Sunday, 10 February 2013
CT - someone's research
I've been doing a bit of research and found this interesting. Could this be discussed, I would like to hear other peoples point of views on these 3 paragraphs. Thanks.
Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992
Part VI Enforcement 33-(1) which states the following: "Before a billing authority applies for a liability order it shall serve on the person against whom ...the application is to be made a notice (“final notice”), which is to be in addition to any notice required to be served under Part V, and which is to state every amount in respect of which the authority is to make the application." therefore, if they fail to state all the amounts owed or the correct amount, we should consider the Liability or null and void .... right?
“Part VI Enforcement 53.—(2) Subject to any other enactment authorising a stipendiary magistrate or other person to act by himself, a magistrates' court shall not under this Part hear a summons, entertain an application for a warrant or hold an inquiry as to means on such an application except when composed of at least two justices.” So if there is only one magistrate hearing the Summons, this should also make the outcome of the proceeding null and void also ...... right?
“the Human Rights Act Article 6”
• Under Article 6 cases against people for contempt of court or for not paying their council tax count as criminal proceedings therefore in Section 1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. This includes:
• The right to an independent and impartial judge or tribunal.
• The right to be informed at a very early stage what the accusation against you is.
I'm quite sure the Human Rights act supersedes their crappy regulations ...... right?
If this is a criminal and not a civil charge then burden of proof is supposed to be higher and based on just the balance of probabilities. Therefore production of foundation evidence should be in the court file whether you turn up or not. We know its not the HMCS but a private tribunal. Also if they know you disagree with paying have they offered you any other option. This appears to be a VOA tribunal that you can go to but are not told about therefore not completing or exhausting before sending out the negligent misrep of the summons. Look carefully at all info given by the council. Then see how many times the tribunal is in it. It’s not a mags court invite. Its an invite to a mags court to do private business with no rules either in CPR civil or criminal. Mags court rules are also ignored.
Posted by Admin at 12:34