London Rates Relief Based Talk

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Don't think TCR has ever been on the Scis church locator website

As for this, I call BULLSHIT, there no date on the article

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

NOW I'll believe it abit more

The Sex Pistols: It happened here

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

It most definitely was. It used to be the London Church of Scientology. It is not any longer as this is now 146 QVS and this could result in 68 TCR having to pay business rates now. Might we see a change of the lettering above the door soon?

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Roland, check Camden planning search. You'll see that there has been no recent application for change of use.
Planning Application Search

Last related item to property use: Certificate of lawfulness for existing use as a place of worship and religious instruction (Class D1). Granted 12-08-2005

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Is that the only one for TCR yea?

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Then I don't know what this upcoming court case or court appearance or court whatever is all about. I think that Camden Council hate the clams nearly as much as mid Sussex. Camden made their C/S wear a chef's hat when handing out vitamin pills for their Purif they run in the basement and they made Coco move out. They earlier complained about my bike I had chained to the railings out the back there that I had to use as part of my Purif as having one leg shorter than the other I could not do the running part of the Purif and had to cycle round instead.

I would like to think that Camden are taking them on about business rates and the other London authorities are looking on with interest but I just don't know. We will all have to wait for another few months I guess.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

I haven't received Communion from the C+E in a long time but when I did they never had to wear chef's hats to do it because the local council decided that it was foodstuff. When I say mid Sussex Council and Camden Council hate the clams then I do so with some justification. Let's hope that Camden Council have got something nasty planned for the clams in this upcoming court thingy.
-------------
Scientology business rates relief in the UK

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Private Eye | Official Site

Private Eye has a nice piece on the rates.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Yes, we know. But we would like more details on the court case between Camden and the Church of Scientology at 68 TCR.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Camden Council v the Clams at 68 TCR

What is going on with this upcoming court date?

I want to know.

If you know then PM me and I promise not to pass it on. I'm good like that. Signed the Official Secrets Act and all that.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Should you even be saying you signed the act if you did?

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Don't "beg the question"
"Please explain how the Scientology Celebrity Centre at 42 Leinster Gardens, is for public benefit."

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Umm, did I miss something? What is basis for thinking there is upcoming court case?

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

68 Tottenham Court Rd - Scientology rates exemption? - WhatDoTheyKnow

Search on "court proceedings". I added this to my document.
--------------------------
Scientology business rates relief in the UK -- 05OCT2010 -- (PDF version)

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

"such information might be disclosed in due course once any Court proceedings commenced" (i.e. if and when)

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

It's a slightly strange usage which seems to indicate that this will be a drawn out process and not something quick and simple like they had not paid their business rates and a date had been set for a hearing at a magistrates court as part of the process described below.

Business Rates recovery action

.....but I suppose it could be drawn out. What do other people make of it?

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

If it IS just a magistrate's court for recovery of unpaid business rates then how come Camden are refusing to give information and say it is sub judice? It surely would not be for a magistrates court with just the magistrate making a decision in a straight forward case like this.

Wondering......

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Some CoL FOI Internal Review's need chasing up plz you guys.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Some new info:

Esco Text Retrieval System

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

'kin a.

- W "well informed" T

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Fucking Hell!

How did that turn up? )

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

The KING of FOIer's WT of course.

Also, thought you'd be 'wetting' yourself there Roland LULZ

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

It's a very interesting document.

In that it sets out their current reasoning, and in that they do seem to plan to release further information re past FOIA requests, I'm not sure how much further FOIA can take us. I think maybe they've released everything interesting now.

The strongest counter-argument (that I can think of) for the view put forward in that document - that they shouldn't risk litigation - is that the likelihood of the applicant sueing them is not a legitimate consideration when deciding whether to grant mandatory relief.

And that point won't work on FOIA.

As far as I can see it, we'd need to be heading for either:

complaint to the auditors (we should definitely do this anyway)

or

judicial review

- WT

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Minutes to a meeting dated September 27th... on the even of Anon Day in other words.

I appreciate that "members are requested to decide..." and we don't know the outcome of their decision yet, but... wow. I don't think this will end well for the cult.

Well done W.T., Roland and certain other Anons who shall remain nameless (of course).

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

thanks BB.

Yes, Roland gets his own mention in the minutes.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

We do. They decided to keep the mandatory relief.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

sorry if this is stupid lazy faggot question, but i noticed the bottom of this document mentions this:

^^is that something we've already seen?

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

good point. we don't have that.

the current document summarises their reasoning though, so I'm not sure it's worth the bother of getting it.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

where do the say that?

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Employing Carter Ruck in a failed attempt to spike a BBC documentary: £1m+

Getting to OT8 and learning it's nothing but "you mocked up your own past lives": $350,000 each

Losing your cult's tax exemption in City of London: £304,226.45 per year

Knowing that the above has to be reported to David 'psychotic midget' Miscavige at 2pm on Thursday: priceless

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

it's buried in their stock response:

Procedures for granting and revoking rates relief - WhatDoTheyKnow

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

They haven't lost it.

Yet.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Financial implications

15. The total cost of mandatory relief in the current financial year, including the City premium and the supplement for Crossrail is £304,226.45, the vast majority of which, £288,674.45, is borne nationally through the NNDR pool. Of the remainder, £2,592.00 is the City premium and £12,960 is the Crossrail supplement.

WWP - Rates Valuation Info

WOW pretty damn close with my calulations

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

i beg to differ... quoting their claims verbatim from that doc could be useful. Plus, stories & claims change as times change. so historical proof of what they stated then vs. what they state now could be valuable.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

One thing stands out, and it is the same thing that was always suspected ever since rates relief was granted by CoL. That is the fear of the costs of litigation. The report makes no bones about that. A bit OTT in my view. They speak in terms of "recovering costs" without regard to what is right in law. Like they don't care that although they may believe it is not a charity that has any public benefit, they are willing to finance it and let the public think, through this local authority endorsement, that it is a charity.

In someways you can hardly blame them for being concerned about costs with the threat of public spending cuts especially when even the central government is reluctant to debate the issue and provide more solid information (including Charities Commission who didn't seem to clarify things with respect to the 2006 charities act, which is surprising). They clearly need more help because they almost admit to being totally unqualified to make these difficult and contentious decisions.

What I can't understand is why a local authority should even have to worry about the definition of charity in terms of public benefit when a decision was made on the cult, by a government appointed body, The Charites Commission, in 1999 that still stands today. IMO any litigation should be aimed at the body who formed that decision (the Charites Comission) and not a Local Authority who is merely following that advice (or should)
What is the point of having Charity Comission rulings if a local authority empowered to grant relief based on charity and public benefit can't even rely on that same directly relavent information?

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Re-reading ^^^ Sponge sums it up really

That to me basicaly says fu Charity Commission, we're scared that CoS will sue us if we stop the rates relief.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Hmm...

I don't read this so much as a refusal to end the COSREC tax avoidance scandal, but as an appear for central government to resolve matters, or at least to back them up with regard to the cost of litigation.

This doesn't say "never." It just says "not alone." In a sense, we're stronger than ever before because we have fresh, accurate information about CoL's decisions... and none of it comes out in support of the cult.

Also, we might still find that Sen. Xenophon severs Scientology's tax lifeline at the Australian end.

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

good point.

so apply for it:

WhatDoTheyKnow - make and browse Freedom of Information (FOI) requests

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Absolutely right.

As far as I can see, the decision to grant (and maintain) charitable relief is based on the cult's notorious litigiousness, and its financial resources.

So for the moment, the cult's usual tactics have been working.

As far as I can see though, this does make CoL vulnerable to judicial review because:

1)

The criteria in the Local Government Finance Act, about whether or not mandatory relief should be granted, have nothing to do with the likelihood that the applicant might take the local authority to court.

They also have nothing to do with the deep pockets of the applicant.

CoL have said that this is a matter of the administration of justice: justice should be the same for all applicants.

It is wrong for CoL to be making this decision based on the fact that Scientology is rich and likes to sue.

2)

Even if (1) is incorrect, CoL have made a mistake in calculating the risk/reward ratio of going ahead and taking away the mandatory relief.

That's because they've only considered one year's mandatory relief (£300k).

They should be considering all the past, present and future mandatory relief relating to this site.

That comes to many millions of pounds (depending on how many years you use for the calculation) - so the potential legal costs become insignificant.




Roland, if I write a 'letter before claim' making the above points, would you put your name to it and send it in? (since you're already namefagged)

A 'letter before claim'
Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review - Ministry of Justice
is the first step in the judicial review process - but it doesn't commit you to suing them or hiring a lawyer or paying their costs or anything.



Anons please add any futher grounds for judicial review which you think might apply (outside of the ones above and the ones in Roland's document).




- WT

Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

Xenu, disconnection and assorted Hubbard-paranoia

Dubious benefits, certainly unrelated to any of the stated aims from the cult PR material

There's an awful lot of harm to weigh against dubious cultist "wins"

I'm not convinced there's any benefit, regardless

We might debate wheelchair accessibility at QVS... or the cult's Hubbard-source policies about disabilities, both physical and mental

ROFL, ROFL, ROFL...

Not sure what this means. Celebrity fast-tracking? $3000 suits for Miscavige? (If he was normal size, his suits would cost at least $4000, so technically, he's a bargain... if you want a psychopath in charge.