The Simple Reason Why I Had My Council Tax Liability Order Turned Over
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 เม.ย. 2024
- Get our FREE Peace Keepers and Court Auditor courses here at peacekeepers.org.uk/
FREE Council Tax dispute challenge download here noc.peacekeepers.org.uk/
"Peace Keepers have been created to help secure a just and equitable existence., coming together to defend the peoples peace, to restore and preserve our inalienable rights, the highest standing in truth to be sovereign."
Nothing can be done to the prejudice of the people.
(Bill of Rights 1688)
Law is the people’s birth right.
(Act of Settlement 1700)
All are equal under the law.
No one is above the law.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
No one can knowingly impose their will upon any other without freewill.
Everybody has lawful excuse to the right of self defence.
---------------------------------
Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976
Allowance is made for "fair use" purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
-----------------------------------------------------------
0:54 People follow the path of least resistance. You are 100% correct Mark 👍🏻
this is why most of the time the courts will need a roll over in the form of a plea deal acceptance in order to convict their victim
Again thanks Marc for explanation
I do second this!
Why not just quote form their own legislation that council tax does not apply to domestic properties instead of any other route?
Where does it say that?
@@tcrookes2803 It does not. There was an amendment in 2003 and Text
was added providing the ''Definition of a Dwelling'' which until 2003 stated
it applied to Non- Domestic.
@@anti-stupid-not--vax9629 It does not matter what I believe what is your point ? if you have not got one to make then why are you even commenting ?
The original post was looking for assistance so either assist or shut up its really very simple.
@@DannyDee-sp5ek Exactly, and the Textural Amendment [2013] says ''Domestic Dwelling'' -
F1 S. 3(4A) inserted (E.) (1.4.2013) by The Non-Domestic Rating and Council Tax (Definition of Domestic Property and Dwelling) (England) Order 2013 (S.I. 2013/468), arts. 1(1), 3
So the 1992 Act has an Amendment that clearly states the definition of a ''Domestic Dwelling House''.
@@DannyDee-sp5ek had so called covid fine off zee council for £20 billion...I threw them off the premisis sent the fine back unopened and nobody took my goods!
The end
In a real court the Judge has the power to quash it, ive had mine quashed in the past, proving its not lawful to impose such hefty anounts on people who dont have the means to pay.
Teach me I’m going threw it now
through NOT threw.
@@leavemyrightsalone😅
You said Set aside before now its Turned Over ????. I thought the LO didn't exist. Getting very confused with the changes.
yeah completely lost in detail and one contradiction upon another. "not corruption" lol so people who defraud other people to commit harm to others by war mongering, child trafficking or extorting money [from the public] and or putting that money into offshore accounts IS NOT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY by a corrupted individual or individuals?? think marc needs to re evaluate his purpose in all of this.
Why are you even in our Telegram groups Karen, why do accept Marc's help and then attack him. We are not responsible for you not understanding his comments which are actually quite rational and he is entitled to them.
it exists in the minds of the court and those who peddle the system.. that's the problem
Actually today I found section 36A of the CTAER1992, inserted by SI 2004 927 which grants Magistrates Court the power to set aside LO's :) For 20 years legal professionals have made ££££££££££'s arguing s142 does not apply to CT... Many call that corruption - I call that ignorance!!!
The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) (England) Regulations sorted this... in SI 2004 927 TWENTY YEARS AGO AND NONE OF THE PROFESSIONALS HAVE EVEN READ IT AND THE COURTS HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT IT!!!
SHEAR UTTER INCOMPETANCE / IGNORANCE OR CORRUPTION???
Quashing of liability orders
36A.-(1) Where-
(a) a magistrates' court has made a liability order pursuant to regulation 34(6), and
(b) the authority on whose application the liability order was made considers that the order should not have been made, the authority may apply to a magistrates' court to have the liability order quashed.
(2) Where, on an application by an authority in accordance with paragraph (1) above, the magistrates' court is satisfied that the liability order should not have been made, it shall quash the order.
(3) Where an authority makes an application under paragraph (1) for a liability order (“the original order”) to be quashed, and a lesser amount than the amount for which the original order was made has fallen due under paragraph (3) or (4) of regulation 23 (including those paragraphs as applied as mentioned in regulation 28A(2)(9)) and is wholly or partly unpaid or (in a case where a final notice is required under regulation 33) the amount stated in the final notice is wholly or partly unpaid at the expiry of the period of seven days beginning with the day on which the notice was issued, the billing authority may also apply to the magistrates' court for an order against the person by whom the lesser amount was payable.
(4) Paragraphs (2) to (5) of regulation 34 shall apply to applications under paragraph (3) above.
(5) Where, having quashed a liability order in accordance with paragraph (2) above, the magistrates' court is satisfied that, had the original application for the liability order been for a liability order in respect of a lesser sum payable, such an order could properly have been made, it shall make a liability order in respect of the aggregate of-
(a)that lesser sum payable, and
(b)any sum included in the quashed order in respect of the costs reasonably incurred by the authority in obtaining the quashed order.”.
Turned over? i thought there was only the remedies of set aside or Quashed in terms of a Liability Order made ? Am i correct in presuming that you referred only to the 1980 MCA provisions to pull them back ?
As in Plato's Cave Allegory, the vast majority of the population continues to enjoy life living in a cave.
Marc is 100% correct, freedom is a numbers game, the higher the number the higher success rate. Unfortunately at this time that number represents a tiny fraction of people. As Marc will attest, it is far more difficult building a house by yourself and much more easier and efficient with a team. Sadly with all of the events happening around the World today, most have not quite caught the drift that they are next. Twenty years of pure hell is in the forecast. Are you ready ? The fall of the great Roman Empire is occurring now.
Thank god we are witnessing the fall of this sick empire but I’m sure it will be quick and there will be much relief all around, unfortunately I don’t think it will last, a bit like out of the frying pan and into the fire use the time of flying through the air to try to land on the edge
I’ve had a charge put against my house for owed CT I just don’t know what to do anymore 😔 the PRA group just had a ccj against me after I had 7 days to provide my evidence to HMTCS they heard the case and now I have to find £300 to have the judgement set aside I have zero cash and just don’t know what to do anymore I’m so sad every moment of every day and I work full time I have £20 to my name till the end of month 😢
If the Charge [Restriction] was registered on your Title Deeds by the
Council for the Non-Payment of Council Tax then you need to
apply for the 'Disposition' [Charge] to be removed.
You need to Contact the Land Registry and inform them that the ''Council''
do not have a Certified Copy of the Court Order which can only
be issued by the Court.
Without having possession of a certified Copy of the Court Order
they have no Legal Authority whatsoever.
And the reason they Do not is because No Magistrates Court issues
a Court Order for Council tax.
So its impossible for anybody, Council Included, to obtain a
Certified Copy of an Order that the Court does not make for
Council Tax so it can not produce it.
If the Land Registry refuse then write to them telling them
that you will now hold them responsible for any costs or
expenses you incur for them Registering a Restriction
against your Title which is unlawful and defective.
Also write to the Councils Legal Services and demand to
see a ''Certified Copy of the Court Order as Issued by the
Court' in regard to your Non-Payment of Council tax.
Inform them the you want to a proper Court Order
not an extract from their Own Computer Data base
which has no Legal authority whatsoever.
Also inform the Council that by them not having a Certified Copy
of the Court Order as issued by the Court because its a
matter or record that the Court does not produce one,
the Council as ''Data Controller'' has now given cause
to a Breach of Article 33 of the GDPR in that it has breached your
Personal Data by its actions without having the
required legal Instrument.
Make sure all letters are sent Recorded delivery
or any e.mails are Screen Shot encrypted and retained as
back up and send all e.mails twice but at least
12 hours apart.
The write to the Council's Compliance Offer stating
that their Council tax department has Breacher
your GDPR Article 33 and have they yet recorded it and
are they going to submit the correct report in being
the Data Controller that has caused the Breach.
Stay strong and use the very system they have
created against them.
Hopefully Mark can help you with this. I fully understand your position, I think a lot of the country are struggling to make ends meet. You’re not alone.
Do you have a credit card you can use? I do know if CCJ amount is cleared within 30 days, the court will remove it if you provide proof all outstanding amount has been cleared.
I’ve had a ccj on my credit file for nearly six years. It has affected interest rate charges on loans, credit cards etc. it’s been really difficult for the last six years with a ccj on file. It was paid off quickly and it shows as settled but still it’s been tricky to get any kind of credit. I am looking forward to September when the file will be completely removed. I feel like it’s such an achievement! I’ve kept every single payment up to date and will continue to do so. As we move closer to a social credit score system I think it’s important to be aware
@@Kellycreator"credit" is another scam.
You have nailed it, great reply, if something does not exist, and cant be verified, how can it stand, I would send a notice to land registry for full disclosure and who signed off on it.
Watch todays LONG video as to what to do....
W H O O P - - - -- W H O O P
Watch The primer fields on dual slit experiment? There's only one truth?! The observer can see one thing but not necessarily the truth? 😂
Have you done the dual slit experiment yourself?
Appreciate what you are trying to do..i think. I just dont understand the point of this so called victory. You claim that council tax is not enforcable yet didnt seem to agrue that in court. Instead you said the council acted correctly taking you to court and you ultimately won because the court didnt do everything correctly, due to laziness or other. Yet you didnt pay your council tax as you beleive its not enforcable and instead got lucky with a lazy court...whats the point?
I believe what Marc is saying is the courts have to do their job correctly, AND if they do they’ll see council tax is not lawful.
@@jeffbarrett1787 Thanks for this Jeff.
My s111 was 2 days late... so they refused that so s142/8 has no time limit so now have it back in court on 12 August... so lazy court was not part of the plan but opened the alternative root and I cannot fault the judges dealing with the set aside so I cannot s111 it into High Court :(
The listing is 2 hours before DJ Clarke who turned set the LO aside to present the full arguments of the the unlawfulness of CT which is based upon constitutional evidence which is current statute law but is being ignored by magistrates and legal advisors because they have no idea how the system is designed. I imagine he will let the council challenge my arguments but hopefully he also will so we can get to the root of this false belief that Parliament is sovereign and he unbiased looks at the evidence... and unless he dismisses the councils complaint which is unlikely as last time they withdrew their claim which is more likely, this is going to High Court and Appeal Court and Supreme court to fully expose the nonsense that Parliamentary Sovereignty is utter nonsense, but the rule of law is the primary constitutional principle...
@@marchorn466 Thanks Marc, this makes more sense now and i look forward to following you on this journey.
@@adistraction2668 had he not set aside the LO then that would have opened the door to do s111 and get it into High Court in the Summer... This is a game of chess... need patience one move at a time! They cannot stop the constitutional stuff getting into the Higher Courts and due to public interest from High Court should be able to leapfrog to supreme court
Guys there is NO ORDER its only an application
Talk is cheep where is the order? You aint got one have you its 13th April and still no evidence to prove what you say is true 😂
Are you calling us liars?
@@PeaceKeepersOfficialChannel no i never said that all i said is what you say Show us the evidence 😂
@@PeaceKeepersOfficialChannel i do know courts issue order on the day, i also know they can say we sent it, but to say what you are saying means nothing and these are your words show me the evidence!!
@@PeaceKeepersOfficialChannel is it true you dont have the order
@@publicnotice4169 we have a spoken order with witnesses in court who you can speak with in our Thursday night telegram zoom. Marc has also chased up for the written. If you going to call us liars get your facts and evidence in place, we do not lie!