A shopkeeper faces a second date in court to appeal a carbon copy of a case he won just over a week ago.
The local authority took legal action after David Cairns refused to pay five years of Elgin BID levies, on the grounds of democratic principle.
Sheriff officers identified items to be seized in lieu of the unpaid bill of £459, but Mr Cairns successfully appealed the decision after proving the stock in his store had been “substantially undervalued”.
Officers then returned to Baggs of Elgin to revalue the stock with an expert from Elgin Auction Mart, but found it to be worth no more than what they had initially recommended.
Mr Cairns said he had been left with no choice but to return to court for a second time.
“I don’t understand this,” he said.
.
“I got a letter from the court saying they have substantially undervalued the goods.
“They have come with an auctioneer to convince the court they have valued the goods properly.
“They have now valued the goods at exactly what they were valued at the last time.
“Now, I have to go back to court with the exact same argument. They have banked everything on the fact that they have an auctioneer with them, so that must be the right value.
“If they just gave me a fair value, then they could have what I owe them.”
Elgin BID manager Gill Neill said: “We work with all our businesses large and small, independently owned and national in a variety of ways, we do not distinguish or categorise, we treat all members as equals.
“Businesses as diverse as kilt hire, dress sales, cakes, flowers, opticians, dentists and podiatrists are working with a sense of pride and optimism, happily promoting each other where ever the opportunity exists.
“We encourage and attempt to work with all BID members, however some of our members exercised their right to vote against the BID company and have chosen not to get involved in activities.
“While we completely respect their rights, we are obliged to follow due process where businesses chose not to pay their levy and pursue payment.”
A Moray Council spokesman said: “In order to conform with enforcement legislation, the sheriff officers felt that it was appropriate that a professional valuer be used to value to goods attached.
“This is an option which may be exercised at the sheriff officers’ discretion and is not required by legislation.”