Tweet
This subject has come up from time to time on previous threads but I think it’s worth reminding ourselves occasionally of the British legal system’s failings.
I’m referring to the ‘mafia style’ operation which Council's, LGO, Magistrate's courts, Police and private bailiff firms – who are all a party to – leave those affected by the council's systematic abuse with no legal redress.
It is commonly known that accusations of council/bailiff fraud – reported under sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Fraud Act 2006 – are dismissed as ‘CIVIL’,
i.e.
“This matter originates from an unpaid Council Tax bill which is clearly not an issue for the police.”
This view however, is contrary to that of the Fraud Act 2006 and Baroness Scotland of Asthal in the House of Lords on the 20 April 2007. (Crime: Fraud).
If Police crime units can conveniently get out of investigating issues arising from so called civil matters; where do they draw the line?
i.e.
At what point do issues originating from civil matters become serious enough to be classified as criminal?
It’s obvious that systematic fraud by our councils and their bailiffs who breach sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Fraud Act 2006 are not considered serious enough to be classed as criminal.
So, what view would the Police have in relation to an incident originating “from an unpaid Council Tax bill” which, for example, left a bailiff suffering serious injuries from an alleged debtor defending his right to refuse him entry?
Would this then become a criminal matter?
Of course this needs no answer but the example goes to demonstrate that the justice system is flawed and discriminatory and is in desperate need of reform.
P.S
There are still spaces for the petition against Bailiff Action for Parking Tickets.
I’m referring to the ‘mafia style’ operation which Council's, LGO, Magistrate's courts, Police and private bailiff firms – who are all a party to – leave those affected by the council's systematic abuse with no legal redress.
It is commonly known that accusations of council/bailiff fraud – reported under sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Fraud Act 2006 – are dismissed as ‘CIVIL’,
i.e.
“This matter originates from an unpaid Council Tax bill which is clearly not an issue for the police.”
This view however, is contrary to that of the Fraud Act 2006 and Baroness Scotland of Asthal in the House of Lords on the 20 April 2007. (Crime: Fraud).
If Police crime units can conveniently get out of investigating issues arising from so called civil matters; where do they draw the line?
i.e.
At what point do issues originating from civil matters become serious enough to be classified as criminal?
It’s obvious that systematic fraud by our councils and their bailiffs who breach sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Fraud Act 2006 are not considered serious enough to be classed as criminal.
So, what view would the Police have in relation to an incident originating “from an unpaid Council Tax bill” which, for example, left a bailiff suffering serious injuries from an alleged debtor defending his right to refuse him entry?
Would this then become a criminal matter?
Of course this needs no answer but the example goes to demonstrate that the justice system is flawed and discriminatory and is in desperate need of reform.
P.S
There are still spaces for the petition against Bailiff Action for Parking Tickets.
Comment