Customize

London Rates Relief Based Talk

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

  1. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    I like Claire.

    Who's Paul Nagle?
  2. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Chief Internal Auditor
    City of London Corporation

    Edit: Could be good news for us unless he is the Paul Nagle on the Scn completion lists in which case the clams have the last laugh.
  3. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Oh. Good. :)

    <grin>

    Does he know about the 2 factual errors on the Scientology application for mandatory relief, viz:

    1) COSREC says they're a charity when they're not.

    2) PH and Massimo saying that COSREC hadn't applied for mandatory relief at Saint Hill whereas in fact they had applied and been denied.
  4. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    He knows about both of them. I told him the first thing for sure ages ago and now he knows the second.

    But don't expect much to come of this. They have closed ranks. I suspect that only a judicial review can crack this open. I might get the text together for this soon. I wrote something previously in one of the threads saying how things would be different if they had followed ombudsman recommended procedures before making a decision. Now we can say that if they had checked the statement Hodkin and Massimo made about their East Grinstead non-application then they would have found out that it had been applied for in 1999 and been turned down. No consequesnces about legal action then. The ECvHR was signed in 1950 so CoLCorp was in the same boat as Mid Sussex District Council. They got cajones. CoLCorp have none. Just closed ranks and a wasteful attitude when it comes to public money and a bad attitude when it comes to FOI requests.
  5. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    BRUUUUUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA !!!!!!!!

    <snark>
  6. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Perhaps we could donate some strap-on ones?


    snarkTitle2.gif
  7. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    IJLTH

    Druids Recognised; Daily Mail Angry
  8. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Oh I don't know - if that was the case, and it could be established to be true, it might work in our favour.
  9. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    For info re Judicial Review: London's legal community is having 'pro-bono' week in early November (from the 8th). I am hopeful that London anon will take full advantage of this series of events to try and get the best possible free legal assistance that might be available. London anon should network to make sure opportunity is not lost. If we can get quality legal advice, then we will almost certainly be able to add a well deserved black eye to the cult's many tarsal perforations.
  10. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    The article did not strike me as an angry attack.

    Alll a religion needs to do to get charitable status with the Charity Commission is to convince them they they believe in some sort of Supreme being that they venerate or worship and that they have a fixed set of beliefs an they follow them seriously and it is open to all including the poor and they get charitable status. The "charitable" part is their getting people to believe in some sort of Supreme Being (in this case something like "Nature") because that is supposed to help people. They don't have to do anything as part of their religion like open homeless shelters and soup kitchens. It is a hangover from English case law. Druidry meets this condition - Scientology does not.
  11. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    yeah, I didn't bother to copypaste that bit. it was dull. follow the link if u want it.
  12. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    OK, I read it. The Daily Mail may not like it but it's tough shit because that is what English case law says is OK as a religion when combined with the ECvHR. I spent hours reading up on this (things are a bit slack at work). Here is the Charity Commission decision that they published which I carefully read a few times:

    http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/library/about_us/druiddec.pdf

    ....and you will see that with them having to take into account the ECvHR and seeing as English case law says what it does then it is inescapable that they gain religious status not because they do charitable things that we think of as charitable but rather because it has the charitable purpose of getting people to worship some sort of Supreme Being in some form that is done in a positive way. The English case law underpinning this you can read about in the following link:

    http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Library/guidance/lawrel1208.pdf

    More juicy links on this page:

    Charitable purposes and Public Benefit

    Druidry has been deemed a religion for the purposes of charity law. Scientology has been deemed not a religion for the purposes of charity law. And there is fuck all they can do about it.
  13. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Oh, absolutely. God forbid I ever find myself agreeing with the Daily Mail.

    That looks like a really interesting decision - thanks for the link - I've skimmed it quickly, although I don't have time to read it properly before the heat death of the universe - but paras 57 and 58 seemed particularly relevant to 'our' issue, in that they make it clear that the factors the Charity Commissioners thought applied in the 1999 case of COS(UK) still apply under the new 2006 Charities Act.
  14. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    ..which is why I laughed then puked when Sunderland came to its decision and ignored the Charity Commission.
  15. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    I am hoping a few of you have enough interest and time to read all the above stuff which is why I posted the links but then I thought that none of it makes sense unless you know that all modern charity law is based on the preamble to the Statute of Charitable Uses Act 1601.

    http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/phall/01. Charitable uses.pdf

    It is why, in the UK, a "charity" is only a charity if it falls to be under control of the Court. Same goes for "established for charitable purposes" - it must fall to be under the control of the Court - because the Court needs the power to protect money donated for charitable purposes and if it does not have that power then it can not be a charity in the UK. Central and local government are nearly always getting this wrong. The Charity Commission has it right.

    The Statute of Charitable Uses Act (1601), 43 Elizabeth I c. 4

    An Acte to redresse the Misemployment of Landes Goodes and Stockes of Money heretofore given to Charitable Uses
  16. Anonymous Member

  17. XenuV2 Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Wow. I can't believe that there have been over 100 layers who have acted on behalf of Scientology. Maybe we could get in contact with those Lawyers who have represented the Victims of $cientology.
  18. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    And they can easily afford to pay since St. Hill attracts rich clams from all over Europe for auditing their Bridge at about 200 GBP per hour and they also can do their OT levels up to OT VII (I think) plus they can do the St. Hill Special Briefing Course there which costs a fortune. That place is making a mint off these rich chumps.

    But if we could get the rates relief removed from the London Org then they would start having serious financial problems in the UK.

    Maybe Sunderland Council will reverse their decision and this will maybe get the ball rolling. I get the impression from the redacted emails that there was opposition from within to the granting of this rates relief.
  19. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    I was wondering what the yearly heating bill would be like for 146 QVS. I would guess that they would have to heat the lobby and the course rooms they are using at the very least. Also the ED's office and the C/S's office and the registrar's room.
  20. Anonymous Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    This might be of interest to some people:

    BBC News - Legal aid to be axed in some civil cases

  21. XenuV2 Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    not easy times in GB. any kind of legal support is likely to get harder to come by for the most of us. that is a shame for us because the comments and suggestions about pro-bono legal support may be harder to secure.
  22. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Pro-bono work might be of a limited quality and capacity. They may give it to newbies or part-timers.

    Timing, well, the local authority chooses to extend mandatory rates relief on an ongoing basis. It's all in the future.

    I remember when Bobbie Woods got pro-bono support. I got involved. I got the impression that the pro-bono solicitor nearly had a mental breakdown after they thought they had been infiltrated and a tape that was sent them got stolen out of their own office. They then realised what a danger they were dealing with and so the big boys took over and smashed the cult.

    Pro bono is too weak for this.
  23. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Dear Claire,

    I am unable to find a contact for possible Data Protection Act violations by organisations withing the CoLCorp ward so I will trust you to pass this on to the right person.

    It concerns a recent student magazine article:

    Parasitic Circuits: The Secrets of Scientology | The Oxford Student

    In the first paragraph of the article the author claims to have taken away a filled-in form that contains personal details about a person. If this is true then I think this is a serious breach of Data Protection responsibilities and perhaps this Church of Scientology organisation at 146 QVS is not aware of their responsibilities.

    As you might know, progress for Scientologists is up their "Bridge to Total Freedom" and this is measured by the stages of "auditing" they have achieved. Speaking as an ex-member myself then I know that some very personal information is given out during these "auditing" sessions that is all written down and stored in "PC folders" that will be kept somewhere on the premises. It is important that this information is stored safely because its release could have damaging consequences for the individuals concerned. I think Chapter 25 of the "Anderson Report" will give a flavour of why it is important to keep this information secure.

    THE ANDERSON REPORT: CHAPTER 25

    I hope there is a relevant officer in the CoLCorp who you can pass this email onto to check into this matter.

    Roland
  24. JustMissedMe Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    This is very, very rough estimation, because there's so many variables involved. Stuff like how well the place is insulated, what average temperature they set, which supplier they use and if that supplier charges them as a business or a residence, and so on and so forth.

    But a good rough estimate for that postcode is between 6 and 8 pence per kwh for primary units and 3 and 4 pence per kwh for secondary units. This would be for gas heating, which seems to be the cheapest option. Again in that postcode, a thousand square feet for a year goes through roughly 20,000-25,000 kwh.

    Anyhow, all of this means that I can offer a (very!) rough guess of £800 a year to heat a thousand square feet at 146 QVS. I'm not sure how big the Org at 146 QVS is. Granted, it's not just a straight case of multiplying £800 by however many thousands of sq feet are involved. But it does at least give you an idea of the cost involved.

    tl;dr version - heating that thing must cost a chunk
  25. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Its 2737m² according to the VOA website so that converts to 29,461ft² so that would be £23,569 a year if proportional but in practice I am guessing £15,000 to £20,000 a year.

    Cough up clams - you don't want that raw meat to get cold now, do you? There must be at least 30 of you public there earning a living so hand over that £500+ each year to keep that raw meat warm to help planetary Clearing.

    <snark>

    Wait for a prolonged cold snap and then someone walk into there and check out the temperature. If it is too cold for comfort then report back here and assuming there will be a person on reception wearing extra warm clothing to compensate then report them to Health and Safety.

    <snicker>

    And they still have to pay £67,000 a year business rates so they still have to fork out about £90,000 a year once you include heating, maintenance and electricity. And there are maybe only 30 public there who are earning a proper living. I wonder if they are pressured into donating £3000 a year each to keep the place running. I hope so.
  26. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Charity relief for the Church of Scientology Celebrity Center, 42 Leinster Gardens

    From: Roland Rashleigh-Berry (rolandberry@hotmail.com)
    Sent: 18 November 2010 17:12:25
    To: Mike Haworth-Maden (xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.gov.uk)


    Dear Mr. Haworth-Maden,

    it seems to me illogcal, improper and unlawful to grant charitable relief to an organisation that uses its premises for the auditing and training of the rich and famous in return for expensive fees and all to the exclusion of the ordinary public who can not afford such fees. I can not see how this is a "charity" within any definition or meaning of the word.

    I have just this one question to ask of you - "Is it permissible for a local authority to do this and under what authority granted to them?" If you can answer that one question then the matter is closed from my point of view.

    Many thanks in advance for your response.

    Yours sincerely,
    Roland Rashleigh-Berry



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: xxxxxxxxxxxx@audit-commission.gov.uk
    To: rolandberry@hotmail.com
    Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:24:37 +0000
    Subject: RE: Charity relief for the Church of Scientology Celebrity Center, 42 Leinster Gardens


    Dear Mr Rashleigh-Berry

    I am writing further to my email of 20 September 2010. I have now been able to consider the matter you have raised with me concerning the granting of mandatory rate relief by the City of Westminster Council on the Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre at 42 Leinster Gardens in the context of my responsibilities as auditor, which were set out in my emails of 16 and 20 September 2010.

    As part of my work, I have considered the information you have drawn to my attention. I have also obtained and considered the views of the Council.

    The Council made the decision to grant mandatory relief following consideration of the organisation's application, having sought legal advice and following a visit to the property by Council officers. As such, and on the basis of the information currently before me, I have not identified any issue that calls for the exercise of my statutory powers. My view is, of course, without prejudice to the rights of members of the public as part of the audit process. These rights are set out in the Audit Commission publication shared with you via my email of 16 September 2010.

    I should additionally note that I understand that the Church of Scientology Religious Education College Inc. has recently moved from 42 Leinster Gardens to a new property within the City of Westminster. As such, a new application for mandatory relief is to be considered by the Council.

    I will share this email with the Council for information.

    May I finally thank you for raising this issue with me.

    Yours sincerely




    Michael Haworth-Maden
    Director of Audit and District Auditor
    Audit Practice
    Audit Commission
    1st Floor
    Millbank Tower
    London
    SW1P 4HQ
  27. AnonLover Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    so is there a mechanism for the general public to oppose/contest a new application - before its considered and approved again?
  28. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Roland

    I have passed on your email to the relevant department, and they will respond to you directly.

    Kind regards

    Claire


  29. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Can somebody please volunteer to make a complaint to the ombudsman about this? It's been raised with the Council and also with their district auditor (M H-M) so the ombudsman is the next port of call. We are talking about the "Celebrity Centre" here which is a place where the rich and famous get their auditing and training in return for their fees. And this place gets charitable rates relief. This is obscene. It has got to stop. The ombudsman needs to be made aware of this.
  30. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    London will be going through a cold snap next week 22-26 Nov 2010 so can somebody turn up for their Sunday Service on the 28 Nov 2010 to check on the receptionist so make sure they are heating their workplace according to regulations? If the receptionist is wearing a coat and scarf then report them to the local council.

    What is the maximum/minimum temperature in the workplace?

    Oh, and while you are there then have a problem with something in your eye.
    http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/faqs/temperature.htm
  31. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    I just complained to the local government ombudsman about both CoLCorp and CoW so we'll see what happens.
  32. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    None that I know of beyond writing in to the council and having your say.

    I have raised this with the local government ombudsman.
  33. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Dear Mr Rashleigh-Berry

    Thank you for your e-mail of 18 November 2010.

    The Council has an obligation to award rate relief where the ratepayer is a charity or trustees for a charity and the hereditament is wholly or mainly used for charitable purposes (whether of that charity or of that and other charities) (see sections 43(5) and 43(6) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988). For this purpose, a charity is defined as an institution or other organisation established for charitable purposes only or any persons administering a trust established for charitable purposes only (see section 67(10) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988). It is for the Council to determine whether a ratepayer is a charity and whether a hereditament is wholly or mainly used for charitable purposes. A determination on whether the Council was correct or not in the view that it formed can only be made by the courts. With regard to my responsibilities, however, on the basis of the information I have considered and for the reasons set out in my email of 17 November 2010, I have not identified any issue that calls for the exercise of my statutory powers, including the discretion to apply to the courts for a declaration that an item of account is contrary to law (section 17, Audit Commission Act 1998).

    Yours sincerely



    Michael Haworth-Maden
    Director of Audit and District Auditor
    Audit Practice
    Audit Commission
    1st Floor
    Millbank Tower
    London
    SW1P 4HQ



  34. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Don't forget to look in on 68 Tottenham Court Road as you walk past in this cold weather to make sure the receptionist is not so cold that they are wearing a coat. If they are then report them to Health and Safety for poor working conditions.
  35. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    Just sent to the Communities and Local Government web site

    I gave them the document you can link to as follows:

    http://forums.whyweprotest.net/123-leaks-legal/original-lrh-eds-46182/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hi,

    I have heard nothing back from you about this. I want to state clearly that I agree with Eric Pickles statement of 15 Oct 2010 when he urged local authorities to not to give rates relief to churches of Scientology but I note that nothing was transmitted via the Communities and Local Government web site that local authorities rely on for their central government feeds.

    I believe I speak for everybody else in the UK to say that we want this rates relief to "churches" of Scientology stopped and I am wondering when there is going to be action by the government about this injustice to follow up the clear statement issued by Eric Pickles.

    I have already donated enough material to disprove the supposed "charitable" nature of this money-grubbing cult, with their false claims affording them charitable rates relief, but perhaps this extra piece of information (attached) would help underline their parasitic nature.



    Would it be possible to give me a date when this cult will lose its rates relief across the UK?

    If there is a problem with central government achieving anything in line with Eric Pickles statement then please advise what action needs to be taken by ordinary members of the public to remove this cult's business rates relief.

    Roland Rashleigh-Berry



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: rolandberry@hotmail.com
    To: contactus@communities.gov.uk
    Subject: FW: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595
    Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:53:41 +0000

    Dear Sirs,

    On 15 October 2010 Eric Pickles MP, in the Guardian newspaper, urged local authorities not to give rates relief to churches of Scientology. And yet they still do and nothing was sent them using the usual government feeds from the Communities and Local Government web site. A few of us have complained to both local authorities and their district auditors but still they will not remove this rates relief. We have had final refusals from the City of London Corporation and the City of Westminster about this matter so I have now brought this to the attention of the Local Government Ombudsman. However, in the absence of clear direction from central government, I am not expecting any results from this.

    Is central government willing to act to back up the statement of Eric Pickles MP by giving clear directions to local government or was this statement just a publicity stunt?

    Roland Rashleigh-Berry


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: rolandberry@hotmail.com
    To: forwarder@lgo.org.uk
    Subject: RE: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595
    Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:16:54 +0000

    Dear LGO,

    since you haven't got back to me yet then I thought I would forward you some minimum documentation (though not requested) that makes it clear that the CoLCorp and the CoW erred in granting mandatory rates relief these churches of Scientology.

    1) At no point in time did either council enquire as to the nature of the activities performed on the premises, any costs charged and if so their prices (and perhaps their sales policy). Any normal person would have done this in the sense of asking "what goes on there and are you selling anything?".

    If they had done that then they would know that the premises are mainly used for the training and auditing of its members (see the description of the activities of Division 4 from their own web site):
    Scientology Churches Structure - Divisions 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Seven-Division Org Board

    ...and that they have a price list for this that you can see from a scan shown on the following link:
    Operation Clambake present: Prices up to OT8 and beyond

    ...and that they even have a policy of hard-selling these things as stated in the Hard Sell Pack they publish:
    http://forums.whyweprotest.net/123-leaks-legal/puddle-leaks-49134/14/#post983355

    2) Neither of these two local authorities have obviously thoroughly read the decision of the Charity Commission to not grant charitable relief to the Church of Scientology in the UK and their detailed reasons which fully goes into the legal aspects. They should both have studied and respected this decision but seemed to not be familiar with it:
    http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/library/start/cosfulldoc.pdf

    3) There is a lack of evidence that they have considered the balance of good vs. harm that this cult does since there is no evidence that they have sought any negative viewpoints. Any normal person would have done a Google search on this and found a lot of very negative things which would lead them to conclude that this cult was not of public benefit.

    4) Eric Pickles MP on 15 October 2010 released a statement to the Guardian to urge local authorities not to give rates relief to this organisation that the public consider controversial and asked them to respect the decision of the Charity Commission in this regard and all local authorotoes have ignored this which is beyond comprehension.
    Government urges councils to stop giving tax breaks to Scientology | World news | The Guardian

    5) Both local authorities, if they had stopped to think for a moment, would have emailed Mid Sussex District Council to ask if they had ever applied for rates relief for their headquarters in East Grinstead and they would have been informed that they applied in 1999 and were turned down because they were not a registered charity. Therefore they would have asked about and probably made the same decision not to grant rates relief and not be afraid of counter legislation.
    http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/scientology_rates_relief_for_st


    If you need any further documentation from me or wish to discuss with me in a phone call then please ask me. But I hope the above is enough as it should be enough for any normal person to see that the decision they made to grant charitable rates relief could not be justified if they had followed any reasonable procedures that any normal person would have followed.

    Roland Rashleigh-Berry






    > From: forwarder@lgo.org.uk
    > To: rolandberry@hotmail.com
    > Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:06:35 +0000
    > Subject: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595
    >
    > 22/11/2010
    >
    > Your ref:
    > Our ref: 10 014 595
    > (Please quote our reference when contacting us)
    >
    > Dear Mr Rashleigh-Berry,
    >
    > Thank you for completing our online complaint form. I would like to discuss your complaint with you over the telephone, therefore could I please ask that you call me on 0300 061 0614. Alternatively, if you provide me with a contact number, I would be happy to call you.
    >
    > Yours sincerely
    >
    >
    >
    > Donnamarie Groves
    >
    >
    >
    > NOTICE - This message contains information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you have received this message in error please advise us at once and do not make any use of the information.
    >
  36. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    I'd like to make an appeal to any English person reading this who thinks it wrong that a greedy, bullying, money-grubbing cult can get charitable rates relief from a local authority considering they were turned down for charitable status by the Charities Commission. You can make a difference to this by writing directly to your MP and stressing that you object to the boroughs of Westminster and the City of London Corporation granting rates relief to the Church of Scientology. The reason being that it devalues the charitable work done by real charities in England and dilutes the trust in them and the funds that they justly receive though public bodies and private donations. If you value the work of charities (I mean "real" charities) in England then please write in to your MP yourself to complain, using whatever you find in this thread or elsewhere to aid your argument. I think that if 100 people wrote in to their MPs then this charitable status would be removed and the cult would pack up its bags and leave the UK alone.
  37. XenuV2 Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    I will put it to the London Anons.
    I suggested we direct a protest at City of Westminster council for granting the rates relief.
    We appreciate your hard word RolandRB.
  38. DeathHamster Member

  39. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    There could be a case made to peoples MPs to stop ALL mandatory and discretionary rates relief in all local authorities as they are clearly abusing the system by granting rates relief to churches of Scientology. You, as a rate payer and tax payer, are having money taken from you by local authorities and given to undeserving causes. Real charities that do good work are suffering a lack of funds as a result and their ability to do good works diminished. It would be far better and fairer for all real charities if local government support were removed entirely and this money collected and returned to the residents of boroughs who can then themselves decide on who deserves charitable donations and to make those donations.

    Scientology won't be the only scam charity out there. I bet there are hundreds or even thousands of them all benefitting from your enforced donations. If we do a very rough calculation then assume the £300,000 per year that the Co$ in the CoLCorp are giving in rates relief represents one thousandth of rates relief the other scam charities are getting then that is £300 million per year split between roughly 20 million tax payers so you are paying £15 a year as a tax payer to give your money to a scam charity. If you got that £15 a year returned to you then you could (and I hope you would) donate it to a genuine charity like Childline who are genuinely helping young people. Just think how the activities of Childline would be changed if they had that £300,000 per year and how many children could be prevented from committing suicide or having their lives damaged forever.

    Instead, the cult gets it.

    Make that point to your MP.
  40. RolandRB Member

    Re: London Rates Relief Based Talk

    RE: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595‏
    From: Roland Rashleigh-Berry (rolandberry@hotmail.com)
    Sent: 11 December 2010 08:45:52
    To: contactus@communities.gsi.gov.uk


    Hi,

    thanks for that. Perhaps you could also forward this to the same Official as I believe it represents the thinking of many UK citizens.

    There could be a case made to stop ALL mandatory and discretionary rates relief in ALL local authorities as they are clearly abusing the system by granting rates relief to churches of Scientology. UK rate payers and tax payers are effectively having money taken from them by local authorities and given to undeserving causes. Real charities that do good work are suffering a lack of funds as a result and their ability to do good works diminished. It would be far better and fairer for all real charities if local government support were removed entirely and this money collected and returned to the residents of boroughs who can then themselves decide on who deserves charitable donations and to make those donations.

    Scientology won't be the only scam charity out there. There might be hundreds or even thousands of them all benefitting from the enforced donations made by UK citizens. As a rough calculation then assume the £300,000 per year that the Church of Scientology in the City of London are getting in rates relief represents one thousandth of the rates relief other undeserving charities are getting then that is £300 million per year split between roughly 20 million tax payers so each tax payer is paying £15 to scam charities. If each tax payer got that £15 a year returned to them then they could (and I hope they would) donate it to a genuine charity like Childline who are genuinely helping young people. Just think how the activities of Childline would be changed if they had an extra £300,000 per year and how many children could be prevented from committing suicide or having their lives damaged forever.

    Instead, a cult gets it and that money gets sent to America and ends up hidden in secret bank accounts.

    Ask yourselves what is happening to real charities in England and Wales as a result of the misapplication of the mandatory and discretionary rates relief system. I would like to see central government remedy this situation.

    Roland Rashleigh-Berry

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subject: RE: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595
    Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 11:19:35 +0000
    From: ContactUs@communities.gsi.gov.uk
    To: rolandberry@hotmail.com


    Dear Sir,

    Your email has been forwarded onto an Official in the department.

    Many thanks

    TO Team.



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: Roland Rashleigh-Berry [mailto:rolandberry@hotmail.com]
    Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 11:48 PM
    To: contactus@communities.gov.uk
    Subject: RE: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595


    Hi,

    I have heard nothing back from you about this. I want to state clearly that I agree with Eric Pickles statement of 15 Oct 2010 when he urged local authorities to not to give rates relief to churches of Scientology but I note that nothing was transmitted via the Communities and Local Government web site that local authorities rely on for their central government feeds.

    I believe I speak for everybody else in the UK to say that we want this rates relief to "churches" of Scientology stopped and I am wondering when there is going to be action by the government about this injustice to follow up the clear statement issued by Eric Pickles.

    I have already donated enough material to disprove the supposed "charitable" nature of this money-grubbing cult, with their false claims affording them charitable rates relief, but perhaps this extra piece of information (attached) would help underline their parasitic nature.



    Would it be possible to give me a date when this cult will lose its rates relief across the UK?

    If there is a problem with central government achieving anything in line with Eric Pickles statement then please advise what action needs to be taken by ordinary members of the public to remove this cult's business rates relief.

    Roland Rashleigh-Berry


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: rolandberry@hotmail.com
    To: contactus@communities.gov.uk
    Subject: FW: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595
    Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:53:41 +0000

    Dear Sirs,

    On 15 October 2010 Eric Pickles MP, in the Guardian newspaper, urged local authorities not to give rates relief to churches of Scientology. And yet they still do and nothing was sent them using the usual government feeds from the Communities and Local Government web site. A few of us have complained to both local authorities and their district auditors but still they will not remove this rates relief. We have had final refusals from the City of London Corporation and the City of Westminster about this matter so I have now brought this to the attention of the Local Government Ombudsman. However, in the absence of clear direction from central government, I am not expecting any results from this.

    Is central government willing to act to back up the statement of Eric Pickles MP by giving clear directions to local government or was this statement just a publicity stunt?

    Roland Rashleigh-Berry


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: rolandberry@hotmail.com
    To: forwarder@lgo.org.uk
    Subject: RE: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595
    Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:16:54 +0000

    Dear LGO,

    since you haven't got back to me yet then I thought I would forward you some minimum documentation (though not requested) that makes it clear that the CoLCorp and the CoW erred in granting mandatory rates relief these churches of Scientology.

    1) At no point in time did either council enquire as to the nature of the activities performed on the premises, any costs charged and if so their prices (and perhaps their sales policy). Any normal person would have done this in the sense of asking "what goes on there and are you selling anything?".

    If they had done that then they would know that the premises are mainly used for the training and auditing of its members (see the description of the activities of Division 4 from their own web site):
    Scientology Churches Structure - Divisions 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Seven-Division Org Board

    ...and that they have a price list for this that you can see from a scan shown on the following link:
    Operation Clambake present: Prices up to OT8 and beyond

    ...and that they even have a policy of hard-selling these things as stated in the Hard Sell Pack they publish:
    http://forums.whyweprotest.net/123-leaks-legal/puddle-leaks-49134/14/#post983355

    2) Neither of these two local authorities have obviously thoroughly read the decision of the Charity Commission to not grant charitable relief to the Church of Scientology in the UK and their detailed reasons which fully goes into the legal aspects. They should both have studied and respected this decision but seemed to not be familiar with it:
    http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/library/start/cosfulldoc.pdf

    3) There is a lack of evidence that they have considered the balance of good vs. harm that this cult does since there is no evidence that they have sought any negative viewpoints. Any normal person would have done a Google search on this and found a lot of very negative things which would lead them to conclude that this cult was not of public benefit.

    4) Eric Pickles MP on 15 October 2010 released a statement to the Guardian to urge local authorities not to give rates relief to this organisation that the public consider controversial and asked them to respect the decision of the Charity Commission in this regard and all local authorotoes have ignored this which is beyond comprehension.
    Government urges councils to stop giving tax breaks to Scientology | World news | The Guardian

    5) Both local authorities, if they had stopped to think for a moment, would have emailed Mid Sussex District Council to ask if they had ever applied for rates relief for their headquarters in East Grinstead and they would have been informed that they applied in 1999 and were turned down because they were not a registered charity. Therefore they would have asked about and probably made the same decision not to grant rates relief and not be afraid of counter legislation.
    Scientology rates relief for St. Hill Manor and grounds - WhatDoTheyKnow


    If you need any further documentation from me or wish to discuss with me in a phone call then please ask me. But I hope the above is enough as it should be enough for any normal person to see that the decision they made to grant charitable rates relief could not be justified if they had followed any reasonable procedures that any normal person would have followed.

    Roland Rashleigh-Berry






    > From: forwarder@lgo.org.uk
    > To: rolandberry@hotmail.com
    > Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:06:35 +0000
    > Subject: Complaint to LGO - case reference 10014595
    >
    > 22/11/2010
    >
    > Your ref:
    > Our ref: 10 014 595
    > (Please quote our reference when contacting us)
    >
    > Dear Mr Rashleigh-Berry,
    >
    > Thank you for completing our online complaint form. I would like to discuss your complaint with you over the telephone, therefore could I please ask that you call me on 0300 061 0614. Alternatively, if you provide me with a contact number, I would be happy to call you.
    >
    > Yours sincerely
    >
    -------------------------------------
    I just forwarded this to The Guardian/Observer and Private Eye.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

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

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins