Council Tax Liability Order hearing on August 2, 2013 – Enfield and Haringey Magistrates' Court

HM Courts and Tribunals Service did not have the information requested.

Dear Her Majesty’s Courts and the Tribunals Service,

I refer to an article published in the Haringey Independent on August 2, 2013, concerning a Council Tax Liability case heard at Enfield and Haringey Magistrates' Court and its decision to award costs of £125 against the defendant challenging the reasonableness of the sum in respect of sending a summons.

http://www.haringeyindependent.co.uk/new...

In the article it states that the chairman of the bench said:

“We have heard your representation about the issues in general. We can only make a decision on your case individually.

“As you have said, you have the means to pay the costs. We have approved the £125 liability order.”

It stated also:

"The council representative explained the £125 sum was agreed between the court and the council in March 2010 and is consistent with other London Boroughs."

Q. Please supply all recorded information, i.e. calculations etc., supporting Haringey Borough Council's £125 claim for costs (summons costs) which satisfied the Chairman of the bench, Freddy Lawson, that this expenditure had in fact been incurred by Haringey Borough Council in respect of instituting the complaint. I trust this will include details "agreed between the court and the council in March 2010"

Yours faithfully,

Cherie Jerez

Arnold Layne (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Cherie,

This may be of interest to you:

(Council Tax and NNDR Summons and Liability Order costs)

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

Especially this response:

"....I can advise that Haringey Council refers to the relevant legislation in respect of council tax administration. The calculation of costs is covered within the Council Tax Administration and Enforcement Regulations 1992 and any associated amendments to the Act.

In calculating reasonable costs, consideration is given to staff involvement, time, accommodation and administrative costs, as well as IT, postal and loss of income which are averaged across the number of council tax payers summoned for non-payment.

The court costs of £125.00 have been in place since 01 April 2010. These were approved as reasonable costs by HM courts service, Deputy Justice’s clerk, Stephen Carroll on 23rd March 2013. As you can see from the breakdown of the cost of taking recovery action the actual cost is in excess of the £125.00 we pass on to the Council Tax payer.

The costs calculation (2010-11) provided to HM Courts service is as follows: (see link to the calculation below)

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/1...

Of concern is the total number of accounts summonsed in Council Tax and Business Rates cases which was used in the calculation. Haringey has supposedly stated to the Magistrates' Court that in 2010-11, this was 18,153. This figure is at odds with CIPFA's recorded Revenue stats which states a total 24,934:

http://www.cipfastats.net/uploads/reve10...

To confirm this, the data sheet indicates that the number of summonses issued in 2010/11 was 23,227 for Council Tax (column 43) and 1,707 for Business rates (column 97) – a total 24,934.

If, as Haringey Borough Council has stated, these false and misleading figures were submitted to the Magistrates' Court to claim a false level of costs, it will require Police investigation. However, if the Magistrates' Court was carrying out its judicial function correctly, it would have been alerted to the fact that the number of summonses requested did not correspond with the figures which were approved by HM courts service on 23rd March 2013.

Wood1, James,

1 Attachment

Dear Ms Jerez

 

Please see attached a letter of acknowledgement confirming receipt of your
Freedom of Information request dated 29^th December 2013 that is now being
dealt with by the London Regional Support Unit. The letter stipulates when
you should receive a response by.

 

Yours sincerely

James M. Wood
Operational Support Assistant
Regional Support Unit
Tel: 0203 334 6155
Email: [1][email address]

London Regional Support

Post Point 9.01

9th Floor

102 Petty France

London

SW1H 9AJ

DX 152380 Westminster 8

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Wood1, James,

1 Attachment

Dear Ms Jerez

 

Please see attached a final response to your Freedom of Information
request made on the 29^th December 2013.

 

Yours sincerely

James M. Wood
Operational Support Assistant
Regional Support Unit
Tel: 0203 334 6155
Email: [1][email address]

London Regional Support

Post Point 9.01

9th Floor

102 Petty France

London

SW1H 9AJ

DX 152380 Westminster 8

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Arnold Layne (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Please see the response to my FoI request:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

The attached response ( https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/1... ) is the same as yours (word for word).

It was pointed out to the MoJ that the following exhibited a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. Litigation costs are to cover out-of pocket expenses, not act to coerce people to pay their council tax...

"Prior to issuing a summons a charge payer will have been sent a demand, a reminder and a final reminder. The threat of issuing a summons, allied to the costs which will be applied for acts as an incentive for people to meet their liability."

Dear Wood1, James,

I have concerns that you have copied a response, word for word, from this request for information:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

Please see the attached ( https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/1... ), specifically the quoted passage below:

"Prior to issuing a summons a charge payer will have been sent a demand, a reminder and a final reminder. The threat of issuing a summons, allied to the costs which will be applied for acts as an incentive for people to meet their liability."

Note: In relation to the above, it was pointed out to the MoJ it had exhibited a fundamental misunderstanding of the law, by considering it was permissible for litigation costs to be used as an instrument to coerce payment of people's council tax.

By repeating this after it was pointed out, does the MoJ, consider setting costs at a level unrelated to "reasonable costs incurred" within the law, if it acts as a deterrent?

Yours sincerely,

Cherie Jerez

Wood1, James,

Dear Ms Jerez

Thank you for your email dated the 20th January 2014 to which the contents have been noted.

In response to your email, the information you had requested was not held by Highbury magistrates' court as explained in my letter to you. The extra information provided was given to provide insight to how costs are applied in Council Tax Summons.

As explained in my letter to you, the London Borough of Redbridge can request a level of costs but it is a Judge that determines the final costs applied at the hearing.

"The court cost of £125 is the maximum amount that can be asked for and does not, and cannot, fetter judicial discretion when deciding what amount to actually award".

I cannot add any further comments to my response which addressed your questions raised in your Freedom of Information request of the 29th December 2013. If you are still unsatisfied with my response, I refer you to my letter of the 17th January 2014 to pages 2 and 3 to instructions to how you can seek an internal review if you choose to do so.

I am sorry I cannot be of more assistance.

Yours sincerely

James M. Wood
Operational Support Assistant
Regional Support Unit
Tel: 0203 334 6155
Email: [email address]
London Regional Support
Post Point 9.01
9th Floor
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
DX 152380 Westminster 8

show quoted sections

Dear Her Majesty’s Courts and the Tribunals Service,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Her Majesty’s Courts and the Tribunals Service's handling of my FOI request 'Council Tax Liability Order hearing on August 2, 2013 – Enfield and Haringey Magistrates' Court'.

Please read the document linked to below which is in response to a request made to Haringey Borough Council (Council Tax and NNDR Summons and Liability Order costs).

I would like to know who is lying.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/1...

"The court costs of £125.00 have been in place since 01 April 2010. These were approved as reasonable costs by HM courts service, Deputy Justice’s clerk, Stephen Carroll on 23rd March 2013. As you can see from the breakdown of the cost of taking recovery action the actual cost is in excess of the £125.00 we pass on to the Council Tax payer."

Note: the date above is incorrect, 23rd March 2010 is claimed to be correct by Haringey Council.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

Yours faithfully,

Cherie Jerez

Arnold Layne (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Cherie!

Please see my response from Haringey Borough Council today (23 January 2014)

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

"Dear Mr Layne,

We maintain our previous response was correct; the costs were approved as reasonable costs by HM courts service, Deputy Justice’s clerk, Stephen Carroll on 23rd March 2010."

SW Region Support,

1 Attachment

Please find attached acknowledgment
 

Kind regards

Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer & Business Support

HMCTS, SW Region Support Unit

T 01392 331751  |  Gold Fax 0870 739 4378 |  E
[1][email address]

SW Regional Office | Lynx House | Pynes Hill Campus | Rydon Lane | Exeter
| EX2 5JL

I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to
make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of
Justice in any way via electronic means.

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

SW Region Support,

1 Attachment

Please find response attached.
 
Regards
 
Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer and Business Support

HMCTS SW, Regional Support Unit

Tel 01392 331751 Fax 01392 331744 Goldfax 0870 739 4378 Email
[1][email address]

Lynx House, Pynes Hill, Rydon Lane, Exeter, EX2 5JL

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to
make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of
Justice in any way via electronic means".

P Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this
email?  Reduce. Re-use. Recycle.

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Arnold Layne (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Cherie,

It is important that you see this from Haringey:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

"19 February 2014

Dear Mr Layne,

Thank you for your email below.

I can assure you that the Court did agree our cost levels as described previously and we hold evidence of this. "

Seems to be at odds with your response from the MoJ (12 February 2014)

"• During the course of my investigation, I have also made contact with Haringey Borough Council who have been unable to confirm or deny the existence of a written agreement as referred to in your aforesaid request. You may therefore wish to pursue your question with them."

Dear SW Region Support,

Haringey Borough Council has given its assurance that
the Court did agree its cost levels and holds evidence. Said evidence has subsequently been requested, however, it hasn't been forthcoming and suspect the reason for this is that it's being manufactured. We will see.

Yours sincerely,

Cherie Jerez

SW Region Support,

Dear Ms Jerez,

Thank you for your comment below. Please may I remind you of your route to appeal should you wish to.

How to Appeal

Information Commissioner's Office
If you remain dissatisfied after an internal review decision, you have the right to apply to the Information Commissioner's Office. The Commissioner is an independent regulator who has the power to direct us to respond to your request differently, if he considers that we have handled it incorrectly.

You can contact the Information Commissioner's Office at the following address:

Information Commissioner's Office,
Wycliffe House,
Water Lane,
Wilmslow,
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Internet address: https://www.ico.org.uk/Global/contact_us

Kind regards

Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer & Business Support

HMCTS, SW Region Support Unit

T 01392 331751 | Gold Fax 0870 739 4378 | E [email address]

SW Regional Office | Lynx House | Pynes Hill Campus | Rydon Lane | Exeter | EX2 5JL

Do you need RSU support? Here are the roles of the team: http://libra.lcd.gsi.gov.uk/southwest-re...

I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

show quoted sections

Dear SW Region Support,

I'm unsure whether you realise the seriousness of the situation by your comments regarding escalating a complaint to the Information Commissioner.

The potential corruption highlighted in this Foi request brings the integrity of the justice system into question which more involves a matter of criminal investigation than merely which section of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 provides the next action to be taken.

I hope that if and when further information is obtained regarding this request, HMCTS will take more interest in it than merely whether or not it was held, and have some regard to the lies and deceit which have been involved in responding to the public.

Yours sincerely,

Cherie Jerez

SW Region Support,

Dear Ms Jerez,

There is nothing more I can advise you from an FoI perspective. The FoIA is only concerned with which section of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 was applied, and whether it was used correctly. FoIA is not a vehicle by which the public can pursue other grievances against the department, or seek an opinion from MoJ on a particular issue.

We cannot respond under the FoIA to issues which the Act was not designed to deal with. There are however other mechanisms available outside of the FoIA via which complaints about MoJ services can be made. If you are unhappy with the service provided you may wish to complain using the complaints procedure where any issues raised will be dealt with as treat official by HMCTS.

Here is the link to HMCTS complaints procedure: http://www.justice.gov.uk/complaints/hm-...

Kind regards

Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer & Business Support

HMCTS, SW Region Support Unit

T 01392 331751 | Gold Fax 0870 739 4378 | E [email address]

SW Regional Office | Lynx House | Pynes Hill Campus | Rydon Lane | Exeter | EX2 5JL

I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

show quoted sections

Dear SW Region Support,

There is new evidence which suggests Haringey Borough Council has a compulsion to lie in order to make an easy life for itself, but ultimately backfires.

Rather than produce the evidence which the council had assured it held with regards the agreement with the Court, it avoided addressing this by providing its interpretation of the law surrounding how costs are applied.

I am considering reporting the way Haringey Borough Council apparently lies to the public in the matter of misconduct in public office. However, it appears that this kind of behaviour has become widely accepted and wonder if anyone will care.

Yours sincerely,

Cherie Jerez

SW Region Support,

Dear Ms Jerez,

Your comments will be placed on file.

Kind regards

Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer & Business Support

HMCTS, SW Region Support Unit

T 01392 331751 | Gold Fax 0870 739 4378 | E [email address]

SW Regional Office | Lynx House | Pynes Hill Campus | Rydon Lane | Exeter | EX2 5JL

Do you need RSU support? Here are the roles of the team: http://libra.lcd.gsi.gov.uk/southwest-re...

I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

show quoted sections