I need advice re Rundles

[normality]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

I am sure that they will agree with the EA and say it was 4 days before I paid. As the ultimate test of English law is reasonableness is it reasonable to. Charge 75 to someone who is unaware of the charge when you have posted one letter. I would have thought 15 would be a fair price for postage

[bluebottle]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

I have a feeling it will be down to Regulation 45(3), Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992. This makes it quite clear if after a Liability Order has been obtained the liable person pays the arrears owing in full, the levy shall not be proceeded with. It sounds to me that Rundles might be trying to pull the wool over the OP's eyes. However, the OP still needs to find out when the local authority told Rundles the OP had paid in full.

[normality]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

I don't think the council did. I think the EA asked them because I had informed them the liability order was paid. So which law is the most important here the taking control of goods act 2014 which on the face of it has me paying 75 for receiving a letter or the council tax administration and. Enforcement regulations 1992 which say that a levy can't be proceeded with. Can Rundles proceed to attempt a levy now in either case just to get their compliance fees?

[bluebottle]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

You need to ask the council -

1. On what date they passed the Liability Order to Rundles;
2. On what date they received the payment from you;
3. On what date they informed Rundles of the payment.

Don't assume things have or have not been done. If in doubt, check it out.

Basically, the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 applies to local authorities and Regulation 45(3) clearly states that if after obtaining a Liability Order, a Liable Person pays all arrears in full, the local authority must accept the payment and not proceed with a levy, i.e. sending in bailiffs.

What you have to understand about bailiffs is that they lie. If the council accepted your payment, they were under a duty to inform Rundles and stop them taking any action. If they failed to do so, they have acted unlawfully. If Rundles have been told "No action", but are carrying on regardless, they are potentially acting unlawfully and I would say are not entitled to demand any fees from you. They should seek these from the local authority.

[ploddertom]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

One other thing of note is to remember that although you may have paid on X date it will not have cleared to the Council on Y date, there could be up to 5 days difference between the dates.

[Guest]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

I would get a complaint into the CEO of the council immediately. I would copy Rundles in on the letter.

Breifly outline the poor manner in which the case was handled by the council originally and then go on to advise that you've seen an undated letter from Rundles, after you've paid the debt. You can include the 3 questions listed in post #19. Ask for recovery action to be suspended whilst this matter is being investigated.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to Regulation 45. It is connected with "distress" which is now obsolete. 45(3) talks about a "levy" which is also now obsolete. You can use it as a guideline or as a comparison but it no longer carries any weight as a matter of law.

[bluebottle]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

I would get a complaint into the CEO of the council immediately. I would copy Rundles in on the letter.

Breifly outline the poor manner in which the case was handled by the council originally and then go on to advise that you've seen an undated letter from Rundles, after you've paid the debt. You can include the 3 questions listed in post #19. Ask for recovery action to be suspended whilst this matter is being investigated.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to Regulation 45. It is connected with "distress" which is now obsolete. 45(3) talks about a "levy" which is also now obsolete. You can use it as a guideline or as a comparison but it no longer carries any weight as a matter of law.

Regulation 45(3) is in place as a safeguard against abuse by local authorities and civil enforcement companies. The references to distress and levy are, now, academic. However, it still does not change the fact that if a local authority sends in bailiffs after a Liable Person has paid or bailiffs, having being told "No action", carry on regardless, Regulation 45(3) can be used as evidence that neither a local authority or civil enforcement company has lawful authority to act in such a way. The Regulations, themselves, do not create a criminal offence or a civil tort. It is the case that by the act of a local authority and/or civil enforcement company in not complying with the statutory provision that a civil tort or criminal offence is committed, though, torts and offences will be under other legislation, not the Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) Regulations 1992.

[Guest]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

There are provisions within the new regulations that deal specifically with the taking control of goods and paying the creditor directly. These will take precedence over the old council tax regulations that refer to distress. I'm not sure why you think the old regs can "be used in evidence" when new regulations cover the issue. I think you need to digest the full impact that the April 6th changes have had.

In any case, Rundles received the account 4 days before payment was made by the debtor so they are entitled to charge the compliance fee.

[normality]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

I the OP accept what you say makes logical sense and had reached that conclusion myself but is it reasonable (being that reasonableness is the test of all laws) to charge £75 to post me a letter? and if i had incurred the fee why after the EA had received the file did the councils website not charge me the new charge as well as the liability order? my problem is i dont have £75 and i can ill afford £235 on top if the bailliffs attend and invoke the enforcement fee. I am not sure they can do this the new legislation does say in section" 4 (3) The enforcement agent may recover under this regulation the whole fee provided in the Schedule for a stage where the amount outstanding is paid after the commencement, but before the completion, of that stage. " as i paid in the compliance stage despite not knowing about it at the time I read that to mean I only owe the compliance stage fee as a maximum. Can Rundles now escalate the matter to the enforcement stage just to collect their fees?

[Guest]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

Put the complaint in as per my post #21. You will note that I mentioned asking for recovery action to be suspended whilst the complaint is investigated.

With regards to their entitlement to enforce just for their fees, I wouldn't like to advise. As these new regulations are only a month old, there have been no test cases or precedents. My own feeling is that they cannot enforce just for their fees but this is based on my opinion, formed from reading the regulations as you have.

Getting "charged" the fee on a bit of paper & actually paying are two separate things in any case.

[ploddertom]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

I the OP accept what you say makes logical sense and had reached that conclusion myself but is it reasonable (being that reasonableness is the test of all laws) to charge £75 to post me a letter? and if i had incurred the fee why after the EA had received the file did the councils website not charge me the new charge as well as the liability order? my problem is i dont have £75 and i can ill afford £235 on top if the bailliffs attend and invoke the enforcement fee. I am not sure they can do this the new legislation does say in section" 4 (3) The enforcement agent may recover under this regulation the whole fee provided in the Schedule for a stage where the amount outstanding is paid after the commencement, but before the completion, of that stage. " as i paid in the compliance stage despite not knowing about it at the time I read that to mean I only owe the compliance stage fee as a maximum. Can Rundles now escalate the matter to the enforcement stage just to collect their fees?

Most who know me know I'm not a great lover of Enforcement Co's due to the lies & deceit that are usually produced by them but in this instance they could be right. using a broken down washing machine as an example you would likely pay a £75 call out fee whetehre he finds fault with it or not, the same applies to the Compliance Fee. If you decide you want to argue this then you do run the risk of incurring the Enforcement Fee. I and others have suggested you contact the Council to see when they passed it over for enforcement - have you done this yet? In order to get out of this the £75 should be paid and if it is later found that it was not due then it can be reclaimed.

[bluebottle]

Re: I need advice re Rundles

Most who know me know I'm not a great lover of Enforcement Co's due to the lies & deceit that are usually produced by them but in this instance they could be right. using a broken down washing machine as an example you would likely pay a £75 call out fee whetehre he finds fault with it or not, the same applies to the Compliance Fee. If you decide you want to argue this then you do run the risk of incurring the Enforcement Fee. I and others have suggested you contact the Council to see when they passed it over for enforcement - have you done this yet? In order to get out of this the £75 should be paid and if it is later found that it was not due then it can be reclaimed.

I think that is the most practical step to take, at present, PT. However, the OP will need to make it clear to Rundles that the £75 is being paid with a caveat attached to it.