Haggling Can Be Fun

But you have to make the effort.

Take me, for instance. I slaved over a letter to the taxman. Then I had to find an envelope, whack a stamp on it, and post if off. It all took...minutes. That saved me £300.

Emboldened, and a little excited, I penned another missive. This also took several minutes. This time I saved £1,100.

My original "debt" was £4,300. That is now reduced to £2,900.

I reckon two more letters should do it. One went off just moments ago. I will let you know if that further reduces my "debt".

There are Doubting Thomases (and Thomasinas) out there. You slagged me off. You called me a freeloader. You told me (rather unkindly, I thought) that I was full of shit. You told me that big burly men would smash down my door and cart me off for intimate moments with Big Vern in cell 49B. No visits to report. Not even so much as a nasty letter. Nothing. Zip. Nada.

Care to apologise yet?

All I did was to write two simple letters drawing attention to existing statutes. I asked for proof that my "debt" is legal or lawful. Plainly, they can not provide that evidence. In an act of appeasement, the taxman shaved off over 25% of this alleged debt. I think that they think that I will now cheer, punch the air, and shout "RESULT!". I will do no such thing. I will await the letter from them that says "Look, Ranty, we have searched high and we have searched low, and we just cannot find any excuse, legal, lawful, or otherwise, to justify us taking your money like this. We have therefore zeroed your "debt" and we will never bother you again, you wily rascal".

It may not say exactly that, it may just say something meaningless with a zero at the bottom. That will do me.

My "Just Say No" campaign continues*. Remember to say it nicely though. Remember also that you have to remove any controversy by offering to pay the "debt" conditionally. The conditions make all the difference in the world. You need proof that a contract (with two wet signatures-yours and theirs-actually exists) and if they can find one and send you a copy, then pay the "debt".

If they can't.....

Well then, you must politely decline to make payment.

If the guy two doors down from you banged on your door and said "Oi! You owe me 2 grand", would you pay him? Or would you say "For what? When did I agree to pay you 2 grand?". If he can offer no proof that you promised to pay him, you would naturally ask him to bugger off.

That's all we are doing here. We are asking for proof that the "debt" exists, and if it does, we are merely asking to see the contract. Would a judge uphold the neighbours demand for cash without a contract being in place? I think not. How many judges would side with a government demanding monies from you without evidence that you willingly agreed to pay? Sadly, the answer is "Most of them". They are on the same team. Why would they rule otherwise? Even knowing the demands, often with menaces and threats, are unlawful? Courts do not dispense justice, and they certainly do not deal with the law. They are bankers. They are there to extract cash, or, at a push, separate you from your liberty for a time. Even the word "bench" when translated into French becomes "banque" so why do we insist on telling ourselves that courts exist for some noble purpose? They don't. They collect money for HMG. We should rename the courts. We should call them what they are: Accounts Payable.

Enough lecturing. Let's wait some more to see what they come up with next. I still have more tools in the box, so if the screwdriver doesn't work, I'll use the spanner, and if that fails, I will reach for the hammer. They are all metaphorical, of course.

The only tool I actually possess is a pen.

It seems to be working rather splendidly.

CR.

* I remind you again that I am not offering advice. This blog is for your entertainment. Whilst the subject matter is intensely personal to me, I do not expect (nor counsel you) to imitate my actions. Any risks I take are my own. My choice. My responsibility.