Windows on the World: Newlyn and Council Tax Fraud Exposed after council lose court case
Latest article: More lies exposed... and the remedy. You do not have to fill in the SPD form as long as you supply the information yourself. Now why were they trying so hard to deny it?
Update : The fraud is still being carried out, however you have the info through these articles to deny the council and their third party fraudsters the right to demand information.Notice how they present it as though they are doing this on behalf of the rest of the upstanding citizens. Sickening propoganda. Their arrogance should dissappear with their salaries and pensions.
Newlyn PLC, Party to fraud
Re: Seperate amount brought up which was not part of the original council tax summons...which was also not owed and got quashed in court! Scroll down for original article. Below is all correspondence between myself, the council and Newlyn.
This is an update after the false "debt" was passed to Newlyn. Full story below.
Update: Cheryl Vickers of Newlyn PLC is now party to the fraud. After having been served with the documents below Newlyn stated they would look into the matter. Newlyn have now stated (of the council) "As their agents , they have passed us a liability order, issued by the magistrates court and we are duty bound to continue with the enforcement of it". SCROLL DOWN FOR LATEST
The letter was headed "Without prejudice". I then gave Cheryl Vickers of Newlyn ten days to respond with proof of the liability order.
Another "without prejudice" letter arrived dated 24th May (They wouldnt put Without Prejudice on if they had court authority as this means I cant use it in court against them, though I will anyway as they have already broken the law)
Amanda Lambley on behalf of Cheryl Vickers stated they had a liability order (of course still no proof as they dont have one) It had already been requested but they dont appear to have a photocopier!!! So thats the second count of fraud.
They have also added on illegal fees to the original "debt" which they also could not seem to work out. It was once £474.01 , then it became £446.51, now miraculously it is £516.51. Very creative, but of course with no legal standing and also the third count of fraud.
They dont seem to want to send paperwork regarding the "debt" either.
This is now a criminal matter. If looting operations threaten you with their presumptions make sure you let them know if they are acting outside the law.
Wonder if their legal team can come up with anything to rebutt this as they have no claim against my name and no authority to use it!
This complete disregard for lawful procedure is now an epidemic but in reality they have no legal standing.
Go to ucadia.blogspot.com for more info on the fraudulent use of your name by third parties issuing false financial instruments in your name with unlimited liability with no legal standing. Frank O Collins has done deep research into this and many other matters pertaining to incorrect use of your name on these unlawful documents. "Pirates hand in the cookie jar...exposing corporate fraud". Listen to the link..
FULL FOLLOW UP STORY TO "COUNCIL LOSE COURT CASE OVER SPD FORM" ARTICLE
This article is a Follow up to the court case I won against Waltham Forest proving that the SPD (Single Person Discount Form) was fraudulent and you do not have to fill it in. See article: Council lose court case over SPD form.
Phone call to council over SPD Form:
As stated in the article Waltham Forest council brought up an amount at the first court date which was not part of the summons and committed perjury by stating it was from 2006. (All this is explained in the correspondence below).
Elaine Logan acting on behalf of Waltham Forest is now party to the fraud. Below is the correspondence I sent.
Elaine Logan also stated that my statutory declaration was a "letter" and stated it was received on the 20th, it was in fact stamped by a barrister on the 22nd and delivered by hand and a receipt obtained on the 25th when it was delivered.
Lies, obsfucation and fraud are now all normal practice for administrative drones in the public sector. This has been brought in by trained "change agents" and Common Purpose type training.
It is however worth confronting them with their misconduct in public office and making sure they know they are personally liable.
I also issued a public notice of Estoppel and notice to Newlyn debt collectors who have been handed the false financial instrument fraudulently by Elaine Logan acting on behalf of LBWF.
Here is my response:
To: Elaine Logan
Acting on behalf of
London Borough of Waltham Forest
Re: Letter dated 9th April 2013
Re: Untrue statements made by Elaine Logan on behalf of LBWF, misconduct in public office and being party to fraud on behalf of LBWF. Ignoring a legal document and obfuscating facts by deliberate and willful deception through issuing unlawful proceedings and being party to fraudulent financial instruments.
Statement of fact:
Elaine Logan states: “I refer to the contents of your letter that reached my office 20th Feb 2013 regarding your council tax account, the contents of which have been noted. Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding”.
The document referred to was not a letter. The legal document, a statutory declaration was witnessed, stamped by a barrister and dated 22nd Feb and reached your office on 25th. A stamped receipt dated 25th Feb was obtained from a member of staff for LBWF as the document was served by hand.
The above statement by Elaine Logan is therefore untrue.
There is no evidence that Elaine Logan did not ignore this legal document and was not party to deceptive practice and untrue statements in the above quoted letter and it is believed that none exists.
Elaine Logan states: “A hearing date 10th Jan 2013 at Thames magistrates court has been withdrawn and all associated costs”.
This is an untrue statement. LBWF issued vexatious proceedings on assumption through negligence and fraud. Despite all relevant parties at LBWF being served documentation in good time and also given five chances to remedy (creating five more counts of fraud in this case) they chose to carry on with a false assumption rather than act on the factual information provided.
The Bulk hearing on the 10th Jan became the case heard on 1st Feb because the magistrate ordered a hearing following information being presented which proved LBWF had failed to address the facts through deliberate fraud and deception.
The hearing on 1st Feb was for the counterclaim brought by myself and upheld against LBWF. If the hearing on 10th Jan had been “withdrawn”, the perjury committed by LBWF and the false amount claimed by yourself on behalf of LBWF which was not part of the summons amount would have no standing according to your own assumptions. This is an untrue and contradictory statement by Elaine Logan.
At the hearing on 1st Feb LBWF council lost the case and were denied costs. LBWF committed fraud, perjury and were found to be in contempt of court at the hearing on 10th Jan and also at the case being heard by the district judge on 1st Feb.
The counter claim against Waltham Forest was upheld by the judge and can be heard in County Court if the outstanding amount of £2,600 pounds is not settled forthwith. This amount is separate from the amount stated below which will form the basis of this particular claim.
Elaine Logan states: “Council tax records show Liability order 117157 was issued against you at Waltham Forest Magistrates court on 19th October2009.”
As stated in the statutory declaration referred to above (enclosed), no liability order was made for any of the amounts claimed (the amounts so far have changed three times, see below).
The law states that Liability orders for council tax last for one year from date of issue.
The legal determination made by Elaine Logan is therefore false and has no standing. Any further correspondence from Elaine Logan must disclose whether or not she is legally qualified.
As there was no liability order issued there is no evidence that Elaine Logan has not made incorrect legal determinations.
There is no evidence that the above statements are not false, fraudulent and evidence of misconduct in public office and it is believed that none exists. Any legally qualified third party adviser to Elaine Logan is also implicated in this matter.
The letter to which you refer from Mrs T Denham dated 2nd Jan:
Statement of fact:
Daniel Fenwick (Head of legal services) had failed to respond to the legally correct assumption of fraud by LBWF and failed to respond at all. This negligence wasted the time of the courts, myself and council tax payers money.
Daniel Fenwick having been served with all relevant facts had thereby formed tacit agreement with all known facts by non response
The response from “Your colleague“, Mrs T Denham Revenue Services Manager dated 2nd Jan 2013 and received on the 9th Jan, the day before the hearing failed to address all points and made statements which were untrue and contradictory regarding contract, council tax, liquidated damages and the 1992 Local Government finance Act. All assumptions in this correspondence were incorrect.
The letter refers to an amount of £548.33 which was not owed and was not the subject of any known liability order. The amount now as stated by yourself is, £508.88. The amount you stated was on a “liability order” is £475.
There is clearly no accounting for this amount and there was never a liability order for this amount which you assumed to be from 2009, yet the court presenting officer stated was from 2006, this as stated had nothing to do with the hearing or the summons amount on the 10th Jan. This did however amount to perjury by LBWF as stated in the statutory declaration which has been ignored by LBWF and yourself and deceptively described by yourself as a letter.
There is no evidence Mrs T Denham was not in dereliction of duty as a public servant, party to fraud and misconduct in public office and it is believed that none exists.
Mrs T Denham having failed to address all points was party to vexatious and entirely unnecessary court proceedings which the council lost and were denied costs. The judge stated on 1st Feb 2013 that the counterclaim made by myself against LBWF unless settled in full can now be heard in The County Court.
Re: Elaine Logan having instigated bailiff proceedings for monies not owed and with no legal standing.
There is no evidence that Elaine Logan has not acted fraudulently in public office and intentionally and vexatiously caused distress, issued unlawful proceedings with no standing and issued false instruments in public office and it is believed that none exists.
Newlyn debt collection will now also be acting as third party to the above stated fraud by attempting to obtain money knowingly or unknowingly by deception with no legal standing as third party interloper in the matter.
There is no evidence Elaine Logan is not solely responsible for this Involvement of a third party interloper acting with no lawful standing in the matter and it is believed that none exists.
London Borough of Waltham Forest are now liable for three times the amount
stated in the letter above of £508.88.
The outstanding amount owed by LBWF is therefore £1,526.64.
Elaine Logan is also solely responsible for transferring a fraudulent financial instrument to Newlyn Debt Collectors who are now knowingly or unknowingly party to the fraud. Elaine Logan will be solely responsible for any correspondence by mail, phone or visits from any third party interlopers pursuing this false claim on behalf of Elaine Logan. Elaine Logan will be personally liable for any time and costs incurred in dealing with this matter.
The above information is now in the public domain and can be used in any form in any medium in any part of the world without prior notice.
Notice of Estoppel:
To: Elaine Logan
Acting on behalf of
London Borough of Waltham Forest
PUBLIC NOTICE OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL
Your Ref: Elaine Logan 9/4/13
Re: False claims for amount(s) described in the document attached following LBWF losing court case 1st Feb 2013.
Describing the existence of a false financial instrument. Making false claims and obfuscating only known facts for financial gain.
You have been stopped. You are hereby formally noticed by this public notice of estoppel with regard to your incorrect and unlawful actions and false claims in your letter dated 9th April 2013. The statement of facts and statutory declaration served with this document contain the only known facts in this matter.
Elaine Logan on behalf of LBWF having been party to unlawful and fraudulent financial instruments and untrue claims are hereby stopped in their unlawful claims.
Any third party interloper acting on behalf of LBWF and Elaine Logan is also hereby noticed that their actions are unlawful and without equitable standing in this matter.
Respondents are also prevented from denying the existence of the counter claim plus costs which is now over due for payment and protected by the bills of exchange act.
From my Statutory declaration:
Re: Council document : “Impending enforcement action” vexatiously issued by LBWF after losing court case and being denied costs against myself on 1st /2nd /13.
There was no liability order granted against myself at a Magistrates Court on 19/10/2009. There was no accounting or evidence for an amount claimed of £474.
Evidence of a Magistrates Court liability order was requested by myself but never received in 2009. The Council document “Notice of Impending enforcement action” is therefore not a vaild document and has no legal standing.
Following the council issuing an incorrect summons for monies not owed on 10th Jan 2013 the council presenting officer Alistair Clarke committed perjury by bringing up an incorrect amount not owed or part of the summons amount. Mr. Clarke stated the amount was from 2006 which was untrue, this clearly was a reference to the above amount.
The magistrate ordered an adjournment until 1st Feb as the council had not filed a defence to my counterclaim or produced any of the filed documents served on them.
On 1st Feb London Borough of Waltham Forest lost the case for the summons amount against myself and were denied costs. The judge stated the counterclaim by myself was vaild and could be heard upon request at The County Court.
Any third party requesting payment for the amount stated, £474 will be acting fraudulently on behalf of LBWF. Any action taken by LBWF against myself will be considered harrassment and reasonable fees will be added to the counterclaim.
I make this solemn declaration believing the same to be true and by virtue of the
Statutory Declarations Act 1835
Elaine Logan and Waltham Forest failed to respond to the above correspondence as of course they couldnt.
Here is my notice to Newlyn Debt collectors
To Cheryl Vickers
c/o Newlyn PLC
Notice to: Newlyn PLC
This matter is in the public domain
Re: A false financial instrument issued by London Borough of Waltham Forest.
Please read the enclosed documentation. Elaine Logan acting on behalf of LBWF council may have passed a fraudulent financial instrument to your company through their Council Tax department. The false claim of a liability order by LBWF is outlined in detail.
LBWF committed fraud, perjury and were in contempt of court and have vexatiously issued a fraudulent claim against myself. LBWF lost a court case and were denied costs against myself at Thames County Court on 1st Feb. The judge also ruled that a counterclaim by myself could be heard in The County Court.
The details of this are outlined in the enclosed correspondence. A statutory declaration is also enclosed.
The case can be viewed online at www.landofthefree.co.uk in the article “Latest: Council lose court case over SPD validation form”.
Please be aware that there may be a counterclaim against you personally in the County Court if there is any attempted enforcement through fraudulent financial instruments issued on behalf of your company acting as third party to Elaine Logan acting on behalf of LBWF.
Please do not respond with a standard letter stating that a legitimate debt has been passed on to you for collection, as this is untrue. There is no outstanding debt or liability order. Any response will be considered to be in the public domain and published as stated at the end of this notice. I hope this clarifies matters
The above information is now in the public domain and can be used in any form, in any medium, in any part of the world without prior notice.
To Cheryl Vickers
c/o Newlyn PLC
Re: Your Correspondence 16/5/2013
Having been served with correct determinations and having ignored and obfuscated the facts you are now put to strict proof on your assumptions.
Please forward a true copy of the liability order which you state was “Issued by the Magistrates court” signed, stamped and dated. Elaine Logan acting on behalf of Waltham Forest Council has as stated passed you a false financial instrument as there is no outstanding liability order against MY Name
If the true copy of the liability order is not received within ten days from the above date your claims will be assumed to be untrue.
Any correspondence or contact regarding this matter from third party agents
acting on your behalf will be deemed to be unlawful until such time as you supply proof of your claims.
As stated you have ten days to respond before further action is taken.
As stated above no proof of liabilty order was sent yet they still falsely maintain that they have one....Here is my response...
To Cheryl Vickers
c/o Newlyn PLC
Re Your letter 24th May
Please notice that you have now accepted by tacit agreement the only known fact in this matter that there is no liability order for any amount against MY Name
Your statements and those of Amanda Lambley (Litigation Manager) are untrue. Your claims of a liability order are known to be false. There never was any court liability order against MY Name
Both yourself acting on behalf of Newlyn PLC and Elaine Logan on behalf of LBWF have as stated ignored all facts and proceeded knowing that the claim was vexatious and fraudulent as outlined in my previous letter (enclosed) Above
It is also noticed that you have added fees to a false financial instrument for unlawful financial gain.
This is therefore the third count of fraud by Cheryl Vickers on behalf of Newlyn PLC.
As you have failed to respond with any proof of your claims you are hereby forbidden to use MY Name on any future correspondence.
You have no right to use the name and no claim against it.
Any future correspondence fraudulently demanding money by using the above name will be returned to you at your own cost.
Newlyn Reply 7th June
Newlyn replied agian "Without prejudice" stating that even though they had a liability order they do not have access to it!
So we know their claims are false and they have no liability order. Also of interest is the computer generated
"Removal of Goods Notice".
Where the council tax account number is printed it also states "Credit Union reference" This is interesting as Waltham Forest do have a credit Union but I am not a member of it. Looks like they are using everyones Council Tax account to create sureties on (ie they can borrow money on your name and number) without consent.
They are now liable for three times damages so they will now be invoiced.
Their computer generated misspelt notices have also been sent back in unstamped envelopes so their MD and litigation officer have to pay the postage.
Waltham Forest website no longer mentions collection of unpaid council tax
This is of course more fraud. It also looks like Waltham Forest have sold off their council tax debts. There is no reference to collection of unpaid council tax on their website. Previously it states who their bailiffs were and what the fees are.
If the debt has been sold then the debt collector can set their own collection fees, however as they have no court authority they can only ask you to pay, this only works with consent.
Conclusion: When councils blatantly lie and they resort to this do let whoever corresponds with you know that they are PERSONALLY liable!
NB Check out this FOI request which reveals outstanding Council Tax debt in Waltham Forest. This is from 2011:
Freedom of Information Request
I am writing in response to your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), which we received on 29 November 2011.The wording of your request was as follows:
Please can you detail all Council Tax debt currently outstanding over all financial years and break down by current enforcement stage (i.e. Bailiff, Tracing, Pre Write Off)
In response to the above request I can confirm that the Council does hold the requested information and advise you as follows:-
- Recently summonsed - £464,264.31
- Liabilities – £595,829.89
- Information requested – £48,539.21
- 14 Day Letter recently issued – £1,173,278.60
- Bailiff – £3,112,372.57
- Summonsed arrangement (where we have agreed that the customer can pay back the summonsed debt in instalments – £740,488.70
- AoE / AoB (attachment of earnings / benefit) – £359,666.11
- DWP Pending / Attachment Pending = waiting to set up an AoB / AoE – £178,443.17
- Charging Order – £575,061.85
10. Petition for Bankruptcy / Statutory Demand for Bankruptcy = waiting for bankruptcy proceedings to start / complete – £1,147690.60
11. Bankrupt – £109,170.03
12. Committal Summons / Pending – £356,795.53
13. Returned from Bailiff (awaiting tracing or decision on other action to be attempted) - £4,974,070.63
14. Awaiting Tracing or Write Off (where initial attempts at tracing have failed, and no action can be taken) – £588,099.69