Thanks and Please Help!

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

thanks Labman,

my case is in Romford county court.

I don't think the The Bar Pro Bono Unit: Free Legal Advice and Representation can help as you need to be referred by a solicitor or CAB and they need 3 clear weeks before your deadline to help.

I'm just going to have to do the best I can while keeping an eye out for a good solicitor but time is running out, I need to prepare my evidence and statement this weekend to be ready to be served by midweek.

[labman]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

I've been trying to find an excellent Sticky written by Springer Spaniel, but I can't. It gives a step by step guide to preparing documents for court which is just what you need.

If anyone else can find it, please post a link for A54.:tinysmile_grin_t:

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

I've been trying to find an excellent Sticky written by Springer Spaniel, but I can't. It gives a step by step guide to preparing documents for court which is just what you need.

If anyone else can find it, please post a link for A54.:tinysmile_grin_t:

This is all I could find...

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...ad.php?t=14181

Maybe a bit too high level for this case but useful anyway I think.

LA

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

Thank you Guys.

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

does anyone know if a bankruptcy clerk to the court can phone your bank and ask them to freeze your account?

I didn't think they had that type of authority, I thought the official receiver can but in my wife's case he said they wouldn't yet that's exactly what the court clerk did...

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

has anyone ever seen a liability order?

do they need to bear the defendants name? do they need to have the court's seal?

thanks in advance for your comments.

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

has anyone ever seen a liability order?

do they need to bear the defendants name? do they need to have the court's seal?

thanks in advance for your comments.

Well, normally the council gets a 'batch' of liability orders rubberstamped at the same bulk hearing, which is why it annoys them when someone attends the magistrates court and defends - it messes their lists up. When this happens someone from the council will take you to one side and try and strike up an arrangement.

I believe that technically these courts are not 'real' courts, but 'commercial courts' that merely pay lip service to normal court procedures. There was a lot about this a couple of years ago - the 'freeman' movement - and you can see an example here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNhsRjsw4Yc

but whether this is actually 'legal' or not I don't know, but very funny nevertheless.

Anyway, I doubt that a court seal is required, or that a paper 'order' actually exists - probably just a tick next to a name on list.

HTH
LA

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

Thanks Lord Alcohol.

A liability order has been produced as evidence against me yet it doesn't bear my name or address or state the sums owed or have the courts seal so how can it hold any legal force?

I thought all court orders needed to correctly name the defendant or offender (& often victim!) and bear the courts seal...

[labman]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

I make no pretence at knowing what I'm doing when it comes to court things, but that sounds seriously dodgy to me.:tinysmile_hmm_t2:

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

Yes it's totally slapdash.

My understanding is that, as long as a court had found someone liable for a council tax debt, and the person who owes the money has not said he doesn't, then an order can be made. I think the idea is that the physical item is irrelevant - it's the fact that a court 'made' an order that's important, even if printed on bog paper or even not at all.

This is why councils can't send copies of these orders - they don't really exist in physical form - but whether they should I don't know.

Btw, the order is important for the council because, without it, they cannot revert to bailiffs to collect. It's the mechanism they use to 'legally' get their money. Bear in mind that it is a criminal offence not to pay CT so the steps are different to civil action (like a credit card debt) which takes a different route entirely.

LA

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

thanks Lord Alcohol.

I'm still researching but think that under common law a debtor is entitled to see any court order obtained against him and if its not addressed to the debtor and doesn't have a court seal, why should a debtor take it seriously?

just doesn't sound like justice...

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

I completely agree A54.

The fact is that if you defend yourself by disputing the validity of liability orders you may, unless you can pull a freeman stunt, end up in chokey. A court may just say that it made an order and that is sufficient to enforce the debt.

Don't forget we are dealing with criminal law here, not civil, and things are different.

Anyway, I agree with you. The whole system is Dickensian.

If your councillor was no help have you tried your MP? Or maybe ask for another meeting with your councillor but with a friend or family member who can minute what the councillor says? If he's not prepared to help in a case that is clearly wrong then you could get your local paper involved - be good timing if your local elections are coming up - no councillor is going to want bad publicity.

I also think you seriously need to find a good solicitor because with CT, as you know, your liberty is at stake.

HTH
LA

[labman]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

I think this is a reliable source. Note point one!



Taken from: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/idgmanual/idg45150.htm

• Any order issued by a court should be clearly marked as such. Orders should be stamped with the court’s official seal and signed by the presiding judge.
• If you are uncertain about whether a particular document constitutes a signed and sealed order, you should clarify the matter by telephoning the court. Contact details for the court will normally be given on the order.
• An order may be made against the Inland Revenue, Customs and Excise, Child Benefit Office or other part of HMRC. HMRC will accept these orders, but may limit disclosure to the part of the organisation referred to in the text of the order.
• You must see the actual order. A draft order will not have been signed or stamped and will not provide you with lawful authority to disclose information. If you are provided with a copy of an order you must ask that the original is posted without delay.
• An order issued by a superior court (High Court) is sufficient to enable HMRC to lawfully disclose the requested information.
• If you receive an order from a Crown Court, County Court, Magistrate’s Court, Coroner’s Court or an Employment Tribunal, and there is no other lawful means for disclosure, you should seek further guidance from Information Strategy (IDG90100).

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

You need to be a bit careful here A54, despite labman's useful post (useful for me anyway - cheers labman!!). A normal 'court order' is a different kettle of fish to a 'liability order'. The former causes (or should cause) something to happen; the latter is merely a 'proof' that a liability is genuine and is nothing more than that.

A liability order doesn't actually 'order' anything. A court order does.

I honestly don't think there's any mileage in looking at the LO itself unless there is a mistake (like the wrong amount), but the court will always say that you should have said so at the time but didn't.

I don't like this either, but we're stuck with it for now.

LA

[labman]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

The idea is that you admit liability, or the council proves your liability. The court then confirms that your liabilty by issuing - note the wording, it's important, issuing a Liability Order.

It is therefore an order issued by the court. There should therefore be a proper copy of it, complete with the court seal, which can be viewed.

I suspect these don't exist, but that is very different to saying they should not exist.

If the council were to pursue this to the hilt, logic would dictate that ultimately they would apply through the court for the ultimate penalty, imprisonment.

Under the rules of disclosure, they could therefore be asked to disclose the Liabilty Order. Woulld they not have problems doing this if it does not exist, and they have claimed it does?

A54, I am not necessarily recommending this course of action, but logically it does make sense - to me anyway.