UK Council TAX summons scandal Followup

Follow up to the council tax scandal

 

Hello all and thank you to everyone who left all the great feedback and lovely comments.

In response to many comment’s including a full set of new developments over the past months i feel compelled to share the findings with you the world.

As with everything i say in my blogs i always meet my words and this time is no exception. In fact this follow up post has something of a treat for you all.

Following my post on UK council TAX scandal corruption I had mentioned contacting your local constituent well I did. That being Nicky Morgan, nice enough lady well i linked her to my post which she had read and gave me a written reply by mail.

This i would like to share with the world, i have blanked out personal info and uploaded as so all can read the letter.

Some very interesting points and small technicality corrections on my post. yes it might make you giggle.

For the case Nicky responds to she consulted the deputy director at charnwood borough council called David Platts. I am releasing this info not in a slanderous manor at all, it is just for completeness.

The following was pulled out and quoted from the previous post

In the event of failure to pay council TAX twice, the individual in question is summoned to court and required to pay £62.50 for court costs.

She admits this is the case and goes on to say that it may only take one payment before a summons is issued. This again proves that the system is broken in that the so called reminder notices sent are enough to be considered a defaulted payment. It is correctly said that the reminder notice is then sent approximately 14 days after the supposed payment was missed. In reality even if you paid it late the notice will still arrive. When a person tries to speak to the department all they tend to get is, the computer automatically issues the notice etc and you don’t have a leg to stand on. Seriously if you cant get the software developers to make the system work for human beings then you need to find a developer that can. Were not robots, were human beings, meaning were alive and actually understand the word maybe, sort of, kind of not just yes or no, on or off.

I am assured that the policy for the first bill is just a bill and only after 14 days is the notice sent. Well now there is a thing you see  the council and there minions are not perfect. What i mean is they make mistakes them selves, there staff make miscalculations whatever the situation, the computer sometimes fails as mentioned above it does not take into consideration all possible variables, misfortunate events and so on. At which point you the average Jo public have no idea in many cases how this all works or even how to sort it. In many cases you just pay it to shut them up and get them off your back.

No where in the letter I got in response to my post from Nicky Morgan does it mention or address isues like this. How many times in the past 20 years ++ has a person paid these costs unfairly because they either could not handle the stress or had no idea how to.

Nowhere in the document does it also mention that it is illegal or legal for the arrogant members of staff in the department who are 100% dismissive and blame the computer system “Its the computer and that’s the way it is”.

As i mentioned in my original post I go on to say how if someone is paying there council TAX can be summoned. If someone is very hard up, that means struggling with there finances and was unable to pay on the exact date but pays it later in the month he would still get a summons. The unfair treatment of this is not addressed in the corresponding letter of response. Cleverly avoiding the main issues i would say there Nicky! good one.

It gets better as the letter goes on to speak about:

There is a discrepancy regarding the payment date being set as the first of each month. If people recieve there salary at the end of the month, funds take 3 days to clear, in which time they may already be late to pay there council TAX and face paying an extra £62.50(summons cost)

Once again the political correctness of cleverly worded paragraph follows explaining how they calculate the financial year. Stating that plans run from the 1st April to the 1st January and only by direct debit does the council allow further payment date options to be the 3rd and 25th of every month, with 14 days prior to the payment date, you are to be issued with a notice that payment is due on this date(generally 14 days of the date of letter).  Basically your life means nothing, diddle squat, finito, worthless to them, just pay on that date that’s the way our system works. That’s our rules and you will abide by our rules, there is no highway just our way.

Now about the court hearing. There seems to be a slight discrepancy about this, something that i think central government would like to look into. I wont release recorded telephone calls incriminating the person(individual) in this area but it is a concern that i personally don’t think will be dealt with. It is the scaremongering, the threatening behaviour . You must at all costs not allow them to get to you in this way.

I spoke about them not letting you in to put your case forward to the judge and as mentioned above the staff attitude from the enforcement department is disgusting to say the least. If you actually get a smile out of them you have done well. The phone call i mentioned regarding this actually records not a singular member of staff but more than one on different occasions  clearly stating that in there belief it is pointless even going to court as you wont be allowed to enter the court room, so pay the summons cost(outstanding balance) in full before the court hearing and we shall remove it from the court. Note the remove from the court but not removal of summons costs. follow this up by:

“But if i am to pay £62.50 i want to get what i pay for and want my hearing before the court, I shall take my picnic basket and the kids, be a nice day out don’t you think? Bargain for £62.50. Do they have a kettle for the instant pot noodle.”

That sounds just like a hustle would you not say, direct from the council departments enforcement staff. I mean this in a non sexist way but all these so called officers were female. All the contacts with a male officer were not met with this ferocity or tack and deserves nothing more than the type of response I have given above.

  • Bellow are the high resolution scanned images of the letter i received.



  • And page 2



To conclude:

The bellow as before in my post if followed and strongly fought you will win.

Make sure you follow the additional steps listed bellow, all chargeable if asked to do something further:
  1. Follow there complaints procedure and exhaust it completely to the point nothing further can be done to resolve the situation.
  2. File the complaint that had not been resolved by the local authority to the local government ombudsmen along with the complaint response correspondence you got from the above complaint procedure.
  3. File the further complaint if both the above failed to the government ombudsmen with all the above correspondence and so on. Find further information on this here. Dont forget togoogle search too
  4. Invoice the council for all your time, charges etc. Do everything possible to get paid and then pay of there charges. Take the excess money you have earned from the above and give it to charity or a random homeless person on the street. At least by him a bottle of booze with some of it, share it out etc. Now that’s public money well spent lol just kidding.
  5. Further note to this would be to also contact your elected constituent and keep mailing them all the outcomes, concerns complaints views you have crucial improvements and actions your taking as when corruption like this happens it really does no good for there image or respectability.

UK Council TAX Scandal corruption summons

Council TAX practice worst than the bankers.

Hello my good readers and welcome to another blog post on a serious note regarding council TAX in the UK. The scandalous scheming cons and how a agreement passed in 1992 by the previous conservative government has come back to attack the poor.

We all know how annoying and painstaking it can be trying to communicate and resolve issues with the council TAX departments across the UK or should we call them local criminals.

Interestingly here is the 1992 legislation for council TAX enforcement that we will refer to bellow:

Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992, particularly Regulations 33 to 35.

Now you may think the above is all in order and perfectly fine, we all have to pay the TAX blabla blaaa. Yes i agree and yes we do as council TAX pays for the police force, Fire service, refuse and street cleaning as well as the salt gritters, pedestrianized repair/development drainage etc. Weather you like it or not we all need and enjoy these services that it provides so we pay for it.

The problem begins when local councils begin to pervert the above regulation sections 33 and 35. Just when you thought it was all fine to have such a regulation it gets perverted out of all control and in today’s day 20 years since it was made this perverted legislation busts out into the open for some to see, hopefully now everyone can see it.

It is fair to say that the legislation (if you have not read it already) states that on two defaults meaning you fail to pay your council TAX not once but twice you will be summoned to court to be challenged as to why you failed to pay your council TAX not once but twice, fair comment so far would you not say.

Summons costs at present are £62.50 and for a low income person/families this is allot of money, if there circumstances are difficult there council TAX alone is hard to pay. Hitting them with another £62.50 summons cost is really not the way to go for starters. It makes me laugh when the government criticize bankers for there bonuses and or bank charges and then they them selves are guilty beyond all question of a doubt of the same criminal activity.

Now the argument against this is that people who default and do not(maybe they refuse to pay) there council TAX must be summoned and it is the cost of the court for which the £62.50 is for. Because the council TAX enforcement is actually run by public money (Council TAX oh yea your money is not just for fire service and so on but also to pay for the collection and accountant staff on stupidly high wages that we could do without or at least cut the cost to).  The summons cost is to be paid by the person(s) not paying there council TAX. I am sure many readers are saying tuff tits at the screen right now regarding this but remember if someone is having difficulty paying there council TAX due to low income or whatever, is it fair to hit them with a higher bill.

If you think the above is fair or unfair you have not heard the worst of it yet so read on. Continue reading

RBS Bonuses and ACTA

I recently got an email from an organization called 98 degrees who were contacting me in regard to RBS Bonuses.

It is a concerning issue that the country taxes the little man who is on less than 20k/annum. These people who earn over 50000.00/annum are taxed @ 50% Income tax but they receive bonuses annually additional to there income. These bonuses are not taxed like wages. It would be a fair comment to say lets tax there bonuses @ 60%, the 60% tax would become public property and would finance the NHS and further public services. By taxing these bonuses across the board one can limit the amount of money they would be awarding and in effect keep more in the system, putting it back where it is needed. That to me sounds like a fairer Briton.

Here is the reply i wrote to 38 Degrees in regard to bonuses ACTA and recent events that no one is targeting in fact there making a big commission with no solution.

 

Hi 38 Degrees

Yes i did hear about this person getting a massive bonus. I dont think
attacking him directly is the answer. Attacking the ideals and immoral
aspect of this is what should be happening. Getting the government to
place a high TAX like 60% tax on bonuses for these people. weather it
be in shares or money. For instance The shares that were worth £999,000
@ 60% TAX would then be owned by the general public which in turn could
fund our NHS country development and so on much better. It would give
the average Jo a relief and allow for a much lesser Income TAX for
those on less than 20K a year. I think 20-24% Income tax for someone on
12K a year is wrong.

The wealthy need to put more back into the system, why should they be
the only ones who are allowed to enjoy a fulfilled life while others
struggle and suffer. My local council has once again stopped giving out
bin bags, even though i pay a huge amount a month on council tax we get
no bin liners.

Also the one culture changing factor that has fuelled a bit of piece
hope and self education in our lives above the rich and wealthy with
there proclaimed bonuses is the new ACTA bill which aims to keep the
richer rich rather than keep an open free trade market. Being a Open
Source software developer and allowing stupid USA patents mainly one in
particular(that states if you did not build the software yourself you
must pay to use it) taken out by microsoft would be effective in the UK
if the bill is accepted by the EU. The UK has already signed it, this
affects me directly as i program software share it free into the
community which in turn gets debuged by the many. They get the use it i
get to use the debugged version and we all contribute making a free
open commerce of innovation creative and very useful software that
everyone anywhere in the world can enjoy.

The ACTA act will allow patents operating in america to be enforced
globally, as mentioned above the USA patent system does not work as it
allows Microsoft to stop free open source software that has helped
billions of people enjoy learning the internet, education into
programming without any commercial cost, provided a cost assured
economical solution to today’s servers allowing small companies to get
of the ground without licence costs.

Everyone is pointing the finger but no one is targeting the issue
directly. Let him have his bonuses because next year they will all be
given bonuses again and the next year and again and again. TAX the damn
thing that’s what VAT was for in concern to shops so do the same with
there bonuses. Clamp it down so that the money they take out can be put
back into the system and continue the perfect circle.

At the moment ACTA is due to break that circle and seen as nothing is
being done about the bankers bonuses this will continue to break the
perfect circle meaning poverty, filth, and so on will prevail. Beer in
pubs is already priced the poor to drink at home and with the
supermarkets rising the price per bottle that will be unaffordable too.
The future is looking dark and violent. The rules the fat cats play by
needs to change, a 3 year old can see that.

Daily Express say Millions afraid to turn on the heating

The Daily express say that millions will be afraid to turn on there heating but wholesale price have dropped, The daily express also ask us what do we think should be done in this dilemma. Sounds familiar to the fuel prices (petrol/diesel) 10 years ago don’t you think.

Snippet from the Daily Express Facebook page:

  • Millions of people will be afraid to turn on their heating this winter because of rip-off energy prices. Wholesale electricity and gas prices are plummeting, but the energy firms keep charging us more. What do you think should be done?

My answer to this dilemma:

Easy problem to solve this. Think about it, when a shop charges too much for something what do we do? Shop around thats what we do, we find someone else who can provide it at a cheaper price.

Although that sounds simple to the everyday person in changing energy companies one must remember your costs are in lou and contract terms apply.

I say lets step it up, Remove the ability for any energy companies to sign you to nothing more than 1 hour. No more 12 month or 24 month contracts for gas or electric. This opens the consumer up to move to the cheapest supplier at will whenever he/she finds a better deal.
Make it illegal for energy suppliers to hold you against your will with them for an outstanding balance. The balance must be taken to the reading that you left them at to the minute and be chased up as if it was an arrears for a product purchase. They must never be allowed to tie you down to them. Why? because it allows the consumer to choose freely meaning the energy supplier must provide exceptional price or service to keep you as a customer based on consumer satisfaction.

When there faced with a free internet/high-street shop to shop market they would be more inclined to keep you shopping in there store with the better price as you cant taste or sample the quality of electricity and gas. Its all the same supply just different organisation charging you.

Reply to Nick Clegg regarding Phone hacking

Hi Nick

Thank you for giving me an opportunity to respond to this scandal. Yes I
do consider it a scandal and way out of order.

I have been a specialist in the field of electronics security hacking
and computers of all kinds for many years now. There is not much I don’t
know or can not do.

For years the system has been the same, only those such as the BBC or
Mr Murdoch’s corporate capitalism have secured. The public network is
wide open in fact so far so that not only can corporations do this but
any 5 year old who can use a screwdriver.

There is a law and that states prison penalties for interfering with a
public network weather it wireless or land line. A common trick in the
hacking times was to make sure all components used were BABT certified
this allows connection of any circuit you make to be allowed onto the
network phone or whatever. This BABT certificate insures no
interference so it just made hacking legal lol.
Saying that then comes the data protection act which is a point of
unlawfully gaining information digitally or analogue that does not
belong to you. I know this fully states digital data but as for
specifically analogue voice calls well that’s something else.

I really do think the Data Protection Act for peoples privacy who ever
they are is updated. A service provider such as BT or even Virgin
media, NTL, Diamond Cable and the likes must be held responsible for
these insecurities of there users or customers privacy. Penalties must
be high and not imposed on those particularly who commit the crime.
More punishment must be placed on the providers, why? because if this
is so the providers such as BT and so on would have to invest in
security measures to protect the public not pass it on to the person
committing the crime. Cure the problem not the symptom.

If you are told securing this is not possible then you need to reject
that claim. I have been in this industry for years and if only a few
steps and investment (penny’s in all respect) was taken the problem
would be solved. This applies for digital as well as analogue in fact
in today digital networks it is so simple to secure its a joke. its
cost is man hours in days maybe weeks not months. Yes I am talking
about a random encryption key form. This allows each call to generate a
LARGE random key that is unique to that call and that call alone only
those that made the call can hear each other its used wide spread in
email and VOIP which virtually all networks use now.

The above works well for land lines or corded systems, the next area to
overcome is wireless. WIMAX is the biggest pitfall this was hacked in 3
weeks since O2 and Vodafone implemented the system its a joke really
is. They pulled of a wide open cellular to WIMAX an unencrypted
Ethernet network that suffers from 20 year old hackings of which are
impossible at present to secure. Unless the above encryption method is
to be wide spread as a must in the system.

I can not stress enough that the companies delivering these services
must Must be held accountable for this so that they will do something
about it otherwise they will implore NMP(Not my problem) attitude well
know in business. Yes people may also have to purchase new telephone
equipment that meets a new standard to encrypt the line right from the
handset, a new BABT certification would it be. one that actually
focusses on security rather than interference to there unsecured
network.

The system could be staggered as to allow the user to use secure call
handsets in comparison to insecure. The network must make sure its
encrypted once the signal hits there systems. This means the only way
to intervene the call would be to pin the wire.
Pin the wire is a technique known as sticking a pin in the cable to
make contact with the conductor allowing you to listen to the traffic
passing over it unencrypted data and audio.

If you got this far I have to say well done and thank you for reading,
there is one more serious issue. Somewhat an issue you will be very
familiar with.

The internet traffic filtering, as you jump back saying “here we go” a
crucial problem faced by encrypted networks is you cant filter it. You
don’t have any idea what is passing between sources as its encrypted
unless you have the master key. Random keys may become a problem unless
they pull it up know the pass phrase and are able to decrypt the data.
Who can be trusted to do this the network companies or would you make
it legal to brute force (crack) the pass key. who makes the pass key
the customer, well they best be able to means the user takes
responsibility for there privacy in a user friendly way so that the
corporations can meet there security responsibility.

Either way virgin media don’t like me encrypting my emails they
sometimes never reach there destination lol. That’s a clear indication
of conflicting interests there.

Simply you need to cure the problem not the symptoms This account just
proves there is a huge problem with peoples privacy. Could it be that
he is manipulating you to take action so that he can take more control
by making things more controlled in the media industry. Maybe just
maybe. Careful consideration needs to be taken on how media the key
word here ‘media’ is and must be kept free from capitalisation and god
forbid monopolised. We should be able to share our media how we
want and free from constraint something that is a growing problem right
now and Mr Murdoch I am sure has something of an influence. They must
not have the right or power to influence peoples choices as to what
music or programs they wish to watch or listen to.

Social Engineering must be made illegal or disallowed. A good point
from the presence of the EU were part of would be to make sure right
across Europe that manipulation and social engineering is to be made
illegal with high punishments in media or person to person.

Thanks for reading this sorry it was long but I have allot of views in
this field many of which are from experience. If you have any further
questions at all please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Thank you again.


Kind Regards