| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Red Rocket |
Posted - 23/02/2008 : 22:35:19
Hi All
I have just received a huge bundle of paper from the TC office, its such fun.
One of the screen shots, details the ruling on my dispute. At the end of the paragraph it states "No Error" and then the cheeky fraudulant monkeys have Tipp-Exed out the last few words/dates/codes??????
Anyone any idea what may come next.
By the way thanks to all you folks behind the website its a life saver. |
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| splashin |
Posted - 25/02/2008 : 22:49:15
quote:
Originally posted by Sarah
Under freedom of information rules don't all deletions have to have an accompanying explanation? Perhaps a complaint to the Information Commissioner would also be worth a stamp.
Sarah
Yes, another Faux Pau to add to the list.
LOL
 
Splashin |
| splashin |
Posted - 25/02/2008 : 22:44:48
Ali
I can understand what you are trying to say here on this last post, about being able to write the person who carried out certain actions to your claim which needs explanation's.
I don't think we should really put any blame whatsoever onto any individual, who are really just doing a job. Everybody who is employed are protected from these outside grievances and that should also apply to Tax Credit employees. You can only use the tools your employer gives you to do your job. And can only also use the training you have had.
The onus should really be on HMRC alone. If you were to pick up an item in the supermarket which was wrongly priced, then the item should really be sold for the advertised price, the retailer would have to bite the bullet and sell it at that price. The retailer should then retrain that employee to make sure procedures are correctly carried out.
After all this is a BIG BUSINESS and we are all consumers.
  
Splashin |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 25/02/2008 : 16:28:09
Thinking about it, the tippex will be covering the official's name. I am remembering having photocopied documents where the name was blank - obviously tippexed then photocopied. Guess they are getting lazy in their old age - not photocopying but just sending out the tippexed versions. Sounds to me like that's what it is.
It's to protect the identity of staff making 'dodgy' decisions, although I doubt we can sue them. But if we found the name, we could write to them, I guess, at HMRC. What chance they would remember us from so many, though?
Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is…the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
|
| kazbabe |
Posted - 25/02/2008 : 16:12:44
i got my bundle the other and some of the paper has exactly the same thing with the tippex and no explanation with it either. |
| Alan the Geordie |
Posted - 25/02/2008 : 14:42:22
>> Prisons are too full for HMRC officials anyway!>>
You know, the really funny thing about my ex-accountant is that before he set himself up in private practice he was working for the Inland Revenue! Absolutely true, I kid you not.
Geordie: "Alreet, de ye fancy a Broon?"
English: "Hello, fancy coming for a drink?" |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 25/02/2008 : 14:10:16
Prisons are too full for HMRC officials anyway!
Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is…the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
|
| Alan the Geordie |
Posted - 24/02/2008 : 22:39:01
>>......and then the cheeky fraudulant monkeys have Tipp-Exed out the last few words/dates/codes?????? ......>>
Some years ago, I had an accountant who showed me a trick with Tip-Ex, Tip-Ex solvent and a photocopier.
Basically, it is possible to remove the Tip-Ex from the document by wiping-away the Tip-Ex with a cloth soaked with the solvent thus allowing you to read whatever is underneath it.
Where does the photocopier come into it? Well, in this case it doesn't, but in my ex-accountant's case it resulted in him being convicted of fraud and sent to prison.
Geordie: "Alreet, de ye fancy a Broon?"
English: "Hello, fancy coming for a drink?" |
| Ali M-W |
Posted - 24/02/2008 : 19:18:58
The things the TCO gets away with are just incredible. I've had a screen print arrive with a chunk hacked off and sellotaped together, too. Adjudicator told me nothing had been edited! When they photocopy the letters they don't even get all the text in. And we've had one SARN request arriving at its final destination unsealed!
Glad to hear that you intend to keep them to task, Red Rocket. Nowhere else would 'customers' accept such sloppy 'service' and bad practice. Why should we?
Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is…the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
|
| Red Rocket |
Posted - 24/02/2008 : 17:51:25
Thanks to all who have replied and the advice. I'm going to write to both the SAR office and the Info commissioner and see what happens next.
cheers
Red Rocket |
| Sarah |
Posted - 24/02/2008 : 11:44:59
Under freedom of information rules don't all deletions have to have an accompanying explanation? Perhaps a complaint to the Information Commissioner would also be worth a stamp. |
| splashin |
Posted - 24/02/2008 : 09:11:05
 I agree with Miss Froy here, more than likely a staff members name. But never let a sleeping dog lie. I would certainly write off as Miss Froy suggested to the SAR office asking for an explanation.
 
Splashin |
| missfroy2 |
Posted - 23/02/2008 : 23:20:23
The first thing that came into my head was that it could be a staff members full name?
However, if that is the case it should be explained to you. I would write to them (SARN unit) and ask for an explanation and under what provisions they are withholding the information. It definately isn't acceptable to just tipex it out!
MF2 |
