My name is registered with wrong surname. Newlyn Enforcement

lincroft1710

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81995816#Comment_81995816

Not true. If there is a non student in a property where students reside, then the non student is responsible for the CT and if the only non student, would be entitled to 25% discount

jefstudent

Thanks for everyone's reply. The issue is i have already rang the council and newlyn and explained everything but seems like they are not doing anything about it.

If anyone has any experience with these enforcement agents. Would they listen to me and is this going to make any difference if i explain it to the agents that this is liability issue as the named person is not myself.

lincroft1710

If you reiterate you are not the liable person and refuse to pay, they will likely do one of 2 things. Either keep pestering you, but eventually give up or take you to court. If they take you to court it is for them to prove you are the liable person, not for you to prove you aren't.

Jude57

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81997086#Comment_81997086

Not quite, I'm afraid. If Newlyn are collecting, the matter has already been to Court to obtain the Liability Order that gives the Council the right to employ bailiffs to collect. And in the Magistrates Courts, when dealing with Council Tax, it's an absolute liability offence. Liable/not liable. In practice, Magistrates don't get involved in that decision, the legislation is quite clear that liability is a matter for the Council. What that usually means if someone attends and disputes liability, is that the Magistrates postpone the hearing so that the Council can investigate and either withdraw their application for the Liability Order or proceed with it after confirming that the individual is in fact the Liable Party. I suspect that the Summons for the Liability Order was sent to whatever address the Council had for the Liable Party and so the OP of course wouldn't have received it. The Council or more likely Newlyn would have tried to trace the Liable Party and have unfortunately located the OP who has a similar name. Frankly, Newlyn don't care who pays, as long as they get the money.

To OP, given that you're not getting any joy from either the Council or Newlyn, you should, without delay, contact the Councillor who represents the Ward where the relevant property is located. It's likely that the recent local elections may have changed who is now the Councillor for that Ward, so make sure you have the right person. Contact them by phone or, preferably, by email and copy it to the Director of Finance or whatever title the head of finance for the Council has. Set out clearly that you have never lived at the address concerned, that at the time concerned you were a full time student and give the address(es) where you DID live, along with dates. Technically, you should have registered at those addresses and claimed the Student Exemption because that would be irrefutable proof but hopefully the Council Tax officer will see that you're not the person who is responsible for this debt. Further, though Council Tax is not like a County Court Judgement (CCJ) in that it's not automatically reported to the Credit Reference Agencies, some Councils and bailliffs DO report it, so keep a close eye on your credit file so that you can make sure you know if it happens with this debt. I'd recommend if you haven't already, signing up for the free MSE Credit Club.

Edited to add, here's the contact information for the Council's Executive:

https://www.manchester.gov.uk/the-council-and-democracy/councillors-and-decision-making/ask-a-member-of-the-executive-a-question

Please note the the Local Government Ombudsman won't even look at your complaint until you have been through the Council's own complaints process, basically so that the Council has the chance to correct any errors so don't waste your time involving the LGO just yet.

lincroft1710

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81997368#Comment_81997368

This appears to be a case of mistaken identity rather than liability. Surely Newlyn (or any other bailiff) cannot just pursue anyone who has a similar name to the liable person

Jude57

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81997485#Comment_81997485

Yes, Newlyn do seem to have 'found' the wrong person. Unfortunately, until the OP (or anyone similarly affected) can prove to the Council's satisfaction that they are NOT the person being pursued, yes, they can continue. I'm sure you'll understand that claiming 'it's not me' is frequently used by people trying to avoid debts of all kinds and Councils tend to be sceptical until they can be sure it's really NOT you they're seeking. As the bailiffs act on the Council's instruction, only the Council can call them off, so they'll keep going until instructed to stop. As the OP's efforts so far haven't worked, let's hope that involving the local Councillor will have some effect, even if it's only to put everything on hold to give OP a chance to get together whatever proof they can that they've always lived in the Midlands and have no connection to the Manchester address. Otherwise, the Council will keep chasing the debt and that could have serious long term consequences for the OP.

lincroft1710

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81997751#Comment_81997751

I agree and fully understand about "its not me, guv"

I don't know if it is still the case, but back in the 20th Century, you could swear an oath in front of a Commissioner (usually a well established local solicitor) and I wonder if this is still possible, i.e. the OP swears an oath in front of the Commissioner that they are not the party liable for the debt and copies of the oath are sent to Newlyn and the council.

However even if possible it is likely this action could cost more than the debt

Jude57

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81998421#Comment_81998421

As far as I know, yes, it's still possible to have a Commissioner for Oaths do that but, like you, I suspect it would be costly, the Commissioner probably having to follow similar procedures to those in Anti Money Laundering regulations. One would have to provide some evidence of identity and the OP could save money by providing that direct to the Council.

I'm suggesting involving the local Councillor to act as an intermediary between the OP and the Council so that it's handled at a local level without the OP needing to incur more costs. And I'd hope that if a newly elected Councillor is in place, they'll be keen to get in to the Council Tax team and throw their weight around. They were the bane of my life when I worked in Council Tax recovery and even long-standing Councillors were usually woefully ill-informed but their interest in a case meant extra careful dotting of 'i's' and crossing of 't's'. Council officers aren't infallible and unfortunately these days the public are likely to speak to call centre staff who triage calls to a scripted standard with no idea how services operate, much less the ability to problem solve a more urgent, complex situation. I'm hoping the Councillor helps in this case to get the attention of someone with the authority to recall the debt from Newlyn and assure the OP that no further action will be taken against them. If that doesn't help, it's time for a formal written complaint, following the procedure on the Council's website.

lincroft1710

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81998440#Comment_81998440

When I was in the VOA I took great pleasure in putting councillors well and truly in their place as they were completely out of their depth when dealing with CT banding rather than CT liability/charging, but thought they knew it all. One in particular tried to make a name for himself by attempting to get a band reduction for a number of his constituents. Unfortunately for him the problem he thought would lead to a band reduction, existed before the houses were built, let alone bought by his constituents, so the house prices would already reflect this.

I often wonder how he explained away his failure to achieve the anticipated band reductions.

Jude57

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81998569#Comment_81998569

Ah yes, the Councillor drunk on what they THINK is their unassailable right to get things done their way and damn legislation or regulation. Like you, I used to take enormous pleasure in explaining the legal ramifications of doing what they wanted and their potential personal liability. I once got a Councillor physically banned from setting foot on my Department's floor for the remainder of his tenure. I was talking on the phone to a member of the public and this Councillor, having had me pointed out to him, stormed over to my desk and pushed down the buttons on my phone, cutting the conversation off. I politely asked him not to do that again and picked up the handset to call the person back. I'd just apologised to the member of the public when the Councillor cut the call off again. This time I simply got up, walked to the Director's office, was buzzed in by his PA and explained what had happened, asking the Director how he wanted me to deal with it. He told me to leave it to him and, knowing how terrifying he could be (though never to his staff) I'd love to have been a fly on the wall during the 'conversation' between the Director and the Councillor. I imagine it was a bit like Sir Alex Ferguson's legendary 'hairdryer' treatment.

To be fair, most Councillors were fine to deal with and treated us as the experts, happy to have us explain the issues and limitations of what could be done. Although a colleague became a legend when an angry Councillor shouted at him that he was nothing more than a "jumped up shiny ar**d clerk". My colleague stood up and with a voice trained by decades of speaking in Court, replied calmly "that's a jumped up shiny ar**d Principal Officer to you, Councillor Bloggs".

Apologies for the threat drift.