Freeman of the Land and Council Tax

The Freeman of the Land movement incorrectly believe that they are only bound by contracts they have agreed, or laws they have consented to.

As a result they claim they are not liable to pay Council Tax as they have no contract with the Council, or have not consented to it. 

Liability to pay Council Tax is established under the Local Government Finance Act 1992. A Person does not choose whether or not they are liable under this legislation. Claiming to be a Freeman of the Land does not mean you are not liable to pay Council Tax.

Your liability to pay Council Tax is not dependent on, and does not require your consent or a contractual relationship with the Council.

The legislation covering liability to pay, the billing and recovery of Council Tax is set out in the following legislation.

• The Local Government Act 1972
• The Local Government Finance Act 1992
• Council Tax (Demand Notices) (England) Regulations 2011 (as amended)
• Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992

All information can be freely accessed at www.legislation.gov.uk.

Anyone who withholds payment of their Council Tax, will be subject to recovery action in accordance with the relevant legislation.

Use of arguments held by the Freeman of the Land movement will not delay or prevent recovery action being taken against you. Before seeking to use such arguments as a defence against payment of Council Tax, we recommend that you seek proper legal advice (at your own cost).

In some cases, the Council may seek Committal to prison for non-payment of Council Tax. Freeman of the Land defences do not stand up in Court. In 2015, an individual claiming to be a Freeman of the Land attempted to argue he was not liable to pay Council Tax on the grounds that a contract was required and that he had not consented to it. The individual was sentenced to 40 days in prison by Manchester Magistrates Court (Manchester City Council v McKenzie [2015]). 

Liability to pay Council Tax arises under the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Your liability to pay Council Tax is not dependent on, and does not require your consent or a contractual relationship with the Council. 

The High Court has further clarified this matter in the case of Kofa v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council [2024].

When dealing with the matter of consent to be charged Council Tax and that no one can be forced to pay, J Fordham stated at Paragraph 17 that 'the 1992 Act and 1992 Regulations are themselves legislative prescriptions forming part of the "law", to which "rule of law" we are all subject'. He also clarified that consent is 'expressed through the ballot box, with elected representatives in parliament then decided collectively about the merits of primary legislation' and this is ...'precisely because of the impossibility and inappropriateness of individualised consent to legislation, from "every individual...in person"'.

Liability to pay Council Tax arises under the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Your liability to pay Council Tax is not dependent on, and does not require your consent or a contractual relationship with the Council.

The issue of a Council Tax bill (demand notice) in accordance with the Council Tax (Demand Notice) (England) Regulations 2011 (as amended) creates the debt in the name of the billed person. 

Your liability to pay Council Tax is not dependent on, and does not require your consent or a contractual relationship with the Council. As a result no signatures are required by either party. 

Despite claims that court summons documents are invalid if not signed in wet ink, this is incorrect. There is no requirement for a wet ink signature under rule 109 Magistrates’ Courts Rules 1981. Case law has confirmed stamp or electronic signatures are valid for the purpose of signing a summons. Please see R. v. Brentford Justices ex parte Catlin [1975], in which Lord Chief Justice Widgery stated that it is acceptable for a signature to be affixed by way of rubber stamp. Therefore, a wet ink signature is not mandatory on a Court Summons. 

No statute authorises or prevents a Council preparing a summons on behalf of the court’s. Section 51 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980, states that a person can apply to the magistrates’ court for a summons. If  granted, it is usual practice for the complainant to prepare, and send the summons and it is also their responsibility to serve the summons on the respondent (Rule 99 of the Magistrate Court Rules 1981 sets out how a summons can be issued). In the case of Council Tax, this is the Local Authority/Billing Authority.  

In advance of the hearing you were issued a Magistrates Court Summons advising you of the date and time of the hearing. If you do not make representation to the Court, or fail to attend, the Court will issue a Liability Order in your absence.  

If you believe that the Court was wrong to award a Liability Order against you, you should raise this directly with the Magistrates Court. You will need to be able to show that the Council or Court has failed to follow the required process, and apply to the Court to have the Liability Order set aside. 

The Council does not hold individual Liability Orders for each taxpayer listed at a Liability Order hearing. These are bulk proceedings, in which an individual will be named on a list presented to the Court. 

This list contains the details of those taxpayers and their debt, against whom a Liability Order is requested. A copy of the list of the granted orders is retained by both the Court and the Council. The Court will sign the corresponding bulk order for that list. 

A Copy of the signed bulk order, together with your entry on the list can be supplied upon request.

The Council does not hold individual Liability Orders for each taxpayer listed at a Liability Order hearing. These are bulk proceedings, in which an individual will be named on a list presented to the Court.  The hearing is not listed by each individual who is summonsed to attend. You will therefore not find a court hearing listed as 'City of Doncaster Council v A N Individual'. The Court will likely record the relevant court session as 'City of Doncaster Council Liability Order hearing' or similar. 

A list is provided to the court by the Billing Authority, containing the details of those taxpayers and their debt, against whom a Liability Order is requested. A copy of the list of the granted orders is retained by both the Court and the Council. The Court will sign the corresponding bulk order for that list. 

A Copy of the signed bulk order, together with your entry on the list can be supplied upon request.

If you have concerns about the records of the Court, you should contact them directly. Such queries should not be directed to the Council.

Claims have been incorrectly made that no Liability Order exists and cannot be enforced, as no paper copy of an order can be provided. More recently, this has based on misinterpretation of the judgement in Leighton v Bristow & Sutor [2023].

When dealing with Mr Leighton’s argument that no Liability Order was granted, HHJ Harrison stated at paragraph 17 of his ruling that ‘…If I ask myself, on the balance of probabilities, whether the Magistrates’ Court on the dates shown made liability Orders against those persons on the court list, then the contemporaneous documentation suggests that this was the case’.  At paragraph 18, HHJ Harrison goes on to say the form of the order does not form part of his judgement, but that he is satisfied by the evidence one was awarded, recorded and notified to the defendant; where he stated - ‘whether or not the form of the order is capable of challenge is not, in my judgement, central to the resolution I must resolve in this case. What is relevant is that I am satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the Magistrates Court indicated they were granting liability orders against those shown on the list on the days in question. Furthermore, the council noted the making of the same, and the council then passed on that information to the defendants for enforcement’. HHJ Harrison goes on to set out in paragraph 19, that ‘For the purposes of paragraph 66(8)(b) [of The Tribunals and Courts Enforcement Act 2007], that would amount for grounds for a reasonable belief on the part of an enforcement agent that there was in existence a non-defective instrument’. 

This matter in further clarified in the case of Kofa v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council [2024].

When dealing with the matter of consent to be charged Council Tax and that no one can be forced to pay, J Fordham stated at Paragraph 17 that 'the 1992 Act and 1992 Regulations are themselves legislative prescriptions forming part of the "law", to which "rule of law" we are all subject'. He also clarified that consent is 'expressed through the ballot box, with elected representatives in parliament then decided collectively about the merits of primary legislation' and this is ...'precisely because of the impossibility and inappropriateness of individualised consent to legislation, from "every individual...in person"'.

J Fordham also provided further clarification in his observations at paragraph 29 of his judgement, where he stated 'The 1992 Regulations do not require a "court issued" order' before stating 'I have been shown no provision of the 1992 Act which requires a court-issued order. Regulation 34(6) provides that the magistrates' court will "make the order". Rule 115  specifically excludes liability orders from the general duty to serve orders', and 'I have been shown no provision which requires entry in the court record, to be sent or served on person against whom a liability order is made or enforced...'.

J Fordham also addresses the comments made within the Leighton v Bristow & Sutor [2023] case, stating '...the judgement in Leigton concluded - based on extracts from a "court list" paired with a signature certifying "the number of liability orders made" - that the evidence set our in the documents satisfied the High Court on the balance of probabilities that the liability orders in question had been made'.

As stated above, this evidence can be provided on request. The above cases confirm this this is sufficient to demonstrate a Liability Order has been granted, and that it can be enforced.

City of Doncaster Council is a Local Authority, and Billing Authority for the purposes of the billing and collection of Council Tax. A Billing Authority is created under the Local Government Finance Act 1992, and the Local Government Act 1972.

City of Doncaster Council is a Local Authority, and Billing Authority for the purposes of the billing and collection of Council Tax. A Billing Authority is created under the Local Government Finance Act 1992, and the Local Government Act 1972.

Liability to pay Council tax arises under the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Your liability to pay Council Tax is not dependent on, and does not require your consent or a contractual relationship with the Council.

Council Tax legislation was created by Act of Parliament and came into effect 1 April 1993.

Liability to pay Council Tax is set out in Sections 6-9 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Your liability to pay Council Tax is not dependent on, and does not require your consent or a contractual relationship with the Council.

The Council is aware of misleading articles on the Internet which claim Council Tax is not payable, based on the concept of 'Freeman of the land', incorrect references to the Magna Carta, or in incorrect or flawed interpretation of the law. Attempts to refuse payment of Council Tax on these grounds have already failed, and in case of Manchester Magistrates Court v McKenzie [2015] the individual was sentenced to 40 days in prison. 

The High Court has further clarified this matter in the case of Kofa v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council [2024].

When dealing with the matter of consent to be charged Council Tax and that no one can be forced to pay, J Fordham stated at Paragraph 17 that 'the 1992 Act and 1992 Regulations are themselves legislative prescriptions forming part of the "law", to which "rule of law" we are all subject'. He also clarified that consent is 'expressed through the ballot box, with elected representatives in parliament then decided collectively about the merits of primary legislation' and this is ...'precisely because of the impossibility and inappropriateness of individualised consent to legislation, from "every individual...in person"'.

This request is for the following information as set out under Section 44 and Section 45 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 44 Information: controller’s general duties

1.

(a) the identity and the contact details of the controller, and

(b) the contact details of the data protection officer, and

(c) the purposes for which the controller processes my personal data, and

2.

(a) information about the legal basis for the processing, and

(b) information about the period for which the personal data will be stored or, where that is not possible, about the criteria used to determine that period, and

(c) information about the categories of recipients of my personal data, and

(d) was the personal data being processed and collected without my knowledge, and

 

Section 45 Right of access by the data subject

1.

(a) confirmation as to whether or not personal data concerning me is being processed, and

(b), access to my personal data and the information set out in subsection (2).

2.

(a) the purposes of and legal basis for the processing, and

(b) the categories of personal data concerned, and

(c) the recipients or categories of recipients to whom my personal data has been disclosed (including recipients or categories of recipients in third countries or international organisations), and

(d) the period for which it is envisaged that the personal data will be stored or, where that is not possible, the criteria used to determine that period.

 

Response: The Data Controller is City of Doncaster Council. All of the information requested above can be accessed in the Council Tax Privacy Notice.

Your personal data is collected in accordance with and for the purposes set out in the Local Government Finance Act 1992 and The Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) Regulations 1992 (SI1992/613). Your consent is not required.

The Council has lawful basis for the processing of personal data relating to the administration of Council Tax under Article 6(1)(c) & (e) of the UK General Data Protection Regulations (UK GDPR), as follows:

Article 6(1)(c) 'Legal Obligation', which gives lawful basis for processing where 'processing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which the controller is subject'.

Article 6(1)(e) 'Public Task', which gives lawful basis for processing where 'processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller'.

This is supplemented by Section 8 of the Data Protection Act 2018, the Council does not need consent for the 'processing of personal data that is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of the controller’s official authority includes processing of personal data that is necessary for —

(a) the administration of justice,

(b) the exercise of a function of either House of Parliament,

(c) the exercise of a function conferred on a person by an enactment or rule of law,

(d) the exercise of a function of the Crown, a Minister of the Crown or a government department, or

(e) an activity that supports or promotes democratic engagement.'

 

Your data is collected and held by City of Doncaster Council for the purposes of taxation collection, in accordance with Schedule 2, Part 1, Paragraphs 2 & 3 of the Data protection Act 2018.

Please also see:

• The Local Government Act 1972.
• The Local Government Finance Act 1992.
• Regulations 3 to 6 the Council Tax (Administration & Enforcement) Regulations 1992 (SI1992/613).