schedule, (set in law), that would now apply as recovery action is taken and asked you to urgently contact us. With no contact nor payment from you we wrote to you again twice.

    I have noted from your email that you dispute your liability in respect of this matter. The Council however does not regard the matter as in dispute and their instructions to us remain to collect the full balance. Please contact us with your proposals to discharge this debt in order to prevent further action.

    Yours sincerely,

    Paul Davies.
    Complaints Team
    Rossendales Limited

User avatar
jasonDWB
Posts: 14826
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Contact:

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

Post by jasonDWB » 20 Jul 2016 17:41

If your council tax was in credit when the liability order was applied for, they owe you money that was in credit.

You can ask the council to apply to the magistrates court to quash the liability order under section 82 because there were no sum owed. Potentially you could apply to the court to compel the council to quash the order, but I have never done this, and I am unsure what rules of court provide for it. That requires research on my part, which I only do for clients rather than forum posts.

Alternatively, see if there is a rule that enables you to apply for an order to cease and desist, but that requires evidence the council was not acting under a statutory duty (i.e, no debt owed in respect of the enforcement action brought)
Author, Dealing with Bailiffs. Beat the Bailiffs
Instant phone consultation with me: Click here

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 20 Jul 2016 19:28

Thanks for the suggestions.
jasonDWB wrote:If your council tax was in credit when the liability order was applied for, they owe you money that was in credit.
I could see what they say to that, but my guess is that they'll hide behind the court granting the order and therefore "be afraid it's not something we can get involved in".
jasonDWB wrote:You can ask the council to apply to the magistrates court to quash the liability order under section 82 because there were no sum owed. Potentially you could apply to the court to compel the council to quash the order, but I have never done this, and I am unsure what rules of court provide for it. That requires research on my part, which I only do for clients rather than forum posts.
I've tried this one, at least asking the council to apply to the court, but they won't, presumably because that would land the Justices' Clerk (Humber and South Yorks) and a couple of judges in it (see later in post).
jasonDWB wrote:Alternatively, see if there is a rule that enables you to apply for an order to cease and desist, but that requires evidence the council was not acting under a statutory duty (i.e, no debt owed in respect of the enforcement action brought)
I see the same problem here as every corner I turn I'm met with the same obstruction. I sense the Council, Police, Court, LGO etc., have all closed ranks. My opinion is that at the liability hearing the district judge was protecting the Justices' Clerk by granting the council a liability order. If he'd refused to he would have implicated the Justices Clerk for gross negligence in the mishandling my high court appeal (still being covered up).

I expect to have to go through the inconvenience of being locked up over this because the council seem to have support from the police who refuse to get involved unless the court refers the matter (which it won't); see the S1 Magistrates' court information laid (post #178) and Deputy District Judge Hayles' refusal to issue a Summons (post #179). This implies DDJ Hayles is protecting both the Justices' Clerk for gross negligence and the district judge at the liability hearing for protecting the Justices' Clerk (at my expense).

User avatar
jasonDWB
Posts: 14826
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Contact:

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

Post by jasonDWB » 20 Jul 2016 20:46

Why don't you ask the Parliamentary Ombudsman for a simple request. Ask them to have the LO revoked and cease and desist enforcement on the grounds there was no sum outstanding on the date the application was made.

That's it. Then have them explain why they cannot. It is after a council not following parliamentary intention and exposing you, a taxpayer to an unlawful loss and aggravation from enforcement action for money you don't owe.

I don't know if you can accuse a civil servant of perjury by lying on the application that you owed council tax when you did not.
Author, Dealing with Bailiffs. Beat the Bailiffs
Instant phone consultation with me: Click here

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 21 Jul 2016 11:11

jasonDWB wrote:Why don't you ask the Parliamentary Ombudsman for a simple request.
I think it's just a waiting game. I anticipate the Parliamentary Ombudsman eventually receiving the complaint about the Justices' Clerk which has incidentally been referred to the Clerk herself to deal with. Once there's been a response (which I have no confidence of there ever being one) it will need referring to the HMCTS complaints handling team after which I will need to get my MP to refer it to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
jasonDWB wrote:I don't know if you can accuse a civil servant of perjury by lying on the application that you owed council tax when you did not.
The accusation of perjury relates very specifically to the reason the council gave in its witness statement for engineering the debt and diverting current year's payment to a previous year. That was that it believed I had withdrawn my High Court (case stated) application appealing the costs instituted a couple of years ago. I have proved the case beyond all doubt that the council could not have believed that to be true (withdrawing appeal). The police have not disagreed with my evidence, the force simply won't investigate, neither did the judge disagree with my evidence who refused to summons the police in respect of the section 1 application (MCA 1980). His opinion was simply that the Magistrates' court's decision should have been appealed. The only organisation which has committed itself to denying my claim is the council by way of its sham internal fraud investigation.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 11 Aug 2016 11:09

I have taken a route intended to break the cycle of the sham Local Resolution process, where the police force deals with the matter of complaint itself. A complaint to the Police & Crime Commissioner about Humberside Police's Chief Constable should have meant that the IPCC would be the appropriate body to deal with the matter. The Police & Crime Commissioner, elected to represent the taxpaying public, has made the decision not to formally record the complaint against the Chief
Constable.

The complaint is about the Chief Constable, and contrary to the opinion of the Crime Commissioner, is the appropriate person against whom a complaint should be made, as that person has overall responsibility for endorsing/allowing the gross negligence and corruption.


From: "Xxx" <xxx.xxxxx@gmail.com>
To: "SPOC PCC" <PCC@humberside.pnn.police.uk>
Cc: "Harvey, Allan 5521" <Allan.Harvey@humberside.pnn.police.uk>; "!enquiries"
<enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk>; <judi.heaton@humberside.pnn.police.uk>
Sent: 01 August 2016 14:10
Attach: Police complaint - 13 July 2016.pdf
Subject: Complaint - Chief Constable of Humberside Police

Dear Mr Hunter

Complaint – Chief Constable of Humberside Police

I'm writing in connection with the outcome of my complaint (CO 282/16/AH) that was dealt with under the Local Resolution process. Though I note the deadline by which I'm entitled to submit an appeal is 11 August 2016 I have decided not to pursue this as it would, with almost all certainty be a waste of time. It is a foregone conclusion that commencing such a procedure would lead, once having being processed through the usual administration to another unacceptable outcome (as on previous occasions).

It is simply indefensible that Humberside Police should choose to take its solicitor's wrong advice to obstruct a crime being investigated in circumstances where;
  • i) the offender is known,

    ii) allegations have been proven beyond all doubt, and

    iii) failure to investigate leaves the offender at liberty to continue causing the victim injustice.
It is inexcusable that the force has ignored representations concerning that incorrect advice and is why I am
now complaining about the Chief Constable as the person having overall responsibility for endorsing/allowing
such gross negligence.

Outcome letter (13 January 2016) to the Local Resolution process (Ref: CO/461/15)

I have assumed that the letter referred to in the attached outcome response as one dated 6 January 2016 is in fact the letter relating to complaint ref: CO/461/15 (13 January 2016). The following is the content in the outcome letter relating to legal advice sought from the Force Solicitors in respect of the issue of complaint:
  • "I understand that this matter has been heard in a court of law. The advice I have obtained is that the issues you raise may be appeal points that could be raised at any subsequent appeal hearings.

    Humberside Police do not investigate allegations of perjury unless a request to do so comes from the court themselves."
Representations submitted on 3 May 2016 to the Professional Standards Branch concerning the above content alerted the force that the police do not have to be instructed by the court to investigate perjury (Humberside police's claim), as was the view of the Crown Prosecution Service. Its website states under heading "Cases Involving Allegations of Perjury":
  • "Where a judge or magistrate believes that some evidence adduced at trial is perjured s/he can recommend that there should be a police investigation.

    The absence of such recommendation does not mean that there is no justification for an investigation."
The assessment of the appeal to the Local Resolution outcome dated 8 June 2016 indicates that the 3rd May representations had been ignored (other than itemised in appeal grounds), which is an approach consistent with a previous assessment (CO/19/14).

The 8 June assessment also failed to address representations made both on the 3rd May and in appeal form (25 January 2016) regarding issues which may be raised in a subsequent appeal. To reiterate, any such appeal would involve civil proceedings and concern a challenge to the relevant legislation governing Council Tax administration and/or enforcement, therefore, representations involving criminal law would not be considered appeal points that could be raised in civil proceedings.

Ignored representations also included the "suitability test for Local Resolution" and having no regard for the "Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015" which if considered correctly would have determined the complaint unsuitable for Local Resolution. It was also stressed that the person against whom the complaint was directed should be the Chief Constable so that any investigation would not be undertaken by the force itself.

I'll be clear that if the force institutes complaints about any officers associated with the failings referred to in this correspondence (other than Chief Constable) I will not engage in the process which I presume is laid down under the Police Reform Act 2002 etc.

My complaint categorically concerns the Chief Constable, being the person with overall responsibility for the failings.

Consequences of the failure

By looking the other way when the matter brought to its attention, Humberside Police has enabled North East Lincolnshire Council (NELC) unobstructed to make further fraudulent demands by appointing bailiffs Rossendales (a firm proved to have committed fraud 'en masse') to enforce the liability order that was obtained by lying to the court about money that is not owed.

The Council’s Revenues & Benefits service had not as you would have expected considered it a narrow escape to have got away with being the subject of a criminal investigation, but emboldened it to take further liberties with the law and seen it as a green light to continue taking steps to recover the sum. It can only reasonably be assumed that because it was ultimately the judge's responsibility for granting permission the council would deem it appropriate to exploit that decision regardless of being aware it was not entitled to the sum being pursued.

Meanwhile, the fraudulent charges continue increasing (currently around £540) and the bailiff firm does not intend to cease enforcement on account of the monies not being owed. It is likely when the bailiffs have to refer the case back to the Council on being unsuccessful, the Council will only have available to it under the fraudulently obtained order the option of committal. It is considered the police are complicit as its failure has enabled NELC to commit crime against a taxpayer by the fraudulent use of the Magistrates' court and should be held ultimately responsible for the circumstances which could realistically lead to false imprisonment.

Given that the evidence raises no possible doubt as to the allegations, it is simply indefensible that Humberside Police should rely on its obviously wrong solicitor's advice, especially when during the previous appeal process representations concerning that incorrect advice were submitted and subsequently ignored. I would like confirmation that this complaint will be recorded and dealt with appropriately as one made against the Chief Constable of Humberside Police.

Your sincerely

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 11 Aug 2016 11:25

From: "Johnson, Louise" <Louise.Johnson@humberside.pnn.police.uk>
To: "Xxx" <xxx.xxxxx@gmail.com>
Sent: 10 August 2016 17:53
Attach: 20160805 response.pdf: Appealing_against_a_complaint_not_being_recorded_PDF_version.pdf
Subject: RE: Complaint - Chief Constable of Humberside Police

Dear Mr Xxxxx, please find attached response to your complaint.

Yours sincerely

Louise Johnson
Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Humberside


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our ref: LJ/CC/1697

10 August 2016

Dear Mr Xxxx,

Thank you for your email of 1 August 2016 in which you indicate that you wish to make a complaint against the Chief Constable of Humberside Police, Justine Curran.

The Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner is the appropriate authority for handling complaints against the Chief Constable only, my consideration must therefore concentrate solely on any allegations against her.

You indicate that you are writing in connection with the outcome of a complaint that you made to Humberside Police and state that you do not wish to pursue the appeal mechanism that is available to you as you feel that it would be a waste of time and that you therefore wish to complain about the Chief Constable because:

“It is inexcusable that the force has ignored representations concerning that incorrect advice and is why I am now complaining about the Chief Constable as the person having overall responsibility for endorsing/allowing such gross negligence”

and

“I’ll be clear that if the force institutes complaints about any officers associated with the failings referred to in this correspondence (other than the Chief Constable) I will not engage in the process which I presume is laid down under the Police Reform Act 2002 etc. My complaint categorically concerns the Chief Constable, being the person with overall responsibility for the failings”


As has been previously explained, complaints against the police must be handled in accordance with legislation, namely the Police Reform Act 2002, as amended. In relation to your complaint ref CO 282/16/AH, this has been considered by Humberside Police, who are the correct appropriate authority, and you have been advised of the outcome. You have been advised of the correct appeal mechanism which is to the Humberside Police Appeals Body. In now directing your complaint at the Chief Constable it would therefore appear that you are attempting to have the Force’s decision overturned by other means and this is an abuse of the complaints procedure.

I understand that you are frustrated by this ongoing matter, as has been demonstrated in correspondence with this office going back to August 2012. However, the Chief Constable has not been involved as you yourself acknowledged in your appeal dated 16 June 2016 in which you stated “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.” You also acknowledged this in your letter to the Police and Crime Commissioner dated 11 May 2016 in which you stated “A request was made for the matter to be escalated for the attention of the Chief Constable in order that the anticipated dissatisfaction of a subsequent decision would be subject to external scrutiny rather than the force investigating itself. The force proceeded regardless and the matter dealt with under the Local Resolution process with the outcome (13 January 2016) stating that the issues may be appeal points that could be raised at any subsequent appeal hearings and that the force did not investigate allegations of perjury unless a request to do so comes from the court.”

You are therefore aware that the Chief Constable has not been involved in the matters that you have raised.

For these reasons I will not be formally recording a complaint against the Chief Constable. If you are unhappy with this recording decision you may be able to appeal to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). I have enclosed their factsheet which details how to do this.

You have 29 days from the date of this letter, within which to make your appeal. You are advised to post your appeal in good time to ensure it reaches the IPCC before the end of the 29th day. The 29th day is 7 September 2016. Appeals received after 29 days may not be allowed unless there are exceptional circumstances.

You might want to consider using guaranteed next-day delivery post service to ensure that your appeal is received within time.

Yours sincerely

Louise Johnson
Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Humberside

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 12 Aug 2016 09:37

Appeal submitted to the IPCC under the Police Reform Act 2002 against the Police & Crime Commissioner for Humberside making the decision not to formally record a complaint against the Chief Constable.

Online, "here"

Appealing against a complaint not being recorded

11 August 2016

To the Independent Police Complaints Commission

The Police and Crime Commissioner for Humberside misrepresented my complaint against the Chief Constable. The Commissioner believes I am attempting to have the Force’s decision overturned by complaining about the Chief Constable as an alternative appeal mechanism to the Humberside Police Appeals Body.

Contrary to the opinion of the Crime Commissioner the complaint is about the Chief Constable, who is the most appropriate person to complain about, as that person has overall responsibility for endorsing/allowing the gross negligence and corruption. This has been made categorically clear in my submission.

I have been engaged in enough of these appeals to know that they serve no purpose other than to provide the force a record to justify its decisions against investigating criminal allegations. Initially considering the process a waste of taxpayer's money, on reflection it is probably by far the cheaper option than actually investigating and why the process is abused.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 27 Aug 2016 22:41

IPCC
independent
police complaints
commission

Our reference number: 2016/070973
Force reference number: LJ/CC/1697

18 August 2016

Dear outlawipcc

Thank you for your appeal, received in this office on 11 August 2016. You asked us to review the decision not to record your complaint by Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner.

This letter confirms that we have received your appeal. However, we have not yet looked at the issues you have raised.

Our role is to review whether or not Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner are the correct body to consider your complaint and whether or not they should have recorded the matter as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002. If you have not been given a recording decision we can direct them to provide you with this. Once we have completed the review, the decision we make about your appeal is final. Any direction made about recording your complaint is not an indication from us about the merit of your complaint.

As part of the appeals process we will contact Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner, to get all the information they hold about your complaint. We will use this when looking at your appeal along with the information you have submitted as your appeal. You will not be able to provide additional information for us to consider after a decision is made on your appeal. Our decision will be final.

We deal with appeals in date order based on the date they are received by the IPCC and we will look at your appeal as soon as we can. From the date we received your appeal it may take up to 10 weeks for it to be allocated. However, it is possible that your appeal may be allocated more quickly than this. Please see the document enclosed, visit our website or contact us for more information about the appeals process and what will happen next.

Yours sincerely

Megan Morris
Casework Administrator
Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)
Tel: 0161 2468502
northcasework@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk

User avatar
jasonDWB
Posts: 14826
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Contact:

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

Post by jasonDWB » 27 Aug 2016 23:11

Lets look at this another way.

  • What did the council do wrong?

    What do you want the council to put it right? E.g. how much they must pay you, or to do something or stop doing something.
and

  • What did the police do wrong?

    What do you want the police to to put it right? E.g. how much they must pay you, or to do something or stop doing something.

Then I'll tell you whether you can bring a cause of action using legal proceedings.
Author, Dealing with Bailiffs. Beat the Bailiffs
Instant phone consultation with me: Click here

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 28 Aug 2016 09:03

I didn't post the further developments regarding the 'sham' internal investigation into the allegations of fraud etc. I raised an issue about misconduct in public office.

A letter raising concerns about the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officers was sent to the Leader of North East Lincolnshire Council on 10 August. ( Misconduct in Public Office 10 Aug 2016 )

The leader of the Council replied on 11 August..... ( 11 August 2016 Council Leader - Redact )
Our ref: RO/seh/0193

11 August 2016

Dear outlawipcc

I write to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 10th August 2016 .

In view of the serious nature of your serious allegations against senior officers of the Council I will be referring the matter to Humberside Police. The Council will consider its position in the light of the police response and any findings arising from the outstanding complaints you have lodged with the Information Commissioner's Office. In the meantime, the Council will not be making any further comment on the matter.

Yours sincerely


Ray Oxby
Leader of North East Lincolnshire Council


Municipal Offices, Town Hall Square, Grimsby, North East Lincolnshire DN31 1HU
Telephone (01472) 325905
Email : ray.oxby@nelincs.gov.uk

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 16 Sep 2016 15:58

From 21 March 2016 COMPLAINT TO THE LGO
WHAT DO YOU THINK THE BODY SHOULD DO TO PUT THINGS RIGHT?
The council was not entitled to allocate payment to the balance it did and therefore it should be reallocated to the account to which it was intended.

According to the council, there is an outstanding sum of £211 in respect of my 2015/16 council tax liability. If the effects of the error were put right, it would require that the misallocated payment of £60 is reallocated to the 2015/16 account (restoring the previous outstanding balance); the £60 penalty added September 2015 would have been invalid and so require removing from my account. The remaining sum outstanding would be £91 which I would then be able to settle without fear of further maladministration attributable to the council allocating it wrongly.
Without explanation, a sum has been deducted from the overall amount outstanding on my Council Tax account (not paid by me). The observation that the balance had been reduced by £91 was made on 7 September 2016. The council seems to have oddly credited an amount which I'm not disputing.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6012
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

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

Post by Pote Snitkin » 16 Sep 2016 16:39

Idiots. Typical council incompetence.
It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority. - Benjamin Franklin

On 22/2/17, Peterbard said "taking control of goods and selling them does not actually mean taking control of goods and selling them." Discuss.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 16 Sep 2016 17:38

Perhaps they've come round to the fact that their public roles don't allow them to entertain themselves by playing about with those who pay their salaries and it's a gesture to acknowledge that. If so, they just need to credit another £499,909 to make up what would be considered a reasonable level of compensation for the years of negligence, maladministration etc.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 17 Sep 2016 14:13

Another outcome to another 'sham' complaint's procedure:

Julie Collins
Courts and Tribunals Manager,
Humber & South Yorkshire
Grimsby Magistrates' Court
Victoria Street
Grimsby

14th September 2016

Dear outlawipcc

Re: Complaint Letter dated 11 August 2016

I have now had the opportunity to read through the documentation you have sent to the Customer Services department, including the additional pages sent on 5 September 2016.

The two main matters you complain about are the decision of the court to issue a liability order against you in council tax enforcement proceedings and the decision of the court to convict you of a public order offence.

While I can understand your frustration I am unable to intervene in or change the outcome of your cases. This is because judicial decisions have been made and judges are independent of the administration of HM Courts and Tribunals Service. If you consider the decisions to be wrong then you should consider appealing the decisions. If you are aggrieved by the way the judge has behaved towards you can lodge a complaint with the relevant office.

You are clearly already aware of these avenues as you mention in your correspondence to North East Lincolnshire Council in October 2015 that you have appealed a previous decision to issue a liability order against you. You also made a complaint about the District Judge to the Judicial Complaints Investigations Office in November 2015.

In respect of your conviction at this court on 15 December 2015 you were told that you could appeal to the Crown Court and you were clearly informed about the time limits for that appeal.

You chose not to attend court for your trial on 15 December 2015, saying in effect that you did not consider District Judge Curtis to be a fit and proper person to hear your trial and that the court as a whole should be investigated for complicity in defrauding the public. It was because of this that the court felt that it was not appropriate to reopen your case under section 142 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.

[SECURITY CLASSIFICATION]
You submitted your appeal against conviction in April 2016 but your application to appeal out of time was refused by the Crown Court judge. I cannot comment on that as once again that was a decision made by a judge.

The court set up a hearing for you to attend to apply to take out a private prosecution against a member of the police force but you decided not to attend and the matter was dealt with by a Deputy District Judge in your absence.

Much of your documentation concerns complaints made to both the police and North East Lincolnshire Council and I am not able to comment on that.

In conclusion having considered your complaint I do not accept that the court has failed to address the issues you have raised in the past. I do not accept that the court has, in your words, 'fobbed off' criminal accusations made by you against both the court and the District Judge. The court has informed you of the different routes of appeal and responded to your queries to the best of its ability.

If you are not content with this response you can escalate your complaint to my line manager, Mrs Jodie Morris.

Yours sincerely,

Graeme Townell
Legal Team Manager
Grimsby Magistrates' Court

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 19 Sep 2016 10:05

outlawipcc wrote:From 21 March 2016 COMPLAINT TO THE LGO
WHAT DO YOU THINK THE BODY SHOULD DO TO PUT THINGS RIGHT?
The council was not entitled to allocate payment to the balance it did and therefore it should be reallocated to the account to which it was intended.

According to the council, there is an outstanding sum of £211 in respect of my 2015/16 council tax liability. If the effects of the error were put right, it would require that the misallocated payment of £60 is reallocated to the 2015/16 account (restoring the previous outstanding balance); the £60 penalty added September 2015 would have been invalid and so require removing from my account. The remaining sum outstanding would be £91 which I would then be able to settle without fear of further maladministration attributable to the council allocating it wrongly.
Without explanation, a sum has been deducted from the overall amount outstanding on my Council Tax account (not paid by me). The observation that the balance had been reduced by £91 was made on 7 September 2016. The council seems to have oddly credited an amount which I'm not disputing.
Again, without explanation, my account has been meddled with. This time a sum has been added to the overall amount outstanding on my Council Tax account. The council seems to have taken back the £91 it credited last week.

As North East Lincolnshire Council has admitted to monitoring this thread it must have learned about its error from the post quoted above.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 19 Sep 2016 12:51

From: outlawipcc
To: jodie.morris@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Sent: 19 September 2016
Attach: Legal team manager 14 Sept 16.pdf
Subject: Grimsby Magistrates' court Complaint - 11 August 2016


Dear Mrs Morris,

Re: Grimsby Magistrates' court Complaint - 11 August 2016

Iam escalating my complaint to you as I consider that Mr Townell has failed to address the points raised objectively and focussed on elements he has been able to claim HMCTS has no remit to intervene.

The response (attached) is little more than a chronology of some carefully chosen issues raised in my complaint which also functions to misrepresent my concerns to be matters relating to judicial decisions as opposed the administration of HMCTS.

Documentation concerning complaints made to the police, Council etc. etc., have been included to give the fullest account of the failings and the degree to which I have been affected as a direct result of the court's failure to take seriously the allegations of perjury, fraud etc., which would have been avoided had someone taken responsibility.

There would be little advantage in going through all the issues which haven't been considered in the response as I would in effect simply be re-submitting the same complaint in another form.

The only new information I have as a result of the complaint is the Magistrates' court's reasons for not reopening the case under section 142 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. The response informs me that the reason was because I had expressed that I didn't consider District Judge Curtis to be a fit and proper person to hear the trial and that the court as a whole should be investigated for complicity in defrauding the public, not as I had been previously informed, simply because I deliberately chose not to attend the trial.

These accusations were not trivial and indicate that the court has been negligent in both failing to reopen the case for reasons put forward in my representations and not considering it appropriate to refer the matter to the police.

I believe at this stage of the complaints procedure HMCTS aims to reply within 10 working days.

Yours sincerely

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 06 Oct 2016 15:47

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has considered whether or not Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner were the correct body to consider the complaint about the Chief Constable and whether or not they should have recorded the matter as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.

It's outcome letter...

IPCC
independent
police complaints
commission

Our reference number: 2016/070973
Force reference number: LJ/CC/1697

4 October 2016


Dear outlawipcc

This letter is about your appeal against Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner which we received on 11 August 2016.

We are independent of the police. Our role is to look at whether your complaint should have recorded. When making my decision I have to see:
  • • if the chief officer or appropriate authority failed to make a decision?
    • if the chief officer or appropriate authority failed to notify the correct appropriate authority?
    • if the matter/s you raised should have been recorded as a complaint?
After looking at all the information available I have not upheld your appeal.

My letter to you will consider each point:

1. Did the chief officer or appropriate authority fail to make a decision?

No, the Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner's office reviewed your complaint dated 1 August 2016 and notified you of their recording decision in a letter dated 10 August 2016.

Not Upheld

2. Did the chief officer or appropriate authority fail to notify the appropriate authority?

No, the Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner's office are the appropriate authority.

Not Upheld

3. Should the matter/s you raised have been recorded as a complaint?

When a complaint is made to a chief officer or appropriate authority, they have a duty to record any complaint about the conduct (behaviour) of a person serving with the police or a contractor.

The law allows the chief officer or appropriate authority not to record a complaint if:
  • • the chief officer/ appropriate authority is satisfied that the subject matter of the complaint has been, or is being, dealt with by criminal or disciplinary proceedings against the person whose conduct it was;
    • the complaint has been previously withdrawn; or
    • the complaint falls within a description of complaints specified in law, being:
    •  it is already subject of a complaint made by or on behalf of the same complainant;
       the complaint does not contain the name and address of the complainant nor that of any other interested person and it is not reasonably practicable to ascertain such a name or address;
       the complaint is vexatious, oppressive or otherwise an abuse of the procedures for dealing with complaints;
       the complaint is repetitious; or
       the complaint is fanciful (meaning - if, and only if, no reasonable person could lend credence to it).
I have reviewed your complaint email dated 1 August 2016 and have decided that the matters you raise are not required to be recorded.

Within the Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner's non recording decision letter dated 10 August 2016, they acknowledged your desire to make a complaint against the Chief Constable of Humberside Police. The Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner's office reviewed your complaint against the Chief Constable, Justine Curran and stated they would not be recording your complaint, as it was deemed to be an abuse of procedure.

The Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner's office referred to your complaint under Humberside Police's reference C0282/16/AH and noted you had been informed of the outcome and the correct appeal process in directing your concerns to the Humberside Police Appeals Body. The Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner's office stated in their letter dated 10 August 2016, by now directing your complaint at the Chief Constable, it seemed you were attempting to overturn the decision provided by Humberside Police and this was deemed to be an abuse of procedures.

In reviewing your complaint email dated 1 August 2016 and considering the ground applied by the Humberside Police and Crime Commissioner's office, I agree with the ground identified.

Within your complaint email dated 1 August 2016 you raise allegations against the Chief Constable of Humberside Police and state" my complaint catergorically concerns the Chief Constable, being the person with overall responsibility for the failings." You also stated you were directing the complaint at the Chief Constable "so that any investigation would not be undertaken by the force itself." The Chief Constable does not appear to have had any direct involvement in your previous allegations under reference C0282/16/AH.

In reviewing your complaint dated 1 August 2016 you appear to demonstrate an understanding of the complaints process in stating " Though I note the deadline by which I'm entitled to submit an appeal is 11 August 2016 I have decided not to pursue this as ..It is a foregone conclusion that commencing such a procedure would lead .... to another unacceptable outcome." Within your appeal form dated 11 August 2016, you state you "have been engaged in enough of these appeals".

It appears that the focus of your complaint is dissatisfaction with the outcome of previously raised matters, as within your complaint email dated 1 August 2016 you refer to "ignored representations", "incorrect advice" and "gross negligence" in regards to your complaint under reference C0282/16/AH. You also state within your appeal form dated 11 August 2016, the reason for your appeal being "the police force did not record my complaint." You have yourself identified you were provided with a right of appeal to raise your concerns regarding the outcome of your complaint, under reference C0282/16/AH however you have chosen not to exercise your right of appeal to the Humberside Police Appeals Body. The correct process to challenge the decision assigned to your complaint under reference C0282/16/AH, was to do so using your right of appeal.

As such I deem your new complaint dated 1 August 2016 to be a misuse of the police complaints system to progress and escalate complaint matters that you have already raised with Humberside Police, due to your continued dissatisfaction with how they have previously been handled and the outcomes provided to you. On this basis I will not be upholding your appeal.

Not Upheld


You are not able to appeal my decision. However, if you have any questions or need more information about my decision please contact me. My details are at the end of this letter.

Yours sincerely



Danielle Rose
Assessment Analyst
Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)


Tel: 0121 6733753

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6012
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

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

Post by Pote Snitkin » 07 Oct 2016 07:54

The IPCC is one of the most corrupt bodies out there. Independent? It's about time they were called what they are - coppers looking after their mates.

For any lawyers reading, the above is my opinion so.... :P
It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority. - Benjamin Franklin

On 22/2/17, Peterbard said "taking control of goods and selling them does not actually mean taking control of goods and selling them." Discuss.

User avatar
jasonDWB
Posts: 14826
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Contact:

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

Post by jasonDWB » 07 Oct 2016 10:11

I think the IPCC for the police is what CIVEA is to bailiffs.

I stopped referring clients to the IPCC long ago. Its small claim track, or a section 1. Both of these yield a speedy money transfer in my client's direction with minimal effort.
Author, Dealing with Bailiffs. Beat the Bailiffs
Instant phone consultation with me: Click here

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 07 Oct 2016 10:21

Contrived (IPCC)
In reviewing your complaint dated 1 August 2016 you appear to demonstrate an understanding of the complaints process in stating
  • "Though I note the deadline by which I'm entitled to submit an appeal is 11 August 2016 I have decided not to pursue this as ..It is a foregone conclusion that commencing such a procedure would lead .... to another unacceptable outcome."
Original
Though I note the deadline by which I'm entitled to submit an appeal is 11 August 2016 I have decided not to pursue this as it would, with almost all certainty be a waste of time. It is a foregone conclusion that commencing such a procedure would lead, once having being processed through the usual administration to another unacceptable outcome (as on previous occasions).
Contrived (IPCC)
Within your appeal form dated 11 August 2016, you state you
  • "have been engaged in enough of these appeals".
Original
I have been engaged in enough of these appeals to know that they serve no purpose other than to provide the force a record to justify its decisions against investigating criminal allegations. Initially considering the process a waste of taxpayer's money, on reflection it is probably by far the cheaper option than actually investigating and why the process is abused.

stopbailiff
Posts: 785
Joined: 11 Dec 2015 14:57

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

Post by stopbailiff » 07 Oct 2016 15:47

Look at this case, too. Williams v East Northamptonshire DC [2016] EWHC 470


download/file.php?mode=view&id=2403
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 07 Oct 2016 17:01

Thanks for the link stopbailiff.
(1) The application for the liability order was valid even though the summons included a request for costs.....The attached schedule made it clear that the sum payable was the £975 unpaid council tax. The summons complied with the requirements of the Magistrates’ Courts Rules 1981 r.98. There was nothing in those Rules or in the Regulations to prevent additional information, or a reference to a claim for costs, and the inclusion of such a reference would not render the summons invalid. The purpose of the reference to costs was simply to inform the appellant of the amount of costs claimed, so he could so he could pay them before the hearing if he chose....
Not very thorough for a high court judge.

East Northamptonshire District Council
When Council Tax summons costs are applied to the debtor's account

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 14 Oct 2016 11:38

North East Lincolnshire Council is picking on someone else

Rossendales demand £1,463.26 where no debt exists.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 17 Oct 2016 18:08

Internal staff guidance on local taxation could explain why the Local Government Ombudsman never investigates in the interest of the taxpayer.

Internal staff guidance on local taxation

Section 7 – Common faults that result in complaints to authorities and to us

Payment allocation

The allocation of payments can give rise to problems, especially when there are arrears or summonsed debt.

Council officers do not watch each account and decide where each payment will go. The computer system will allocate it, according to some simple rules. Usually payments which are exactly equal to instalments or exact multiples of instalments will be allocated to the current instalment debt. After a summons is issued the computer may then allocate instalment payments to any arrears – as the right to pay by instalments is been lost once a final notice has been issued.

You will need to establish what system the council uses, how it decided which payments went where and how the taxpayer was told.

In Tower Hamlets LBC v J A and H C Fallows (1989) C A (RA 1990) 255 Mrs Fallows made a cash payment to the Tower Hamlets cashiers. She did not get a receipt. The payment was not credited to the rates account. A police and Council investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing, it also did not find the money. Tower Hamlets asked the magistrates’ court for a Liability Order. The court declined to issue one. The council appealed. The appeal court found that the burden of proof was on the council to show the rates had not been paid. In deciding on the balance of probabilities the magistrates had not erred. The evidence given by the council had shifted the evidential burden of proof to the ratepayer, she had given evidence at that point and discharged the evidential burden of proof placed upon her.

Legally taxpayers should pay as billed, so the council does not need to say how any ‘odd’ payments may be allocated. But if the taxpayer has specified, preferably in writing, where they want payments to go, and the council has agreed, then there should be some mechanism in place to ensure this happens.


August 2016

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 20 Oct 2016 19:10

outlawipcc wrote:From: outlawipcc
To: jodie.morris@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Sent: 19 September 2016
Attach: Legal team manager 14 Sept 16.pdf
Subject: Grimsby Magistrates' court Complaint - 11 August 2016


Dear Mrs Morris,

Re: Grimsby Magistrates' court Complaint - 11 August 2016

Iam escalating my complaint to you as I consider that Mr Townell has failed to address the points raised objectively and focussed on elements he has been able to claim HMCTS has no remit to intervene.

The response (attached) is little more than a chronology of some carefully chosen issues raised in my complaint which also functions to misrepresent my concerns to be matters relating to judicial decisions as opposed the administration of HMCTS.

Documentation concerning complaints made to the police, Council etc. etc., have been included to give the fullest account of the failings and the degree to which I have been affected as a direct result of the court's failure to take seriously the allegations of perjury, fraud etc., which would have been avoided had someone taken responsibility.

There would be little advantage in going through all the issues which haven't been considered in the response as I would in effect simply be re-submitting the same complaint in another form.

The only new information I have as a result of the complaint is the Magistrates' court's reasons for not reopening the case under section 142 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. The response informs me that the reason was because I had expressed that I didn't consider District Judge Curtis to be a fit and proper person to hear the trial and that the court as a whole should be investigated for complicity in defrauding the public, not as I had been previously informed, simply because I deliberately chose not to attend the trial.

These accusations were not trivial and indicate that the court has been negligent in both failing to reopen the case for reasons put forward in my representations and not considering it appropriate to refer the matter to the police.

I believe at this stage of the complaints procedure HMCTS aims to reply within 10 working days.

Yours sincerely
The review from the Acting Legal Team Manager South Yorkshire and Humber, Second stage 18 October 2016:

Mrs A Watts
Justices' Clerk for
Humber & South Yorkshire
Doncaster Justice Centre South
College Road
Doncaster
DN13HS

Our ref: 00034/165/1617
18th October 2016

Subject:- Complaint Review dated 19 September 2016

Dear outlawipcc

Thank you for your email dated 19 September 2016. I am sorry that you are not satisfied with the response to your initial complaint and felt it necessary to escalate this matter. I apologise for the delay in responding, it has taken me some time to review all of the information you provided and make the further necessary enquiries. I have now had the opportunity to consider all of the documentation you have submitted to the Court in relation to your complaint and request for a review.

You state in your initial letter dated 11 August 2016 that your complaint regarded two separate but related matters; proceedings in which a Council Tax Liability Order was made and proceedings related to a Public Order Offence.

As per Mr Townell's response, the making of the Liability Order was a judicial decision and not one that we are able to intervene in. This is also the position in relation to your conviction and sentencefor a public order offence. The evidence placed before the Court was considered by the Judge and the decisions were made. You were advised on more than one occasion of the appeal routes available to you and it is evident from within the documentation you have provided that you have explored these avenues. This also includes the decision not to re-open your case under section 142 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980, again this is a judicial decision and not something that can be overturned by this Court - the correct route of appeal would be by way of Judicial Review.

I acknowledge that your complaint does not relate solely to the judicial decisions made but also to the conduct of the Judiciary involved in the decision making, responses to correspondence you submitted to the Court and the allegation you make that the Court has not taken seriously the allegations of fraud, perjury etc.

I am satisfied that you were made aware of the right to complain to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office in relation to the conduct of the members of the Judiciary that you allege, a route which I note that you followed.
  • [SECURITY CLASSIFICATION]
I am also satisfied that the Court has taken all necessary steps to respond to the numerous concerns you have raised over a significant period of time by providing you with the information you have required on many occasions, this is also evident from the documentation you provide.

The Court takes seriously all allegations of fraud and perjury. The evidence you refer to has been before the Court in different forms and in some instances has formed part of the evidence on which the decisions, discussed above, were made. You also made an application to lay an information relating to the allegations you make which was refused by Deputy District Judge Hayles. Full reasons for his decision were made and provided to you. This is again a judicial decision that this Court can not interfere with, the correct route of appeal is by way of Judicial Review.

It is unfortunate that you are unhappy with Mr Townell's response but I am satisfied for all the reasons mentioned above that he did address all of the points raised; these being issues that this Court cannot further intervene with.

Should you wish to escalate this matter further you complaint should be directed to:

Customer Service Team
10th Floor (10:34)
102 Petty France
London
SW1 H 9AJ


Yours Sincerely


Mrs Jodie Morris
Acting Legal Team Manager
South Yorkshire and Humber

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 21 Oct 2016 18:44

From: outlawipcc
To: HMCTS Customer Service (Correspondence)
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016
Attach: Legal team manager 14 Sept 16.pdf | HMCTS second stage 18 Oct 16.pdf
Subject: Fw: Grimsby Magistrates' court Complaint - 11 August 2016

Dear Sir/Madam

Re: Grimsby Magistrates' court Complaint - 11 August 2016

I am escalating my complaint to Customer Service Team as I consider the review of Mr Townell's response has been improperly conducted. The bias, which was anticipated with an employee having to scrutinise a colleague is blatant, and consider that until the issues are escalated to a truly independent body if one exists, it is unlikely the any of the concerns raised will be dealt with objectively.

It is also sensed from the review that there has been no or little effort put into understanding the points raised. Simply defending the court on the basis that it responded to the numerous concerns raised has no significance if the information provided mainly obstructed a resolution; and when challenged, a request to back up its claim with a statement of truth was ignored (re, Court Associate sitting with D.D Judge Andrew Pascoe, page 347 of complaint).

Evidently, the matter regarding the decision not to re-open the case under section 142 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 has been improperly addressed, as the reviewing manager implies that a judge had made a ruling which could only be challenged in the High Court therefore the decision out of the court's remit. If the complaint had been properly considered rather than making assumptions the reviewing manager would have known from the responses that the court refused to allow the case to be re-opened. The judicial decision related to the appeal to the crown court that was refused by circuit judge Mark Bury on the spurious grounds that I deliberately absented myself from trial and put forward no adequate reason for the appeal being out of time.

In order to put the matter in perspective, the appeal to the Crown court was out of time because of the many weeks spent corresponding with the Magistrates' court and providing extensive evidence to support why it would be appropriate to re-open the case under section 142. Representations contained in the application also justified why the trial was not attended.

It is sensed through reading the review that HMCTS endorses spurious decision making by the judiciary with the justification being that a person aggrieved by incompetence has the right of appeal via the High Court. It is of course grossly unreasonable to expect someone to expose themselves to the risk of catastrophic financial loss, especially on account of judges misconducting themselves. Contrary to the cavalier attitude to litigation this would seem disingenuous as in another context the Justices' Clerk for Humber & South Yorkshire expresses regard for the Administrative Court's time and public money by limiting to one application what would have been a case stated and judicial review by delivering a draft case without a need to enter into a recognizance (see below "court's track record").

In any event, the court manager suggesting civil litigation is pursued in the high Court is irrelevant when all matters have involved criminal allegations.

When you consider this court's track record when a matter is pursued this way, I am approaching four years being grossly inconvenience by the Court obstructing the progress of an application to state a case for an appeal to the high court in the matter of North East Lincolnshire Council's application for a council tax liability order. It would not be reasonable to expect anyone engage in an appeal where the involvement of Grimsby Magistrates’ Court has to be relied upon.

It has not gone unnoticed that the reviewing manager has for an easy life relied on the outcomes of the bogus judicial watchdog organisations like the Judicial Conduct and Investigations Office, for the court not taking responsibility for addressing allegations of fraud, perjury etc. Court managers are surely aware that organisations like these are positioned at the taxpayer's expense merely to give the impression that holders of judicial office are accountable. Judges and judicial ombudsmen are not remunerated with six figure salaries so they can offer a system which serves the public and will make their decisions accordingly to toe the government line. The evidence proving the case against the council is indisputable (pages 144-163 of complaint) yet this is apparently irrelevant to the complaint because of the corrupt judicial decisions.

Yours sincerely

outlawipcc

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 04 Nov 2016 13:05

HM Courts & Tribunals Service
Customer Investigations Team
Post Point 10.34
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Email:
ComplaintsCorres&LT@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Our ref: 00034/165/1617

2 November 2016

Dear [outlawipcc]

Grimsby Magistrates' Court

Thank you for your email of 21 October about the handling of your cases by the Grimsby Magistrates' Court. I am sorry that you remain dissatisfied with the previous replies you have received. I am replying at the final, appeal stage of the complaints process.

I have reviewed the previous responses from Mr Townell and Mrs Morris and having done so I am satisfied that your complaint has been responded to appropriately. While I appreciate your strength of feeling about the decisions reached in your cases, it is not possible to challenge a judicial decision, for whatever reason, through the HM Courts & Tribunals Service complaints process. The only way to challenge a judge's decision is by making the appropriate application or appeal.

I am sorry that your application to reopen your case was refused but, as this was not an administrative function, I do not propose to comment further.

I am sorry that you feel the service you received was not a good one. However, I have found no evidence of maladministration, that is, a staff administrative error which has affected either of your court cases. If you believe that you have experienced an injustice, I would suggest that consider seeking legal advice to discuss the matter.

If you do not consider that my reply has dealt with your complaint satisfactorily, you can ask a Member of Parliament to refer your case to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (the Ombudsman). Complaints are investigated at the Ombudsman's discretion. More details can be found on the Ombudsman's website: http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/.

Yours sincerely

Richard Redgrave
Head of Customer Investigations

Superman_Returns
Posts: 50
Joined: 26 May 2016 12:59

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

Post by Superman_Returns » 10 Nov 2016 10:44

Hi Outlaw,

Was just wondering... what comes next?

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 11 Nov 2016 09:06

Superman_Returns wrote:Hi Outlaw,

Was just wondering... what comes next?
Regarding the HMCTS complaint, hopefully the Parliamentary Ombudsman Complaint form will be completed over the weekend and sent to my MP to refer it to the organisation. Then when the Parliamentary Ombudsman makes its decision in favour of HM Courts and Tribunals Service (if discretion is used to investigate) the next and only option is to contest the decision in the High Court.

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 23 Nov 2016 14:13

outlawipcc wrote:A letter raising concerns about the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officers was sent to the Leader of North East Lincolnshire Council on 10 August. ( Misconduct in Public Office 10 Aug 2016 )

The leader of the Council replied on 11 August..... ( 11 August 2016 Council Leader - Redact )
Our ref: RO/seh/0193

11 August 2016

Dear outlawipcc

I write to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 10th August 2016 .

In view of the serious nature of your serious allegations against senior officers of the Council I will be referring the matter to Humberside Police. The Council will consider its position in the light of the police response and any findings arising from the outstanding complaints you have lodged with the Information Commissioner's Office. In the meantime, the Council will not be making any further comment on the matter.

Yours sincerely


Ray Oxby
Leader of North East Lincolnshire Council


Municipal Offices, Town Hall Square, Grimsby, North East Lincolnshire DN31 1HU
Telephone (01472) 325905
Email : ray.oxby@nelincs.gov.uk
Humberside police have dealt with the matter as professionally as ever. Evidently not even bothering to provide anything to support its decision. No more than 10 minutes could have been dedicated to the investigation which was the amount of time it must have taken to draft its billshot letter.

Humberside Police
Specialist Command
Police Headquarters,
Priory Road,
Hull, HU5 5SF

Dear [outlawipcc]

You recently wrote to the North East Lincolnshire Council to make allegations of fraud and perjury against them, and to make an allegation of perverting the course of justice against District Judge Curtis.

This complaint was passed to Humberside Police to investigate as it contained criminal allegations. In order to ensure independence it was allocated to a team that you have had no previous contact with.

I write to inform you that we have completed our investigation into the allegations you make. In relation to the allegation of fraud that pertains to your council tax bill, we find no evidence of dishonesty on behalf of the local authority. Further to this, the allegation of perjury you alleged was committed by North East Lincolnshire Council in relation to the use of your payments to offset the debt is also found to be unproven. Your assertion that North East Lincolnshire Council have dishonesty appropriately around £56,000 from residents cannot be supported by the evidence available.

The fraud you allege that pertains to the additional debt caused by North East Lincolnshire Council using payments you made to pay costs is also not supported by any evidence.

Finally, the allegation of perverting the course of justice allegedly committed by District Judge Curtis we find is without evidential support.

As an additional matter we find that the complaint that witnesses involved in the trial against you in relation to the incident on 30th April 2015 gave false evidence is also without basis. You claim that CCTV was hidden but in fact this was categorically not the case.

I appreciate that you will be disappointed in the findings of our investigation but I can reassure you that this was done completely independently, by an experienced Senior Investigator who has no prior knowledge of any of your previous allegations.

I have also written to North East Lincolnshire Council to advise them of the outcome.

Yours sincerely

Christine Wilson

outlawipcc
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

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

Post by outlawipcc » 24 Nov 2016 11:40

From: 'outlawipcc'
To: christine.wilson@humberside.pnn.police.uk ; enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2016 10:35 AM
Subject: Investigation into misconduct in public office - ref: CW/DEJ


Dear Ms Wilson

Re: Investigation into misconduct in public office

I received a letter dated 19 November 2016 (ref: CW/DEJ) from yourself.

Though the matter concerned allegations of misconduct in public office about North East Lincolnshire Council's Chief Executive and Monitoring officers, the response is a series of spurious statements, with nothing supporting them, concerning decisions the force has previously claimed it had no remit to investigate.

Notwithstanding that the matters have been misrepresented it is clear that the force hasn't investigated anything.

The complaint alleging Misconduct in Public Office runs to 62 pages and many supporting documents were referred to in that paper which were never asked for.

If the force seriously intended properly investigating these matters then an effort would have been made to gather all relevant information, but at no time did anyone from Humberside police enquire whether I had anything additional that would assist.

I'm informed that the investigation has been carried out completely independently by an experienced Senior Investigator with no prior knowledge of my previous allegations. Unless you mean the Investigator does not serve with Humberside police I would contest the that this has been dealt with independently. Assuming then that the Investigator does serve with Humberside police I would like to know for the record who that person is and would also like to know at what level of seniority within the force this investigation and decisions are known about.

Finally I wish my concerns about the failure to properly investigate the allegations escalated to the Chief Constable.

Yours sincerely

[outlawipcc]

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests