Rossendales and capital contribution order

[Emmo]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

I am attaching relevant extracts from the Human Rights Act 1998, Emmo. These set out your husband's basic human rights under the Rome Convention (aka European Convention on Human Rights). Because the public's confidence and trust in government agencies and departments is at an all-time low, human rights are becoming more and more important in enforcing your rights and putting the government and its commercial partners-in-crime back in their boxes.

I would be inclined to remind both LAA and Rossendales that they are subject to the Human Rights Act 1998 whatever they may think. LAA's conduct may amount to maladministration, so speak to your MP about pursuing LAA's conduct with the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

don't see how this helps with the underlying query as to whether they can recover an individuals debt from a partners assets

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

don't see how this helps with the underlying query as to whether they can recover an individuals debt from a partners assets

What you have to realise is that there are currently some very disingenuous and dishonest people at work within government agencies and departments who, quite frankly, don't give a monkey's about the rule of law. The sort of treatment you have experienced from the LAA and Rossendales Collect appears to bear out this. The LAA has asked for an Apportionment Order in order that liability for the Crown Court costs is cancelled. This needs to be actioned asap. If the LAA and Rossendales Collect refuse to answer reasonable queries put to them, I would be somewhat wary of believing anything they say. You should also get your MP onboard asap as there may also be maladministration on the part of the LAA.

The HRA is our protection against the abuses and excesses of the State and should be quoted when government agencies, contractors and departments do the sort of things they have in your case, if only to remind them that they are subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

[Emmo]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

Different case / scenario to Poppymad's. My query relates to recovery of a debt from a partners capital which is in sole name. LAA state the debt relates to the individual but do not seem to want to answer the question whether they will seek to recover from the capital included in the Capital Assessment even though it is not owned or available to the person to whom the debt relates.

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

Different case / scenario to Poppymad's. My query relates to recovery of a debt from a partners capital which is in sole name. LAA state the debt relates to the individual but do not seem to want to answer the question whether they will seek to recover from the capital included in the Capital Assessment even though it is not owned or available to the person to whom the debt relates.

The LAA is behaving like the arrogant morons that they are. A public authority (which is what the LAA is) is required to treat people it has dealings with fairly and in a timely manner. By not answering a pertinent question as to the affairs of an individual with whom they have dealings, they cannot be said to be acting fairly. Whether LAA like it or not, they have no choice but to answer any reasonable questions you may have of them.

You will need to be firm and forceful with them. You should also contact your MP as LAA's behaviour may amount to maladministration and you will need your MP's assistance to puruse the matter through to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

[poppymad]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

Thank you bluebottle. After some negotiations with my husbands solicitor the judicial apportionment apllication has now been sent to the trial judge and we are waiting for his response. Haven't heard from Rossendales for a whole week!! Awaiting outcome ...will keep you posted. Hope the other poster Emmo on here has sorted their problem.

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

Thank you bluebottle. After some negotiations with my husbands solicitor the judicial apportionment apllication has now been sent to the trial judge and we are waiting for his response. Haven't heard from Rossendales for a whole week!! Awaiting outcome ...will keep you posted. Hope the other poster Emmo on here has sorted their problem.

That is encouraging news. If the LAA has been informed the Judicial Apportionment Application has been sent to the trial judge, strictly speaking, they should put matters on hold until you hear furtherk. This extends or should extend also to Rossendales Collect.

[poppymad]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

Today I received an email from my solicitor to tell me we dont owe anything. ...the judicial apportionment application was accepted and there is no liability. My husband had pleaded guilty to the section 4 offence at the poluce station so in essence had the racial / religious section 31 not been added it could have been dealt with there and then with no need for legal aid. So relieved and thankful for all your help. Having been successful I am on a bit of a roll and seriously considering taking action regarding the CPS bringing these charges in the first place. 18 months of stress and threat of imprisonment seems so unfair when there was no evidence .

[Sir Vere Brayne d'Emmidge]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

The judge on sentencing (a £1200 fine) stated that due to the time wasting by the CPS and the extra costs incurred he was minded to order the CPS to pay the costs.

Get a transcript from the Court and use it as your evidence!

[poppymad]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

OMG!! just when I thought this was done and dusted I get a bill from Rossendales for over £300 for costs incurred! ! I rang them and they said it was payable because they incurred costs enforcing the order. I asked why this amount was not included in the original amount damanded on the contribution order and they stated that had I paid the cco I would not have been billed for the costs! !! The costs are broken down into solicitors fees, court costs bla bla bla de bla!! Said I wouldnt pay a penny and asked if a phone call from my solicitor could sort it out...they said yes we'll speak to him but I'll still owe the money. I phoned the legal aid agency means testing department who I have been corresponding by email with back and forth since the cco was sent out and after them insisting that I speak to Rossendales only they agreed to look at the case and phone me tomorrow. Embarrassingly the man at the end of the line knew the case well but had not actually been dealing with it!! I hope I dobt regret the curt emails I sent lol.

[bluebottle]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

Rossendales have a damned cheek saying what they have. It was the LAA who cocked-up and they who should pay off Rossendales. In any case, it seems pretty clear the LAA should not have been chasing this matter in the first place.

[poppymad]

Re: Rossendales and capital contribution order

Hopefully the LAA will come to that conclusion too.