Councils up their fees for late payers – The Times

[outlawla]

I read of a case where (sorry, I don't have the reference) where a doughty 80 year old woman fought the Liability Order. It was reported that the bench admitted that they were under contract to issue the Orders. The case is probably findable. I recall she was quite a lady, now sadly passed on.

 

Would be interested to read about this case. Looked but unfortunately didn't come up with anything. [Edit] Thanks! no_good_deed. Is this the article – Media Blackout –Why? (Cached site)

 

However, I just came across this article (CCR Magazine) which gives opinion of local authorities' attitudes to bailiffs' dubious fees from a bailiff firm's perspective. I should think it's instantly recognisable by those who have had to deal with their councils. It paints them as being less than honourable and caring.

 

".....If the local authority isn’t paying for the service, then who is?” This is the inevitable response from the cynical and to an extent, who can blame them?

 

Ultimately this situation leaves the impression that debtors are being asked to cover any hidden costs as well as being required to settle the debt.

 

We need to be perfectly honest about this. If local authorities are turning a blind eye to unregulated costs being attached to debts then this is a practice which is bound to become apparent and will reflect badly on all sides.

 

There is a belief among the core bailiff sector that such practices are, if not actively encouraged by some councils, then simply ignored. If the recovery rates are high enough – then methods are not checked....

 

Edited March 2, 2012 by outlawla

[ploddertom]

If you read the recent consultation documents there are a couple of things that come to mind.

 

Councils regularly send large amounts of cases to Bailiffs without checking

a - the debtor still lives at the address

b - any regard as to circumstances

c - any regard as to vulnerability issues

This is done because they use the excuse they have neither the funds, personnel or resources to check themselves and it is easier to let the Bailiffs do it for them at nil cost to the Council.

 

Looking at the clearance rates them 15% - 18% seems to be the norm. In my view that simply isn't good enough and shows the system doesn't work. Those Councils that have their own Bailiffs are not subject to the same level of complaints as we see from the private sector.

 

PT

[sutton6344]

My local authority wrongly removed my single occupancy discount 3 times leading to liability orders.

 

Even though the discounts were corrected the local authority have refused to refund the fees.

[brassnecked]

My local authority wrongly removed my single occupancy discount 3 times leading to liability orders.

 

Even though the discounts were corrected the local authority have refused to refund the fees.

If the liability order was gained as a result of the council's error, they should refund the fees and apply to the magistrates to quosh the orders, and yes refund the fees. a Formal Complaint may well still be an optio, copied to all the bigwigs including your MP ,

[outlawla]

My local authority wrongly removed my single occupancy discount 3 times leading to liability orders.

 

Even though the discounts were corrected the local authority have refused to refund the fees.

 

 

If the liability order was gained as a result of the council's error, they should refund the fees and apply to the magistrates to quosh the orders, and yes refund the fees. a Formal Complaint may well still be an optio, copied to all the bigwigs including your MP ,

 

I agree, your council can apply to the magistrates' court under legislation in the Local Government Finance Act 1992, and/or the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations. If they refuse, the LGO may also be worth contacting in addition to a formal complaint.

 

Details and template letter on this post.

[sutton6344]

Hi Guys, Thank you for your replies.

 

Just to confirm, my local authority claim to have sent letters asking me to confirm the single occupancy and as there was no reply the discount was removed. They even claim this to be good practice.

 

The discounts have been adjusted but the fees haven't.

 

Can this still be classed as the council's error?

[outlawla]

Might be worth starting a thread in the Local Authority Council Tax....section of the consumer action group site.

 

In my opinion, whether or not it can be classed as the council's error, only a fascist organisation would insist that you're penalised for not responding, either to a letter which was not sent, or never reached the intended for whatever reason. Remember, they will probably have targets to meet for income generated with these court costs.

 

EDIT:

 

Whichever way you look at it (fascist council aside), if your circumstances had not changed (single occupancy), there was no reason for you to inform the council, one way or the other. Maybe the council should be focussing attention on their mailing contractor and Royal mail.

Edited March 12, 2012 by outlawla

[sutton6344]

I've taken your advice and started a new thread here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?341950-Single-Occupancy-Discount-wrongly-removed

[sutton6344]

Remember, they will probably have targets to meet for income generated with

these court costs.

 

Just a thought but would it be possible to make a Freedom of Information request to find out ?

[brassnecked]

Just a thought but would it be possible to make a Freedom of Information request to find out ?

 

They will hide behind "reducing public confidence in the justice system" as an excuse to not disclose the information.

[outlawla]

Some ideas for a Freedom of Information request:

 

1. Ask your council if it has a minimum amount of outstanding debt, below which it should not progress for recovery action. If it does have this policy, what is the minimum?

 

2. Ask them to provide data for all liability orders issued on behalf of [your council] for non-payment of council tax, relating to a debt less than [£xxxx] between dates [20xx – 20xx].

 

To clarify the request the format would ideally be as in the following spreadsheet.

 

NELC Liability Orders 2006 to 2011 – Itemised.xls

 

Ask them to distinguish between the level of debt at the time the liability order was made, and the sum detailed on the Summons document.

 

If you wanted to be cheeky you could ask them how many householders they have to subject each year to summons and liability order costs for the council to subsidise the entire operation of council tax administration, and if they generally exceed such a target.

[lamma]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/18/part/II/crossheading/public-inspection-etc-and-action-by-the-auditor