Please use our A-Z INDEX to navigate this site or return HOME




Fighting against slavery in all its forms, Dr King Shultz and Django Freeman



There might be a contract for the level of services that you are willing to contribute to. One the other hand, your council may not have provided the services, or otherwise behaved in a manner where there is a reasonable contract. All contracts of course must be reasonable. If they are not, there should be a mechanism through which you can seek an effective remedy.


In the case of the Generating Station, the council has failed to provide adequate roads, or to prevent regular flooding, or even illegal waste discharges out to sea. There are no affordable homes to rent in the Hailsham/Herstmonceux area. And worst of all, the Heritage Asset has no reasonable or beneficial use to pay for treatments or general maintenance. It is thus a good idea to write to the Council, asking how/where the Tax they are claiming, is being spent.





The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) may apply to the way Councils seek to get around challenge, in seeking Charging Orders. With there being no Right of Appeal built into their tax collecting mechanism, your rights vanish. You may as well be a factory chicken for all the rights they afford you.


Here are some potential ECHR Articles that councils are presently violating (infringing):

Article 6: The right to a fair hearing seems to be violated. Without a chance to defend yourself, the charging orders obtained appear unfair.


Article 8: If the council's actions significantly interfere with your private and family life, especially considering where an existing order prevents residential use, this could be a concern.


Article 17: This article prohibits denying a right under the Convention through another mechanism. If Article 6 is being violated by the council's system, then Article 17 becomes relevant.


The UK's HRA and Article 13:

The UK Parliament incorporated most of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic law through the HRA 1998. Article 13 wasn't included because the UK government believed existing domestic law already provided effective remedies for breaches of Convention rights.


Though, in this case Councils have deliberately engineered a system where there is no recourse in English Law. That intended (as stated by Parliament) could not happen, has happened. Domestic law is lacking a safety net. This has been shown time and time again. Two of the latest proofs of evidence, being the prosecution of 900 post office sub-postmasters, and the NHS contaminated blood scandal. None of which could have happened if there had been an Effective Remedy - as a Right.


Another issue, is the police being paid for out of Council Taxes. A clear conflict of evidence, when one local authority is asked to investigate another in the same geographical region. According to a Telegraph article from 28 June 2024, one in ten police chiefs have stood down amid allegations of wrongdoing. Corruption is clearly rife in British law enforcement.


Judicial Review is not a Right:


Firstly, likely applicants who are on a low income could not afford the legal fees in making an application.


Secondly, there is no Legal Aid to level the playing field and overcome the costs element.


Thirdly, all such applications may be refused by a Single Judge, who may be bowing to the State aiming for honours and other advancements. That only towing the party line rewards. As in not making the State look bad, so condoning Nobel Cause Corruption.


Article 3 Degrading Treatment


The situation described could be argued as a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment) alongside Article 6 (right to a fair hearing).

Here's a breakdown as to Why Degrading Treatment Could Be Applicable:

Lack of Hearing: Not being allowed to defend yourself can be seen as a form of humiliation and a denial of basic rights. Treating humans like chattels (goods). Some animals have more protected rights.


Closed Court: The lack of transparency and public scrutiny raises concerns about fairness and can be seen as an attempt to silence dissent.


No Right of Appeal: The absence of any recourse against the council's decision adds to the feeling of powerlessness and injustice. As time goes on the frustration mounts, not only from having other rights abused, but also because of the financial implications, having bailiffs call at their homes to take goods, and finally, facing bankruptcy. As councils have pursued in the past. (Duffy V New Forest District Council)









WERE YOU TRICKED BY A SYSTEM YOU HAVE NO CONTROL OVER? - Did you enter into a service contract, or were you tricked into thinking it was legal. Did you think (like so many others) that you had to accept their terms without being able to challenge them. That is not so. The Consumer Protection Act 2015 provides a level of protection to consumers from those who provide services. If, for example, the service provided is not of up to a normal standard (not of merchantable quality).


Firstly, how was the Band value of your property arrived at, and did you agree with it? And what were the published terms of the (deemed) contract to provide services? You will find there is no published terms and conditions relating to the (goods or services) Service being provided. It is a make it up as you go along unwritten contract, that allows councils to (in effect) defraud their deemed customers.


A basic human need is shelter. Where then are the affordable homes? If there are none, then the (deemed) valuation is artificially high. Meaning that the charges are not correct - the banding value is inflated. It is worse than that. In only granting consents for executive housing for landlords to charge high rents, your council is artificially raising the Banding on all houses. Hence, they are overcharging you, deliberately and with malice aforethought. They are doing this to charge higher taxes and grab the CILs (Community Infrastructure Levies) for which they are not improving the infrastructure. The most obvious of which is the roads and street lighting. Signs, hospitals, doctors, schools, shops, etc.


As a case in point, are the roads fit for purpose? If not, the taxes being charged are excessive and you are entitled to a discount. The first thing to do is ask you local authority to qualify their position. To set out the basis of their ability to seek money in return for services. That you may find are not being provided. When the council refuse to answer your reasonable questions. Only a fool pays more that they should. And only a fool does not read the terms of a contract - deemed or otherwise.


How many staff are employed to provide the services they claim to be providing. Are those staff being overpaid. Are they receiving fat pensions and retirement bonuses? Are they working from home? You are entitled to know if the wages and salaries are excessive. To know if the services you are being charged for are reasonable, or if you are looking at Culpable Overcharging.


Have you asked the police to investigate what appears to be fraudulent accounting. Was not Donald Trump charged and convicted of such a crime? The problem here being that your police force is paid by Council taxes. Hence, your local force cannot (and will not) investigate allegations of overcharging. Misappropriation of public monies, etc.


Nobody has the right to take away your shelter. You are not a slave. We are all born equal. Nobody is above natural law. If you cannot change their rules, you do not have to accept them. But even playing by their rules, you may find your council are attempting to defraud you. And that is illegal. For example, if they refuse to answer (provide) some basic information as to how they are running their corporation.


USING THEIR RULES AGAINST THEM - Once you realise that they are ripping you off. Put them on Notice, requiring them to answer questions as to the above. Are they or are they not overcharging, and why are they doing it. The Magistrates Court, the way it is operated is a self-serving mechanism that violates your right to a Fair Hearing under Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) because it is not a real court. The room is hired by the council and the clerk paid by the council, as are the magistrates. Hence, Councils have engineered a means designed to undermine your Rights. They are judge and jury in their own cause. Not in any way independent, as required by Article 6. Whereas, it is a basic requirement that any Court has to be Independent, Fair and Impartial.


Here are the links to applicable UK statute:


You will find your council will not answer questions as to the above. Why? Because they know they are breaking UK (statute). So what to do next? Well, we have no effective remedy in the UK. The Human Rights Act 1998 specifically removes that, by omitting Articles 1 and 13. Check that out for yourself. Try to find Article 13 in the Schedule. That's right, it is not included. But it is included in the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Hence you need to lodge a claim in the European Court in Strasbourg, France.


There is no Legal Aid to challenge any of this and develop an argument. All withdrawn years ago. So check out Section 6 of the HRA, where you will find it is a violation of your basic human rights to violate a Convention Right. As in Article 13. Which is part of the European Convention of Human Right. Also in the the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But let's concentrate on the European Court, as your first port of call.


To be clear, there is no "Effective Remedy" in the UK. A remedy to be effective has to be a Right and affordable. One magistrate said anyone could seek a Judicial Review. But that is discretionary. You need permission for that. Hence, it is not a 'Right.'


The Magistrates court, the way council's abuse it, is a violation of Article 17: A system or practice that violates a Convention Right. These are your grounds for lodging in Europe. Violations of Articles 6, 13 and 17. Which invokes Article 3: Mental Torture. These are ongoing violations, as they seek to pursue council taxes with Bailiffs and Bankruptcy. Thus invoking Article 8 (Freedom of Interference in private and family life) and Article 1 or Protocol 1 (peaceful enjoyment of possessions).


According to the Consumer Protection Act 2015 (Section 24) you are entitled to a discount, or full refund, if the services provided are not as described in any deemed contract. Like rutted and potholed roads.


According to the Fraud Act 2006 (Section 4) the council is required to safeguard your financial interests. In not providing the services, or artificially rating houses higher as a result of their own negligence: failure to provide affordable housing stocks. They have committed fraud, and thus violated your Human Rights. Since there is no effective remedy in the UK, without Article 13 protections. In this case a level playing field. Or, Equality at Arms.


If you can find like minded persons who are being charged Council Tax at prices/rates way above that affordable. You may consider lodging a joint claim; a class action. Or multiples of claims with exactly the same grounds. Join or form an action group.


The UK is still bound by the Convention as signatories. 'Art of War' by Sun Tzu: "Learn thy enemies ways and use them against them."


You will need a printer and laptop, or iPad. All communications must be sent by Recorded Post, printed on paper, sent in envelopes. No other form of service will do. Such as emails or texts. They are not legally recognized forms of Service. Good luck : )




We are presently working on this page. Any application to the ECHR will need to tailored to your circumstances. We appreciate this is difficult for the layperson being confronted with multiple violations as described above.


If the European Court accepts your case, they will appoint a lawyer and provide free legal assistance.











Please use our A-Z INDEX to navigate this site