JBW visit today Council Tax debacle posts

[neil_tp]

Once a EA returns the debt back to the LA, no fees are payable.

[neil_tp]

I can show all the supporting legislation and previous cases , all you seem to do is state your belief. Which is fine , but not when you ae advising others.

 

 

What I'm stating is what happens day to day, lets agree to disagree and see what happens with CC

[Peterbard]

What I'm stating is what happens day to day, lets agree to disagree and see what happens with CC

 

If it were just you and me involved i would do with pleasure, but I am not risking injuring the other members well being by leaving any doubt, you are incorrect.

This is usual practice, I do not see why anyone should think the EA should work for nothing, in anycase it is supported by legislation.

[neil_tp]

If it were just you and me involved i would do with pleasure, but I am not risking injuring the other members well being by leaving any doubt, you are incorrect.

This is usual practice, I do not see why anyone should think the EA should work for nothing, in anycase it is supported by legislation.

 

I don't want you injuring CC's wallet especially if the £235 is in dispute..

[Peterbard]

I don't want you injuring CC's wallet especially if the £235 is in dispute..

 

Things arnt so just because you think they should be, it is all about what the law says, as For the £235 it is already owed

[neil_tp]

Don't think so, the law says 70mph is the speed limit on a motor way, nobody ever breaks it do they?

[Bailiff Advice]

He has paid the council what he owes them, sounds like JBW were trying it on anyway. A LO amount doesn't have any future EA fees on it.

 

Neil,

You joined the forum years ago in 2007 and started your own query about an employment tribunal case that you were involved with.

 

Five years ago in 2010 you stopped posting on the forum altogether and then, for reasons that are completely unclear, you took an interest in visiting the bailiff section of the forum in Decamber and it would seem from your many posts that your intention has been solely to disrupt as many threads as you can. I have been the victim of personal 'digs' from you and so have others.

 

You now seem to have some warped view that paying the amount only of a Liability Order to the council will clear the debt. You are not correct.

 

I will not respond to any further posts from you and I urge everyone else to do the same.

[neil_tp]

Neil,

You joined the forum years ago in 2007 and started your own query about an employment tribunal case that you were involved with.

 

Five years ago in 2010 you stopped posting on the forum altogether and then, for reasons that are completely unclear, you took an interest in visiting the bailiff section of the forum in Decamber and it would seem from your many posts that your intention has been solely to disrupt as many threads as you can. I have been the victim of personal 'digs' from you.

 

You now seem to have some warped view that paying the amount only of a Liability Order to the council will clear the debt. You are not correct.

 

I will not respond to any further posts from you and I urge everyone else to do the same.

 

 

Didn't think you would be long BA,

 

Plenty of evidence that the debt can be repaid to the LA without fees, so I will disagree with you. Your known now to be very deeply involved with the EA industry so much now your not independent anymore.

 

 

I have only posted under this user name.

Edited April 6, 2016 by honeybee13
Pejorative remarks removed.