HMRC Is Shite

HMRC Is Shite
Dedicated to the taxpayers of Britain, and the employees of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC), who have to endure the monumental shambles that is HMRC.

Wednesday, 3 November 2010

£6.4BN Bad Debt Write Off

DebtHMRC's bad debt write offs have risen by 40%, from £4.6BN to £6.4BN, as at March 2010. This rise is due to a number of reasons including; the recession, the change in IT systems and debts becoming time barred.

There is now some debate as to whether HMRC are becoming more aggressive wrt debt collection (eg sending in private debt collection agencies sooner than they used to do).

Tax professionals and some trade bodies claim that HMRC is "tightening the screw", whilst HMRC are quoted in the Telegraph as saying:

"Before any debt is passed to a debt collection agency, a 'final opportunity to pay' letter is issued – only if that is ignored would the debt be passed to an agency."

Two contrasting views, what's the reality on the ground?

Please feel free to comment if you have noted a change, or no change at all, in HMRC's debt collection procedures/attitude.

Tax does have to be taxing.

Professional Cover Against the Threat of Costly TAX and VAT Investigations

What is TAXWISE?

TAXWISE is a tax-fee protection service that will pay up to £75,000 towards your accountant's fees in the event of an HM Revenue & Customs full enquiry or dispute.

To find out more, please use this link Taxwise

Tax Investigation for Dummies, by Nick Morgan, provides a good and easy to read guide for anyone caught up in an HMRC tax investigation. A must read for any Self Assessment taxpayer.

Click the link to read about: Tax Investigation for Dummies

HMRC Is Shite (www.hmrcisshite.com), also available via the domain www.hmrconline.com, is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

40 comments:

  1. Well, Bernadette Kenny is no longer part of the ExCom... shame really.. ahem..

    Now here is a funny thing, there is a Blog Post from Kenny dated 01/11/10 which waxes lyrical about the challenges facing Personal Tax and all the things that she is focussing on... then on 02/11/10 Leslie Strathie's Newsboard Message is saying Kenny is leaving and thank you and goodbye!

    I wonder what occured between the BlogPost of 01/11 and the departure as noted in the NewsBoard of 02/11/10. Did anyone else find this strange?

    Now a cynic may assume it is because heads had to roll because of the PAYE fiasco (of which Kenny was apparently in charge)... but I couldn't possibly comment on such cynicism!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It would not be the first time--Stuart Somebuggerorother was their Financial Controller a couple of years ago and he slung his hook under very mysterious circumstances.
    They paid him the best part of 100 grand to go before the end of his privatly negotiated contract , as well as giving him 4 grand to pay for legal advice on how to break his contract early in a manner most advantagious to him and 17 grand to cover the help he needed to look for another job.

    Being a bad lad and/or a bungler pays off for HMRC senior managers

    ReplyDelete
  3. It was Cruickshank.

    He pissed off before finishing his full contract and HMRC gave him 90 grand, thank you very much.

    ReplyDelete
  4. re Kenny: Dame Lesley announced today that her "replacement" would be found by "open competition" - er - I thought it was announced in the Comprehensive Spending Review that posts left vacant by natural wastage would not be filled - is this the usual case of one rule for the high and mighty and another for the rest of us - or am I missing something?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Talking of natural wastage, the entire senior management consist of "natural wastage". With any luck the ConDem coalition ought to pull the plug and flush 'em away to sea as soon as possible!!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wish these comments/observations would be kept to the subject... thought it was about debt collection. (Then again comments are clearly from HMRC staff so there's no surprise... off subject again).

    HMRC (anchors) have been sending out Bailiffs while letters have gone unanswered... all in breach of their own guidelines and every other debt collection guideline in this country.

    If you write to HMRC and they take 12 weeks to open the letters and reply and in the meantime send out the bailiffs... how does that work?

    One private bailiff turned up without any identification!

    Had two wasted visits from HMRC bailiff/debt collectors (production of correspondence produced a hasty retreat) ... at taxpayers expense... WHEN HMRC OWE ME MONEY for over-paid taxes, because some HMRC numptie can't input figures into 'Box 19 – Total allowable expenses' despite visits to and speaking directly with HMRC staff! STILL awaiting refunds... you have to ask for it... but if HMRC issue incorrect statements, (you challenge them in writing; HMRC take 12 weeks) how do you reclaim it... send out the Bailiffs!

    I have spoken to the County Court and will be taking out an injunction against HMRC next time they turn up... and the cost of all that will be charged to HMRC (or that is you, me and every taxpayer of this country).

    A number of formal complaints are in progress with HMRC ... since May... no HMRC response other than apology for not replying! (24 weeks and still waiting!)

    Yes I think you can say they are being more aggressive... it's just they don't know 'what the rules are'!

    IDIOTS and that is being polite.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 4 November 2010 17:10

    Sorry to hear about you plight, I commented a while ago on here that the time delay in processing mail could lead to this sort of situation.

    Regarding your complaints, I made a written complaint about HMRC service in May as well and never received a reply.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I made a written complaint about HMRC service in May as well and never received a reply.

    It will be still going around & around from one office to another in the back of a truck, clocking up hundreds miles, before someone finally figures out where complaints are dealt with in this new centralised HMRC. I believe it is one woman in Scotland but no one is certain.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The latest is one letter from HMRC with contact details, address, tel no, fax no etc. Phone us IMMEDIATELY on this number etc etc... or we send in the bailliffs etc... and the HMRC letter is recent only to telephone the number and be passsed from pillar to post, with someone in need of a lobotomy and to be told the office no longer is open to deal with the enquiries but 'now just a general office they have had a shake up and a swop round'. Excellent. No-one can deal with the enquiry or letter sent by HMRC, or the debt recovery office it eminated from, which apparently no longer exists! CLUELESS.

    I believe formal complaints are to be sent in Welsh... it's clear HMRC don't speak English.

    I expect the bailiffs are already on their way.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Here's my prediction now... why pay £20k to UK HMRC idiots who can't even input data accurately and have trucks of HMRC mail driving up and down the m'ways of the UK... put the lot on an aircraft and send it to India... just like the rest of us in business who have lost out to this country. And having had professional business dealings with India, despite my initial reticences they have provided a first class EXCELLENT SERVICE and to be commended. They have staff who work hard. Management who know what they are doing. Rigorous processes and checking and do it all in next to no time.

    Yeah, if I worked for HMRC I would be looking for another job now... like the rest of us. Only difference is, HMRC staff will get huge redundancy packages and huge pensions.

    Predicted here first... HMRC India office by 2020. Any bets???

    Now where's that bailiff?

    (no comments about the £20k please... indicative only... and work out the average before replying)

    ReplyDelete
  11. 5 November 2010 07:53

    No comments huh? You'll be lucky. The data input people earn between 11-15K. Those that operate on that data and adjust it between 16-19k and those that analyse it 26K plus.

    Average pension of someone who has contributed for 40 years. 4,000? Not HUGE.

    Oh and TNT are the people who 'drive the mail up and down the country' and lose it far too often. That's a PRIVATE company.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the poster @ 4 November 2010 19:01.

    That was the quickest response I have ever had from HMRC, keep it up.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 5 November 2010 07:27

    PRIVATE Debt collectors have been known to fake letterheads of the organisation they have just taken the debt from in order so that the organisation itself get the money paid but the debt collection agency still gets paid for the 'work' they did.

    If it has out of date numbers on it then the DCA is being sloppy.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If it has out of date numbers on it then the DCA is being sloppy.

    If the DCA's name starts with 'IQ' then there will be many posts about sloppy and dodgy practices going to be made around here in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "No comments huh? You'll be lucky. The data input people earn between 11-15K. Those that operate on that data and adjust it between 16-19k and those that analyse it 26K plus."

    SEE WHAT I MEAN!

    15k + 26k (plus) = 41k, divide by 2 = 20.5k.

    AND this is from somoene who THINKS they know what they are talking about.

    I did say work out the average

    HMRC staff!

    NUMPTIES

    You can stay anonymous but you still show your true colours and abilities.

    I wish I could get paid 11k-15k for NOT inputting data in Box 19 (or any of the others) and getting it all wrong... only here in the real world you get sacked.

    And to make it worse we, the taxpayer are paying YOUR wages!

    ReplyDelete
  16. SEE WHAT I MEAN!

    15k + 26k (plus) = 41k, divide by 2 = 20.5k.
    ...
    I did say work out the average


    Yes, and you have worked out the average based on the highest possible earnings for the lowest grade and it's the lowest grade that does the data entry. I said what each grade would be doing but you conveniently ignored this.



    I wish I could get paid 11k-15k for NOT inputting data in Box 19 (or any of the others) and getting it all wrong... only here in the real world you get sacked.

    Along with all of the payroll bureaux who send incorrect figures (e.g. forgetting to put previous pay and tax from other employers when they have operated a cumulative code etc.) to us which affect end of year assessments?


    And to make it worse we, the taxpayer are paying YOUR wages!

    This one always makes me laugh. with the exception of serial fraudsters - everyone pays everyone elses wages to some extent - otherwise the economy would not exist.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yes, and you have worked out the average based on the highest possible earnings for the lowest grade

    I guess this 'estimation' comes from the private sector always overestimating their own worth to the nth degree.

    Seriously I remember getting on a train one morning to London and some hairgel in a suit was doing a spreadsheet to work out how much he could charge someone and without consulting any other documents or files (either on his computer or in his briefcase) simply changed his fee from £2,500,000 to £3,000,000.

    Don't worry though, if you're working for a corporation you can always fudge the facts later. I suspect the person who has a problem with 'box 19' actually filed his return online and thinks there's someone to blame at HMRC for 'reinputting' the figures when it's simply transferred from one system to the other - in the format it was sent in to them (which when commercial software is involved - despite HMRC releasing the entire data specification to software developers, some manufacturers still cause problems)

    ReplyDelete
  18. Was Box 19 ever completed?
    It wouldn't be the first time I've had some Twat scream at me over the phone about HMRC errors when the return was completed incorrectly.
    Even when the pages were photocopied and returned to said Taxpayer he accused me of changing the form

    ReplyDelete
  19. Seriously I remember getting on a train one morning to London and some hairgel in a suit was doing a spreadsheet to work out how much he could charge someone and without consulting any other documents or files (either on his computer or in his briefcase) simply changed his fee from £2,500,000 to £3,000,000.

    They where probably about to quote on an project for HMRC.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 6 November 2010 09:22

    Chances are he never did. Either that or he added up boxes 10 - 18 wrong or just neglected to fill them in and entered figures in box 19.

    Not to be too harsh on him but if he's questioning that particular box, he is filling the form out for people whose turnover is less than 64K. Not the bigshot dealing with Indian outsourcers as he makes out to be.

    Also if debt collectors are chasing him, doesn't this mean that it's a debt that would have been quite old? Which means this person must have been aware of the mistake for some time but it took debt collectors at his door to do something about it.

    On a similar note to your enquirer who screamed blue in the face - I remember talking to someone on the phone who filed on-line and she had already moaned to another HMRC colleague that her calculation was wrong and stating that we 'added something' to her return (this wasn't state pension or an underpayment to be collected, it was something on one of the schedules). Yes that's right, HMRC just ADDED some random figures to your on-line return after you filed it and checked the calculation, which is why our system showed only ONE version of the return being submitted and no amendments - on-line or by HMRC or otherwise. HMRC just randomly adds figures of income to your return just to see if you notice. Stupid thing is, all she needed to do was go back online and amend her figures - not waste two staff members time over a problem she created - and people here wonder why the post takes so long to answer.

    Some people just hate to be told they are wrong!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Some people just hate to be told they are wrong!
    Are you allowed to make derogatory comments about HMRC management?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Is an old debt when HMRC lose letters and don't reply to written correspondence for 10 months?

    Perhaps 11k and 75k for a manager should have been used.
    Big earners included FD Simon Bowles (£185,000), information chief Phil Pavitt (£180,000) Mike Falve, director general for people (£175,000) and chief executive Lesley Strathie (£170,000). (That fckus up any 'average').

    It was stated, no comments and indicative.

    Clearly this blog is for HMRC staff only.

    The arrogance that suggest everyone has telephones and online facility is astounding. Kafka was right.
    59% of households in the North East do not have internet access. (National Office of Statistics).

    And what about the deaf, blind, infirm, aged, etc... how long a list do you want? Their fault '19' wasn't completed?

    HMRC is social engineering and because not everyone can conform, go booloo and blame the individual for NOT conforming to their procedures and processes which are so easy to understand anyone can do it. NOT.

    Which part of Govt or Audit Commission stated HMRC only answer 51% of telephone calls? National average 95%.

    Is that why HMRC have written off £6,4bn ?

    ReplyDelete
  23. The last commenter has fallen on their own sword really. As he has stated that HMRC staff are incompetent for not completing one box and that all HMRC staff should be sacked then goes on to state "what about so and so?". This is a straw-man argument. He is stating that because HMRC staff are not sympathetic to his own plight of his own making as an apparent professional businessman, that therefore the same must be true for other sections of society who are not so privileged.

    HMRC provides documents in various different formats e.g. braille, large print and audio and there is always guidance available on request either by telephone (someone talking you through the return) or the notes with the return which when it comes to box 19 are self explanatory (add boxes 10 to 18 to get box 19). Also no comments here referred to the idea that everyone had internet access.

    With regards to the averages again. The people in HMRC who earn over £100k are very few and far between (thank goodness) and therefore do not $%^£ averages up that much because there must be about 30 of them compared to the 60,000 left who make up the rest of the department. Someone needs a lesson in averages methinks (seeing as the same person needs to export small lumps of batch processing jobs to India - he probably isn't that great at maths)

    Lets assume in a large processing office (e.g. people who deal with individual PAYE and Self Assessment work you have a layout like so:

    Senior manager (Number: 1 - Salary £58,000.00 x 1 = £58,000.00
    Senior officers to manage the HO's and look after the office (Number: 3 - Salary £40,000.00 x3 = £120,000.00)
    Higher officers split between management & complex technical work (Number: 25 - Salary £31,000.00 x 25 = £775,000.00)
    Officers spilt Managers & technical work (Number 65: - Salary £28,000.00 x 2 = £1,820,000.00
    Assistant Officers (Number: 500 Salary £18,000.00 x 500 = £9,000,000.00)
    Admin Assistants (Number: 100 Salary £13,000.00 x 100 = £1,300,000.00)
    Total Staff: 694
    Total Wage bill: £13,073,000.00

    Average salary 694/13073000 = £18,837.18

    (For the purposes of the above I have used MEDIAN example salaries and these are also indicative but not in the same sense as the OP - these have some basis in reality rather than some civil-service-bashing type figure plucked out of thin air to suit the needs of his argument).

    If you take out the management grades (so 600/10300) and therefore focus on the data inputters (the commenters initial target) the wage bill slips to £17166 - which is about £800 less than what I personally get paid after working for the department at the lowest two grades for over 8 years.

    Bleat all you want about it being 'indicative' but HMRC staff will come here and defend themselves against dimwitted, ill thought out, no-basis-in-reality-right-wing-press style comments such as your comments. HMRC staff in the main are not paid well but still provide a good service despite all the problems they are faced with in trying to achieve such a service. You have demonstrated from your comments so far, that you are just creating problems for yourself with your tax bill and trying to blame it all on low paid HMRC staff.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The last commenter has fallen on their own sword really. As he has stated that HMRC staff are incompetent for not completing one box and that all HMRC staff should be sacked then goes on to state "what about so and so?". This is a straw-man argument. He is stating that because HMRC staff are not sympathetic to his own plight of his own making as an apparent professional businessman, that therefore the same must be true for other sections of society who are not so privileged.

    HMRC provides documents in various different formats e.g. braille, large print and audio and there is always guidance available on request either by telephone (someone talking you through the return) or the notes with the return which when it comes to box 19 are self explanatory (add boxes 10 to 18 to get box 19). Also no comments here referred to the idea that everyone had internet access.

    With regards to the averages again. The people in HMRC who earn over £100k are very few and far between (thank goodness) and therefore do not $%^£ averages up that much because there must be about 30 of them compared to the 60,000 left who make up the rest of the department. Someone needs a lesson in averages methinks (seeing as the same person needs to export small lumps of batch processing jobs to India - he probably isn't that great at maths)

    Lets assume in a large processing office (e.g. people who deal with individual PAYE and Self Assessment work you have a layout like so:

    Senior manager (Number: 1 - Salary £58,000.00 x 1 = £58,000.00
    Senior officers to manage the HO's and look after the office (Number: 3 - Salary £40,000.00 x3 = £120,000.00)
    Higher officers split between management & complex technical work (Number: 25 - Salary £31,000.00 x 25 = £775,000.00)
    Officers spilt Managers & technical work (Number 65: - Salary £28,000.00 x 2 = £1,820,000.00
    Assistant Officers (Number: 500 Salary £18,000.00 x 500 = £9,000,000.00)
    Admin Assistants (Number: 100 Salary £13,000.00 x 100 = £1,300,000.00)
    Total Staff: 694
    Total Wage bill: £13,073,000.00

    Average salary 694/13073000 = £18,837.18

    (For the purposes of the above I have used MEDIAN example salaries and these are also indicative but not in the same sense as the OP - these have some basis in reality rather than some civil-service-bashing type figure plucked out of thin air to suit the needs of his argument).

    If you take out the management grades (so 600/10300) and therefore focus on the data inputters (the commenters initial target) the wage bill slips to £17166 - which is about £800 less than what I personally get paid after working for the department at the lowest two grades for over 8 years.

    Bleat all you want about it being 'indicative' but HMRC staff will come here and defend themselves against dimwitted, ill thought out, no-basis-in-reality-right-wing-press style comments such as your comments. HMRC staff in the main are not paid well but still provide a good service despite all the problems they are faced with in trying to achieve such a service. You have demonstrated from your comments so far, that you are just creating problems for yourself with your tax bill and trying to blame it all on low paid HMRC staff.

    ReplyDelete
  25. The last commenter has fallen on their own sword really. As he has stated that HMRC staff are incompetent for not completing one box and that all HMRC staff should be sacked then goes on to state "what about so and so?". This is a straw-man argument. He is stating that because HMRC staff are not sympathetic to his own plight of his own making as an apparent professional businessman, that therefore the same must be true for other sections of society who are not so privileged.

    HMRC provides documents in various different formats e.g. braille, large print and audio and there is always guidance available on request either by telephone (someone talking you through the return) or the notes with the return which when it comes to box 19 are self explanatory (add boxes 10 to 18 to get box 19). Also no comments here referred to the idea that everyone had internet access.

    With regards to the averages again. The people in HMRC who earn over £100k are very few and far between (thank goodness) and therefore do not $%^£ averages up that much because there must be about 30 of them compared to the 60,000 left who make up the rest of the department. Someone needs a lesson in averages methinks (seeing as the same person needs to export small lumps of batch processing jobs to India - he probably isn't that great at maths)

    ReplyDelete
  26. Lets assume in a large processing office (e.g. people who deal with individual PAYE and Self Assessment work you have a layout like so:

    Senior manager (Number: 1 - Salary £58,000.00 x 1 = £58,000.00
    Senior officers to manage the HO's and look after the office (Number: 3 - Salary £40,000.00 x3 = £120,000.00)
    Higher officers split between management & complex technical work (Number: 25 - Salary £31,000.00 x 25 = £775,000.00)
    Officers spilt Managers & technical work (Number 65: - Salary £28,000.00 x 2 = £1,820,000.00
    Assistant Officers (Number: 500 Salary £18,000.00 x 500 = £9,000,000.00)
    Admin Assistants (Number: 100 Salary £13,000.00 x 100 = £1,300,000.00)
    Total Staff: 694
    Total Wage bill: £13,073,000.00

    Average salary 694/13073000 = £18,837.18

    (For the purposes of the above I have used MEDIAN example salaries and these are also indicative but not in the same sense as the OP - these have some basis in reality rather than some civil-service-bashing type figure plucked out of thin air to suit the needs of his argument).

    If you take out the management grades (so 600/10300) and therefore focus on the data inputters (the commenters initial target) the wage bill slips to £17166 - which is about £800 less than what I personally get paid after working for the department at the lowest two grades for over 8 years.

    Bleat all you want about it being 'indicative' but HMRC staff will come here and defend themselves against dimwitted, ill thought out, no-basis-in-reality-right-wing-press style comments such as your comments. HMRC staff in the main are not paid well but still provide a good service despite all the problems they are faced with in trying to achieve such a service. You have demonstrated from your comments so far, that you are just creating problems for yourself with your tax bill and trying to blame it all on low paid HMRC staff.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Also £13,000,000 may sound like a lot for one office but I dare you to find a private sector employer of a comparative size (700) who can boast such a low average wage.

    ReplyDelete
  28. and the person who could have amended their form online could have done so because they actually submitted their form online - Before that argument is used.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Wankers
    You are the only ones who know the system.
    Nobody else does.
    Clearly this is a HMRC staff bleat web site.
    Idiots.
    Why you are employed by HMRC.
    Hit a nerve?

    ReplyDelete
  30. £18,837.18

    Doesn't sound too far off 20k to me.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "HMRC provides documents in various different formats e.g. braille,"

    "and the person who could have amended their form online could have done so because they actually submitted their form online"

    I would love to have seen the 'customer' reading the braille document and then filling in the forms online!

    Online braille... now there's a new idea... clearly developed by HMRC.. I knew they were good but not that full of shite.

    (or is that all too cryptic?)
    Braille = blind = can't see online = can't fill in the forms (online)... without assitance.

    OED – 'Cryptic' = having difficult clues that indicate the solutions indirectly.

    ReplyDelete
  32. From above

    Anonymous said...
    Was Box 19 ever completed?

    I wish I'd never mentioned Box 19. After a long illness and hospital treatment; I attended a HMRC office (which proved nearly impossible to arrange and took months to arrange an appointment) and HMRC staff were very helpful when I finally met someone, provided paper forms (no online option EVER mentioned) and pencilled in which boxes I was to complete. Somehow it appears to have gone a little wrong thereafter.

    I specifically went to HMRC for advice and guidance because the information I required was not available online or by telephone. Staff at the office couldn't provide the information necessary and telephoned a HMRC Cardiff 'technician' direct on my behalf because of the difficulty (a service not directly available to the public... the public have to telephone 0845 nos, put through to various offices (call centres), explain to 300 people and get put through to the wrong office and person anyway, who doesn't know what you are talking about.) HMRC Office staff have a direct number for technicians in Cardiff, but don't give it out to the public.)

    HMRC staff physically pencilled in on the form the boxes they required completing and information necessary. This I did. The original forms still have the pencil marks on them, I purposely never erased them!

    I did everything I could to do 'the right thing'. I did all this to specifically to avoid the very issues and problems I am now facing. Save time and make sure everyone was happy and done right the first time. Now apparently the information I provided, and that recorded by HMRC do not appear to be the same. All it needs is to sit down with someone at HMRC and spend three minutes to resolve (although it will take 3-4 hours of my time, to prepare, drive to the office and back, put info back on file etc). No; letters are lost, HMRC take three months to reply to letters and it is my fault. A meeting... you must be joking. Formal complaints are taking more than 12 weeks to elicit a response.

    I will not be a guilt-catcher for HMRC failures. Sorry HMRC fault. Admit it.

    Why is HMRC facing yet another Government Treasury sub-committee "how HMRC is doing its job, whether it can do it better, and what the future holds"?

    http://hmrcisshite.blogspot.com/2010/10/inquiry-launched.html

    Someone above (HMRC staff) stated

    "Some people just hate to be told they are wrong!"

    That includes HMRC and the Government. For goodness sake have the strength of character, management and boldness to admit a valuable execrise that was necessary hasn't quite gone to plan, changes to a huge Government Department (instigated by Labour's Gordon Brown) has not worked and needs repairing. It's done, gone, get over it and move on. HMRC is shite and needs sorting out.

    Nearly 11 November and people gave their lives, died for this country for all this.

    Stop being in denial – "not my fault". Oh yes it is.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Correction - the deadline is 6 months and 25 days for a paper return and 9 months and 25 days for online - both of which are still preferable to the US system which takes no prisoners.

    ReplyDelete
  34. 8 November 2010 22:51

    What are you on about? The customer who could have amended their return online did in fact file their return online, Which is why the suggestion was made that the SAME PERSON could have amended their return online BECAUSE THE FILED THEIR RETURN ONLINE IN THE FIRST PLACE. Nothing was mentioned about the person who filed online being a braille reader. (Although if you weren't as small minded as you were, you would have realised that people who can read braille are perfectly capable of accessing most websites as long as they don't have mind-numbing flash content at every corner).

    How are you not understanding this? If I were to carry your thought processes to their logical conclusion. It's difficult to imagine how you managed to press the 'Publish your comment' button as this would require intuitiveness that you yourself do not feel able to afford to blind people.

    ReplyDelete
  35. As usual, the right-wing have decided to add some weighted hyperbole e.g. 'People died so I had the freedom to get the tax return wrong and blame Whitehall mandarins for it all'.

    HMRC staff in the main at the lower grades are working class people who face the same problems as everyone else. Yet they are continually scapegoated in the media as high paid Whitehall mandarins. How would you feel if the job you were doing was attacked on a daily basis?

    A working class person cannot help the mountain of post that comes in every day (mostly generated by thoughtless right-wing media types egging people to 'demand satisfaction' all the time) to HMRC and to be honest, the quickest way to turn someone against you who is in the same situation as you is to act superior to them (as you originally did and as the Daily £$%" and the $un tries to do - haha the idea those papers speak for the working/middle classes, they are both completely out of touch with reality). Oh and stop pretending £18,000 is too much for a worker. I assume everyone here has Internet access and a mobile phone, both of which could be considered is a luxury if you are on less than that and are single. Admit it - you are all paid this much if not more in the private sector.

    The enquiry centres are reducing their hours at the mercy of HMRC management, This is NOT a majority staff decision. The union doesn't support it. There has been a recruitment freeze in HMRC and the department has been told to lose 13,000 on top of the 35,000 it lost in the past 5 years (about the same period the post got to the state it is now)

    ReplyDelete
  36. Tell you what, why don't all of you complaining on this board that HMRC working class staff get paid too much for their work and don't do their job properly just "£$& off to the USA. Over there you have from 1 January to April 15 to file your returns. (4 months and 15 days) to file your return AND PAY THE FULL AMOUNT THAT YOU YOURSELF CALCULATED BECAUSE THE IRS DOES NOT OFFER SUCH A SERVICE instead of the 6 months that HMRC give you for HMRC to calculate your tax or 9 months for you to file online and receive a calculation from HMRC straight away (and still feel the need to tell staff that they are wrong for calculating your tax correctly).

    Also under the US system, YOU (THE CITIZEN) ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECTLY DECLARING TO YOUR EMPLOYER ANYTHING THAT WOULD AFFECT YOUR ALLOWANCES AND DEDUCTIONS.

    The above wouldn't work in the UK - Everyone expects to be babysat with regards to their tax affairs by HMRC then throw a tantrum when it all goes wrong, they are so far removed from their responsibilities that no wonder HMRC employees are jaded by all the stupid nonsense crap that is thrown at them by the "%$$£ £$"%

    ReplyDelete
  37. I will not join the debate regarding staff wages etc but I have to agree with Anon @ 10 November 2010 00:08 in that it is the employee’s responsibility to ensure the employer is aware of everything relating to allowances.

    However as someone who deals with the IRS and HMRC I can assure you that dealing with the IRS is a lot easier than dealing with HMRC.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anon @ 8 November 2010 20:28

    You can only change your online form up until you submit it, the online system does not let you log back in after that. This is a bug in the system that has existed since at least March 2010.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Can I nominate 8 November 2010 22:51 for the biggest moron in the universe award?

    Not allowing for the fact that he will probably receive his darwin award first?

    ReplyDelete
  40. HMRC are getting more aggressive. This WRT collections agency, are thugs. a young fried of mine, his girlfriend lost her Grandmother 2 months ago, her only surviving family memeber, who brought her up for the past 10 yrs after her parents died, she is now only 20. Got a letter addressed directly to her from HMRC the next day stating that for the last 15 yrs they have over paid her grandmother's pension. I mean the day after the woman died. and that she, not her grandmother owes HMRC £10,000. A week Later this WRT Collections have agents Banging at the door. They have Broken into the house, they have forced entry into one of her friends houses and kicked the door into the pregnant residents stomach causing her to Miscarry. they camp in their car outside her house. They have broken into the house when she is upstairs having a bath and stolen money. The latest event with this agency is they have forced entry into the same friends house with a gun trying to frighten her and shot her friend in the side and sent a letter to her boyfriend threatening him that if he doesn't back off he will face criminal charges and a fine of £1,000 for perverting the course of Justice. Now you tell me that that is not WRONG. And this is now word of a lie. The Police, the Local MP and Solicitors are involved, yet Nothing, Nothing is being done By HMRC to stop this fromn Happening. And the Bailiffs believe they have every right to take these actions to get the money from her for HMRC, they think they are Above the Law.

    ReplyDelete