Is council Tax even Legal?

naijapower

I dont think the bill of exchange rule or meaning has any relevance with council tax bill. They are two separate things.

James123_2

dzug1 wrote: »

But it IS linked to ability to pay, even if that link is imperfect and indirect. That link is CT banding - if you have a bigger/better/more expensive house you must be richer and able to pay more.

Yes there are flaws in that argument, but it's not total rubbish

Well, yes I guess there are flaws in any taxation arrangement but CT does seem to be an issue on which many are vexed. Just because, at one time in one's life, you may have bought a larger house does not mean that you will always have the income to match. This is certainly the situation we're in - although we're only Band D. No-one likes paying tax, but the doubling of bills in the last 10 years has pushed many people on fixed incomes into relative poverty. CT is a very crude measure of someone's ability to contribute to local finances. For my money, I'd welcome making use of a replacement such as local income tax.
Anyway, I'm off topic re the main post so I'll leave it there.

lincroft1710

James123 - making a nuisance of yourself takes up council employees' time which they are paid for out of your CT payments. If you stopped wasting their time they could get on with their job and as I said in my previous post you're talking to the wrong people.

If you are on low income there are CT benefits and I know that a lot of people have savings which means they don't qualify.

What always amazes me is how people moan and bleat about CT but pay hundreds and thousands in VAT without a murmur.

James123_2

Well, my note of making a 'minor nuisance' of myself was said rather tongue-in-cheek. As I've never missed a beat in paying CT in 20+ years I think a phone call to clarify whether this is a charge or a tax is reasonable. Unfortunately, change will only happen if enough people start to query this charge/tax. For now at least, we are all free to express a collective dissatisfaction with the current state of play and to put our point of view on these forums - whether we're in agreement or not. In this instance, it's clearly the latter. I don't think posters should be rebuked for doing so.

lincroft1710

James - Council Tax only came into force 16 yrs ago.

If you only made the one phone call, then that would not be unreasonable.

The local income tax argument has been frequently aired, but clearly Parliament does not give it credence (and it is Parliament who are in the driving seat). Although there are obviously dissenters, a property tax has been its chosen method for the nation to help fund local govt spending since at least the 19th century. The exception was the brief 3 yr reign of the Community Charge (Poll Tax).

As we will be having a general election within the next 8 months, why not write to all party leaders and ask what their intentions are towards the present system and let them know your views.

James123_2

Thanks for the reply Lincroft
I think that the crux of my point is the rate of increase over the past 10 years which surpasses any measure of inflation by a considerable degree. This might be a minor irritant for those on middle-incomes, but it does impact disproportionately on low-earners. Indeed, given the high CT bills, it was explained to me by CAB that the value of a full CT rebate is now so considerable that it acts as a disincentive for those on benefits to gain work. There are certainly anomalies in any system, but CT is making life difficult for a growing band of folk on very modest incomes.
I’ve spent 27 years working and now am unable to do so because of a cancer diagnosis. I’m more than happy to pay my ‘fair’ share. Equally, I am resigned to the fact that I may have to sell my house in order to afford future CT bills. Whilst the principle of property tax is long-established, I think the execution of such leaves much to be desired.
Anyway, that’s my Sunday Sermon over!
Have a good week all!

mynameisdave

I live on the Wirral nad havent heard this is any of the rubbish rags we have that try to pass themselves as newspapers.

mynameisdave

jayhow wrote: »

yes I am aware of the LGFA 1992 but the point is that CT is unlawful for the following reasons:
Now under our local council, we get sent a notice, not a bill, a notice,it isn't a bill because it does not bear two signatures, one of them being the householder, to say they will pay the tax imposed upon them, this is described under the Bill of Exchange Act 1882:
3 Bill of exchange defined

(1)A bill of exchange is an unconditional order in writing, addressed by one person to another, signed by the person giving it, requiring the person to whom it is addressed to pay on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time a sum certain in money to or to the order of a specified person, or to bearer.

(2)An instrument which does not comply with these conditions, or which orders any act to be done in addition to the payment of money, is not a bill of exchange.
I also have been informed that a bill also has to have a head office stamp or similar at the bottom of it for it to be deemed as a bill and not just a notice.
Stating that you have to pay council tax under the loacl governemnt finance act is just quoting a statute law,statute laws are only laws when given the consent and weight of the governed if they so wish.
Now it is the same with a Liability Order from a court, it has to have a magistrates signature on it to be legal,if not, it is null and void, there also has to be the courts crest and or/ stamp upon it to be a legal document.

The Tax deducted box on my wage slip doesnt contain two signatures. Does this make income tax illegal?

juliescot

mynameisdave wrote: »

The Tax deducted box on my wage slip doesnt contain two signatures. Does this make income tax illegal?

Of course it does. You write to that nice Mr Darling and quote this thread and I am sure you will not have to pay any more tax at all.;)

toby3000

James123 wrote: »

Yes, I agree. However, I feel that making a small nuisance of myself is a minor moral victory in the face of a tax which is believed by many to be grossly unfair. I can think of no other 'tax' in the UK which isn't linked in some way to an individual's ability to pay. Only our food bill is greater than our own CT demand.

Surely VAT has even less link to earnings? Or, indeed, most other duties, or things like airport tax... I'm not saying they should be abolished by any means, and they won't ever abolish indirect taxation, but there's taxes that are less fair than CT