Misinformation about so=called single person discounts put into the public domain

Dear Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead,

A recent BBC article quotes one of your councillors as implying
that people who do not live alone are no longer entitled to a
single person discount and that they have to tell the council tax
department if one of their children becomes an adult. Unless that
child does not fall to be disregarded this is wholly untrue. He
adds that it is not fair if they do not tell the council this as it
is unfair on people who do pay on time and inform the council of
changes. But there is no evidence to show that a person with an 18
year old child is not paying as they ought or has failed in any
legal obligation to inform the council.

It appears that letters will be sent to people where what is called
'data matching' suggests that they are no longer living alone, and
that if people do not respond as demanded they face the hassle of a
tribunal appeal to get the discount to which they are fully
entitled deducted and which the council has a statutory duty to
deduct from their account.

However, we know full well that no so-called data matching exercise
can show that there is lack of entitlement and that this most
certainly does not arise simply if a person has turned 18. Nor does
it arise of another person has moved into the house, or if the
householder has a new partner. The information in this article is
not just legally wrong, it is highly likely to cause confusion and
distress to the very many innocent people who seem about to get
accusatory letters from a council that falsely believes they have
done something wrong.

A search of your web site reveals that application forms for
'single person discounts' give the false impression that this
discount is awarded because the person is living alone (ie without
any other adults disregarded or not in the property). People appear
to be expected to 'cancel' this discount if they are no longer
living alone as thus defined. The are threatened with all sorts of
legal consequences if they do not obey. But this is legally wrong
and no penalty can be issued in most of the circumstances your web
site and press release refer to. You have either got the law wrong
yourself, or you have for some reason failed to provide a
reasonably fair and accurate account of the law through your press
department. It is a matter of some legitimate concern that elected
council members appear to be misstating the council tax laws which
they have a responsibility to oversee and apply. I shall not shame
the elected member by naming him publicly.

Despite there being no legal basis for this at all, you have a
cancellation form which says

"If you are no longer the only adult living in your home, because
someone is living there with you or your child has reached the age
of 18, you must report this immediately to the Council Tax office."

This is not true. It would appear that you are not only
misinforming the general public of their rights and duties via
press releases, but also that people visiting your web site for
information about the basis of entitlement to a section 11(1)
discount will also find false information.

I do not know where you got this false idea that discount
recipients must tell the council if their child becomes an adult.
The only place I have seen this nonsense written down before is in
an Audit Commission annual report which the Audit Commission
admitted does not accurately reflect council tax law. I would
advise utmost caution in taking any pronouncements of the Audit
Commission on such issues at face value. They have a policy of
manipulating public opinion when moving 'beyond data matching'.
What you are doing, if what you have said in public about it
honestly reflects your administrative arrangements, is quite
clearly 'beyond data matching' as the people on your hit lists will
mostly be completely innocent and wholly entitled to the 'single
person discount' you deducted from their bills.

I cannot find on your web site the usual council tax leaflet in
which the actual law must be explained to all taxpayers every year,
in accordance, for example, with the demand notice regulations as
amended.

I therefore ask;

1 How many complaints you have received about the inaccurate
information on your web site

2 For a copy of the information provided to all taxpayers each year
as required by the demand notice regulations.

3 For copies of any fair processing notification issued to discount
payers explaining the uses to which you are actually putting their
data, including of course the logic underpinning any automated
processing which it is known in advance throws up false positives
(ie includes innocent entitled people on the suspect lists)

4 What plans you have made to put this situation right.

For a relatively accurate account of council tax law, albeit one
making use of the term 'data matching' that does not conform with
the definition in the Audit Commission's Code of Data Matching
Practice, see the Audit Commission response on this web site. The
account of the legal basis of council tax discounts, including the
statutory assumptions as to the future on which every discount is
actually based are clearly stated by the Audit Commission legal
officer in this paper, even though it ignores the question of the
definition of data matching in the statutory code of practice.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ri...

These make it clear that the presence of a second adult where your
data bases only record one is not, repeat not, evidence of lack of
entitlement, failure to notify in accordance with legal obligation
etc etc.

Ironically, it seems that the Audit Commission does not believe
that people ever make the sort of mistake you have made, ie
assuming there is such a thing as a sole occupant discount to which
only people living completely alone are entitled. I shall send them
a link to your web site to prove that a very great deal of
misunderstanding does exist.

Given that the law never ever uses the term 'single person
discount' it is astonishing that so many people continue to use
this highly misleading term as if there actually was any such
discount. Obviously, there is not.

Yours faithfully,

K Hodgkinson