| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 12/06/2007 : 23:00:14
Paula, Sarah, Lisa and I have had a good, productive day. This post has just got to be just a start, because there's so much to say about it and to take in, and it's a case of what to do first - post the bare bones and then fill you all in properly, or to put together something more informative. Everyone's been so supportive and the messages are flooding in, so I think I owe it to you guys to at least offer something.
The HMRC meeting was an eye-opener. We'll elaborate soon, but the really interesting observations were these:
HMRC really haven't got a clue what's going on. They didn't fully comprehend how certain aspects of their policy (around maternity, so I daren't even try to explain what I don't pretend to understand - but no doubt Lisa, Paula or Sarah will very soon) affected people, and openly admitted that no-one had ever raised that question before!
They also had never apparently realised that what they thought they were communicating to us was being poorly explained and meant something completely different to laypeople who hadn't worked for fifteen years for HMRC!
Their so-called 'expert' on the Civil Partnership Act, David Woodhouse (I believe) was the only one of the seven who was, quite frankly, rather sour, totally failed to comprehend why people in same-sex relationships weren't ecstatic about being 'allowed' to be recognised as a couple and have their tax credit awards register an overpayment just because the date on which the CPA recognition of same-sex couples was applied happened to fall mid-way through a tax credit year. He tried to pass this off as treating same-sex couples 'equally', but it didn't wash. After Paula had put him straight, he contented himself by pulling contemptuous faces at everything we said until he mercifully had to leave to go to another appointment. Having left, the meeting suddenly became more harmonious and productive. His attitude was ambysmal and we are going to complain. We very pointedly thanked all his colleagues 'with a single exception'. I shudder that he 'leads' on the application of the Civil Partnership Act. He was a rather unsmiling individual with no soft edges.
His colleagues seemed to pick up his thinly-veiled hostility, because Chris (I haven't got my notes, can't remember her last name) apologised unreservedly for my declaration of being in a same-sex relationship causing notes everywhere in the system that this was a 'relationship breakdown', and agreed that it was unacceptable that having been up front about my sexuality, HMRC kept referring to my partner as 'he' or 'him' without even bothering to look.
When I looked Tracy Gale in the eye and said 'The Tax Credit system has been a fiasco, hasn't it?' she looked right back and said 'elements of it have been a fiasco, yes'. I think it's around that time that the building in London collapsed!!! Well, I very nearly did...
We covered as many questions as we could in the time, and we'll do justice to them all in a proper statement soon. Paula's got a really good understanding now, for her casework, of the distinction between discretion and the reasonableness case. I shall let Paula explain that one to you. The great thing was that it seems that we now have genuine respect and credibility from them (apart from David W.), and an ongoing collaborative, advisory role! We left them with our unasked questions and plenty of evidence as 'homework'.
Right, I'm going to post this before I lose it, and add to it with later posts! |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 08/07/2007 : 10:38:49
I like that idea. Maybe, once charitable status has been approved, Paula can go into T-shirt production and we can become more visible and vocal - a sea of banners and T-shirts! What say others? |
| rosie |
Posted - 06/07/2007 : 09:55:24
ivory towers - why dont we all get together in London, say October - and make some real noise, similar to the pensioners with the council tax problems, the media will have to take note then, banners the lot..... anyone up for it...we could even be on tv at no.10??? Do it correct, give notice to the powers that be etc.. |
| Alan the Geordie |
Posted - 29/06/2007 : 21:40:30
quote:
Originally posted by Ali M-W
Oh Alan, I'm not going to argue with you! I don't get out much, and it was huge fun. I don't know about 'wandering' around London, it was a mad rush, but it was good to meet up with some of the gang and help try to make HMRC understand a little bit more about life at the sharp end of tax credits. The rail company did well out of me but it was worth every penny. It's not every day that you get to be ignored by HMRC actually in person, and it makes a refreshing change from simply having your correspondence ignored. It was also hugely enjoyable being ignored outside number ten, and I look forward to us being ignored again by the national newspapers.
Spoken (written?) like a natural born optimist!  |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 29/06/2007 : 19:30:45
Oh Alan, I'm not going to argue with you! I don't get out much, and it was huge fun. I don't know about 'wandering' around London, it was a mad rush, but it was good to meet up with some of the gang and help try to make HMRC understand a little bit more about life at the sharp end of tax credits. The rail company did well out of me but it was worth every penny. It's not every day that you get to be ignored by HMRC actually in person, and it makes a refreshing change from simply having your correspondence ignored. It was also hugely enjoyable being ignored outside number ten, and I look forward to us being ignored again by the national newspapers. |
| Alan the Geordie |
Posted - 29/06/2007 : 15:53:51
Ali,
Do you and the other lasses not realise that foreign tourists pay a small fortune and spend many uncomfortable hours packed in an environmentally unfriendly airliner to have a wander around London?
All it cost you was was the bus fare!
You should all be a bit more grateful 
(having lit the blue touch paper I think I'd better retire to a safe distance  ) |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 29/06/2007 : 07:41:52
The 'errors' they refer to are, of course, described as 'claimant errors' rather than their own, and there's no attempt to uncover how many are caused by HMRC's systems spewing out incorrect details and figures, by the wrong salary being used due to the system, by the right salary being used but behind-the-scenes calculations being done incorrectly, or anything else attributable to HMRC's inadequate IT systems and poorly trained, overworked, and at times alienated staff. HMRC still claim and infer that when incorrect salaries are used, it's down to the individual not telling them, whereas in fact the claimant commonly did tell them and they did nothing. That's without those so-called claimant errors which were down to HMRC not explaining their system properly at the time of operation. Expecting claimants to intuitively know what HMRC want and expect them to do, and instinctively keep informing them of the same old changes and mistakes because we are somehow meant to know that they can't do anything efficiently and promptly (except, perhaps, harrass us, which they do amazingly quickly and methodically) is like expecting your average three year old to write a doctorate thesis. It's too complex for us to know all the ins and outs of. By harping on about 'claimant error' and 'claimant fraud' (see how they like to lump both together to create a stereotype of claimants as stupid, scrounging and deceitful?)they fail to take account of why these errors are so commonplace, and their part in this. I struggle to read reports such as these, as they make me so angry. But thanks anyway, Rosie. |
| rosie |
Posted - 28/06/2007 : 18:40:48
http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_ShowContent&propertyType=document&columns=1&id=HMCE_PROD1_025711
report into the errors 2003 on hmrc site |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 28/06/2007 : 15:24:54
...And they're just as cruel! |
| Alan the Geordie |
Posted - 28/06/2007 : 13:22:31
quote:
Originally posted by Ali M-W
Of course they are. What worries me is how many more of our legitimate questions to HMRC are being 'farmed out' as FOI requests... HMRC make evasiveness into an Art Form.
I know what you mean. I've just had another letter from Primarostrich that doesn't answer a single question that my MP asked her.
I tell you; getting a straight answer to a straight question from these people is like stuffing melted butter up a porcupines arse with a red hot needle!  |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 28/06/2007 : 12:30:32
Of course they are. What worries me is how many more of our legitimate questions to HMRC are being 'farmed out' as FOI requests... HMRC make evasiveness into an Art Form. |
| Alan the Geordie |
Posted - 27/06/2007 : 12:43:29
quote:
Originally posted by Robert
There must be evidence in how much it costs to chase payments. because they wrote off payments under £300 pounds saying it would cost too much to collect. public accounts committee reports..but he said in that report he would try to break the cost down to give a true and accurate figure on how much it does really cost..
The truth is out there.. GO get it..
I agree with you Robert.
I think they're just giving us the bums' rush. |
| Robert |
Posted - 27/06/2007 : 12:40:56
There must be evidence in how much it costs to chase payments. because they wrote off payments under £300 pounds saying it would cost too much to collect. public accounts committee reports..but he said in that report he would try to break the cost down to give a true and accurate figure on how much it does really cost..
The truth is out there.. GO get it..
|
| Alan the Geordie |
Posted - 27/06/2007 : 12:35:02
quote:
Originally posted by Ali M-W
...And here's their response:
<<How much does it cost taxpayers to deal with one overpayment dispute?>>
Answer: Following a search of our paper and electronic records I have established that the statistical information you have requested is not available. The Freedom of Information Act does not require us to create information in order to respond to an FOI request.
[Of course it doessn't - that would be far too helpful.]
And in answer to:
<< What are the average costs and time spent for the following:
• For HMRC issue court summons and prepare for court?
• To send out and respond to a TC846?
• To process a SARN data protection request?
• To provide missing items identified by the claimant as missing following an earlier SARN request for which incomplete information was supplied?
• To respond to a second tier complaint?
• To respond to an Adjudicators Office case?
• To provide case details to an MP?
• To respond to an investigation by the Parliamentary Ombudsman investigation?
(To include all the staff time of all involved, telephone, mail and paper costs, any other resources, costs etc.)>>
Answer?
I will let you guess.
I'll give you a small clue (not that you need one): "Eh, eh, eh!"
And there I was thinking we were getting somewhere.
It's all very disappointing but not surprising really knowing what we already knew about them.
Maybe there's some truth in the saying about tigers not changing their stripes!
(Yes, I know that saying's about another big cat and its spots, but I couldn't spell leopard)
Anyway, you all had a nice day in London so it wasn't a complete waste of time! |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 27/06/2007 : 07:01:27
...And here's their response:
<<How much does it cost taxpayers to deal with one overpayment dispute?>>
Answer: Following a search of our paper and electronic records I have established that the statistical information you have requested is not available. The Freedom of Information Act does not require us to create information in order to respond to an FOI request.
[Of course it doessn't - that would be far too helpful.]
And in answer to:
<< What are the average costs and time spent for the following:
• For HMRC issue court summons and prepare for court?
• To send out and respond to a TC846?
• To process a SARN data protection request?
• To provide missing items identified by the claimant as missing following an earlier SARN request for which incomplete information was supplied?
• To respond to a second tier complaint?
• To respond to an Adjudicators Office case?
• To provide case details to an MP?
• To respond to an investigation by the Parliamentary Ombudsman investigation?
(To include all the staff time of all involved, telephone, mail and paper costs, any other resources, costs etc.)>>
Answer?
I will let you guess.
I'll give you a small clue (not that you need one): "Eh, eh, eh!"
And there I was thinking we were getting somewhere.
|
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 27/06/2007 : 06:54:04
Yawn, two weeks on and still waiting.... for even a reply to my emails. Nice to know HMRC have forgotten about us again.
Just before we met HMRC in London (12th June), we emailed them a few questions regarding the average costs of recovering an overpayment. Here's what we asked them:
How much does it cost taxpayers to deal with one overpayment dispute? What are the average costs and time spent for the following:
• For HMRC issue court summons and prepare for court?
• To send out and respond to a TC846?
• To process a SARN data protection request?
• To provide missing items identified by the claimant as missing following an earlier SARN request for which incomplete information was supplied?
• To respond to a second tier complaint?
• To respond to an Adjudicators Office case?
• To provide case details to an MP?
• To respond to an investigation by the Parliamentary Ombudsman investigation?
(To include all the staff time of all involved, telephone, mail and paper costs, any other resources, costs etc.)
We'd sent this a day or so before, and so we'd been a bit optimistic in expecting answers on the day. Instead we were assured that they would treat it as a Freedom of Information Request and post me the answers as soon as they could. Last night I received an answer from them.... |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 18/06/2007 : 16:26:51
Yes, I can see that report being a weighty tome - that's if they include everything they should... |
| Alan the Geordie |
Posted - 18/06/2007 : 13:41:37
It will be interesting to see if "The Report" does go to Dawn Primarolo. (Does she still have a job??)
And - if she is still there - after the surgery that she's had she won't be allowed to lift anything too heavy for quite a while. |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 17/06/2007 : 17:57:01
Thanks! It's going to be an ongoing dialogue, so if anyone has anything they want raised with HMRC, let me, Paula, Sarah or Lisa know, and we'll email them. The thing I'm really waiting to see is the Report HMRC are doing for dawn Primarolo, and what it states (as well as what they leave out?), but we shall see... The impression I got is that most of the officials wanted a safer, fairer and better system but were dependent on Ministers agreeing the necessary actions. I wonder if they'll say it as we all said it then (or appeared to), or tone it down for Dawn Primarolo's consumption? We shall see soon... |
| auntieh |
Posted - 15/06/2007 : 21:18:07
Just wanted to say a big thank you to the visitors to London for giving up your time and energy to represent so many of us casualties, seen and unseen, the quiet and the more vocal!
Let's hope we see an end to this nonsense soon!
 |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 08:31:33
I think it's also fair now to say that, after our successful London Tour (or 'gig', as Alan calls it), that chances are that HMRC officials (and MPs) will be looking in from time to time, but benignly, to see what 'customer' experiences actually are, and what they can learn from us. Not a definite but quite a possible. We may have different views on that, but I feel it can only be beneficial to our cause that all these complex issues and experiences (recurring themes as well as the bizarre and unique, like Chrisp's resident 'ghost' who is being chased for repayment)are known about and understood. Anonymity is still very possible - ask one of the really 'techy' people like Sammy or Underdog, or possibly Robert, how this can be done. |
|
|
