Thanks and Please Help!

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

I think this is a sort of semantics thing - I spent an age trying to get copies of my LOs from my council until the penny dropped.

I believe (admit I might be wrong - I'm not legally trained) that with an LO the court "orders" that the liability exists. Even if this order is "issued" it might just be "issued" from the gobs of the magistrates rather than penned on parchment and stamped with the seal of Her Majesty.

In a civil court, an "order" is an instruction that must be obeyed, otherwise "contempt" sets in.

If there was a paper LO, what would it tell A54 to do? Nothing. All it would say would be that the court decrees that the liability exists (ie, A54 hasn't appeared in court to say that it doesn't). Also, the LO is more useless than that, because it could say that "A54 must pay this amount to that council" but instead is merely a verification that a debt exists that can now be collected, the sanctions available to the creditor (the council) coming under criminal law.

I know, it is absurd.

LA

[labman]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

It is totally absurd, as it is contrary to natural justice, and due procedure cannot be seen to have been followed.

I agree with you it's not worth overly pursuing, but it highlights a gaping flaw in the legal system, and it would be interesting to know if anyone has actually pursued this argument to the bitter end.

[outlawlgo]

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.

I believe you could once view the template forms for the liability order here: (Schedule 2 of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992. But for some reason they disappeared. I believe there are two forms, one for single applications and the other for bulk, i.e, rubber stamping procedure which I should think is the norm.

However this is what my council produced:



Notice there are no details of the debtor, probably owing to the fact there were over 2,000 liability orders obtained that afternoon.

The details would have been presented to the court in the following form:



Notice that was only 1 of 438 pages which had details of several debtors on each page.

[charitynjw]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

http://www.sarahrobsonbarrister.co.u...-Articles.html

An interesting article on setting aside LO's (about halfway down the page).

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

Thanks guys,

I agree that I'm not in the best position to challenge the legality of Liability Orders right now but with a total of 10 or 11 LO's illegally obtained against me I hope to have the opportunity later when my whole life and future (and that of my family's) is not at stake, in fact I'm beginning to feel it should be my mission, one for later.

In any case, the judge I have may have been one that granted LO's for the council in the past, I don't think it would be in his interest if he rendered them legally invalid in any way.

In my case I can prove the Liability Orders should not have been 'obtained' by the council at all, in addition to the fact the appropriate steps were not taken, there was no debt.

Case law dictates that the judge should not go against an LO, he cannot question its validity, however the key point is if he feels an injustice would be caused if he did not set aside the stat demand he has the 'discretion' to set it aside. This fact will be the decider.

I don't want to reveal too much of my strategy (yet) in case one of 'them' is reading this post but I have a number of points that I don't think the council can defend against, each would prove an injustice, if the judgement went against me I think I would have enough grounds to appeal if it was possible.

I'm also pretty sure that if I win it would open the door to civil and/or criminal proceedings against the council so the stakes are pretty high for them too. In fact if I was in their position despite their superior firepower I would be a 'bit' concerned.

Ever heard the one about the elephant and the mosquito? the mosquito won.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

http://www.sarahrobsonbarrister.co.u...-Articles.html

An interesting article on setting aside LO's (about halfway down the page).

thanks.

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

If there was a paper LO, what would it tell A54 to do? Nothing. All it would say would be that the court decrees that the liability exists (ie, A54 hasn't appeared in court to say that it doesn't). Also, the LO is more useless than that, because it could say that "A54 must pay this amount to that council" but instead is merely a verification that a debt exists that can now be collected, the sanctions available to the creditor (the council) coming under criminal law.

I know, it is absurd.

LA

If there was a paper LO that was addressed to me, stated the amount of debt and was sealed by a court, I would see it as a legal order that I could act on too.

As it stands I'm presented with a piece of paper that for all I know could be a draft order that was never granted, it doesn't mention my name or tell me how much it finds me liable for and there are about 700 other pages with defendants not associated with me on a separate page with some computer generated details.

I cannot imagine that natural justice was in mind when this process was made 'legal'.

LA, I thought matters regarding CT were under civil not criminal law?

thanks for all of this, its really helpful. really appreciated.

[charitynjw]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

Hi,

Forgot to add this

http://www.sarahrobsonbarrister.co.u...ty-Orders.html

(Btw, I have absolutely no connection with, nor have I had any dealings with the above.
Just found it, thought it might be of interest, & passed it on).

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

If there was a paper LO that was addressed to me, stated the amount of debt and was sealed by a court, I would see it as a legal order that I could act on too.

As it stands I'm presented with a piece of paper that for all I know could be a draft order that was never granted, it doesn't mention my name or tell me how much it finds me liable for and there are about 700 other pages with defendants not associated with me on a separate page with some computer generated details.

I cannot imagine that natural justice was in mind when this process was made 'legal'.

LA, I thought matters regarding CT were under civil not criminal law?

thanks for all of this, its really helpful. really appreciated.

A54

You're right to be annoyed about this - in my view it is a hopeless travesty of 'justice' and I find it wholly unedifying in a civilised society.

However, it remains a criminal matter which is why you can be jailed for non-payment (which can't happen under civil law). This is why you must not under any circumstances treat it as a civil matter because you can most definately lose your liberty.

The 'judge' is likely to be three untrained magistrates rather than a single knowldegeable judge. The magistrates are usually lay in that they probably have no legal training - they are constantly advised by the clerk, who is legally trained. In fact they are likely to be volunteer JPs, probably retired, and rewarded with expenses, kudos and the satisfaction of locking people up they don't like the look of. If you ever want to see anachronism in action, look at the workings of the magistrates.

The point of the magistrates in your case is merely to determine whether you are liable for this debt, and nothing more. It makes no order that you must now pay the council, it just orders that you owe a debt to the council. It's then up to the council to obtain the money, knowing that legally you owe it.

The LO is not a court order, it is a liability order. It doesn't tell you or anyone else what to do. It just determines that the debt is legally enforceable. The magistrates 'order' that the debt can be lawfully sought.

Hope that makes sense but I would not look at LO's as a defence but look at the appalling level of unfairness that has been pactised - maybe 'human rights' and the EU could be brought into play?

LA

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

A54 - sorry, I should have been clearer. The regs in question are;

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1.../contents/made

which is 'civil' law, but the sanctions available to magistrates for non-payment are 'criminal' in that prison is one of them.

The point is that you should treat this as a 'criminal' matter in that the magistrates can take away your freedom if they believe you won't pay rather than can't pay. There is no criminal record created if you don't pay and go to prison, which adds to the confusion, although a spell banged up won't look good on your cv...

Perhaps a better way to look at it is to view it as 'civil law' with 'criminal sanctions' that is heard in a criminal court.

HTH
LA

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

Thanks Lord Alcohol, definitely helpful.

I just about managed to meet my deadline for submitting further evidence to the court today, problem is I've just discovered more evidence that could help my case, does anyone know if the court will allow me to add to my evidence bundle or is it just too late?

thanks.

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

Hi Guys,

had my hearing today, lets say it was quite explosive...

I spent a long time researching things out and found quite a few interesting points that I 'tested' in court today that I can share in the hope that a) it can help others who are in a similar situation and b) anyone with knowledge can contribute and help (I'm still learning!).

A quick summary of where I'm at...

1. judge adjourned last hearing to allow me to present more evidence to show injustice if he did not set aside stat demand

2. i lodged my 2nd witness statement in with some more evidence including stuff I got from the council following an SAR.

3. my witness statement accused the council of perjury, I showed evidence e.g. letters from council saying i owed x amount and that debt has been reduced which was much less than the council was claiming as owed on the stat demands.

2-3 days before the hearing which was today (20th April) I discovered the council breached the council tax benefit regulations 2006 part 11 which meant that even if the debt existed (I strongly deny it does) the council could not legally recover it, and perhaps more importantly the Liability Order presented by the council was fake! and inadmissible in court!

LO's should (i use should instead of must until i get the court to accept these points) have a court seal and at the very least be verifiable by contacting the issuing magistrates court.

in my case (and I know its the same for many others in my situation) the alleged issuing court could find no trace or record of either the hearing or LO's even after I provided them with LO numbers, dates and my name.

For the record, I have a number of points that defeat (should defeat) the stat demand and in my case the council have seriously 'misbehaved'.

now I've set the scene, here's what happened in court today.

The council's obnoxious solicitors hired some big gun barristers (specialists in insolvency, set asides etc.) who presented the judge with a skeleton argument backed by case law examples, arguing that the judge had no jurisdiction to do anything other than dismiss my application and allow them to proceed with a bankruptcy hearing.

When we got in and sat in front of the judge, he immediately started by saying he was thinking of adjourning the case again or dismissing my application because it may be the wrong court and judge to deal with arguments presented because he could not go behind the order issued by another court, e.g. he could not go into issues regarding the legitimacy of the debt.

I strongly disagreed, i wanted the matter dealt with there and then and told the judge there had been some important developments regarding the technical aspects of the LO's and I was prepared if necessary to argue my case without touching the 'assumption' I owed the debt because of the existence of the LO's and that I had an argument based on technicalities.

the judge agreed to hear me out.

I told him that the LO's were invalid, they had no seal, no identifiable mark of a justice of the peace or magistrate, were not addressed to me, did not have my address on them, did not specify the debt and could not be verified or confirmed by the issuing magistrates court who told me as far as they're concerned the orders do not exist.

The judge freaked!!!

he said I ambushed the council by not making this known to them previously, introducing no evidence and that he had no option but to adjourn again, he was furious but I argued back.

I told him that the council introduced the LO to court not me, that I had a right to question the validity of the purported order that was the basis of their insolvency action, the same document that can ruin me financially, cause the loss of my home and lead to my committal.

I told him i had a fundamental right to challenge the purported order at any time in the hearing and the council should have come prepared with the relevant paperwork and be able to prove the order actually exists by producing copies.

eventually he settled down and asked me to produce evidence to support my 'allegation'. I showed him an email from the issuing magistrates court that said i had to contact the council to 'verify if the orders exist'.

I also pointed out that I had with me a complete bundle of all my council records provided to me by the council under an SAR and that there was no mention of any LO apart from 2 or 3 references that they were going to withdraw summons they hastily issued years ago.

I told him that if there was any record of the LO's that actually exist it would mean the council had breached the data protection act by not providing them.

The council's barrister simply said she had no instructions on this and that if the judge was thinking i had valid points she would insist on him adjourning the case but she was happy to continue if he felt my 'allegations' had no grounds.

I then freaked! so its ok to continue if the judge was to dismiss my claims the LO's were fake but not OK if he felt I was right?

one of the arguments I used was the LO's did not fit the description as per the case Smolen v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council * "Once they bear the seal they are admissible without further proof, (see CPR 2.6(3)). Records of hearings in Magistrates' Court are provable by certified copies, reg 68 of the Magistrates' Courts Rules, 1981."

I did not provide the court with copies of the full above case records (I should have done) and the judge was not willing to accept this point on the snippet I provided.

I argued again that he had discretionary powers to act if he saw that judicial process had not been followed and were causing an injustice.

the judge then did a uturn on what he said earlier, he said he wasn't interested in technicalities and that he was only there to determine if the debt existed.

I now had the opportunity to test 2 other points:

1. did not owe the debt which was in the council's own words an 'overpayment in ctb' because it was caused by their own errors and I had no part in those errors.

I quoted the case:

* Coventry City Council v Vassell held at The QBD

Date: 17 June 2011

And MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM’s ruling that official errors are non recoverable by authorities (paraphrasing)

again i did not provide copies of the full case (my mistake again) but I backed that up by quoting:

The Council Tax Benefit Regulations 2006 part 11 regulation 82:
Recoverable excess benefit


this time i provided copies of the rule which basically confirm that if an 'official' error resulting in overpayment of benefits was made without any involvement of the victim, the overpayments were not recoverable.

the judge freaked again! he said he was not in a position to determine if i was entitled to benefits or if an official mistake was made.

I argued back that if the overpayment was caused by me I would not be in court defending against bankruptcy, i would be there accused of benefit fraud!

again he refused to accept my argument, at this point I decided there was no point in continuing with the hearing because the judge was not giving weight to my case largely because I was an LIP.

I told him that he may as well adjourn because he was not accepting valid arguments backed by case law, he freaked even more! said he was going to make a decision because we had been there over 2 hours (1 hour was originally booked), i saw judgement going against me so i freaked, he then decided the fairest thing was to adjourn to allow me another opportunity to present evidence in the 'accepted way' to give the council the fair opportunity to respond to my allegations.

the judge also blamed me for having to adjourn and awarded the council's costs for the hearing against me (£600), I freaked!

said that the council should have been prepared to validate the evidence they presented (the LO's) and it was unfair to make me pay, he disagreed but suspended the payment until judgement was made.

the council's barrister tried to limit my presentations at the next hearing to just querying the technicalities of the lo, i objected and judge said it wouldn't be fair. barrister than asked the judge to stop me from producing further evidence because I had already produced over 100 pages in bundles, again i objected and eventually the judge agreed I could provide further evidence as long I provided a skeleton argument along with supporting case law docs.

I only got up to stating about a third of my case, I still have ammunition I haven't used yet but wasn't willing to present further because it was obvious the words of a trained barrister meant more to the judge than the words of a lay person.

I invite your comments before going into details of the points i mention so far but I feel I got the power now to nail the council for once and for all, however I'm beginning to think i've taken it as far as I can as a lip and will try and enlist the help of a specialist barrister...

Also want to say thanks especially to Bluebottle, Labman, Lord Alcohol, Charitynjw and the others who's help put me on the right tracks and gave weight to my arguments used in court - THANK YOU GUYS!

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

I totally agree with Labman that it would be foolish to hinge your whole case on the possibility that an LO may be fake or invalid, in my case I've got multiple points in defense each of which could/should prove my case (basically because I'm innocent!).

however just to be clear and in case any of my findings so far could be of any use to anyone in a similar situation...

A Liability Order is one of the most powerful orders that could be laid at a non criminal (as in law abiding citizen), they can ruin you financially, lead to the loss of your home or even see you committed, they should not be dished out lightly and if you truly do not owe the alleged debt - LO's should always be challenged.

From what I've seen so far, the law of the land says that you are entitled to know who has judged you, anonymous judgements are illegal.

Some court orders do not need a court seal although I feel they should always have one because of the extreme power they carry. If an LO bears the court's seal it cannot be questioned and is always admissible in court (and enforceable!).

All court orders must be verifiable by the issuing court.

A photocopy of an order is not admissible in court nor should it be acceptable by you in the same way you cannot spend a photocopy of a £5 note, a photocopy LO can not be acted on.

In months of research I have only come across one case where the validity of an LO was challenged in court, in that the case the LO bore a court seal and was verifiable by the issuing court so was deemed valid. The LO description does not match the LO presented in my case.

(Smolen v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council on 5 APRIL 2006)

In my case (as stated before), it does not bear my name or address, it does not specify the debt, it does not have a court seal, although signed its illegible and does not bear the JP's printed name and it does not have a valid HMCS case number.

You could have heard the judge scream (literally) when I challenged the LO's on the above points in court, he acknowledged that I may have some 'valid' points but was reluctant to rule in my favour without hearing from the LA (their barrister simply said she hadn't been instructed on those points).

If (and its a big if) I succeed in having my stat demand set aside on the grounds the LO is invalid, it could devastate the LA (not my intention even though they deserve it).

for reference: the case law and legislation I presented to the judge to support my claims are:

court documents to be sealed
http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part02#IDAHN0HC

Court documents to be sealed – CPR r.2.6
http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part02#IDAHN0HC

County Court Rules 1981 and the Rules of the Supreme Court 1965). RSC Order 42 r.1(3) provides “Any order…..must be marked with the name of the Judge, referee or Master by whom it was made and must be sealed."
(Source: http://justiceforfamilies.freeforums.org/court-orders-without-seal-are-invalid-t3763.html)

Like I said my case does not rest on just one point, I have prime examples of what 'may' be maladministration, perjury and misfeasance. I do not recommend a defense in court solely based on the validity of an LO unless advised by a specialist solicitor or barrister (and I mean specialist).

I hope this may be of use to other victims. If anyone can add anything to my list of LO verification points, it would be greatly appreciated.

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

Hi Guys,

time for an update and a plea for some ideas on how to tackle a pretty tricky situation.

Since my last post I have had 2 or 3 hearings. rather post a detailed 5 pager here's some bullets...

1. after nearly 3 months of visiting, phoning, writing and emailing the magistrates' court where it was alleged the liability orders against me were issued I finally got a written letter from the court office team leader stating that there are no court records regarding the orders or entry in the court register because at the time liability orders were not recorded!

2. after nearly 3 months since writing to the court asking for the LO's to be set aside, I got a letter from the court on the Thursday before the Jubilee bank holiday telling me a hearing to set aside the lo's had been listed the following Friday- in a neighbouring court that had no admin office!

seeing that all solicitors (and courts) were shut until Wednesday I couldn't get legal advice or representation in time for the hearing.

3. the day before the set aside hearing i wrote in to court saying the notice was too short and questioned why they listed the hearing when they themselves repeatedly confirmed to me the 'orders' do not exist.

4. i attend set aside hearing with a letter to judge explaining the application was made nearly 3 months ago and that since then court has confirmed there are no records of such orders and that due to short notice i could get no legal advice so wanted an adjournment but not before court addressed the issue that the orders do not exist, therefore the hearing might not be necessary...

5. after 8 hours of waiting the case was 'heard', prior to the magistrates entering the court, I told the clerk that i wanted to the court to decide if the case should go ahead after looking at the letter from the court saying there are no records of orders. I also provided the law that said all orders needed to be recorded etc. plus a gem of a press release find here on Legal B's by Ministry of justice on LO's: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...+press+release

6. despite objections from council's barrister, court clerk agrees there's a case to be heard so leaves courtroom to fetch magistrates.

7. 20 minutes later clerk returns with magistrates. immediately states case to set aside but no mention on legality of 'orders'. I raise the question and remind clerk of my request for court to deal with issue, clerk replies this case is not to question legality of orders, just to set them aside! talk about u turn!

8. i argue it out but case was adjourned with directions to file witness statements etc. including i got to provide court with the law that says magistrates court can question legality of orders, then it may if it chooses to, look into it!

so now i got 3 court cases to deal with, all of the judges now seem biased and the courts 'appear' to have joined rank with the council. unbelievable but true.

i have now hired a barrister who advises winning the cases is just half the battle, the council will go for costs either way which it alone can force me into bankruptcy.

9. so at hearing to annul wife's bankruptcy (just 4 days after set aside hearing), the judge, who incidentally was the same judge who made wife bankrupt after being told i filed an application to set aside stat demand (he felt she was not a party to it even though we are jointly liable for the debt so made her bankrupt), was not given wife's witness statement filed 4-5 days or so earlier, yet he had read the council's witness statement which was filed the day before the hearing. judge decides to adjourn hearing after giving directions.

the issue of the legality of the orders was briefly mentioned, the judge said that disclosing a press release by MOJ was not useful to the court who were not equipped to deal with the forensics involved in checking the legality of the orders.

Even more shocking is that the council's barrister claimed they now had certified copies of the orders!

[rimce44]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

I wouldn't bother about this too much.

[A54]

Re: Thanks and Please Help!

thanks rimce44.

A local authority falsifying evidence, lying in court, using 10's of thousands of pounds in legal fees on 'top' barristers, to victimise an innocent.

their latest crime? the court had no records of an order used against me in bankruptcy proceedings, in legal terms it is not a valid order so what does the LA do? they take a document to the court and get it sealed, then claim the order is valid. that's a prison-able offense, carried out in broad daylight with no fear of retribution. The LA is all powerful.

i sincerely hope this never happens to you.