Northgate Council Tax processing system

fFaudwAtch UK made this Freedom of Information request to Haringey Borough Council This request has been closed to new correspondence. Contact us if you think it should be reopened.

The request was partially successful.

Dear Haringey Borough Council,

I believe Haringey Borough Council use the Northgate system as its Software package for the provision of Council Tax. Assuming this to be correct – and the following (see below) is a true account of how payments are appropriated to a person's Council Tax account when more than one sum is outstanding for different year's liability – will HBC disclosed how the laws regarding 'appropriation of payments' are adhered to and the case authority relied on.

"The council tax system has built in allocation rules to ensure that the law with respect to specified payments is met. For instance, if a customer has a payment plan for any year of debt and the payment they make matches the planned instalment then the money will be allocated to that year (this is known as “hard” allocation on the council tax system). If the system is unable to “hard allocate” then it will instead “soft” allocate and the debt will be used against the oldest debt unless manually adjusted."

Yours faithfully,

fFaudwAtch UK

FOI, Haringey Borough Council

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Thank you for your correspondence which has been forwarded to this team as
a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act.

 

To satisfy section 8(1)(b) of the Act we require your full name to
validate your request.   Please see the Information Commissioner’s website
for further information about how to make a valid request:
[1]http://www.ico.org.uk/for_the_public/off...

 

If you can reply to this email with your name and we will be able to
process your request.

 

Please note, no further action will be taken until we hear back from you.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Simon Dingomal 

Feedback Review Officer

 

Haringey Council 

River Park House, 225 High Road, London, N22 8HQ

 

020 8489 1988

[email address]

 

www.haringey.gov.uk

twitter@haringeycouncil

facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

"To satisfy section 8(1)(b) of the Act we require your full name to validate your request. Please see the Information Commissioner’s website for further information about how to make a valid request....."

I don't see any problem providing you with my name.

Yours sincerely,

N. Gilliatt

FOI, Haringey Borough Council

Dear N Gilliatt

 

Re: Freedom of Information Act Request ref: LBH/4785815

 

I am writing about your request for information, which was received on 02
November 2015.

 

We have now considered your request but need to seek clarification in
order to identify and locate the information that you have asked for.  

 

Please specify exactly what information you are requesting as this is not
clear in your correspondence.

 

Please note that we will take no further action on this request until we
receive clarification from you.

 

Once we receive the information we need we will acknowledge your request
and respond to it within the statutory timescale of 20 days.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Jane Selby

Feedback Review Officer

 

Haringey Council

River Park House, 225 High Road, London N22 8HQ

 

020 8489 1971

[1][email address]

 

[2]www.haringey.gov.uk

[3]twitter@haringeycouncil

[4]facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 

P Please consider the environment before printing this email.

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

When a person has two sums of money outstanding, for example in relation to the current year's council tax and a previous year's arrears, there are laws with regard to which of the two accounts the billing authority allocates payment.

It is generally accepted that billing authorities' payment systems are automated, therefore the Council's software supplier with regards its council tax processing system will have been developed so that payments which are made in those circumstances are allocated to the correct account with respect to the law.

I require disclosing the information (most likely be held by the revenues & benefits department) which supports that its system, 'Northgate', appropriates payments in accordance with the law.

Yours sincerely,

fFaudwAtch UK

Gunn Claire1, Haringey Borough Council

Dear N Gilliatt

 

Freedom of Information / Environmental Information Regulations Request:
Reference LBH/4785815

 

I acknowledge your request for information received on 06 November 2015.

This information request will be dealt with in accordance with the Freedom
of Information Act 2000 / Environmental Information Regulations and we
will send the response by 04 December 2015.

 

If you have any questions, please contact us on 020 8489 1988 or
[email address].

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Claire Gunn

Feedback Review Officer

 

Haringey Council

River Park House, 225 High Road, London N22 8HQ

 

T. 020 8489 2576

E. [1][email address]

 

[2]www.haringey.gov.uk

[3]twitter@haringeycouncil

[4]facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 

 

P Please consider the environment before printing this email.

 

 

show quoted sections

Bradburn Mick, Haringey Borough Council

Dear Mr Gilliatt,

Re: Freedom of Information Act Request ref: LBH/4785815

 

Thank you for your request for information received on 06 November 2015,
in which you asked for the following information:

 

When a person has two sums of money outstanding, for example in relation
to the current year's council tax and a previous year's arrears, there are
laws with regard to which of the two accounts the billing authority
allocates payment.

 

It is generally accepted that billing authorities' payment systems are
automated, therefore the Council's software supplier with regards its
council tax processing system will have been developed so that payments
which are made in those circumstances are allocated to the correct account
with respect to the law.

 

I require disclosing the information (most likely be held by the revenues
& benefits department) which supports that its system, 'Northgate',
appropriates payments in accordance with the law.

 

 

My response is as follows:

 

I an not aware of any statutory laws that relate to the exact scenario
that you have outlined.

 

Regulation 52 (4) of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement)
Regulations states what should happen when a partial payment is received
and the Authority are in possession of a Liability Order . That is that
the costs should be discharged first and the balance of the payment (if
any) should be applied towards the discharge of the debt.    

 

The Northgate system currently has 26 posting rules for when a payment is
received which means every effort is made to allocate a payment to where
it is intended. If after all the posting rules have been exhausted a
payment cannot be allocated we currently allocate it to the oldest debt.

 

If a customer expressly indicates, when making payment, where they want it
allocated we would comply with their wishes.

 

If a payment is allocated to the oldest debt, because it doesn’t meet any
of the posting criteria, and at later stage the customer requests it to be
moved it may be done but would depend on what stage of enforcement the
debt was at. 

 

If you have any further queries, or are unhappy with how we have dealt
with your request and wish to make a complaint, please contact the
Feedback and Information Team as below. (Please note you should do this
within two months of receiving this response.)   

 

Feedback and Information Team

River Park House

225 High Road

N22 8HQ

T 020 8489 1988

E [1][email address]

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Mick Bradburn

Council Tax Reduction Manager

Shared Service Centre - Revenues

 

Haringey Council

P.O Box 10505, Wood Green, London N22 7WJ

 

 

T:020 8489 2853

[2][email address]

 

[3]www.haringey.gov.uk

twitter@haringeycouncil

facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 

 

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

 

Mick Bradburn

Council Tax Reduction Manager

Shared Service Centre - Revenues

 

Haringey Council

P.O Box 10505, Wood Green, London N22 7WJ

 

 

T:020 8489 2853

[email address]

 

www.haringey.gov.uk

twitter@haringeycouncil

facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 

 

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

 

 

show quoted sections

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

References

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

Dear Bradburn Mick,

Re, "I an not aware of any statutory laws that relate to the exact scenario that you have outlined."

I believe your first response relates to payment under enforcement. Further more, the regulation is probably no longer relevant since the new enforcement regulations were introduced.

From your second response, I assume at Haringey Borough Council, payments are allocated in the first instance to an instalment amount for the current year where the payment is an exact match to the instalment amount due. If the amount paid does not match the instalments due and there are outstanding arrears on the account the payment is allocated against the oldest arrears debt.

I didn't think that there would be provision to specify how payments should be allocated in the Council Tax Regulations. There are however laws with regards to 'appropriation of payments' which are applicable to billing authorities in dealing with payments such as council tax. The following are examples of Case Authority dealing with the allocation of payments:

– Peter v Anderson (1814) held that where there is no indication from the debtor, the creditor may apply payments as he or she thinks fit.

– Albermarle Supply Co Ltd v Hind & Co (1928) held that, once an election as to where a payment should be allocated was made by a creditor, and communicated to the debtor, that allocation of payment was irrecoverable by the debtor.

– Stepney Corporation v Osowsky (1937) held that the debtor has first choice over allocation of payments; that the choice may be express or implied, and that the creditor cannot exercise discretion unless there is no indication by the debtor.

– R v Miskin Lower Justices (1953) held that where an amount so obviously relates to a specific liability, it would be an unwarranted assumption to allocate the payment elsewhere.

Additionally there is case law (Devaynes v Noble 1816) which can be relevant to some kinds of account, such as banking accounts (current) which relies on the assumption that payments which are specified by neither the debtor nor the creditor should offset the oldest item in the account. This authority cannot apply in a system whereby the accounts relate, as they do in council tax, to ‘distinct insulated debts, between which a plain line of separation could be drawn’.

Could you please disclose how the laws regarding the above described ('appropriation of payments') is adhered to and the case authority relied on.

Yours sincerely,

fFaudwAtch UK

Bradburn Mick, Haringey Borough Council

Thank you for your enquiry. I am currently out of the office and will be
back on 7  December 2015.

show quoted sections

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

Dear Haringey Borough Council,

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Haringey Borough Council should have responded by now.

Yours faithfully,

fFaudwAtch UK

FOI, Haringey Borough Council

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    FW Freedom of Information Request LBH 4785815.html

    12K Download

Dear Mr Gilliatt

Please find attached a copy of the response sent to you on 01 December 2015.

Yours sincerely

Jane Selby
Feedback Review Officer

Haringey Council
River Park House, 225 High Road, London N22 8HQ

020 8489 1971
[email address]
 
www.haringey.gov.uk
twitter@haringeycouncil
facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 Please consider the environment before printing this email.

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

I do not require a copy, I have the original.

The original response on 1 December 2015 stated as follows:

"If you have any further queries, or are unhappy with how we have dealt with your request and wish to make a complaint, please contact the Feedback and Information Team as below. (Please note you should do this within two months of receiving this response.) "

I submitted a further query, but Haringey Council has not dealt with it. Can it please deal with it?

Yours sincerely,

fFaudwAtch UK

Dear FOI,

Please see my 11 January 2016 email as follows:

I do not require a copy, I have the original.

The original response on 1 December 2015 stated as follows:

"If you have any further queries, or are unhappy with how we have dealt with your request and wish to make a complaint, please contact the Feedback and Information Team as below. (Please note you should do this within two months of receiving this response.) "

I submitted a further query, but Haringey Council has not dealt with it. Can it please deal with it?

Yours sincerely,

fFaudwAtch UK

FOI, Haringey Borough Council

Dear Mr Gilliatt

 

Thank you for your email, I am sorry for the delay in responding.

 

Upon investigation I have not been able to locate your further query, can
you please resend it.

 

I apologise for any inconvenience caused.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Jane Selby

Feedback Review Officer

 

Haringey Council

River Park House, 225 High Road, London N22 8HQ

 

020 8489 1971

[1][email address]

 

[2]www.haringey.gov.uk

[3]twitter@haringeycouncil

[4]facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 

P Please consider the environment before printing this email.

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

My 3 December 2015 quoted below:

"Dear Bradburn Mick,

Re, "I an not aware of any statutory laws that relate to the exact scenario that you have outlined."

I believe your first response relates to payment under enforcement. Further more, the regulation is probably no longer relevant since the new enforcement regulations were introduced.

From your second response, I assume at Haringey Borough Council, payments are allocated in the first instance to an instalment amount for the current year where the payment is an exact match to the instalment amount due. If the amount paid does not match the instalments due and there are outstanding arrears on the account the payment is allocated against the oldest arrears debt.

I didn't think that there would be provision to specify how payments should be allocated in the Council Tax Regulations. There are however laws with regards to 'appropriation of payments' which are applicable to billing authorities in dealing with payments such as council tax. The following are examples of Case Authority dealing with the allocation of payments:

– Peter v Anderson (1814) held that where there is no indication from the debtor, the creditor may apply payments as he or she thinks fit.

– Albermarle Supply Co Ltd v Hind & Co (1928) held that, once an election as to where a payment should be allocated was made by a creditor, and communicated to the debtor, that allocation of payment was irrecoverable by the debtor.

– Stepney Corporation v Osowsky (1937) held that the debtor has first choice over allocation of payments; that the choice may be express or implied, and that the creditor cannot exercise discretion unless there is no indication by the debtor.

– R v Miskin Lower Justices (1953) held that where an amount so obviously relates to a specific liability, it would be an unwarranted assumption to allocate the payment elsewhere.

Additionally there is case law (Devaynes v Noble 1816) which can be relevant to some kinds of account, such as banking accounts (current) which relies on the assumption that payments which are specified by neither the debtor nor the creditor should offset the oldest item in the account. This authority cannot apply in a system whereby the accounts relate, as they do in council tax, to ‘distinct insulated debts, between which a plain line of separation could be drawn’.

Could you please disclose how the laws regarding the above described ('appropriation of payments') is adhered to and the case authority relied on."

Yours sincerely,

fFaudwAtch UK

FOI, Haringey Borough Council

Dear Mr Gilliatt

 

Thank you for your email below, your comments are noted.

 

While you may feel that the FOI Act gives you the right to put questions
to us, that is not actually the case.

 

The Freedom of Information Act gives people the right to access
information that public authorities hold. The Act does not give people a
right to be given answers to questions that they would like to put to a
public authority if this would mean creating new information or would
involve giving opinion or judgement that is not already recorded.

 

The ICO has produced guidance for people who wish to make a request for
information under the Freedom of Information Act, you can access it by
following this link:
[1]https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/offici...

 

Please note that we will take no further action on this request until we
receive clarification from you.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Lesley Clay

Feedback Review Officer

 

Haringey Council 

River Park House, 225 High Road, London, N22 8HQ

 

T. 020 8489 3398

 

[email address]

 

www.haringey.gov.uk

 

twitter@haringeycouncil

 

facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 Do you really need to print this email?  Save paper! Save energy! 
Please consider the environment before pressing the print button.   

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

The original response was provided after misunderstanding my request as it did not properly relate to it. Additional information was then provided to assist and therefore the request was, as far as I can see, a valid request under the 2000 Act.

Yours sincerely,

fFaudwAtch UK

FOI, Haringey Borough Council

Dear Mr GilliatT

Thank you for your further email.  A response was sent to you in December
and I cannot see any further request for information.

Both my colleague and I have informed you:

 

The Freedom of Information Act gives people the right to access
information that public authorities hold. The Act does not give people a
right to be given answers to questions that they would like to put to a
public authority if this would mean creating new information or would
involve giving opinion or judgement that is not already recorded.

 

The ICO has produced guidance for people who wish to make a request for
information under the Freedom of Information Act, you can access it by
following this link:

 

     [1][1]https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/offici...

 

As it is not clear in your emails if you are making a new request, please
do not hesitate to contact us with exactly what further information you
are requesting. 

 

Thanks & regards

 

Lesley Clay

Feedback Review Officer

 

Haringey Council 

River Park House, 225 High Road, London, N22 8HQ

 

 

[email address]

 

www.haringey.gov.uk

 

twitter@haringeycouncil

 

facebook.com/haringeycouncil

 Do you really need to print this email?  Save paper! Save energy! 
Please consider the environment before pressing the print button.   

 

 

 

show quoted sections

fFaudwAtch UK (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

There's a strong case to argue in support of council's having a duty to ensure unspecified payments (unmatched) are never allocated to a previous year's debt if doing so would put the current year's liability in arrears.

It has been discovered that a number of local authorities (a minority) have their systems set so payments, which do not match a set instalment amount, are allocated to the most recent account. However, the majority appear not to, thus causing the potential for enforcement action to be triggered;- hardly something you would expect your friendly local authority to wish upon you. Although the authority in the following example has its system set to allocate payments to the oldest account in these circumstances, it does manually reallocate them in accordance with "notes" listed on the account.

But more relevant to these issues, and apparently in accordance with the judgment in R v Miskin Lower justices, payment would also be allocated to the current year if allocating an unmatched payment to the oldest debt would put the current year's liability also in arrears.

Question (1st March 2016):
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

'Am I correct in understanding that additional to the inference "from the account notes or payment arrangements listed on the account", if it is likely that allocating an unmatched payment to the oldest debt would put the current year's liability ALSO in arrears, the payment would be allocated to the current year?

It would, after all, be implied which debt payment was intended if allocating monies to an older balance would likely put the current year's liability in arrears. It would seem that the anomaly could be largely eliminated by setting the system to allocate payments which do not match a debt instalment to the current year's liability and at the same time complying more fully with the judgment in R v Miskin Lower justices.'

Answer (14 March 2016):
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

'Am I correct in understanding that additional to the inference "from the account notes or payment arrangements listed on the account", if it is likely that allocating an unmatched payment to the oldest debt would put the current year's liability ALSO in arrears, the payment would be allocated to the current year?

Yes this is correct.'