Council question Mum's right to single occupancy discount

droopsnout

My 84-year-old mother has today received a letter questioning her eligibility to receive the single occupancy reduction in her Council Tax.

She absolutely does live alone.

I am her only child, live in France, and haven't stayed with her for a longer period than a week.

Naturally, we are asking ourselves why the council has come to this conclusion. I do have one current account, a savings account and a credit card account which record my address as my mother's. Occasional bits of mail are delivered to me there if more convenient or appropriate. I am officially the owner of the property.

So do councils have the power to monitor bank account addresses and addresses on mail?

I am absolutely fuming about this intrusion into her private life, but more so because the letter was quite threatening and extremely upsetting for an old lady.

She actually said to me, "It makes me wonder what the point is of being here."

I've seen the horrible ads shown by the government on TV, the ones threatening to come and get you if you haven't paid your TV licence. The ones that tell us to snitch, Big Brother style, on those we think may be claiming money they are not entitled to. I find them very disturbing.

What powers does a local council have to spy on people like this? They can investigate all they like, but my Mum lives alone.

CIS

My 84-year-old mother has today received a letter questioning her eligibility to receive the single occupancy reduction in her Council Tax.

Most council's have been/are undertaking large scale reviews of Single Person Discounts. These are being led by the Audit Commission due to the massive amount of fraud that takes place.

Although the council cannot monitor bank accounts and mail for council tax purposes the large scale data matching that has taken place uses records such as credit reference agencies (Experian etc).

Although people may not like receiving these letters the council are under a legal duty to ensure that any discounts or exemptions are being claimed correctly and must challenge any cases were it appears that they may be being claimed incorrectly.

The best thing your mother can do is to return the letter with rhe information requested to confirm she is living alone.

At the end of the day any initiative which reduced fraud will benefit the tax payer (including your mother).

droopsnout

Thank you for your reply.

The council should not under any circumstances send out letters which are frightening to the elderly or handicapped. Any letter questioning a subject's honesty should include the name of a person to contact for reassurance and further information.

"Massive amount of fraud". So the UK is becoming an increasingly criminal nation? Then it deserves the police state which is rapidly developing in an attempt to control it.

I appreciate, CIS that you have taken the time and trouble to reply to my enquiry. But I wonder if you realise that the phraseology you use is quite disturbing? "Large scale data matching" means nothing to an elderly person (and I'm no spring chicken either!) "Credit reference agencies" is a term which is more accessible to a wider age group, but to people like my mum, to whom credit is a very dirty word, it is again frightening. It makes her think of debt collection agencies.

I think that government, both national and local, has forgotten that it is there to serve the people, not bully them.

Every potential law can be justified by the kind of reason you give: "reduced [enter "crime" here]will benefit the tax payer". Smoking. Drinking. Mountaineering. Potholing. Rugby playing. Eating. Where do you draw the line? Clearly, no-one wants fraud, but there are ways of approaching the electorate!

My mother has never claimed or received any benefits other than her pension, does not get pension credit because she made the mistake of saving her money and not boozing, gambling or smoking it away.

And the thanks she gets for her total honesty, self-sacrifice and thrift is a thinly veiled accusation of fraud.

I am just appalled.

Oh - she posted back the necessary form immediately, because she was so worried and upset.

Finally, you say, "the council ... must challenge any cases were it appears that they may be being claimed incorrectly". Perhaps they could just ask a few simple questions before sending out nasty letters? Their action reminds me of when I was arrested by the police for assault, on the grounds that I lived opposite a school and had a certain car. I spent several hours in the local nick. If only they had contacted my employer first, they could have established that I was hard at work at the time of the crime.

It is a question of orderly procedure, common courtesy and public service - not threats founded on questionable evidence.

CIS

The council should not under any circumstances send out letters which are frightening to the elderly or handicapped. Any letter questioning a subject's honesty should include the name of a person to contact for reassurance and further information.

The data matching and records held by a council tax dept won't (except in very few cases) record that someone is elderly or disabled but in any case that does not negate the council's responsibility to ensure that the discounts are correct.

Whilst in this case your mother is entitled to the discount the over 60's are actually one of the highest groups we coe across in my dept for claiming discounts and exemptions they aren't entitled to. Just because someone is a pensioner or disabled does not make them incapable of manipulating the system at the cost of the other council tax payers.

droopsnout

Oh dear, CIS. You are being so kind in dealing with my enquiry. You are certainly very generous with your time and expertise. Thank you once again.

But I must reply by saying that an official body like a council really shouldn't be sending such letters to anyone. I realise it was I who mentioned age and handicap, but really, I would have been upset and offended myself to have received this particular letter.

I accept, of course, that councils should protect themselves and the public from fraud. That is not the question here. The complaint I am making is the means they have used to do this, by bullying and frightening an honest elector.

I do not think that councils should consider the taxpayer guilty and treat the removal of their reduction as automatic. The taxpayer should be proven guilty before the reduction is made. If my mother had been in hospital, it is possible that this letter could have been unread for a while.

Why should she be made to feel like a lawbreaker without the slightest question being asked of her? It really is a Big Brother scenario, in which the State knows the public good, and there are set procedures to follow, and "Tough!" if you happen to be a poor innocent and get caught up in it.

If the "data matching records" don't record someone's basic circumstance like age and possible illness, then they are not sufficient evidence upon which to write to someone in this way.

And if the over-60s make more incorrect declarations than other groups, then perhaps they need help in understanding what information is required of them.

Or are you saying that our elderly people are actually the most fraudulous sector in society? Not sure the Daily Mail would enjoy that, LOL!!

Although I agree that age makes no particular difference to a person's ability to commit fraud, I don't believe that this gives councils the right to cause offence and distress.

I wish I hadn't mentioned age. Councils shouldn't treat any taxpayer in this way. They should be obliged to say WHY they think the reduction is not applicable and WHERE and WHEN they obtained this information. They should acknowledge in their letter that mistakes in their evidence are possible and that the facts presented in such evidence are capable often of more than one interpretation. They should allow the taxpayer the immediate opportunity to explain why the evidence may give the wrong impression. They should give a contact name and number so that the matter can be dealt with swiftly and efficiently, so that the taxpayer's peace of mind can be restored without delay. They should include an apology in case they have drawn the wrong conclusions from the evidence they have gathered.

And in my view, if they are use STASI-like tactics to spy on people, they should write to taxpayers at the outset to say that the occupancy of their property is being verified in order to prevent fraudulent claims.

I am particularly sorry that someone so caring as you are, CIS, appears to be bound up in this machine-like treatment of individual human beings, whatever their frailties. I hope you see that to the ordinary subject, the might of those in power is extremely intimidating when the "accused" has no idea why they are being investigated.

I remain extremely perturbed by the council's behaviour, and am still blisteringly angry that my mother should be addressed without due respect and courtesy.

Maybe I'm just old-fashioned. But people's feelings, justice, fairness and courtesy are still important to me.

ALIBOBSY

Just read this thread and wanted to point out to OP that whilst I agree many official letters from different government bodies could be worded better, many older people are to be frank scared by ANY official letter they recieve.

Also to be honest this is partly the OP's fault. To think you could live abroad, have 2 bank accounts and a credit card account at a british address which you own and this wouldn't be flagged up as possible fraud is crazy.
The system will scan and find the OP listed as owner of the property, with a number of current financial details linked to it. Of course they will question the claim.
Sorry your mum was upset tho.

ali x

RayWolfe

I have been here for a long time but I don't think I have ever seen such a level of paranoia as that demonstrated by the OP.
Life sometimes does not always go the way you want but you have to get on with it and lots of people are trying it on when it come to paying less tax than they should. If you want the tax authorities to turn a blind eye and not follow through because they think the whole world is populated by little old ladies. Maybe your mother has other issues that could make her depressed, even to the point of saying to her daughter who lives in another country that "It makes me wonder what the point is of being here." I know about emotional blackmail from my own circumstances.
Please try to keep things in perspective.

droopsnout

Wow! Glad I emigrated! You're welcome to your world of state control.

I'm male, by the way. And a child of the sixties, when we thought freedom was important. As had our grandparents, who fought to prevent totalitarianism.

RayWolfe, you're entitled to your view, and so am I. But if you don't look to preserve your rights, they will gradually be taken away. Your comments are in places quite condescending and you sound like Michael Winner's TV ads ("Calm down, dear.")! I don't see why "little old ladies", any differently from middle aged men like myself, or children, or anyone, should not be addressed with respect and courtesy. Sadly those qualities seem to be lacking in British society these days.

And in how many more ways do I have to say it? I obviously understand the need to prevent fraud. I believe that fraud should be dealt with. But not with such a disturbing first letter as this one is.

Alibobsy, many expats like me are in exactly the same position. It is considered sensible to keep a property in the UK in case things go wrong abroad. It is equally normal for expats to have UK accounts associated with those addresses. I have not kept anything secret. I pay tax in the UK, the taxman has my foreign address, as does the DWP. We have nothing whatsoever to hide because we have done nothing wrong. We have lived abroad for seven years now.

All I'm saying is that when government contacts its electors, it should do so in ways that are respectful and polite, rather than come the heavy pressure immediately.

The comments regarding my mother's mental health are misplaced and out of order. She has no psychological problems and never has had. There is no question of "emotional blackmail", an expression it has become commonplace and convenient to trot out these days. She simply happens to be honest to the point of naivete, proud of her reputation within the community, a regular churchgoer (which I'm not), and very offended by this treatment. Her sister, who is mentally extremely robust, former headteacher, very active, is also much angered by the letter from the council (which you have not seen, by the way) and is ringing them today.

Nosht

To complain to any council write to the specific department with copies circulated to the department head, Chief Executive & your mother's Local Councillor.
Councils are duty bound to write back within specified time & must report annually on any complaints received & the outcomes thereof.

Regards,

N.

Voyager2002

Was the letter discourteous? Or did it simply ask for the evidence and signed declaration that are necessary in order to claim council task discount?

seven-day-weekend

Hi droopsnout, I read about your mum's letter on the expat thread.

I would just like to say that this letter would have frioghtenend my mum too and whilst I understand the need to check that people are entitled to the discounts, I agree that maybe the letters could have been worded in a less confrontational manner.

My son and his girlfriend, both of whom have Aspergers' Syndrome, were frightenend by the Council Tax Bill (and I don't mean by the amount of money it was asking for ). It was because to them the term 'Gross Liability' was in the same context as 'Gross Misconduct' (i.e. my son had done something terribly wrong) and also it was called a 'demand' and my son panicked and thought they were asking him for the £1000 to be paid all at once the following day. He rang me up in Spain, very upset, and I had to calm him down, point out the monthly payment scheme that was on the back of the bill and explain what 'Gross Liability' meant.

These are two people in their 20s. So it isn't only old ladies that get scared of 'official-ese'. People who see the world differently may have problems too and I do think the letters could be worded in a more 'user-friendly' manner.

I was going to write and point this out to the Council, using my son's CT bill as an example, but never got round to it - think I might do so now.

Hope your mum is OK now.

(To other posters - I live in Spain and also own a house (where son lives) and also have various bank accounts and bills in the UK; there is nothing wrong with this, it is perfectly legal and therefore I don't know why people think drooopsnout is somehow 'fiddling'.).