NMW Naming Scheme

Michael Richards made this Freedom of Information request to HM Revenue and Customs

This request has been closed to new correspondence. Contact us if you think it should be reopened.

The request was refused by HM Revenue and Customs.

Michael Richards

Dear HM Revenue and Customs,

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

The revised Naming Scheme for employers who fail to pay the National Minimum Wage came into effect from 1 October 2013 onwards. Under the scheme HMRC is responsible for issuing Notices of Underpayment to employers and, if an employer does not appeal against a Notice or if such an appeal is unsuccessful, HMRC should refer the employer to BIS for automatic naming.

On 5 June 2014, HMRC made an announcement of its 2013/14 figures for NMW enforcement:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmrc-...

HMRC's 5 June 2014 press release quoted the following four examples of employers against whom HMRC had recently taken action:

- A Premier League football club
- A social care provider
- A recruitment agency
- A multi-outlet retailer

Please could you advise if HMRC referred each of the above four employers to BIS under the naming scheme? If HMRC did not refer one or more of the employers please could you state the reasons why referrals did not happen?

Please could HMRC name each of the above four employers as I feel it is in the public interest for this information to be disclosed.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,

Michael Richards

HM Revenue and Customs

FOI 2125/14

Thank you for your communication of 8 June 2014 which has been passed to HMRC’s Freedom of Information Team.

We have allocated the above reference which you should quote if you need to contact us.

The Team will arrange for a reply to be sent to you which will either comply with HMRC’s obligations under Freedom of Information Act or, if we think it’s an enquiry that we don’t need to address under the terms of the Act, let you know why. If it is the latter we will, if possible, pass it on to a more appropriate part of the Department for answer.

show quoted sections

HM Revenue and Customs

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Richards,

 

Please find attached our response to your request for information received
on 8/6/14.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Gopal Bhachu

 

FOI team

The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may
be subject to legal professional privilege. Unless you are the intended
recipient or his/her representative you are not authorised to, and must
not, read, copy, distribute, use or retain this message or any part of it.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately.

 

HM Revenue & Customs computer systems will be monitored and communications
carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system
and for lawful purposes.

 

The Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs are not liable for any
personal views of the sender.

 

This e-mail may have been intercepted and its information altered.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Michael Richards

Dear Mr Bachu

FOI 2125/14

Thank you for your letter of 7 July 2014.

I am writing to request an internal review of HMRC's handling of my FOI request with reference FOI 2125/14.

You state in your letter of 7 July 2014 that the information I requested is covered by the exemption at section 44(1)(a) of the FOIA. I disagree with this assertion.

In my opinion HMRC can lawfully disclose the names of the Premier League football club, social care provider, recruitment agency and multi-outlet retailer under section 18(2)(a) of the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005.

A function of HMRC is the enforcement of the national minimum wage. It would greatly assist enforcement of these rules if the Premier League football club that has contravened minimum wage laws and was ordered to pay arrears of over £27,500 to over 3,000 workers was publicly named. Similarly, naming the recruitment agency that was ordered to pay £167,000 would act as an important deterrent to prevent other recruitment agencies from engaging in similar conduct.

In my view, the above disclosures would clearly be made for the purposes of a function of HMRC and fall within the authorisation provided by section 18(2)(a) CRCA. I would therefore be grateful if HMRC would make the requested disclosure under the FOIA.

Yours faithfully,

Michael Richards

HM Revenue and Customs

FOI Ref 2125/14

Dear Mr Richards

Thank you for your email of 7 July 2014.

As requested, I have arranged for an internal review to be carried out and we will aim to provide our response no later than 4 August 2014.

Yours sincerely

Mary Leeds

show quoted sections

HM Revenue and Customs

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Richards,
 
Please find attached our review of your request for information originally
received on 8/6/14.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Mark Banger
 
FOI team
 
 

The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may
be subject to legal professional privilege. Unless you are the intended
recipient or his/her representative you are not authorised to, and must
not, read, copy, distribute, use or retain this message or any part of it.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately.

 

HM Revenue & Customs computer systems will be monitored and communications
carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system
and for lawful purposes.

 

The Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs are not liable for any
personal views of the sender.

 

This e-mail may have been intercepted and its information altered.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.