Ensuring customers are not subject to unnecessary recovery action, additional costs or hardship

The request was successful.

Dear Braintree District Council,

A council taxpayer who owes more than just the current year's liability runs the risk of incurring additional recovery costs through a further application for a liability order if payments which are intended for the current year's liability are allocated by the council's computer to the previous year's liability. This would most likely happen where a non specific payment is made and the computer software is set to automatically allocate these payments to the oldest year's debt.

Councils computer systems have the necessary flexibility to be set to allow non specific payments to be allocated to the arrears or the current year's liability.

I understand that the majority of billing authorities have their computer software set to ensure that their customers are not subject to unnecessary recovery action, additional costs or hardship, i.e. so non specific payments are allocated to the current year's liability.

How does Braintree District Council have its computer software set to deal with non specific payments. Current or oldest year's liability?

Yours faithfully,

Gwyn Worth

Braintree District Council

Dear Gwyn Worth

 

Thank you for your Freedom of Information Request received on the
29/10/2017.

Reference 1579 has been applied to your request which will be looked into
and a response provided within 20 working days.

Should you have any queries in the meantime, please contact the Freedom of
Information Team at [1][Braintree District Council request email]

Kind Regards

 

Mike Gosling

Performance & Information Officer

Braintree District Council | Causeway House, Bocking End, Braintree, CM7
9HB

 01376 552525| [2]www.braintree.gov.uk

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Braintree District Council request email]
2. http://www.braintree.gov.uk/

Braintree District Council

Dear Gwyn Worth

 

 

I am writing regarding your Freedom of Information request received by the
department on the 29 October 2017

 

The Freedom of Information Act enables access to information held by the
Council, subject to the exemptions contained within the Act. The Act does
not require the Council to create information to respond to a request if
the requested information is not held, nor to give an opinion or comment.

 

A council taxpayer who owes more than just the current year's liability
runs the risk of incurring additional recovery costs through a further
application for a liability order if payments which are intended for the
current year's liability are allocated by the council's computer to the
previous year's liability. This would most likely happen where a non
specific payment is made and the computer software is set to automatically
allocate these payments to the oldest year's debt.

 

Councils computer systems have the necessary flexibility to be set to
allow non specific payments to be allocated to the arrears or the current
year's liability.

 

I understand that the majority of billing authorities have their computer
software set to ensure that their customers are not subject to unnecessary
recovery action, additional costs or hardship, i.e. so non specific
payments are allocated to the current year's liability.

 

How does Braintree District Council have its computer software set to deal
with non specific payments. Current or oldest year's liability?

 

Please find our response to your Freedom of Information request below:

 

Our software is set so that non specific payments automatically allocate
to the oldest account.

 

However, we have an override in place in that if we are aware of a
customer facing problems with their Council Tax account payments we can
set a work item to manually monitor the account so that non all priority
payments that may be made can be checked.

 

 

If you disagree with the Council’s decision in respect of your freedom of
information request or are otherwise unhappy with how the Council has
dealt with your request in the first instance you may approach Emma Wisbey
Governance and Member Manager in writing at the following address:
Braintree District Council, Causeway House, Bocking End, Braintree, Essex,
CM7 9HB.

 

Should you remain dissatisfied with the outcome you have a right of appeal
under S50 of the Freedom of Information Act to appeal against the decision
by contacting the Information Commissioner, Wycliffe House, Water Lane,
Wilmslow SK9 5AF, [1][email address]

 

 

Kind regards

 

 

 

Mike Gosling

Performance & Information Officer

 

Braintree District Council | Causeway House, Bocking End, Braintree, CM7
9HB

 01376 552525| [2]www.braintree.gov.uk

 

 

 

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.braintree.gov.uk/

Dear Braintree District Council,

Thank you for your response. I consider Braintree District Council has provided the information I requested, however, the purpose of this exercise was to ascertain whether or not the principles surrounding the appropriation of payments were being adhered to.

R v Miskin Lower Justices (1953)

It was held in R v Miskin Lower Justices, that where an amount obviously relates to a specific liability, it would be an unwarranted assumption to allocate the payment elsewhere.

If no instruction is given at the time of payment, then the council has a duty to allocate payment to the account which it is most beneficial to the debtor to reduce. That would be in the majority of cases the current liability if the consequences of allocating payment to the arrears meant that the customer was subject to unnecessary recovery action, additional costs etc.

I understand by the council indicating that there are no measures in place to ensure that unspecified payments are allocated to the account which it is least burdensome for the debtor (other than exceptional cases) that the laws surrounding the appropriation of payments are not being complied with. If the laws of appropriation were being complied with, an unmatched payment allocated to the oldest debt (having the consequences of putting the current year's liability also in arrears) would be reallocated to the current year's liability on account of the circumstances implying that this was the debtor's intention (least burdensome for the debtor).

If it appears I have misunderstood anything from what I have stated above I would appreciate if you would correct me.

Yours faithfully,

Gwyn Worth

Freedom of Information Act, Braintree District Council

Dear Gwyn Worth
Thank you for your reply to your Freedom of Information 1579 attached .

In response regarding payment allocation. Where the debtor does not expressly or implicitly say where monies should go then it is up to the creditor to decide. The Miskin case and Nash case law and many others state that you can also decide from the implication of other circumstances at that time.
The allocation of payment to an older recoverable debt is legal and Braintree District Council would no doubt consider that it is to the debtors advantage to pay the oldest debt first to avoid further recovery action which could be more punitive than the recovery of just current debt.

In addition to this, as I we stated in our initial response, we will always deal with individual customer needs/requests as they arise.

Kind regards

Mike Gosling
Performance and Information Officer
Braintree District Council | Causeway House, Bocking End, Braintree, CM7 9HB
B 01376 552525 Ext. 2443 | www.braintree.gov.uk | [email address]

show quoted sections

Dear Freedom of Information Act,

Thank you for you response.

Re; "The allocation of payment to an older recoverable debt is legal...."

Not necessarily in all circumstances. However, it would be if there were measures in place to check payment allocation and move payments to the current year's account to avoid unnecessary recovery action etc.

Re; "... Braintree District Council would no doubt consider that it is to the debtors advantage to pay the oldest debt first to avoid further recovery action which could be more punitive than the recovery of just current debt."

If no instruction is given at the time of payment, then the council has a duty to allocate payment to the account which it is most beneficial to the debtor to reduce. Although in the the majority of cases that would be to the current liability, in a minority of cases, for example where a customer would potentially be liable to committal proceedings, then the council's duty would be to allocate payment to the arrears. But I would hope that the instances of the Council instituting committal proceedings were the exception rather than the rule and such accounts would be closely monitored.

Yours sincerely,

Gwyn Worth