Council criminals breaking the law - the Immigration Act 1971

As many local inhabitants of council areas have discovered, illegal migrants (without passports or visas entitling or granting permission to stay) have entered the UK for solely economic reasons and cannot prove any 'refugee status' but are being given Public Services that local inhabitants often do not benefit from. These include free or subsidised accommodation or housing, welfare payments, free healthcare, free phones, various allowances, and even immunity from prosecution for various criminal offences including harassment, sexual abuse, theft, trespassing, violent disorder & criminal damage. Members of organisations involved often claim that the individuals concerned are 'awaiting confirmation' of refugee status where they are to be given rights such as "leave to remain".

There is no excuse for ignorance of the Law! Anyone employed by councils who assists illegal migrants or asylum seekers to enter or overstay, to access housing or other assistance, is deliberately and knowingly acting criminally and is therefore personally liable to pay a fine or face a penalty of a minimum of 6 months or up to life in prison. These criminals will be banned from any future Public Office, have their pension rights revoked, and any ill-gotten gains asset-stripped.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/77/section/25

"25 Assisting unlawful immigration to member State [F1 or the United Kingdom]

(1) A person commits an offence if he—

   (a) does an act which facilitates the commission of a breach [F3 or attempted breach] of immigration law by an individual who is not [F4 a national of the United Kingdom],

   (b) knows or has reasonable cause for believing that the act facilitates the commission of a breach [F3 or attempted breach] of immigration law by the individual, and

   (c) knows or has reasonable cause for believing that the individual is not [F4 a national of the United Kingdom].

(2) In subsection (1) “immigration law” means a law which has effect in a member State [F5 or the United Kingdom] and which controls, in respect of some or all persons who are not nationals of the State [F6 or, as the case may be, of the United Kingdom], entitlement to—

   (a) enter [F7 or arrive in] the State [F8 or the United Kingdom],

   (b) transit across the State [F9 or the United Kingdom], or

   (c) be in the State [F10 or the United Kingdom].

[F11(2A) In subsections (1) and (2), “national of the United Kingdom” means—

   (a) a British citizen;

   (b) a person who is a British subject by virtue of Part 4 of the British Nationality Act 1981 and who has the right of abode in the United Kingdom; or

   (b) a person who is a British overseas territories citizen by virtue of a connection with Gibraltar.]

(3) A document issued by the government of a member State certifying a matter of law in that State—

   (a) shall be admissible in proceedings for an offence under this section, and

   (b) shall be conclusive as to the matter certified.

[F12 (4) Subsection (1) applies to things done whether inside or outside the United Kingdom.]

(6) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

   (a) on conviction on indictment, to [F13 imprisonment for life], to a fine or to both, or

   (b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both. "

Potential changes to the legislation include:

"25A Helping asylum-seeker to enter United Kingdom

(1) A person commits an offence if—

   (a) he knowingly F2... facilitates the arrival [F3 or attempted arrival ] in [F4, or the entry [F5 or attempted entry] into,] the United Kingdom of an individual, and

   (b) he knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the individual is an asylum-seeker.

(2) In this section “asylum-seeker” means a person who intends to claim that to remove him from or require him to leave the United Kingdom would be contrary to the United Kingdom’s obligations under—

   (a) the Refugee Convention (within the meaning given by section 167(1) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (c. 33) (interpretation)), or

   (b) the Human Rights Convention (within the meaning given by that section).

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to anything done by a person acting on behalf of an organisation which—

   (a) aims to assist asylum-seekers, and

   (b) does not charge for its services.  "

While council staff and management may seek to claim to be part of "an organisation which aims to assist asylum seekers and does not charge for its services", any such claim will be provably false. Councils exist to serve local inhabitants as Public Servants primarily providing services. They are not now, nor ever have been, organisations with "aims to assist asylum seekers", and their constitutions clearly outline their basic rules governing the council's business and 'citizen' rights.

Council Tax deductions ruled unlawful - Legal Precedent set

 "In a decision issued on the 14th of August 2026, Tribunal Judge T. Cole concluded that the Secretary of State had failed to demonstrate that the deduction was lawful with the reasoning behind the decision according to some legal professionals potentially opening the door to legal challenges from other Universal Credit claimants whose benefits have been reduced to repay council tax debts."
"The tribunal’s reasoning appears to be that even where the DWP ultimately has the legal power to impose a deduction without the claimant agreeing to it, the claimant must still be given an opportunity to engage with the process and make representations before that power is exercised."
"If other council tax deductions have been imposed in circumstances where the DWP cannot produce the local authority’s original request, cannot demonstrate the underlying liability order, or did not give the claimant a meaningful opportunity to make representations, claimants may inevitably begin asking whether the same arguments apply to them."

https://www.teesdurhampost.co.uk/post/dwp-council-tax-deductions-ruled-unlawful-in-landmark-teesside-case

"For anyone across the region currently having council tax arrears deducted from Universal Credit — particularly those who are vulnerable & do not remember being given any opportunity to challenge the proposed deduction — the ruling is likely to make uncomfortable reading for both the DWP and local authorities."

For the local inhabitants of every council area, this ruling means that they can potentially claim back any monies taken without the correct procedure having been followed.

The criminals running Corporate Councils are selling OUR Public assets to pay for THEIR fraud!

This has been going on for years - unelected & corrupted corporate council staff and management, selling off Publicly owned assets to compensate and cover for their massive fraud & embezzlement! Every single one of them is complicit in the Fraud and is guilty of Misconduct in Public Office. Every single one should be removed from office, fully investigated, prosecuted, asset-stripped, and in many cases jailed for maximum terms. All monies recovered to be returned to the local council funds to be administered by local people of proven integrity.

The warnings have been in plain sight:

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2019-03-04/sold-from-under-you

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68439624

https://inews.co.uk/news/tax-hiking-councils-forced-sell-property-worth-billions-2931141

https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/economic-growth/regional-development/2024/01/selling-assets-council-bankruptcies-local-government-funding

https://www.localgov.co.uk/Councils-sell-off-4000-public-buildings-a-year-FOI-requests-reveal/45500

https://www.localgov.co.uk/Town-halls-forced-to-sell-community-assets-as-debts-mount/62920

From AI:
"The Local Government Association (LGA) strongly opposes the use of council asset sales to fund day-to-day services, arguing that such measures are not a substitute for long-term funding solutions.  The LGA emphasizes that capital receipts and borrowing are not "free money," can only be spent once, and cannot address ongoing revenue pressures or structural deficits.   
While the UK government has granted flexibility to cash-strapped councils to sell assets like property and land to balance their books, the LGA warns this approach: 
- Fails to solve systemic issues: Asset sales offer only a one-off cash injection that does not resolve the underlying lack of adequate central government funding for local services. 
- Endangers community resources: Selling public assets, including libraries, pools, and parks, extracts wealth and power from communities, often benefiting private developers rather than local needs.
- Risks irreversible loss: Many assets are sold to the highest bidder, permanently removing vital community infrastructure and spaces from public control.
The LGA maintains that councils are best placed to decide what works for their communities and urges the government to address the root causes of local government financial crises rather than encouraging the sell-off of public assets."

From Madeleine Hunt at National Residents for Civic Accountability

Dear team,
The Local Government Association has just openly admitted in the executive press exactly what we have been warning about: councils are speeding to sell off local assets and land just to cover their day-to-day bankruptcy. They are liquidating our land, wildlife, heritage, parks, fields, woodlands to plug the massive financial black holes created by spending public money on restructuring into this wider globalist agenda. They aren't even hiding it any more they are selling the ground from under us to fund their ill-minded agenda.

Because of this panic, every village, town, and borough right now has a group of desperate residents objecting to mass developments, building use conversions, solar farms, and land grabs. But we have very narrow time window to block them

But there is a massive problem: these local groups of ordinary citizens do not understand how the local government engine actually works. They are being pulled down the usual route to nowhere, exhausting their communities by fundraising for mainstream planning lawyers and establishment NGOs. This industry will simply drain their cash, offer them false hope, and ultimately manage them into quiet resignation. Hardly anyone realises that councils are adopting Regulation 19 right now, and once they do, it allows planning applications to be approved almost automatically. All these local campaigns are fighting in good faith, but without knowing this, their efforts are being quietly neutralised. People are investing time and energy into battles that are structurally set up to fail - often guided by advisers who don’t understand the statutory process or those who do understand and deliberately using their knowledge to fulfil their mission.

We need to reach these groups and bring them into the real fight. Right now. Burnham will be announcing his budget on 28 September - and the entire “budget” depends on selling off public assets and raising taxes.

Jerry is now officially leading an NRCA national operation to identify, connect with, and redirect these local campaigners. We need to reach these groups before they spend their money or lose momentum, and show them how to use the statutory and financial mechanisms that actually freeze council agendas.

The goal is to connect all these small, isolated campaigns into one national challenge.

I sent a formal NRCA warning to Rayner two days ago, following my previous formal letter on the same developments and immigration issues — after which she and McMahon disappeared from their seats. Now they’re back, and the issue is back with them. There’s no escape from the evidence.

Here is what you need to do today:
Scout your local areas, community social media pages, and regional papers for any group fighting a planning or development issue, asset disposal, or conversion.

Send the details of those campaigns directly to Jerry at jerrshaw@pm.me.

If you already know the specific names of the people leading these local campaigns, include them immediately, that is the most valuable input you can provide for our strategic actions right now.

Do not let your local objectors being placed on the hamster wheel by a legal system and media designed to exhaust and defeat them. Find them, send the details to Jerry, and let's arm them with the tools that actually work.

Thank you!!

What Is Really Happening Inside Local Councils:

https://docmalik.substack.com/p/443-madeleine-hunt-what-is-really
The infiltrated and corrupted Reform UK political party are actively undermining the work of the NRCA!

Madeleine Hunt and Rachel Mathews: The Illusion of Democracy: Local Government Reorganisation Exposed:

https://docmalik.substack.com/p/499-madeleine-hunt-and-rachel-mathews
Manufactured Crises: How Councils Use Fake Emergencies to Seize Control and What You Can Do About It

SUPPORT THE NRCA LEGAL DEFENCE FUND — STAND WITH US

This is how we win — not protests, but court‑ready, resident‑led legal action backed by evidence.

WHO THEY ARE: National Residents for Civic Accountability — non‑partisan, independent, built on transparency, fiduciary duty, and public trust.

WHAT THEY PROVE: Official audits show 99% of councils fail assurance; £1.1T spending unchecked; Parliament warns reorganisation hides corruption.

WHERE YOUR MONEY GOES: Held in a ring‑fenced community account — strictly for judicial review, legal advice, court costs, and challenging unlawful mergers/secrecy. No salaries, no overhead — pure action.

HOW TO PLEDGE SAFELY:

1. Full NRCA report & pledge page:

https://sites.google.com/view/nationalresidentscivicaffairs/resident-led-judicial-review-fund-governance-audit-and-consent

2. Or direct bank transfer (secure):

• Account Name: Residents Legal Defence Fund

• Sort Code: 23‑05‑80

• Account No: 57489588

• Reference: Justice

Every penny protects our rights, holds officials personally liable, and builds the blueprint every county can follow.

A petition for Somerset inhabitants:

https://www.change.org/p/demand-accountability-and-transparency-from-somerset-council

The National Bladerunner Tour - how to disable & destroy council Phased Array weapons legally

Concerned about the Phased Array weapons being installed onto traffic lights by the corporate councils in your area and across the UK? Join the Bladerunners and learn how to disabled the weapons safely and legally!

Become A Blade Runner talks in the UK we are now taking bookings 

National tour 2026

Host us in your city or town 

Get in early 

Donations to cover our costs, minimum 20 - 150 people for the live talks

A hall or a stand in the park for the venue 

Book us now for your area 

What you need to know

How to submit the Evidence 

How to stop the unlawful 15 minute city prison camp with direct action 

How to educate the public 

How to deal with the police 

Location, England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales 

               Apply to join our on the road convoy, drive with us as we travel from city to town in the UK, or join the team

Must have projector, mic, sound system 

90-min talk + 30 min Q&A

Email: bladerunnertalks@keemail.me

Click on this link to Apply

http://Tinyurl.com/bladerunnertalks

Share this information on all your local stand in the park groups 

Email your friends

Learn to recognise the microwave weapons that are being installed onto traffic lights & crossings

If you remove the offending tech, do a strip-down & identify the dangers while keeping a record

Be in no doubt that these installations are designed to maim & kill!

Mark Steele: “They’ve Built a Kill Grid Across Britain” | 5G, ULEZ & Hidden Technology

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVJ0ase2Esg

The Totnes event recordings:
Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35qHivTNEuc

Part 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hkUI3kvbjY

Council solicitors and other officials acting dishonestly - REPORT THEM!

The disgraceful corporate councils are breaking the rules again. They are often issuing falsified documents.
Yet the rules are clear enough. A PCN  must be issued within 7 days. A "Charge Certificate" must be issued within 12 months. The council must reapply before end of 12 months for another 12 Months. There is a maximum time limit of 24 months and that only applies if they have reapplied.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part75#IDAGQ0HC

CPR 75.7 

" (5) For the purposes of execution a warrant will be valid for 12 months beginning with the date of its issue.

(6) An authority may not renew a warrant issued in accordance with this Part beyond the 12 month validity period but, subject to paragraph (7), an authority may request the reissue of a warrant during the 12 month validity period. "

Council solicitors acting dishonestly can be reported to the Solicitors Regulation Authority and can be sued.
https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/general-dishonesty/

The SRA state that the public have a duty to report dishonesty. A solicitor can be struck off. A council solicitor can be banned from Public Office and lose any pensions.
https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/fraud-dishonesty/dishonesty-suspected

Council staff acting dishonestly should be prosecuted for their Misconduct in Public Office and lose their pensions. If they have conspired with others to issue false documents, then the others must be subject to the same discipline.

Ross v Ashford Borough Council - validity of legal paperwork

"For those who are challenging a petition for bankruptcy, charging order, or an attachment of earnings order for council tax, use the legal precedence of "Ross v Ashford Borough Council" to have the application dismissed by the court.

Ross v Ashford Borough Council is a county court precedent where an individual successfully challenged council tax enforcement proceedings. In this case, the judge dismissed the council's attempt to place a charging order on the resident's home and refused the council permission to appeal.

The primary argument in Ross v Ashford Borough Council centered on the validity of legal paperwork. The court determined that the enforcement chain was legally unsound because the documents (ranging from the liability order to the charging order) were signed off by a paralegal rather than a legally qualified solicitor or a court officer. Because the signatory lacked the required legal authority to compel actions or execute the documents, the entire enforcement case collapsed.

This case is increasingly cited in ongoing council tax and housing disputes across the UK as precedent to challenge enforcement actions. It is often discussed alongside the landmark Mazur case, which examined whether councils have legal standing to pursue certain types of debt enforcement without properly qualified representation."

https://www.peaceofficers.uk/ross-v-ashford-borough-council-a-council-tax-enforcement-case-worth-understanding/

£81 BILLION per year lost through FRAUD & ERROR!

£81 BILLION cannot be accounted for. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kvfk79jDA3M

When you pay the corporate councils you are paying criminals who are embezzling billions from the taxes being paid via councils to central government and collected via HMRC.