Council Tax - Court Summons

CIS

Ok I think im going a bit nuts here as the summons I have has not been issued by the magistrate it seems to have been issued by the authority

The summonses are authorised by the court and the copies are then printed and posted by the council. This is quite legal.

CIS

there is also a lack of evidence , would anyone know whats happening here ?????

Lack of evidence ?

furryferretfeet

are the councils having to chase so many people up about non/late payments, that they have forgotten the courtesy of a quick 'phonecall to the few that offend, asking if there are any issues they can resolve before plunging people even further into debt by adding costs of up to 100...??
are the magistrates' summons computer-generated.
there truly is no evidence of any correspondence between the courts and the council, or any pre-warning notices to residents of the town/city/borough...
any thoughts?

00ec25

furryferretfeet wrote: »

are the councils having to chase so many people up about non/late payments, that they have forgotten the courtesy of a quick 'phonecall to the few that offend, asking if there are any issues they can resolve before plunging people even further into debt by adding costs of up to 100...??
are the magistrates' summons computer-generated.
there truly is no evidence of any correspondence between the courts and the council, or any pre-warning notices to residents of the town/city/borough...
any thoughts?

if you read any of the very many times CIS has answered this question already
- pre warning notices are not required. you as the council tax payer received an invoice and a reminder, you are not entitled to anything else after that

fail to pay and they can go straight to court as you had your chance to pay with the reminder. The council do not have to prove the reminder was received by you only that it was sent by them so claiming you never got it is a waste of your time

the rules are there to ensure people pay on time - there is a reason why debt councillors regard CT as a priority debt that must be paid well before paying off others

nero12

CIS wrote: »

Lack of evidence ?

yes lack of evidence, IMV this falls into the realms of civil procedures as there is a threat of bailiff and other action , therefore they must enclose what evidence they intend to use in court -having checked my records I've been late twice however I've always paid before the end of each calendar month , I'm assuming that they have jumped the gun in issuing the final warning --I therefore require this evidence and don't want to issue and DPA SAR as it will take me past the date of the hearing.
I've emailed nicely however I haven't heard anything back as yet.

The summonses are authorised by the court and the copies are then printed and posted by the council. This is quite legal. ]

CIS I have an issue with this as the paperwork has a photocopied signature so how do I know this isn't a smoke screen, further there isn't an address or a contact number for me to change the date of the hearing while I gather evidence from an authority who may well dither about...Like I said this isn't black and white , I smell a bit of a rat ,and im entitled under British law to see their evidence even if they claim ive already been sent warnings.


BTW thank you for your replies , I realy appreciate all your help

CIS

that they have forgotten the courtesy of a quick 'phonecall to the few that offend,

The few ?. A large council will send out 2000+ reminders each month - are you suggesting they try and call each one ?

CIS

further there isn't an address or a contact number for me to change the date of the hearing while I gather evidence from an authority who may well dither about.

The only way t do this would be to ask either council or the court to adjourn the case.

having checked my records I've been late twice however I've always paid before the end of each calendar month

And that's where you've fallen down - payment is due on the date that it's required. Paying at the end of the month is the same as paying one day late, the payment is still late.

therefore they must enclose what evidence they intend to use in court

The legislation with regards to council summons via the magistrates court does not require them to send any evidence with the summons.

CIS

I have an issue with this as the paperwork has a photocopied signature so how do I know this isn't a smoke screen,

A facsimile signature is a valid signature from the court - prior to the summons being issued the court have signed paperwork for the council to say they can be issued.

The use of facsimile signatures has been tested previously in court and found to be valid - R v Gateshead Justices ex parte Tesco Stores 1981

this falls into the realms of civil procedures as there is a threat of bailiff and other action

The requirements for applying for the liability order are set in the council tax (administration and enforcements) regs 1992 - this is all the council need to follow to issue a valid summons.

nero12

Sorry to sound daft but
the council tax (administration and enforcements) regs 1992 is what triggers further enforcement
however would the section 23.7 paragraph (2) apply

It states they ''must'' supply evidence with the application

and is where any clerical errors ,if any would be found
Service of a copy of an application notice

23.7


(1) A copy of the application notice –
(a) must be served as soon as practicable after it is filed; and

(b) except where another time limit is specified in these Rules or a practice direction, must in any event be served at least 3 days before the court is to deal with the application.



(2) If a copy of the application notice is to be served by the court, the applicant must, when he files the application notice, file a copy of any written evidence in support.


(3) When a copy of an application notice is served it must be accompanied by –
(a) a copy of any written evidence in support; and

(b) a copy of any draft order which the applicant has attached to his application.

And that's where you've fallen down -

respectfully CIS I have to say
No its not, this is exactly why I need the evidence and IMV where they have failed to properly notify. Further like I said in previous posts I sent out a DD mandate in a pre paid envelope with the correct address on it. This satisfied the requirements of the interpretation act and where there is an assumption in law that says they received it regardless of what they claim. I have not failed to pay at any required date as one was never set until I sent the DD mandate. I know this as I've always had a bill day and always paid manually. I've still got over 10 years worth of CT bills to hand and their all the same and all paid around the same time without any of this aggro. I'm therefore not a non payer or a late payer apart from2 which is why the DD mandate was sent.

CIS

Further like I said in previous posts I sent out a DD mandate in a pre paid envelope with the correct address on it. This satisfied the requirements of the interpretation act.

The interpretation act only applies to the service of documents - not sending a DD mandate to the council. Pay is due as shown on the original demand notice until your notified otherwise - did you continue to make payment as per the original demand notice ?

. I know this as I've always had a bill day and always paid manually.

A summons would not just be sent for the fun of it - for one reason or another the council haven't received payment when due. You need a list from the council of when payment was due to compare against the due date - this then needs to be checked against the date that reminders etc were posted.

. I've still got over 10 years worth of CT bills to hand and their all the same and all paid around the same time without any of this aggro

You can't work on the basis that in previous years the council have been less strict with payment dates.