We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Nightmare with Equita. Please help me

Options
2»

Comments

  • Craig - would it not be cheaper and more constructive for all concerned in the main if councils used attachment orders to claim unpaid tax directly from benefits and wages, especially if it was a reasonable amount that did not push people into further debt?
  • D_M_E
    D_M_E Posts: 3,008 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Fourth Anniversary Name Dropper
    Another old post dredged up from the depths - would be nice, though, if the OP came back with an update.
  • Craig1981
    Craig1981 Posts: 769 Forumite
    Third Anniversary
    LilyLizzie wrote: »
    Craig - would it not be cheaper and more constructive for all concerned in the main if councils used attachment orders to claim unpaid tax directly from benefits and wages, especially if it was a reasonable amount that did not push people into further debt?

    old post but anyway...

    councils will always try to attach to earnings. they will do checks to see if they can track down open information regarding employment. it is difficult for a council when charge payers are not communicating or engaging. Bailiffs are used as a last priority

    based on this original OP debt, there was no benefit in payment (would be seen in the Council tax support info). and too large to attach on benefits anyway, as this would be £3.70 a week, around £170 a year. not plausible if the actual liability is more than this every year, unless it is static debt and old debt with no ongoing charges

    if there is constant communication with the council then referrals to the bailiff are unlikely, but councils can also only do so much to help someone
  • CIS
    CIS Posts: 12,260 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Yep - attachment of benefit/earnings are far less hassle to manage than using an enforcement agent where they are feasible, most councils will try and filter cases to pick up the employed ones before looking at enforcement agents (I used to filter through a good few hundred cases a month to pick up employment details and benefit details).


    At the end of the day though the enforcement method used (with a few restrictions) is up to the council and they can choose which one to utilise. The council also have an overriding duty to collect a tax and protect the tax payers as a whole so they have to make the decision over whether or not the collection method is appropriate, it's not always an easy decision to make but it's easy to look in from the outside and criticise the 'big bad council'. Councils are far from perfect but they're not always in the wrong.
    I no longer work in Council Tax Recovery but instead work as a specialist Council Tax paralegal assisting landlords and Council Tax payers with council tax disputes and valuation tribunals. My views are my own reading of the law and you should always check with the local authority in question.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.9K Life & Family
  • 257.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.