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

The request was successful.

Dear Solihull Metropolitan Borough 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 Solihull Council have its computer software set to deal with non specific payments. Current or oldest year's liability?

Yours faithfully,

Gwyn Worth

FOI Information Governance Team,

Information request
Our reference: 2856996
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Dear Ms Worth
 
Freedom of Information Act 2000
 
Thank you for your request for information that was received on 12 October
2017, the details of which are given below:
 
Dear Solihull Metropolitan Borough 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 Solihull Council have its computer software set to deal with non
specific payments. Current or oldest year's liability?
 
We are dealing with your request under the Freedom of Information Act
2000  and we aim to send a response by 9 November 2017.
 
In some cases, a fee may be payable.  If we decide a fee is payable, we
will send you a fee notice and we will require you to pay the fee before
proceeding with your request.
 
The Freedom of Information Act 2000  may restrict the release of some or
all of the information you have requested. We will carry out an assessment
and if any exemptions  apply to some or all of the information then we
might not provide that information to you. We will inform you if this is
the case and advise you of your rights to request an internal review and
to complain to the Information Commissioner's Office.
 
We will also advise you if we cannot provide you with the information
requested for any other reason together with the reason(s) why and details
of how you may appeal (if appropriate). 
 
Yours sincerely
 
 
Teresa Evans
Corporate Information Governance Officer
Corporate Information Governance Team
Solihull Council

Tel: 0121 704 6169
[1]www.solihull.gov.uk
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.solihull.gov.uk/

Carol Bowdery,

1 Attachment

Information request
Our reference: 2856996
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Dear Ms Worth,
 
Thank you for your request for information received on 12 October
2017; please find our response attached. 
 
Yours sincerely,
 
 
Carol Bowdery
Corporate Information Governance Officer
ICT and Information Governance
Solihul Council
[1]www.solihull.gov.uk
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.solihull.gov.uk/

Dear Carol Bowdery,

Thank you for stating that 'non specific payments are allocated to the oldest year’s debt if a council tax payer owes more than just the current year’s liability'.

Would you please confirm whether or not any measures are in place to check that allocating an unmatched payment to the oldest debt in these circumstances would have the consequences of putting the current year's liability also in arrears, and if so, in accordance with R. v Miskin Lower Justices [1953] 1 Q.B. 533, whether the payment would be moved in respect of the current year's account to avoid unnecessary recovery action, additional costs etc.?

Yours sincerely,

Gwyn Worth

Carol Bowdery,

Dear Gwyn Worth,
 
Thank you for your email.
 
We will forward your query to the service area and will contact you again
in due course with their response.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Carol Bowdery
Corporate Information Governance Officer
ICT and Information Governance
Solihul Council
[1]www.solihull.gov.uk
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Carol Bowdery,

Thank you for stating that 'non specific payments are allocated to the
oldest year’s debt if a council tax payer owes more than just the current
year’s liability'.

Would you please confirm whether or not any measures are in place to check
that allocating an unmatched payment to the oldest debt in these
circumstances would have the consequences of putting the current year's
liability also in arrears, and if so, in accordance with R. v Miskin Lower
Justices [1953] 1 Q.B. 533, whether the payment would be moved in respect
of the current year's account to avoid unnecessary recovery action,
additional costs etc.?

Yours sincerely,

Gwyn Worth

Alison McCallum,

Dear Ms Worth
 
You made the following inquiry:
 
"Would you please confirm whether or not any measures are in place to
check that allocating an unmatched payment to the oldest debt in these
circumstances would have the consequences of putting the current year's
liability also in arrears, and if so, in accordance with R. v Miskin Lower
Justices [1953] 1 Q.B. 533, whether the payment would be moved in respect
of the current year's account to avoid unnecessary recovery action,
additional costs etc.?"
 
The Income and Awards Team have provided the following response:
 
"Yes, measures are in place.

Yes, if we believe the customers intention was to pay the current year, we
would move this to the current year in order to avoid unnecessary recovery
action."

 

I hope this information is helpful and I will now close this request.

 
 
Yours sincerely
 
Alison McCallum
Corporate Performance and Policy Support Officer 
Performance and Complaints
Solihul Council

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Carol Bowdery,

Thank you for stating that 'non specific payments are allocated to the
oldest year’s debt if a council tax payer owes more than just the current
year’s liability'.

Would you please confirm whether or not any measures are in place to check
that allocating an unmatched payment to the oldest debt in these
circumstances would have the consequences of putting the current year's
liability also in arrears, and if so, in accordance with R. v Miskin Lower
Justices [1953] 1 Q.B. 533, whether the payment would be moved in respect
of the current year's account to avoid unnecessary recovery action,
additional costs etc.?

Yours sincerely,

Gwyn Worth

show quoted sections

Dear Alison McCallum,

Thank you for clarifying my query. I consider Solihull Borough Council has provided the information I requested. 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's response (see *note*) that there are measures in place to ensure that unspecified payments are allocated to the account which it is least burdensome for the debtor, and consequently the laws surrounding the appropriation of payments are being complied with. This effectively means that 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).

*Note*: "...if we believe the customers intention was to pay the current year, we would move this to the current year in order to avoid unnecessary recovery action."

Yours sincerely,

Gwyn Worth