HMRC Web Chat

GingerBob_3

dori2o wrote: »

The only incompetent one I can see here is you.

Look we get it, you're a loner, you don't like anyone, lets just move on and stop spamming this topic with your boring rhetoric.

Please remember the rules of this forum. Comment on content, not on contributor. By all means state that you disagree with me, and why. I wouldn't even object to you stating that what I say is rubbish or whatever - that would be your opinion and you're entitled to it. But I take exception to you badmouthing me as a person.

dori2o

GingerBob wrote: »

Please remember the rules of this forum. Comment on content, not on contributor. By all means state that you disagree with me, and why. I wouldn't even object to you stating that what I say is rubbish or whatever - that would be your opinion and you're entitled to it. But I take exception to you badmouthing me as a person.

but it's OK for you to call me and my colleagues 'incompetent'?

Pot, kettle and black springs to mind.

chrismac1

Some of the posts on here are unbelievable. As my strapline shows I am not shy of taking HMRC to task on their numerous failings. But come on, surely the web chats are a step in the right direction when it comes to effective communication? And hopefully at least a step on the road to secure e-mails where there is a clear audit trail of who said what to whom and when, which really will be a big step in the right direction.

I am on record as saying that the UK tax service scored 8 out of 10 from me in 1991, 3 out of 10 in 2010 and in the 2015 "customer" survey I scored it 1.5 out of 10. When this was queried by the service surveyor, I gave her about 10 examples from just the preceding 2 months and she said "Fair enough then."

In my view offering e-mail communication as the default - even if it takes HMRC 5 or 6 weeks to answer each e-mail - will at least get the score up to 2 or 3 again.

Darksparkle

chrismac1 wrote: »

Some of the posts on here are unbelievable. As my strapline shows I am not shy of taking HMRC to task on their numerous failings. But come on, surely the web chats are a step in the right direction when it comes to effective communication? And hopefully at least a step on the road to secure e-mails where there is a clear audit trail of who said what to whom and when, which really will be a big step in the right direction.

I am on record as saying that the UK tax service scored 8 out of 10 from me in 1991, 3 out of 10 in 2010 and in the 2015 "customer" survey I scored it 1.5 out of 10. When this was queried by the service surveyor, I gave her about 10 examples from just the preceding 2 months and she said "Fair enough then."

In my view offering e-mail communication as the default - even if it takes HMRC 5 or 6 weeks to answer each e-mail - will at least get the score up to 2 or 3 again.

Email is something I'm currently pushing for.

Pennywise

dori2o wrote: »

Actualy the reason for recording phone calls is for training and quality purposes.The fact that the calls can if necessary be used as evidence is merely a biproduct of the original intention.

As for whether it is admissable, that would generally be for the tax tribunals to decide assuming that HMRC had refused to accept the details in the first place.

Until such a case arises it's all speculation.

Not really. We already have tribunal and court cases in respect of disagreement with what has been said in telephone calls and meetings with tax inspectors, where the taxpayer's notes of the conversations have been argued as being unreliable and inadmissible by the tribunals and courts, so it comes back to balance of probability as to who said what.

In non tax related cases, written documents that are easily edited (i.e. a word documented) have been ruled as inadmissible due to the possibility of them being doctored. Even HMRC themselves require electronic documents (i.e. scans of invoices) to be in a format that can't be edited, so they want to see a scan into a pdf - the industry call it WORM, i.e. write once read many.

Until HMRC also take an identical copy and save it to the taxpayers' record as a cross reference to the document saved by the taxpayer, it's use is of reference interest only and is practically useless in case of future dispute.

The only good thing from what you say is that there's some code showing which HMRC advisor it what who was dealing with you. That's a massive step up from the current telephone system where you have no way of knowing.

chrismac1

Agree the previous post. Most phone staff are happy to tell you their name and the tax office in which they are sitting. But a minority - 10% or so - will refuse a request for this information. So if you've just been told something time-critical, for example, but the person concerned will not even tell you their name and tax office, and the action they committed to do does not get done, you don't even have their name just time and date of call.

Darksparkle

chrismac1 wrote: »

Agree the previous post. Most phone staff are happy to tell you their name and the tax office in which they are sitting. But a minority - 10% or so - will refuse a request for this information. So if you've just been told something time-critical, for example, but the person concerned will not even tell you their name and tax office, and the action they committed to do does not get done, you don't even have their name just time and date of call.

For security purposes I do not agree with giving out an office location however the full name should be provided along with the full name of anyone in the management chain of provided and this is in their guidance.

[Deleted User]

As an ex HMRC employee (long time ago) I do see the web chat as a move in the right direction. That is as far as it goes for me. While I fully understand the intention to provide assistance to those who have difficulty in completing the form I am quite sure that advice is not given as to how BEST fill in the form. For example, a self-employed person may not need to claim capital allowances as the profit is already below the personal allowance - will HMRC tell the caller that?- I think not.

Yes - HMRC will provide assistance to provide what is required but cannot, quite rightly, offer tax planning advice of any kind. Their job is to process and correct tax liabilities, not to minimise them. The two positions are polar opposites.

So, I can see the reasoning. Nevertheless, unless the process is entirely anonymised and the advice of a general nature, I would not be wishing to draw HMRC attention to my lack of knowledge in the submission of my return. Am I alone in thinking that my return would perhaps merit a little more scrutiny in that case - or am I just too cynical?

Just my opinion.

By the way dori2o - your decision to post on this forum is both commendable and very encouraging. I hope that it is appreciated.

Savvy_Sue

I hadn't heard about the web chat service, but it is something I'm pleased about. Along with the introduction of secure email, it would be hugely helpful (when it works well) for those who simply cannot hear well enough to use the phone - I have two siblings in this position, and any advice to 'phone the helpline' is very frustrating.

agrinnall

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

I hadn't heard about the web chat service, but it is something I'm pleased about. Along with the introduction of secure email, it would be hugely helpful (when it works well) for those who simply cannot hear well enough to use the phone - I have two siblings in this position, and any advice to 'phone the helpline' is very frustrating.

Is the assistance that HMRC provides for hearing impaired not of use?

https://www.gov.uk/dealing-hmrc-additional-needs/deaf-hearing-impaired