Have you been using the service at all?

I agree, and where goods are jointly owned there is a beneficial interest but marriage does not mean that all goods are jointly owned between spouses. All the non-debtor party whose goods were seized would need to do is show evidence that the goods aren't jointly owned but are solely owned and the goods should be released.

Yes. Because two people are married and living together does not mean they have a beneficial interest in the goods the other person owns. As an example, a married couple exist, and they both own cars. They each saved for a car from their own wages, and paid for the car from their own bank account which is in the sole name of the car owner. The car belongs to the person who bought the car, it is not jointly owned. The husband has a credit card debt in his sole name and a CCJ, the bailiffs visit. There is no joint and several liability for the debt. The bailiff's clamp the wife's car. She proves she bought the car using a bank account in her sole name in to which her wages are paid, shows the receipt for the car and the bank statement, all in her name. Are you saying that the bailiffs can legally seize the car and auction it off to pay the husband's debt because he has a 'beneficial interest'? Because that is not the case, the husband has no beneficial interest and the car is not jointly owned.

You are under no obligation to fill out the I&E forms if they are not from a court, however, the next steps which your local council takes to recover the debt may be based on that refusal. Whether or not it is a non-priority debt depends on what action your council can take to recover the debt. If you are receiving any benefits it can be considered a priority debt as deductions can be taken from your current benefits.

"just because another adult lives in the same property as another adult does not mean they are jointly liable for a council tax debt" is what I wrote. And that is the case, not all adults are liable to pay council tax even where they live in the same property, full-time students are not liable for example. If two adults live together, one is a full-time student and one works full-time, only the person working full-time is liable. The adult working full time will be eligible for a 25% single person discount. There are a number of other scenarios in which that is the case. I am well aware of joint and several liability and when it arises. It is siplistic to state that where adults live together they are jointly liable for council tax. Schedule 12 states “interest” means a beneficial interest. Which means any goods in which a debtor has a beneficial interest are subject to the warrant of control, that covers jointly owned goods. And is also the argument bailiffs use to seize vehicles on hire purchase, as where there is significant equity in an HP vehicle, that may be considered a beneficial interest. Because two people are married does not mean that all goods become jointly owned nor does it mean there is a beneficial interest in each others goods. Also it does not meant that all finances are "jointly entwined" either. Insolvency is the perfect example of that where one person in a married couple is insolvent but the other person isn't. In fact, it is impossible to make a joint insolvency application for any insolvency options which would not be the case if all finances were "jointly entwined".

If you had an overpayment, you now have a debt. The debt will not disappear, it can be deducted from other benefits which you receive. If you do not receive any benefits at the moment, if you make a claim in the future, it will be deducted at that stage.

There are very few utility companies that will replace the meters free of charge but you might find one willing to do so. Just switching suppliers will not normally result in a different meter being installed.

It is unlikely that the DWP will be concerned about a one off £300 loan from your brother so don't worry about it. If it is queried just explain that it was a loan from your brother which you have to pay back.

Does the letter state that you have arrears of child maintenance and is the amount you earn on the letter correct?

If you earn over £200 per week and have four children, your child maintenance liability is 19% of gross wages each week/month, and then 15% of any gross income above £800 per week, plus an additional amount towards any arrears which you have. The 19% should be shared between the mothers based on how many children they have. The letter you received should state on it how the amount you should pay is calculated, if your wages on the letter are miscalculated by more than 25%, you can ask for a recalculation. If it is only one mother claiming through the CMS, the amount you pay is 12% of gross, and then 15% of any gross income above £800 per week, plus an additional amount towards any arrears which you have. The CMS will not take in to account other expenditure which you have. How much are you expected to pay each week/month?

Robinson Way is a debt collector, Hoist is the parent company which purchases debt. If the debt has not been sold, the debt is still 'owned' by Barclaycard and it has a right to offset any credit you have with it against a debt which you owe. The £500 would have been given to you if you did not owe Barclaycard any money.

A person does not have to be registered to vote at an address to be liable for council tax. I am no "playing" as you put it, there have been a lot of incorrect claims on this thread which I was addressing.

If all assets are jointly owned by spouses, why did the bailiffs unclamp the OP's wife's car? She wasn't liable for the council tax but according to you because they are married the car is jointly owned so is fair game for seizure, right?

In other words, you can't back up your claims.

Where in council tax legislation, the taking control of goods regulations or numerous court cases does it state that once married all goods become jointly owned by spouses?

I don't need to but thanks anyway.

Nobody with the same household demographic to yours is better off than you when receiving benefits only. That is Tory rhetoric to justify benefit cuts, don't fall for the misinformation.

It's not wrong because the statement I replied to was a general statement and did not mention council tax or joint and several liability at all. It is your post, number 2, which is wrong. It jumps to conclusions with no exploration at all. And just because another adult lives in the same property as another adult does not mean they are jointly liable for a council tax debt either.

Obviously where joint and several liability for a debt exists it does not matter whether goods are jointly owned or not. Where joint and several liability does not exist for a debt, goods belonging to a spouse are not automatically considered to be jointly owned.

Only if it is essential for your employment otherwise it can be seized.

No it can't. It must be jointly owned by the wife and husband, a marriage does not mean that all possessions become jointly owned.

Yes but your defence will be that the debt is statute barred, and if it is, the claim will be dismissed.

If you receive notice that the DRO has been revoked, you can challenge the revocation on these grounds, although you should speak to your DRO adviser or approved intermediary before dong so.

If your financial circumstances are unlikely to change within the next 12 months, you might want to consider a Debt Relief Order. That depends on how successful you expect your new business to be, and also how much you value your credit rating.

That should not read £29.05 but the amount you receive as part of the LCWRA component so £X amount whatever that is.