The dreaded Council Tax

EdInvestor

lodestoneman wrote:

What worries people is the endless year-on-year inflation busting council tax rises which are outstripping their incomes.

Quite so.

Let's say then that councils were limited in their ability to raise the tax by the level of inflation.

What services would be reduced to make the required savings?

Would we notice their loss?

seven-day-weekend

lodestoneman wrote:

Quote:
. But it's not the immediate 'ability to pay' which worries people is it? What worries people is the endless year-on-year inflation busting council tax rises which are outstripping their incomes.

---

Taxation: how the sheep are shorn.

Edward Abbey[/I]

So you wouldn't have a gripe with the CT if it kept place with inflation?

By the way, I agree it is crippling to those on fixed incomes, we're on a fixed income ourselves (My husband's teachers pension).

At the moment we don't live in the UK but when we are back there we'll either have to have our son living with us or have a lodger to help pay the bills, until the other pensions click in.

margaretclare

lodestoneman wrote:

But what you don't take into account is that the first 3% (at the moment!) of nett interest in a "half decent account" does nothing more than maintain the value of your capital against inflation, and I do question your 5%(nett) when the best I've been able to find is 4%.

You make this reply very personal to me. Re interest-paying accounts - mine is with the Yorkshire Building Society, it's their E-ISA and it's paying 5.15% even though the actual amount in there is way way short of the £16,000 you mentioned. In fact, neither DH nor I have all that much in the way of savings - what we have is a decent income which means we can't really avoid saving - DH saves £200 every 4 weeks when the next 4-weekly SRP/SERPS payment arrives, which will be tomorrow for him and Monday for me. He's been as surprised by this as anyone!

It's up to you Margaret, where do you see yourself in all this? Are you satisfied with what they are doing to you? I end with quoting Angela Wales : The Council Tax system plays on 'words' and 'words' are deliberately used to stop any defence to any summons and hearing.

Well, you put the ball into my court, and even though I've just listened to a very interesting philosophical discussion on Radio 4 'In Our Time' about altruism, I have no easy answers.

Those who went to jail for their beliefs, the most recent case was of a former soldier a week or two ago, I have the greatest respect for. But it has not done a darned bit of good, except for the publicity. Someone stepped in and paid the outstanding amount, which wasn't what was intended. There was a lot of play on the age of the person, and if I was to go to jail for what I believe in, I wouldn't want the media to seize on 'this 71-year old grandmother with replaced hips etc etc' - although they would, and it would anger me because I am a lot of other things besides being a 71-year old grandmother!

Where do I see myself in all this? Well, I see myself as being totally misled and betrayed by the people I helped to put into power in 1997, but council tax is only one part of the picture. I see myself as being completely un-listened to on any of the issues I regard as important. Before the 2001 general election I took part in publicity for AgeConcern and my part in the video film that was made then focused on the injustice of age discrimination in the workplace. Nothing changed as a result of my participation. I knew even as I did it, that the date planned for this discrimination to be outlawed would be too late for me. A lot of people didn't agree with me at the time - they wanted to retire, and in fact, a lot of people still expect to retire on a good income at 60, an income which has to last them for another 20 or 30 years according to present life expectancy figures.

At the time of the 2005 election DH and I were interviewed for the 'Observer' and we were described as the 'green pensioners'. Our political views were only sought insofar as we were seen as being 'pensioners' and therefore we were expected to talk about what was seen as 'only' of interest to pensioners i.e. state pensions, means-tested benefits and the like. Much of what we said was ignored.

Where do I stand in all this? I dislike what is happening in our country today. I dislike the recent announcement that half a million people immigrated here in the last year that figures are available. I dislike the cosy words of the news-reader, that a number also left, for countries like Australia, France and Spain. There was no analysis of just who has arrived and who has left, although a huge number have immigrated here from Eastern Europe, but also from countries like Pakistan and African countries. Someone once said, many years ago now, that he saw the insanity of a nation 'heaping up its own funeral pyre'. He was scorned and his words are still sneered at. But when one thinks of just who has come here as opposed to just who has left, those who arrive having the tradition of a high birth-rate, those leaving either older people like seven-day-weekend in Spain, or young families going to Australia for a better life, I'll tell you where I stand in all this. I fear for the future of my country, that's where. Sure, I don't like paying £99 a month now for council tax as opposed to £65 only a couple of years ago. I don't like paying a lot more for gas supply either, and tossing us £200 once a year - like throwing a bone to a dog - doesn't make me happy about it, because we have squandered our rich resources and now we are beholden to countries like Russia for our gas supplies. We don't make a thing any more. Even an industry like BAE has been dependent for the last 20 years on contracts to Saudi Arabia, and who are they going to bomb, one must ask? We are beholden to oppressive regimes.

To come back to what I said a few pages back, I don't like the idea that my country is deemed no longer to exist, that the man who is thought of as Prime-Minister-in-waiting speaks of 'Scotland, Wales and the English regions. I have pointed out that one of the things we're paying for in council tax is the regional assemblies which have been set up without the will of the people and without most people even knowing about it. People's heads are focused on irrelevancies such as 'can't wait to get the Christmas decorations up', the latest TV reality show, spend-spend-spend, and similar. Take for instance this: http://www.englishdemocrats.org.uk/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1164275757&archive=&start_from=&ucat=3,4&)

I watched the discussion on the late news after I got back from college last night, and the focus was all on people loading up their car boot or their van with cheap booze and fags, as though that was the only point at issue. The link above shows that there's a lot more to it than that. DH and I have crossed the Channel many times in the last few years and have never bought a boot-full of booze and fags! There are even cross-Channel 'cruises' you can go on where you don't set foot on land and still come back with all those cheap goodies, if that's what you want.

I don't like the fact that my country, whose geographical borders existed for centuries and were thought worth defending, are melting away. This was NOT what I voted for way back in 1971 when I voted to 'stay in' the then Common Market, and my late husband was right when he voted against. We could never have envisaged what has happened since. I thought that anything which prevented another devastating European war would be a good thing. It never occurred to us that half a million members of the 'new' European states would immigrate here, to a small island, within one year. Nor that those we had welcomed, and given shelter to, would have children who would hate us and our way of life so much that they would cause mayhem and bloodshed on the London transport network, that they are still here, now demanding their own distinctive costumes as a right and our children should visit their places of worship as part of normal education.

All this is what we are paying for, and no, I don't like what is happening.

You are hereby summoned to appear before the Magistrates Court etc etc etc to answer to a complaint that you are the person properly liable to pay Council Tax and that the said sum shown below has not been paid in respect of the Tax set by the Council.

Well obviously you answer that the above is correct as it is true.

In our case the likelihood is that they would issue the summons against DH because in certain bureaucratic quarters he is still seen in the old-fashioned way as 'head of the household'. And he wouldn't go to jail for council tax non-payment. There might be things he would go to jail for, but not that.

e.g Do you accept this is the rate set by this Local Authority under regulation blah blah blah?

Well... yes. ( you can't argue with it as it is fact)

Since the last general election, and the one before that, I've done a lot of thinking and reading, and I've become an English nationalist. I thought I was a 'lefty-liberal' but I don't think, at bottom, that I ever was. We are trying to achieve an English Parliament and I'm going to a meeting in London this Saturday. It's many years since I took a train and tube into central London, I'm a bit scared of it, and no, a bus pass wouldn't help with the fare which costs £15. It's time I met with like-minded people. The council tax is only a part of it.

I didn't mean to imply, jennifernil, that there is anything wrong with your continuing to live in your individually-designed house for as long as you wish. In fact, that's probably the best solution for everybody - to have a house which is designed and built to their own wishes/needs/requirements. I am just saying that for many people - and I've seen some - they leave it too late, they would have been better to move to somewhere smaller and more convenient and could therefore have freed up money. I am all for personal choice. Having our little car is a choice for DH and me, and yes, it costs money even if it never turns a wheel, but the convenience is worth it at present. There may come a time when things are different, and in that case, what the car costs us now could buy us an awful lotta taxi-rides!

Another quote is about the fact that a frog doesn't notice it if you put him into water of which he's used to the temperature, then slowly raise to boilng-point. Apparently you can boil a frog to death and he won't notice. I've read that we are like those frogs.

Well, you did ask....

Margaret

Mike_S_8

Ah ! A kindred spirit! I cannot but agree with all your points Margaret - but the boiling frog story is urban legend/myth. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog - and the links there.

That said - the story does bring home the way we are slowly being "boiled alive" w.r.t. all the things you mention (and more) - all of which are, initially, introduced for ostensibly beneficial reasons, but which then undergo extension and "function creep", and end up being used for all manner of malevolent reasons.

See you in the Tower - after we've both been hauled off by the Ministry of Truth !

jennifernil

Hi there Margaret, I agree with a lot of what you are saying but.............I just feel that the wishes of a lot of us "wrinklies" are counted as nothing. Why should we feel obliged to move out of our homes that we love?
Why (we are young pensioners with a caravan) should we be made to feel we should drive a little car?
*** it all! We are going to do as we please, spend our money as we please, and hopefully have enough to last us for as long as we live!!!!!!!!

CIS

Quote:
You are hereby summoned to appear before the Magistrates Court etc etc etc to answer to a complaint that you are the person properly liable to pay Council Tax and that the said sum shown below has not been paid in respect of the Tax set by the Council.

Well obviously you answer that the above is correct as it is true.


In our case the likelihood is that they would issue the summons against DH because in certain bureaucratic quarters he is still seen in the old-fashioned way as 'head of the household'. And he wouldn't go to jail for council tax non-payment. There might be things he would go to jail for, but not that.

Generally the summons would have been issued against the first name on the account -some councils will summon everyone, some will just summon one or two of he people listed.

hodgester

So we're (council tax collectors) slippery now for the wording of a summons issued by the magistrates and based on legislation written by the Government in the early 90's and developed by case law decisions from High Court judges????

I'm baffled by this one. I don't have a moral opinion on the tax, I try not to think about it too much because I haven't seen a cast-iron workable replacement, but here's the gist...

When I issues a summons (on behalf of the magistrates) I have no information on the age or circumstances of the debtor unless they have made a claim for housing/council tax benefit. Ctax records are not required by DPA to hold this information. It is simply that the bill has not been paid as per the notice demand that was issued.

If anyone (irrespective of age) defers on part or the whole of their payment then they will inevitably be summonsed for non-payment, unless they seek help through the benefits system. There is much correspondence exchanged and opportunity to contact a council before the situation reaches the stage of bankruptcy/commital. (In fact of the 3 that I have worked at only one used bankruptcy and none used commital). At that point, the magistrate, if looking at commital, will also make several attempts at reaching an alternative decision before committing.

It can be nothing but wilful refusal against a national law that will result in imprisonment. If we let this pass, what next? Is it only old soldiers of pensionable age that can wilfully flout the laws of this country or can us 30-somethings do it as well? Can I now pass through a red light because I don't agree with it's installation?

What makes me laugh is that I know people who wilfully refuse to pay council tax for years and people phone me every day saying "why don't you chase the people who don't pay?" when they have received a reminder. Yet if we do it, then the next thing is the Daily Mail or Express are having a field day saying we are persecuting people. I am therefore being asked by YOU to be the morale arbiter on who should be pursued ('yes' to slippery multiple landlords but 'no' to chelsea pensioners).

Maybe this thread should be retitled "You can't please all of the people all of the time..."

Mike_S_8

CIS wrote:

Generally the summons would have been issued against the first name on the account -some councils will summon everyone, some will just summon one or two of he people listed.

Ah! But then there is the business of joint and several liablility. For one explanation of this "gotcha", see http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/counciltax/495.asp

CIS

I quite understand joint and several liability - I work in Council Tax

Councils are free to pursue who they want from people of equal liability, but for practical terms we can easily pursu one person - look at it this way - three people share a house and owe £1000 in council Tax: 2 move away without a forwarding address, 1 stays in the area - who are the Council going to chase after ?

CIS

So we're (council tax collectors) slippery now for the wording of a summons issued by the magistrates and based on legislation written by the Government in the early 90's and developed by case law decisions from High Court judges????

I'm baffled by this one. I don't have a moral opinion on the tax, I try not to think about it too much because I haven't seen a cast-iron workable replacement, but here's the gist...

When I issues a summons (on behalf of the magistrates) I have no information on the age or circumstances of the debtor unless they have made a claim for housing/council tax benefit. Ctax records are not required by DPA to hold this information. It is simply that the bill has not been paid as per the notice demand that was issued.

If anyone (irrespective of age) defers on part or the whole of their payment then they will inevitably be summonsed for non-payment, unless they seek help through the benefits system. There is much correspondence exchanged and opportunity to contact a council before the situation reaches the stage of bankruptcy/commital. (In fact of the 3 that I have worked at only one used bankruptcy and none used commital). At that point, the magistrate, if looking at commital, will also make several attempts at reaching an alternative decision before committing.

I agree 100% - I dont deal with the final stages of summons/liability much, we have recovery officers for that, but I do now and again and part of my job is setting up agreements.

The actual point of getting to agreement takes a good bit of correspondence and people get the chance to arrange payments - you'll no doubt agree me that its amazing how royal mail manage to lose every letter up to the summons, which magically finds its way through.

I dealt with a case recently where I gave someone the benefit of the doubt as they told me they where awaiting a benefit claim ( I could have checked but gave them a fair chance) and allowed v-low payments as a temporary measure. a colleague of mine got a query from the customer, realised they hadn't being paying,checked with benefits and found that the 'benefit claim' was non-existant : you try to help people and they throw it back in your face and then complain that we go further with legal action