The money goes on having separate collection systems in each council area, as well as the expensive Council Tax benefit system.

We estimate it costs about 4 times as much to collect £1 in Council Tax as to collect £1 in Income Tax: and costs will increase if the Government decide to proceed with the Council Tax Revaluation.

Council Tax benefit was designed to help the poorest people with their bills. But it simply doesn’t work.

A third of families entitled to Council Tax benefit don’t claim – so have to struggle with their bills instead.

And the situation’s worse for pensioners: approximately 1.7 million don’t claim the money they’re entitled to.

These take-up rates are way below those for other benefits.

The main reasons for the dismal rate of take-up of Council Tax Benefits are that people don’t know about the benefit, and if they do they’re put off by the complexity of the application process – there can be as many as fifty pages of forms to fill in!

We believe that England needs a fairer system of local taxation. The Lyons Report highlights the fact that “fair taxation is based on ability to pay or income.” Thus, a local income tax would achieve the goal of developing a fairer local tax system.

A local based income tax would remove the unfair burden that is currently placed on those least able to pay. Such a tax “could significantly reduce the burden of local taxes on those groups with the lowest average incomes, notably pensioners and lone parents.”

Furthermore, the Lyons report asserts that it would be possible to implement a locally based income tax. “A local income tax could be feasible in England and could viably replace all or part of council tax, or operate alongside it.”

We here at www.NoCouncilTax.com are NOT opposed to paying a “Local Community Charge” PROVIDING is that its fair, that its based upon the services you actually use and of course based upon your ability to pay!

The site that he’s talking about is of course “www.Nocounciltax.com” and he even tries to convince our caller that the decision made by Wirral Council to withdraw in the Roger Hayes case was made of “someones own back” and that “he wouldn’t like to be in her shoes”

What a load of tosh! – All decisions to withdraw from Council Tax cases are made by the councils own legal advisors who are all trained solicitors or barristers retained (At great expense to you and I) by the council. If the decision was made to withdraw by the council then it was made because they knew they were on a hiding to nothing! It’s that simple.

It’s staggering the depths these “legal departments” will go to and the lies they will tell just to try and get you to pay the council tax thats keeping them in a job.

Enjoy the call!

Bailiff accepts FEE SCHEDULE and sees unrebutted, uncontested and undiputed offer to pay in full in an acknowledged NOTICE in front of witnesses

His call came after hundreds of anti-establishment demonstrators stormed Birkenhead County Court yesterday and “arrested” a judge.

Roads were blockaded and dozens of police officers deployed to keep order.

A stand-off followed with several demonstrators staging a sit-down protest in front of police vehicles, refusing to let them pass.

Several arrests were made and police dog-handlers called to the scene.

The protestors were from the anti-establishment “British Constitution Group.”

The demonstration was sparked when one of the prominent voices in the BCG, Wirral man Roger Hayes, faced a hearing for non-payment of council tax.

Mr Hayes believes the tax is unlawful.

Today town hall chief Cllr Jeff Green told the Globe: “Have these people given any thought to what happens to the likes of Sure Start, public libraries or other services that people depend on?

“Not many people like paying tax but we accept the need for tax.

“I am disappointed that this case has been adjourned, but in the light of the events that took place, understand the court’s decision.

“However, before anyone else gets any ideas about not paying their council tax, let me assure everyone that Wirral Council is stepping up its activity to ensure that everyone pays their fair share.

“Nobody is above the law.”

Six people were arrested following yesterday’s disturbance. Two are appearing before magistrates today.

Roger Hayes, chairman of the British Constitution Group, applied at Wirral Magistrates’ Court to have Jon Murphy arrested following Monday’s demonstration.

Mr Hayes, of Wallasey, believes police should have actually helped members of the public arrest the judge.

Yesterday, his bankruptcy hearing for non-payment of council tax ended in uproar when his supporters – several hundred of whom had massed outside – stormed Birkenhead County Court and “arrested” Judge Michael Peake.

Protestors from the public gallery charged at Mr Peake to make a civil arrest chanting “arrest that judge”.

Police scrambled over court benches to control the near riot and one protester shouted “seal the court.”

Another sat in the judge’s chair and declared Mr Hayes be “released”.

Deafening cheers and chants could be heard from the crowd outside the courts and demonstrators used mobile phones to film arrests being made.

Today Mr Hayes told District Judge Lomax at magistrates’ court: “In county court, we arrested Judge Peake for treason and contempt of court.

“I called upon the police and members of the public to help me in this but the police acted incorrectly and arrested lawful individuals.

“We now want the chief constable to appear in court to explain the actions of his officers. They acted unlawfully by rescuing the judge. The rescue and treason is a criminal offence.

“We expect the police to do their job properly and that is the responsibility of the chief constable.”

A Merseyside Police spokesman said: “Merseyside Police is aware of an application for a warrant heard at Birkenhead Magistrates court this morning (8 March)”

Credit: Wirral Globe

Just as the 2009 town hall confrontations gave birth to the modern incarnation of the Tea Party in the United States, with the organization having its early origins in the 2007 End the Fed protests involving Ron Paul supporters, could yesterday’s events herald the beginning of a massive tax revolt movement set to sweep the UK?

There were chaotic scenes as around 600 activists from the British Constitution Group massed around Birkenhead county court chanting “freedom,” and “arrest that judge” as police with riot dogs attempted to hold them back.

Protesters stormed the courtroom and civilly arrested Judge Michael Peake before escorting him from the building. Peake was eventually wrestled away from protesters by police as the activists chanted, “Do your job” to the police. Dozens more police arrived to set up blockades and numerous protesters were arrested.

Peake was ruling on a case involving Roger Hayes, former member of UKIP, who has refused to pay council tax, both as a protest against the government’s treasonous activities in sacrificing Britain to globalist interests and as a result of Hayes clearly proving that council tax is illegal.

Hayes has embarked on an effort to legally prove that the enforced collection of council tax by government is unlawful because no contract has been agreed between the individual and the state. His argument is based on the sound legal principle that just like the council, Hayes can represent himself as a third party in court and that “Roger Hayes” is a corporation and must be treated as one in the eyes of the law.

“As he emerged from the court surrounded by his supporters, Mr Hayes said: ‘The judges are breaking the law in their own courts. I asked him [Mr Peake] if he was serving under his oath of office,” reports the Daily Mail.

“I asked three times for him to confirm this and he refused, so I civilly arrested the judge and I called upon some people in the court to assist me in this,” Hayes said.

“They were acting lawfully and the police should not have arrested them.”

“Made up of people from across the UK, the marchers say they are exerting their “ancient right to lawful Rebellion under Article 16 of Magna Carta,” reported the Wirral Globe.

Raymond St. Clair, who organised the Birkenhead protest said:

“Today was day one. This is going to happen again and again and again. We have sent a message to this court as one nation and one voice until change comes.”

In a statement carried on the group’s website, Common Law is cited as a means through which lawful rebellion will be conducted to address “political treason and criminality being imposed on the law-abiding people of the British Isles.”

“It is clear, beyond all reasonable doubt and with evidence that would stand up in any properly-conducted court of law, that an influential network of rogue British politicians across the parties is unlawfully involved in carrying out the hidden strategies and agendas of a centuries-old, secretive and criminal global elite who are seeking the imposition of unlawful global governance on the unsuspecting peoples of the world. Known broadly by researchers as the New World Order (NWO) – though some refer to them as the Illuminati or Zionists (please note that this does not mean Judaism) – the modus operandi of these powerful traitors and criminals is now clear for all to see,” reads the statement.

The group lists the Committee of 300, the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Club of Rome as just some of the organizations who control “Subservient and compartmentalised national networks of influential politicians, industrialists, campaigning groups, charities and key individuals in trusted positions.”

The British Constitution Group and the movement of “lawful rebellion” is strongly supported by Brian Gerrish, a former Royal Navy Lieutenant Commander who publishes the UK Column newspaper, which documents how Britain is being destroyed by globalist interests as well as the insidious “Common Purpose” organization which has infiltrated every level of British society.

Yesterday’s events will send a clear shot across the bow of the British government, which is currently engaged in aggressive austerity measures involving cuts to public services as well as tax hikes. In March 1990, London was hit with massive tax riots in scenes dubbed the “Battle of Trafalgar,” as demonstrators raged against the infamous poll tax that was eventually abolished after millions of Brits refused to pay it, a sequence of events that many attributed to the downfall of Margaret Thatcher who resigned as Prime Minister in November the same year.

Poll tax was replaced with council tax, which took into account people’s ability to pay based on the value of their home. However, council tax rates have consistently risen over the rate of inflation even as the British people feel more and more misrepresented by the national government based in London and local governments that have been completely consumed by the agenda of Common Purpose to the detriment of their own constituents.

Credit: http://www.infowars.com/british-tax-protesters-arrest-judge-in-act-of-lawful-rebellion/

The police need to be reminded that it is their responsibility to investigate allegations of serious fraud in public institutions, including councils.

Mr Mothersole, the Chief Executive, needs to be reminded that he has a duty to his council tax payers to ensure that council funds are used for the benefit of taxpayers, and not diverted into the bank account of secretive mind bending charities.

John Prentice can be contacted on 0844 798 4314
Sheffield Police can be contacted on 0114 2202020

For years we have now been campaigning in a number of cases to get these corrupt councils to produce a “True and Original Copy” of one of these alleged “Liability Orders”.

Here’s the scam that the councils are trying to pull off!

1. They Issue a summons to you for not paying council tax.
2. When you go to court they try and trick you by meeting with you first in a little room to try and get you to admit “liability” for the council tax by getting you to agree to pay so much per month. This admission of liability on your part means that they can secure a “liability order” without you even entering the court!
3. If you don’t agree to pay then they issue a liability order anyway.
4. Now, our research shows that a “Proper Court Order” MUST have certain things on it and these are:
   1. A Wet ink Signature of the Judge or Justices Clerk who signed it on the day (Not a facsimilie signature)
   2. The Royal Identifier (i.e. Royal Coat Of Arms)
   3. Once the court date has passed they send a “Notice Of A Liability Order”

And this is where the scam exposes itself …

If the councils had a True and Original Liability Order (as per above) then why wouldn’t they send you a copy of that instead of sending you a piece of paper typed up on Microsoft Word claiming that they have a liability order.

A number of us have not been paying council for the last two years successfully because when challenged over this LAWFULLY because we back them into a corner! Here’s how …

1. We conditionally Accept their offer to pay council tax upon proof of claim (In other words they have to prove a number of points) – if they don’t we withold payment.
2. When they send a summons (Invitation to attend their place of business) we ignore it.
3. When they send a “NOTICE OF LIABILITY ORDER” we write back and send them a “NOTICE OF REBUTTAL” and “NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR TRUE AND ORIGINAL COPY OF COURT LIABILITY ORDER” which of course must meet the requirements stated earleir.
4. They then send in the bailiffs who we serve with bailiff packs (Download from www.freedomrebels.co.uk) and issue them with Bills for attending (we also video them and put them on youtube!)
5. Eventually the bailiffs get bored with that game and hand the thin back to the Council.
6. The council eventually send a letter telling you they will send you to court “for committal to prison” proceedings.
7. We then send them a letter which basically says this …

“If you are going to bring the matter into a criminal court and are going to rely on the alleged liability order in your case then the law and due process dictates that you must send me a copy of the TRUE and ORIGINAL LIABILITY ORDER, with all the correct attributes thereupon.

The law concerning disclosure dictates that you, the council, are required to do this at least 14 days before the hearing.

Therefore, if you are going to rely on this document we will bring it up in court that you have vexatiously withehld it at all times and therefore this matter and the valuable time of the court would not have been wasted and also because you, the council are required to disclose it 14 days before the hearing you will have no problem sending it to me now … will you?”

Normally at this point … the council go away because you have backed them into a corner lawfully. They know they can’t go into a court and rely on a piece of paper which …

BY THE ADMISSION OF PLYMOUTH COUNCIL … DOESN’T EXIST ON PAPER!

They also know that you are going to counter claim against them for being vexatious.

Here is the document from Plymouth Council telling us all that these Liability order are non existent!

So there you have it! Proof undeniable, from the council themselves that they don’t ACTUALLY have a Liability Order that conforms to any sort of Lawful requirement! And yet, on the back of this scam they creaming Billions from us all!

We believe that for this unlawful council tax abomination there is a truth in the words of Rutger Hauer’s character Roy Batty in the film Bladerunner!

“Time … To Die!”

Now the story continues …

This article is a continuation of the non-payment of council tax saga… now in its 3rd year.

The story so far: The council have demanded council tax from me (Roger Hayes), which I have refused to pay for 3 years – on the grounds that there is no lawfully enforceable contract between me (Roger Hayes) and the council. The council is refusing to provide me with a lawful contract because they think that they have the right to demand that I pay council tax…which they do not. I am happy to pay my council tax – but only when the Council has agreed to provide me with a lawful contract… this is my right. The benefit of a contract is that it makes the council agree terms and conditions with me and prevents them acting in an arbitrary fashion i.e. it brings power back to the people.

The fact is that the council has no right to demand council tax from me (Roger Hayes) – but they DO have the right to demand it from the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES… but that isn’t me.

If readers are not familiar with the legal fiction – please refer to previous articles or the UK Column web site www.uk-column.org .

On the 11th January 2011 in the county court of Birkenhead, in front of witnesses, the court conceded to the right of Roger Hayes to act as ‘third party representative for MR ROGER HAYES. In essence the court agreed that they were two entirely separate entities. This is an extraordinary development to put it very mildly.

The court however did not concede without putting up a very vigorous fight… this is how events unfolded in the court room.

Judge: Can we first find out who is in the court… is MR ROGER HAYES in the court?

Me: Sir, I am third party representative for MR ROGER HAYES.

Judge: Are you MR ROGER HAYES?

Me: No sir, I am third party representative for MR ROGER HAYES… you may address me as Roger.

Judge: I will not address you as Roger; I will call you MR HAYES.

Me: Sir, I am not MR HAYES, the court is required to address me as I request and I request that you address me as Roger. (NOTE – court protocol dictates that a defendant or respondent can be addressed the way they choose – the judge then referred to me as ‘the gentleman’ but avoided referring to me as MR HAYES).

Judge: If you are not MR ROGER HAYES then I will take note that MR ROGER HAYES is not represented in court.

Me: In that case sir, you will have to also note that the council is not represented in court. (NOTE – This would mean that the case would have to be dismissed, finding for the defendant, because the plaintiff had not appeared).

Judge: I can see that the council has representation in the court.

Me: Then you will have to acknowledge that MR ROGER HAYES has representation in the court. We are all equal in the eyes of the law… if council has third party representation then so does MR ROGER HAYES. The council is a corporation and so is MR ROGER HAYES.

Judge: MR ROGER HAYES is not a corporation.

Me: Yes it is.

Judge: No it isn’t, it is a PERSON.

Me: A PERSON is a corporation.

Judge: No it isn’t.

Me: Define person.

Judge: I don’t have to.

Me: Then let me do it for you sir, A PERSON is a corporation (NOTE: This is defined in a law dictionary). Sir, are you familiar with the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666?

Judge: I am familiar with many laws.

Me: Sir, I asked if you are familiar with the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666, if you are not Sir, then with respect you are not competent to to judge in this matter and that gives rise to a claim of denial of due process.

Judge: Let’s hear from the council.

Me: Sir we can only move on to the council’s presentation when the court has confirmed that MR ROGER HAYES is represented in court.

Judge: Fine.

And the case continued… with me (Roger Hayes) acting as third party representative for the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES and with the judge eventually telling the council to go away and prove its case. The judge was obviously very keen to avoid a charge of denial of due process i.e. a challenge to his competence. It was much easier for him to side with me and pass the buck back to the council. Smart judge.

So what does this all mean? In very simple terms, it is SEISMIC i.e. extremely significant. It means that the court has accepted that the council’s claim is against the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES and not me, the flesh and blood man Roger Hayes. The court has also accepted that I (Roger Hayes) can act as a third party representative to defend the claim against MR ROGER HAYES.

The legal fiction cat is truly out of the bag (although for me this is the second time I have achieved this in court). If the council goes on to win its case, then the court will find against the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES, but significantly, they will not have found against me Roger Hayes… because as the court agrees… MR ROGER HAYES is a corporation… which isn’t me. One important thing is now clearly established – I, Roger Hayes, am not liable for council tax, AND NEITHER ARE YOU.