London Rates Relief Based Talk

Discussion in 'Scientology Property Tax' started by Bluebell, Aug 31, 2010.

  1. RolandRB Member

    I wonder if Tony or Cherie Blair helped swing it for the CoLCorp with regards this mandatory rates relief thing.
  2. RolandRB Member

    The LGFA did not change, it was the definition of "charity" in the CA 2006 that changed. Since that was enacted the definition of "charity" changed to remove the "public benefit" assumption. The trouble with the Act comes in its enforcement with local authorities because to assess the situation and ensure that the organisation is there for the public benefit is beyond the legal means affordable to local authorities.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Anonymous Member

  4. Anonymous Member

  5. RolandRB Member

    Do we have dates for when Massimo Angius worked for OSA at St. Hill and when Peter Hodkin went into practice there? I am thinking of what they told the CoLCorp that no application for rates relief had been made in mid-Sussex when in fact it had and was turned down in 1999. If they both should have been aware of an inconsistency then perhaps we could make a complaint to the police.

    Hodkin & Company was founded in 1994 according to their web site. I seem to remember Massimo Angius phoning me up and threatening to sue me some years before 1999 so he would have been working for OSA at St. Hill. I don't know when Peter Hodkin got involved in the rates relief applications thing. I wonder whose signature was on the rates relief application.

    Mid-Sussex may no longer have the documentation but perhaps St. Hill still has the documentation at their end.

    TO THE SHREDDER - QUICK !!!11!!!
    • Like Like x 1
  6. RolandRB Member

    No, no update but a suggestion as to how to pursue things in 2012.

    How about use the angle that COSRECi is not accountable to anyone as a charity? UK charities are accountable and must prove that their money is put to charitable purposes but not COSRECi as they are not registered as a charity anywhere. Therefore Westminster, the City of London Corporation and Sunderland are giving them an advantage over UK charities. How do they justify giving that advantage to them over other genuine UK charities. What proof do they have or what proof do they seek that the money they collect is properly distributed?

    I've done lots of email writing to these people so perhaps someone else can run with this baton.
    • Like Like x 3
  7. RolandRB Member

    to add to the above, one of the worries these local authorities have is being caught out on ECHR legislation in that they think they are discriminating against a charity just because it is based somewhere else. But using the above idea you can put the boot on the other foot and ask them why they are giving an advantage to a charity based somewhere else.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Anonymous Member

    I still think South Australia should pull the plug on their life support.

    They've never filled anything there, including change of address or board members. Why hasn't an automatic subroutine deleted them years ago?
    • Like Like x 1
  9. RolandRB Member

    It would definitely help in the UK if that happened.
  10. Intelligence Member

    <3 this Thread :) - - good job!

    In Canada we're doning a similar project right now in having Quebec's Provincial Land Tax exemption
    revoked and I'm filing documents next week with our Federal Government Charities Commission to
    perform a Benefits Test on Narconon to have their Charitable status revoked.

    Received a Com from Australia yesterday concerning their charity commission establishing
    a Benefits Test.

    Since we have similar laws here in Canada as the UK (Common Law) much of our charities commission
    test are based on UK Case Law decisios. :)

  11. RolandRB Member

    I have to admit it.....

    I'm sorry.........

    Rather I am not sorry.........

    But I am waging a campaign to STOP local councils giving out information about Scientology rates relief.

    I know I have done a good job of fooling you but I have been working in the opposite direction to you all along.

    I want local councils to give my Church of Scientology tax breaks without anyone knowing about it so I have been waging a campaign against all of you here to make it look like you were organised into a campaign so that I can prevent this information being given out.

    And I have succeeded. Now, the City of London Corporation have used the excuse that people asking for information about their rates relief they give my precious Church are acting in concert with each other and are effectively a campaign. And they do not have to give out this information to people in a campaign because if anyone in that campaign asks for that information then they are asking vexatiously.

    I have won.

    It was me who was fighting a campaign all along and you did not know it and I have cleverly defeated all your efforts to get information from local councils about why they gave them rates relief.

    I know a lot of wives of Council executives will thank me because they can now get invited to posh dinners at St. Hill and get their photo taken with their arms around Tom Cruise and even a photo of them being kissed by him.

    And there is nothing you can do to stop this by asking for information about it because I have blocked your efforts through my campaigm to create the impression that you are a campaign.

    So there! :)
  12. jensting Member

    You are a very naughty person!

    Best Regards

  13. RolandRB Member

    To all you local Councils out there who have something it would be better for all if nobody knew about it.....

    You have seen what I can do.

    Slip me a few grand and whatever it is that you want nobody to know about then I will create a campaign for getting people to send in FOI requests to find out that information and then I will explain that it is a campaign and then you don't have to give out that information EVER.

    That is the law and I am clever enough to use the law to help you cover up stuff you don't want people to find out about. For good!
  14. Intelligence Member

    - -
  15. RolandRB Member

    And I am willing to give evidence to a Court and to swear on the Holy Bible (even though I know that Jesus was a "lover of young boys and men") that the information I have given is true and correct and that I am of sound mind (and have been that way for the past four quadrillion years).
  16. RolandRB Member

    The City of London Corporation laughs in the face of the Anonymous movement. They have blocked all further attempts to give out details about why they give the Church of Scientology rates relief that is in excess of 270K GBP per year. Frail old ladies this winter will have the choice of "heat or eat" and the CoLCorp, with belly-laughs, will imagine those frail old ladies trying to get up to put on a pot of tea only to drop to their knees. And having no money for medical support they will succumb to the cold and death. As their last breath expires the CoLCorp officials wives will be going through the thrill of imagining their picture being taken with Tom Cruise's arm around their neck at a luxury charity dinner held at St. Hill with the clams paying but not them.

    The CoLCorp has proved that they can use the law to trash the Anonymous movement.

    CoLCorp 1 - Anonymous 0
  17. RolandRB Member

    A shoop is needed here. Because we are a campaign then local authorities do not have to give out information on Scientology rates relief any more. That means that every local council can now give it out and get invites to St. Hill for a free dinner with all expenses paid and their wives can get photographed with Tom Cruise's arm around them. I want every local authoritiy to know that and more importantly, I want their wives to know that.

    Wouldn't a photo of Tom Cruise with his arm around your wive look good on the mantelpiece?

    What is needed here is a shoop with Tom Cruise's arm round some fat old bag in a shit dress but with the woman's face blank so that these corrupt bastards' wives get the idea that they want to join in the fun.
  18. RolandRB Member

    • Like Like x 1
  19. RolandRB Member

    Something is running through my mind here........

    I am thinking if all these local council solicitors and comptrollers who are giving our money to the cult.........

    They must think it is a good thing.........

    They must think it is a safe thing........

    They would not have granted all of that money of ours in rates unlesss they were sure it was doing the community good.....

    They must know that the community has young people who will be reassured by their actions to grant public money in the form of rates relief and these council solicitors must be perfectly happy for those children to join this particular religion........

    And they will have children themselves or nephews and nieces......

    And you know how when you buy a Dianetics book you can fill in your name, address and telephone number for them to contact you and badger you relentlessly to come in for services and keep sending you glossy brochures........

    Damn it - I lost my train of thought. :(
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Sponge Member

    • Like Like x 3
  21. RolandRB Member

    That could be your ugly old bag of a wife on the left if you opt to give 100% top-up rates relief to this cult in your borough at your next comptrollers meeting.

    And remember, you don't have to give any honest answers to FOI requests any more because WE ARE A CAMPAIGN. You don't have to give any information to anybody about this so give them the money and wait for the invite and then you'll have that picture to put on the mantelpiece.

    Don't have to worry about paying for any of it. Just get there. You'll be served by slaves on the RPF so there is no labour costs that need to be covered.
    • Like Like x 1
  22. RolandRB Member

    I've got a new angle on this. A lot of the money the "churches" get is from the sale of books, tapes and CDs. They buy this from Author Services Inc. which is a for-profit company that makes a lot of money on these books, tapes and CDs. So effectively ASI is selling their stuff through a charity front. So the City of London Corporation and Westminster are granting 80% rates relief to ASI so they can make a bigger profit on their sales.

    Also, this legal advice they got from that dickhead, wasn't it all to do with human rights and them being a charity elsewhere and not being allowed to discriminate due to their location? Well, aren't they favouring them due to their location because where they are located they do not have to account for their expenditure as a chartity whereas in the UK the charities all have to do that?
    • Like Like x 1
  23. RolandRB Member

    More useful stuff below.

    What the ASI can do is to order to churches to purchase a set amount from them. This might be a release of the Basics and what have you so their "charitable" money is taken away from them and goes to ASI which is a for-profit company.

    The Ideal Org in London then looks more like a hard-sell branch of an aggressive, for-profit literary company that they enjoy greater profits on because the the 80% rates relief they get.
    • Like Like x 1
  24. RolandRB Member

    Anyone got links to the rates relief application forms they filled in the CoLCorp and Westminster?

    There is a niggling thing in my mind that they checked a box to say they had never been refused rates relief whereas we know they were refused it by Mid Sussex in 1999.
    • Like Like x 1
  25. RolandRB Member

    This was from Westminster. It seems to me that the CoLCorp were indeed "exercising a discretion" in the sense of avoiding getting sued.

    "The Council in reaching a decision under section 43 is not exercising a
    discretion. It is applying legislation to decide whether as a matter of
    law a particular charity is entitled to a compulsory relief."

    Can somebody follow up with this? I am going back into hospital soon for major surgery and I think this is a good lead to follow up but I won't be around to see it through.
    • Like Like x 1
  26. Pique Member

    All the best to you Roland.
    Looking forward to having you 'back in the saddle' soon. Take care.
    • Like Like x 1
  27. RolandRB Member

    It isn't for 5 weeks but that is not enough for correspondence with CoLCorp.

    My op is early May 2012.
    • Like Like x 2
  28. RolandRB Member

    What is needed is someone who can spout a bit of legalese to write to these fuckers and point out their responsibilities and somehow avoid giving the impression that you think they are a bunch of twats.
    • Like Like x 2
  29. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 1
  30. RolandRB Member

  31. RolandRB Member

    This is the European Commission State Aid Complaint form.

    Because the Church of Scientology are getting mandatory rates relief from the CoLCorp, Westminster and Sunderland then they are getting State Aid. Can we think of a competitor of theirs in England or Europe who can legitimately fill in that form to complain?

    Maybe one of the Ron's Org groups in Germany?
  32. RightOn Member

  33. RolandRB Member

    Then maybe a group of fortune tellers?
  34. RolandRB Member

    I sent it off. It is maybe a bit weak in reasoning but I sent it anyway.

    • State Aid control - online complaint form - EN‏

    Sent: 06 April 2012 07:23:26

    Sending form
    Sent: 06/04/2012

    First name: Roland
    Last name: Rashleigh-Berry
    Address: Gerbergasse 5

    Town/city: Biberach an der Riss
    Postcode, country: 88400 Germany
    Phone number:
    and/or mobile:

    On behalf of:

    Postcode, country:
    Phone number: ,
    Field and place of activity:
    You may reveal my identity: yes

    3. Information regarding the Member State granting the aid:
    a) Country: United Kingdom
    b) Level at which the alleged unlawful State aid has been granted:
    Central government: Yes, in the form of mandatory rates relief
    Region: The City of London Corporation, Westminster City Council and Sunderland City Council

    4. Information regarding the alleged aid measure:
    a) To your knowledge when was the alleged aid given or granted?
    Seven years ago by City of London Corporation and Westminster City Council and two years ago (backdated six years) by Sunderland City Council
    b) What is the amount of the alleged aid, if known? In what form is it given (loans, grants, guarantees, tax incentives or exemptions etc)?
    270K GBP per year by the CoLCorp, about 40K GBP by Westminster City Council and 6K per year by Sunderland City Council in the form of 80% rates relief granted on behalf of Central government by these local authorities.
    c) Who is the beneficiary? Please give as much information as possible, including a description of the main activities of the beneficiary/firm (s) concerned
    The Church of Scientology in the form of COSRECI (Church of Scientology Religious education Colleges Inc.)
    d) For what purpose was the alleged aid given (if known)?
    Through fear of legal retribution if not granted, I believe.

    5. Grounds of complaint
    Under English law, COSRECI is not a charity as it is not a registered charity in any country and is an Australian not-for-profit organisation. It is certainly not an England and Wales based charity as it would have to be to receive "mandatory" rates relief. British central government is sponsoring the activities of this group by illegaly giving them charitable rates relief where there is no grounds in law to do so. They have chosen to do this through expediency and contrary to the law of the land.

    6. Please summarize briefly to what extent the award of the alleged aid affects
    a) commercial interests:
    COSRECI receives financial benefity not afforded to any other self-help group that might be British or European based.
    b) the market(s) in which the beneficiary(ies) of the alleged aid operate:
    self help groups

    7. Information on other procedures
    a) Have you already approached the Commission's services or any other European or national institution concerning the same issue?
    b) Approaches already made to national authorities or recourse to national courts or other procedures.
    I wrote to my Walthamstow (British) MP about this.

    8. I understand that for a faster treatment of the complaint the information provided above in point 3, 4 and 5 are non-confidential and can be sent to the Member State in question.
    • Like Like x 1
  35. RolandRB Member

    ^^^ I know the above is not very convincing but maybe somebody with a stake in this could do a better job and spout a whole load of convincing legalese. I contacted the Ron's Org org in Germany but I don't suppose those loony cunts will do anything to help themselves.
  36. RolandRB Member

    ^ Maybe this is wrong if they are a "Church" that helps people. Should I withdraw my complaint?
  37. Random guy Member

    I think it looks fine. Anyone can dig up the wider story with minimal effort.
    • Like Like x 1
  38. RolandRB Member

    If somebody makes the least effort then I agree.

    If the European Commission asks this question of the British government (who are overall responsible) then it is going to be a very uncomfortable question for them to answer. They can say that under English law that it is up to the local authorities to decide and it is out of their hands but at the end of the day it is central government granting the tax advantage and therefore sponsoring COSRECi which is an anti-competition act if it is not a genuine charity under English law. And it will be they who get taken to the European Court and fined.

    Should we get a rare bit of luck then if the ColCorp does remove the rates relief then the Co$ is destroyed in the UK because none of their Ideal Orgs will ever stand a chance of financial survival and the membership would go bust very quickly trying to keep the properties open with having to pay business rates plus utility bills.
    • Like Like x 1
  39. Random guy Member

  40. RolandRB Member

    I just hope my original complaint is not so naff so that the European Commission actually writes in to British central government to ask them to clarify the situation. That would be a difficult situation for them and I think they would have to take some sort of action. At the end of the day, it is them giving state financial support to a self-help group in preference to any other. If they say it is a charity under English law then Camden, Manchester and Birmingham would have to give it as well and I would rather see it as consistent because that makes a clearer target.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins