INSIGHT
INSIDE: Business rates • Data analysis • Education and membership • Revenues roundup • Management
September 2015 £6.50 www.irrv.net
ISSN
136
1-13
05
The scene is set for another lively Scottish Conference...says Jim McCaffertyas he prepares readersfor a busy couple of days
The monthly journal of the Institute of Revenues, Rating & Valuation
A message from the Deputy Chief Executive.
Log in to ‘magazines’ in themember area of www.irrv.net to hear the message online.
FeaturesIN
SIG
HT
ww
w.ir
rv.n
et
©IRRV 2015. Reproduction in whole or in part of any article is prohibited without prior written consent. The views expressed in this magazine do not necessarily represent the views of the Institute. Whilst all due care is taken regarding the accuracy of information, no responsibility can be accepted for errors. Any advice given does not constitute a legal opinion.
Cover story 18The scene is set for another lively Scottish Conference...says Jim McCafferty, as he prepares readers for a busy couple of days
Collecting Caledonia! 20Interesting times are undoubtedly ahead, says David McLaughlin
2 www.irrv.net • Forums • Conferences • Training Days • News • Online Training • Qualifications • Membership • Jobs • Council • Tel 0207 831 3505
IRRV INSIGHT
Managing Editor
John Roberts
Editorial Director
Lester Dinnie
Art Director
Don Tregartha
Designers
Clare Barker
Roddy Clenaghan
Copy Editor
Vicki Chastney
Publisher
Tregartha Dinnie
Ltd
IRRV
Chief Executive David Magor OBE IRRV (Hons) Northumberland House 5th Floor 303-306 High Holborn London WC1V 7JZ T 020 7831 3505 E [email protected] W www.irrv.net
Enquiries Membership 020 7691 8996 Conferences 020 7691 8987 Subscriptions 020 7691 8996
Advertising T 020 7691 8979 E [email protected]
Editorial John Roberts IRRV (Hons) T 07952 659 258 E [email protected]
Tregartha Dinnie Ltd Ibex House 5 Keller Close Kiln Farm Milton Keynes MK11 3LL T 01908 306500 W www.tregartha-dinnie.co.uk
IRRV INSIgHT is produced by Tregartha Dinnie Ltd on behalf of the IRRV.
Unless otherwise indicated, copyright in this publication belongs to the IRRV.
September 2015 ISSN 1361-1305
Your IRRV Council:
IRRV PRESIdENT Kevin Stewart FIRRV MAAT MCMI
SENIoR VICE PRESIdENT Jim McCafferty IRRV (Hons)
david Chapman IRRV (Hons)
Phil Adlard Tech IRRV MlnstLM MCMI
John Clark FIRRV
Ian Ferguson IRRV (Hons)
Louise Freeth FIRRV
Richard Harbord MPhil CPFA FCCA IRRV (Hons) FIDP FBIM FRSA
Gordon Heath BSc IRRV (Hons)
Carla-Maria Heath BA IRRV (Hons)
Paul Mcdermott IRRV (Hons)
Maureen Neave Tech IRRV
Nick Rowe IRRV (Hons)
Alistair Townsend IRRV (Hons) MCMI
Alan Bronte FRICS IRRV (Hons)
Mary Hardman IRRV (Hons) FRICS MCMI
Kerry Macdermott IRRV (Hons)
Roger Messenger BSc (Est Man) FRICS FIRRV MCIArb REV
Bob Trahern IRRV (Hons)
HoNoRARy TREASuRER Allan Traynor FCCA IRRV (Hons)
Robert Brown BSc FRICS FIRRV
Angela Storey Tech IRRV MCMI
JuNIoR VICE PRESIdENT
Editor’s welcomeRegular items
John Roberts IRRV (Hons) is Managing Editor of the Institute’s magazines
This month our focus turns to Scotland, as the Institute puts on its flagship event ‘north of the border’, the annual Scottish Conference, once again to be held at Crieff Hydro at the beginning of this month. IRRV Senior Vice President Jim McCafferty provides the introduction with a run down of events in Scotland, and his contribution is supplemented by event sponsors Scott+Co. We also include a special feature from Peter Scott on the principle of ‘diligence’ in the world of debt recovery. Our latest edition also includes a key joint ‘white paper’ contribution from Institute sponsors Critiqom and the Institute itself, designed to take the strain out of the billing and administration of business rates. Turning to the more familiar faces we introduce to you on a regular basis, this month sees the return of Alistair Townsend, who tackles exemption law and practice, Andrew Hobley puts the case of the Local Government Ombudsman and technology guru Simon Bailey examines the progress of online public service access. The fast-moving world of welfare benefits is explored by Geoff Fimister and Louise Freeth, and Ian Nisbet is back with his conclusion on the use of ‘hot desking’. Valuation matters are once again the province of Geoff Fisher, who combines his usual summary of events and news items with the latest case law. On the lighter side, we have our ever-popular caption competition, and with the IRRV’s Performance Awards Gala Dinner fast approaching, our very own style consultant Daisy Schubert is on hand to offer advice on what you need to wear at this ‘must attend’ event. Read on and enjoy!
“Welcome to the latest edition of Insight , the magazine which represents the interest of all members of the IRRV, whatever strand of the profession they are engaged in.”
What’s in the next issue... • incoming President Jim McCafferty is
in the spotlight
• Alan Bryce describes a new counter fraud initiative
• the service of documents via social media is exposed by Alan Murdie.
Chief Executive’s notes 05
News and events 06
Running the Institute 08
Education and membership 09
Daisy’s diary 10
Getting to know you 10
From the archives 11
Faculty Board report 13
Revenues roundup 14
Benefits bulletin 15
Valuation matters 16
Data analysis 22
Credit notes 23
Business rates 24
Collection and enforcement 26
Customer behaviour 28
Technology 30
LGO update 31
Doherty’s despatch 32
Management 34IN
SIG
HT
SEPT
EMB
ER 2
015
Follow us on Twitter David Magor on Twitter Gary Watson on Twitter Follow us on Facebook President’s Blog 3
IIRV-Ad-final.qxp_Layout 1 10/04/2015 15:07 Page 1
ClickDebt is a secure cloud based debt and enforcement solution that is used by businesses such as G4S. It is designed to support debt collection and enforcement operations within the Taking Control of Goods Regulations.
JBW have formed a partnership with ClickDebt to provide in-house enforcement operations with free technology and resources for resilience, out of area and aged debt work.
Thinking about an in-house enforcement team?
jbw.co.uk
YESNO
Well you will need expensive technology to deliver the service...
For more information please contact David Graaff, Business Development Director, on 0203 6977073 or [email protected]
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
David Magor OBE IRRV (Hons) is Chief Executive of the Institute
The main source of growth has been from those working
in local authority benefit teams, however this regular flow,
particularly at Technician level, has massively declined due to
uncertainty in the future role of local authorities in a reformed
welfare system.
The landscape has also changed with the introduction of
the non-domestic rate retention scheme and the increasing
importance of the council tax. Whilst these changes have
seen increased interest in joining the Institute, they have not
resulted in sufficient new members to stem the overall decline.
To address this issue and make the Institute’s qualifications
more relevant to the workplace we are carrying out a
significant revamp of our qualification structure. This will
impact on both the Level 3 Certificate and the Diploma. The
former is being refocused into three streams that will meet
the practical demands that face our existing and potential
members. There will still be an emphasis on local taxation and
benefits, however the latter will be broadened to encompass
welfare reform and the former will see an increased emphasis
on enforcement and insolvency. We still intend to deliver a
specific qualification for non-domestic rates, with specific
content relevant to valuation for rating. The specialised stream
for the Valuation Tribunal is being strengthened in anticipation
of their developing role.
The Diploma will continue to have significant management
content but the specific subject matter will have a clearer
professional pattern which is more relevant to the workplace.
These changes will come into force next year and were
addressed in more detail in the August edition of Insight. There
will also be a marketing programme to bring these changes
to the attention of employers. At this stage we do not intend
changing the route to the Honours qualification.
To ensure we have a balanced approach to our educational
programme we will be launching a new vocational qualification
in valuation. This is linked to funding under the European
Union ‘Erasmus+’ scheme and will be developed with partners
from Spain, Romania, Bulgaria and Poland. Linked to this in the
United Kingdom will be an apprenticeship scheme which will
be partially funded by the UK government. The professional
route to a valuation qualification will continue to be delivered
through our partnership with the Royal Agricultural University.
These changes will reinforce the importance of our
qualifications and hopefully make those in senior management
in both the public and private sectors understand that they take
considerable risks in delivering services without competent and
IRRV-qualified staff.
Chief Executive’s notes
“ The Diploma will continue to have significant management content but the specific subject matter will have a clearer professional pattern which is more relevant to the workplace.”
The world of learning is changingand David Magor describes how the IRRV is adapting its qualifications to meet the challenge
The life blood of any professional body is its membership. Over the last five years we have seen a gradual reduction in those joining the Institute. In the past, the annual growth in membership has balanced with those retiring or terminating their involvement.
5IRRV Membership Become a member of the largest professional institution operating in the field of revenues, benefits and valuation www.irrv.net
David Magor on Twitter
Protecting the English Public Purse 2015Following the demise of the Audit Commission, newly-formed The European Institute for Combatting Corruption and Fraud (TEICCAF) have admirably stepped into the breach, and
the first of their reports, ‘Protecting the English Public Purse 2015’ has recently been published.The report has been developed by the
former counter-fraud team from the Audit
Commission, headed by TEICCAF Board
Chair Alan Bryce, known to many of you
within the IRRV for his previous work with the
Commission, and is available to download at
http://www.teiccaf.com/protecting-the-english-public-purse-2015/
Alan and the TEICCAF team will feature
regularly in future editions of both Insight
and the Institute’s Benefits Advisory Service
magazine, Benefit, in the coming months.
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
News and events
News
Valuation Tribunal decisions galore Recent weeks have seen a number of key Valuation Tribunal decisions publicised by the Service. Among cases of note are:
• HS v Leicester City Council (Council tax – carer’s disregard)
• Mr & Mrs M Ward v J Coll VO (Council
tax – valuation list – banding – agreement
to reduce band – whether late alteration
possible if previous reduction was in error)
• Sainsburys Supermarkets Ltd v Eden District Council (Non-domestic rating –
completion notices – not received).
The President of the Valuation Tribunal
England has also released Revised Practice Statements and President’s Guidance Notes in respect of ‘Skeleton Arguments’ (PGN5), Practice Statement A2 (Listing of NDR appeals final 4), Practice Statement A11 (CTR Appeals final 5) and Practice Statement C5 (Statements of Reasons in Council Tax Liablity Appeals final 2).
All can of course be viewed on the Valuation
Tribunal Service website at http://www.valuationtribunal.gov.uk/Home.aspx
Association news
London and Home Counties AssociationThe London and Home Counties Association Annual General Meeting took place recently at Southwark Council Offices, and after a talk from national President Kevin Stewart,
Allan Clark handed over the presidential chain to Dominic Cain from the host Borough.After the meeting, IRRV members en-
joyed a fascinating guided walk of the
historic Southwark area with qualified
blue badge guide (and IRRV member)
Andrew Warde – here they are as
they take a breather.
Lancashire and Cheshire Association Business rates was the name of the game for the Lancashire and Cheshire Association, when Institute Past President Geoff Fisher and others joined in to present to a well-attended seminar on this vital subject in July. Delegates are photographed as the event gets
under way.
6
Login to IRRV Member Area
www.irrv.net • Forums • Conferences • Training Days • News • Online Training • Qualifications • Membership • Jobs • Council • Tel 0207 831 3505
IRRV Council election – make your vote count!Fellow, Honours and Diplomamembers of the Inst i tute can nowvote in the election of members tothe IRRV’s national Council.
Vot ing can be v ia the websi te , or
by request ing a posta l ba l lot f rom
Deputy Chief Execut ive Gary Watson
on [email protected] or
020 7691 8988 .
Th is year, six seats are being
contested by nine candidates .
The c los ing date for votes is 5pm
on 22nd September 2015 .
7CIPFA Affiliate Membership now available to IRRV Members • Apply NOW for free 2015 CIPFA membership. Log on to www.irrv.net
Korner Dear reader,
By the time you read this article I will have
just over a month left as IRRV President. At the
moment I am in the midst of IRRV Performance
Awards judging visits (it’s great to see the
quality in our profession) with a very busy last
month, incorporating an international visit and
a sentimental trip back to my birthplace in
Northern Ireland.
This year for me has enabled me to meet so
many fantastic and amazing people and I thank
everyone for the warm welcome throughout the
year. I have been living a long held dream to
be the national President of this Institute, albeit
with a heavy heart since the tragic events of a
late February night this year, but so many lovely
people have given me the strength to continue.
I have done my best to continue to put my
all into the role of President, as I believe it so
deserves. I have had many highlights – perhaps
the best are still to come – but I have had an
amazing year up and down the country.
I’ve been to every Association dinner. Every one
was to be fair very different, although two this
year have now been in a marquee – including the
last one I attended in July at West Malling, Kent.
I am sure by now, although I make no apology,
you must be getting fed up of me reminding
you, but please do remember that the IRRV
Annual Conference and Performance Awards
Gala Dinner is being held in Telford from the
6th to 8th October 2015. Further information
about the event is available at http://www.irrv.
net/conferences/meeting.asp?Mid=1578 The
programme will be released by the time you
read this article, and you can of course book
your place if you haven’t already done so – with
prices held for another year.
As you also know the IRRV Performance
Awards Gala Dinner will be held on Wednesday
7th October 2015, when the winners of each
category will be announced on stage. Do please
come and join our host for the evening, Lee
Hurst, and me for what I am sure will be a great
evening. It will be the final evening of my year
as President, when I also after the awards hand
over the reigns of power to the new President,
Jim McCafferty, who I am absolutely certain will
have a great year. I certainly have, thanks to all
of you.
Yours, Kevin
The countdown begins... but there’s still plenty of duties to carry out
Check out Kevin’s blog on: http://irrv-president.blogspot.co.uk/
Kevi
n’s
President’s Blog
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
It’s caption time again... In the July edition of Insight, we wanted to remind you that
Christmas is not that far away, and we also wanted to know
what President Kevin Stewart was saying to the IRRV troops
as he rallied them round at the 2014 Christmas lunch.
Amongst the responses, we picked out Andrew Burton’s
“When I saw this ‘yo yo’ jumper, I said to the shopkeeper, ‘Is this a wind up?’” as our (dubious!) winner. It was a close
call, though, with challenges from such gems as Andy King’s
“Come and have a go if you think you’re hard enough – ‘yule’ be sorry!” and the ever-present Marshall Morris with
“David Magor gave it to me about ten years ago after Gary Watson told him there was no real Father Christmas”.
This month, as the magazine carries a Scottish flavour, we
want to know what the IRRV’s Fraser Macpherson is thinking
as he endures some rough treatment... or simply provide
a caption for the photo. Get your entries into your Editor at
[email protected] as soon as you can!
Captions invited!
Gary L Watson IRRV (Hons) is Deputy Chief Executive of the Institute
Text
Name standfast
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
Running the Institute New members
8 www.irrv.net • Forums • Conferences • Training Days • News • Online Training • Qualifications • Membership • Jobs • Council • Tel 0207 831 3505
• professional meetings and training courses• Forum (and Benefit Advisory) Services• Communications Working Group
(magazines, website and publications)
• update on activities in Scotland and
Northern Ireland.
An update on sales and sponsorship
was provided. The focus was now on Annual
Conference (including the Performance Awards)
in October, where it was encouraging to note
exhibition sales (both in income and numbers)
had already exceeded the level for 2014.
It was a case now of looking ahead to
conferences and seminars (including Performance Awards) in 2015 and 2016. The
programme for Annual Conference in October
continued to be worked on and would be
released shortly. On the Performance Awards,
inspections were taking place throughout August
and September and the Awards Panel would
reconvene on 22nd September 2015 to consider
the reports and agree on this year’s winners.
Moving in to 2016, a Welfare and Benefits
Seminar would be held next February in Central
London, whilst the Revenues and Enforcement
Conference would be brought forward to April/
May and run at a new location, options for which
would be explored straight away.
Our professional meetings and training courses continued to prove popular, with a
large number run on more than one occasion
to cater for demand. It remained the intention
to run these events at venues around the
country – a programme of meetings for the
autumn would be released shortly. As was
reported at previous meetings, Committee
remained hopeful that the Valuers’ Association
Board would soon be in a position to run
a series of regional professional meetings
that will prove of interest to all members
but in particular, members (and prospective
members) of the Valuers’ Association.
On the Forum (and Benefits Advisory) Services, an update was given on membership.
The Forum Service remained strong with over
200 organisations renewing their membership
this year or joining for the first time.
Membership numbers for the Benefit Advisory
Service remained an area of concern and whilst
it was still financially viable to run the service,
it would be necessary to review the long term
options for the service at the next meeting.
Education and Membership CommitteeThe meeting was chaired by Jim McCafferty.
Key reports considered included:
• qualifications and syllabus• membership(including Organisational Membership)
IRRV HQ was again the venue for the third of the quarterly cycle of council meetings, held on 29th July 2015. A summary of what was discussed at Council and in the Committees (excluding the Professional Conduct Committee) is detailed below:
CouncilThe meeting was chaired by the President, Kevin Stewart. Key reports considered included:
• adoption of new Standing Orders
• proposed consolidation of Articles
of Association
• Annual General Meeting 2015
• reports of the Standing Committees
• Chief Executive’s report
• President’s report.
Policy and Resources CommitteeThe meeting was chaired by Richard Harbord.
Key reports considered included:
• management accounts (as at 31st May 2015)• governance and administration
• fees to Council Members.
The latest management accounts were
reviewed. This report traditionally addresses
a number of financial issues – these include
the financial standing of the Institute, pension
contributions, transparency and cash flow. The
audit of the 2014 management accounts had
gone well, with no qualifications. At the AGM in
October, the Institute will be reporting a small
profit of £4,881 on the year. For 2015, it was
still too early to get a feel of how the budget
was looking, with a number of events still
to take place. That said, the Committee was
concerned at the fall in membership income.
On governance and administration, a
number of items were considered. These included
the council elections, AGM, Past President/Honorary
Members’ lunch, finance, litigation, accommodation,
storage facilities, staffing and Associations.
The adoption of new Standing Orders and
the proposed consolidation of our Articles of
Association were considered. A number of
amendments were agreed and revised drafts
would be worked on over the coming weeks
before being taken to the AGM in October.
A review of the arrangements at the AGM
were also agreed – these including issuing
instructions on who can vote/speak at the
AGM, as well as how attendance is recorded.
Commercial Services CommitteeThe meeting was chaired by the Senior
Vice President, Ian Ferguson. Key reports
considered included:
• sales and sponsorship
• conferences/seminars (including Performance Awards)
• valuation matters• IRRV courses
• Ofqual/Welsh Government Statement of
Compliance: SQA.
A report was brought to Committee on
qualifications and syllabus, which
included the new syllabus leading to the
professional qualifications of the Institute. An
article on the new syllabus can be viewed in
the August edition of Insight. There were a
number of actions needed throughout August
and September before the new day release/
distance learning courses commence. In
particular, students currently studying and/or
awaiting results would need to be contacted
individually in order they were made aware of
where they now fit into the process.
On membership (including Organisational Membership) , it was
reported that those who had not paid their
membership fee (and who had not made an
arrangement to pay) after a series of notices
and letters had now been lapsed. The lists had
been circulated to Council and the Associations
for their attention. It remained a cause for
concern that the numbers leaving the Institute
still outweighed the numbers joining.
With regard to valuation matters, Committee
was advised that the Institute had been awarded
funding under the European programme
Erasmus+ to conduct a project entitled VARET,
in partnership with PFVA (Poland), ANEVAR
(Romania), SUMA (Spain) and CIAB (Bulgaria).
The purpose of this project is to invest resources in
the development of a new foundation vocational
training and qualifications network for Europe in
valuation on IRRV’s vocational training framework
for real estate valuation in the UK.
Law and Research CommitteeThe meeting was chaired by Gordon Heath.
Key reports considered included:
• consultations• meetingswithgovernmentdepartments
• researchupdate
• welfarereformupdate
• valuationmatters
• July2015Budget
• EnterpriseBill.
The one consultation considered in any detail
at the meeting was the Institute’s response to
‘anti-avoidance’.
National Council is keen the membership is aware of what is discussed at its meetings. Should a member require further information on any of the reports considered by national Council, they should contact me on [email protected]
Gary Watson chronicles the events of the July round of Institute Council and Committee meetings Running the Institute
In order to continue receiving your online magazines don’t forget to keep your membership details up-to-date. Log on to www.irrv.net
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
8
New examination syl labus 2015 • Recent ly launched by the Inst i tute. For more deta i ls . Log on to www.irrv.net
Latest vocational qualification successes
Congratulations to everyone!!
Student memberSName employer
Andrew McGhee Rossendale BC
Catherine Cox East Hertfordshire DC
John Dove East Hertfordshire DC
Phidelia Klobodu Islington London BC
Daneila Pitkin Islington London BC
Dana Petrovica The Highland Council
Laurie Witham Tandridge DC
QCF memberS Name employer
Joanne Hudson Newark and Sherwood DC
Erin Rhodes Isle Of Wight Council
AFFiLiAte memberS Name employer
Ashleigh Abiona Gerald Eve LLP
GrAduAte memberS Name employer
John Barnes Shepherd Neame Ltd
HonourS memberS Name
Andrew Barlow Wrexham VOA
Darren Collins Gateshead Council
Andrew Love Cavendish Maxwell
CorporAte memberS Name
Adam Francis Goodman Nash Ltd
Hemal Mistry Horsfields
orGAniSAtionAL memberS Name
BWB Rating Ltd
The National occupational Standards
(NOS) for Local Revenues and Benefits have
been in existence for a number of years, and
in their present incarnation for two years. They
were created with considerable input from the
Institute, and can be seen at:
http://www.irrv.net/documents/6/NoS_2014_01_10.pdf
NOS are agreed statements of skills,
knowledge and understanding required of
individuals at work. The way that we describe
NOS is common to most occupational areas.
In particular NOS:
• describe good practice in particular areas
of work
• set out a statement of competence which
bring together the skills, knowledge and
understanding necessary to do the work
• provide managers with a tool for a wide variety
of workforce management and quality control
• offer a framework for training and
development
• form the basis for work-related/Vocationally
Related Qualifications (VRQs).
The current NOS for Local Revenues and
Benefits consist of the following sections:
• process appeals against local authority
decisions
• evaluate benefit applications
• calculate and pay benefits
• monitor ongoing entitlement to benefits
• maintain records of properties for local
taxation purposes
• establish liabilities and amounts due
• implement billing and collection procedures
• recover and enforce sums overdue
• work effectively in the administration of local
taxation, benefits, grants and relief schemes
• provide information on income maximisation
to customers.
They inevitably require updating, but
meanwhile a review of employer ownership of NoS is currently being
conducted on behalf of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).
The purpose of the review is to improve
understanding of the use and non-use of NOS,
Michael Hopkins draws the parallel between professional standards and the public good
education and membership
Michael Hopkins is Qualifications and Membership
Manager with the IRRV. Contact him on
[email protected] or 020 7691 8978
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
9
to quantify their value and understand how
alternatives are being developed and received
by stakeholders.
In particular, areas that are being raised for
discussion are:
• what are the benefits of having a NOS?
• the literature suggests that the majority of
employers do not use NOS directly, although
many use qualifications based on NOS. Why
do you think some employers use NOS and
many employers do not use NOS?
• what have you used NOS for?
• what could be done to better engage
stakeholders with NOS and increase use of
NOS? How could employers be encouraged
or persuaded to use NOS?
• can you envisage an alternative to NOS?
What would it be?
• what are the priorities for the future of NOS?
What changes to NOS might be useful?
Professional bodies are distinctiveAccording to the professional associations research Network, professional bodies
are “dedicated to the advancement of the
knowledge and practice of professions
through developing, supporting, regulating
and promoting professional standards for
technical and ethical competence.” In this they
are all concerned with the public benefit as
well as the reputation of professionals. They
aim to maintain and develop professionalism,
thereby securing high quality professional
services for society.
We should keep in mind these distinctive
features when supporting our organisation,
and note the careful balance between the
needs of professional individuals within the
organisation, and the public good.
IRRVannual Conference,
exhibition and performance awardsGala Dinner, Telford
6th – 8th October 2015Book now onwww.irrv.net
level 3 QCF reveNueS paTHway
TITle employer
Jackie Asher Shepway DC
level 3 QCF BeNeFITS paTHway
TITle employer
Jane Hayles Isle Of Wight Council
Gary Humphreys North Devon DC
level 3 QCF loCal TaxaTIoN paTHway
TITle employer
Jamal Simon Hackney London Borough
Daisy’s Diary
than buy something new this time. After watching the documentary ‘The true cost’, I realise how much power I have with the purchases I make. If I was to use up all the gorgeous dresses that have already been bought by others in the past, I won’t motivate the fashion industry to keep producing more clothes at a faster rate for an even cheaper price! There are certainly a lot of questions that need to be asked about the production line of the clothes we wear. This year, let’s try and make a difference!
And don’t forget, if you have any comments or questions about this article, please feel free to contact me on [email protected] – I look forward to hearing from you.
For any queries regarding your IRRV membership, please continue to use [email protected] – many thanks!
Daisy Schubert is a Membership Officer with the IRRV
Hi everyone and welcome to Daisy’s Diary!
By the time you are reading this, the IRRV Annual Conference in Telford will only be weeks away and preparations are well in hand. While I have always given my outfits during the exhibition and especially the Gala Dinner some thought in advance, this year I really feel the pressure to get it just right! Will I be able to practice what I preach? Can I really ‘travel light’ yet look professional and approachable with just a minimal collection of well selected garments? We will see...
What about you? Have you chosen your attire for the Gala Dinner as yet? It’s always a very glamorous night, especially for our performance awards finalists. With gents in black tie and ladies in gorgeous dresses, the scene is set to celebrate the achievements of the past year.
My outfit for the Gala Dinner is not yet decided on, but I would like to go for a ‘preloved’ dress rather
This month, Daisy’s focus is on the IRRV’s Performance Awards Gala Dinner – what will you be wearing?
GETTING TO KNOW YOU...
Vicki Chastney is a Director of Tregartha Dinnie and has been working with the
IRRV for over 11 years, originally putting her
background in event management to good
use, latterly as the lynchpin of Insight and
Benefit magazines, managing the process
of editorial, advertising, design and artwork
through to print.
A keen sports fan, especially of
Wolverhampton Wanderers FC and England
cricket team she now lives just outside
Buckingham where she has become an
enthusiastic gardener in addition to looking
after her cat and two adopted Labradors!
She has established a reputation as a
beacon of organisational skills in the often
frenetic world of creative agency life and
outside of working hours is fast becoming a
proficient alto sax player.
She’s also a dedicated ‘Fitness Freak’
making several visits a week to her local gym
for Spin, PT and Yoga. She recently embarked
on her biggest physical challenge – climbing
Britain’s three highest peaks in just 24 hours.
Vicki takes up the story:
“After months of preparation and talking
about it the big day had arrived. We got off
to a great start by completing Snowdon
in three hours and fifteen minutes. We
were lucky with the weather in Wales and
couldn’t have hoped for better, which made
it much more enjoyable.
Back on to the bus and up to the Lake
District. We started our ascent of Scafell Pike in the pitch black at 01.17 Sunday
morning. Fog, a mammoth hail storm and
ferocious winds made for a tricky descent,
but still we managed to get it done in just
under the four hours allotted.
Off to Fort William to start the biggest of
the three mountains – Ben Nevis. It took
us nearly six hours to complete, not helped
by the summit being a little hard to find
under 12ft of snow. The rain returned with a
vengeance as we were close to the bottom
but luckily we only had a five minute drive to
the hotel and a long hot bath.
Total time to complete the challenge –
23 hours and 7 minutes! A brilliant
experience, thoroughly enjoyed by us all and
already talking about repeating it next year.”
Editor’s note – Vicki’s page is still open
on https://www.justgiving.com/VicksterChastney/ if you still want
to sponsor her and support Prostate Cancer UK .
The return of our popular column tracking the lives of people you thought you knew! This month, our publishing house’s Copy Editor, Vicki Chastney, describes a personal challenge
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
10
Members are invited to contribute towards the feature and come forward with their own personal
memories of the Institute. The Deputy Chief Executive is also happy to try and answer any questions on
the Institute’s history – contact him on [email protected] In addition, copies of previous articles
can be provided on request.
The twentieth century looms ever nearer, as Gary Watson’s examination of our predecessor body’s history reveals the first part of activities in 1898
Gary Watson on Twitter
The first meeting of the Executive Committee
for 1898 took place on 8th January, with Mr
George S Ager Esquire in the chair. Minutes
from the meeting held on 18th December
1897 were approved.
A letter from Mr Warren (Fulham) was
read giving his apologies for not attending
the meeting. A letter from Mr Hunter (Vice
Chairman) was then read in which he thanked
the Committee for their vote of sympathy
following his family’s recent bereavement.
One further letter was then presented from
the Chairman himself, that read:
29th December 1897
Dear Mr White,Re: Metropolitan Rate Collectors Association
As the Executive Committee last year kindly granted me the privilege of making a small contribution towards the incidental expenses of attending the annual dinner, and also a special donation to the benevolent fund, they will no doubt grant me the same concession this year. I therefore have much pleasure in enclosing two guineas for the purposes named, which could be included in the balance sheet for 1897, if possible. During the next year, I shall have a little leisure and if I can be of service in conjunction with the annual report etc., please command me at the time and place most convenient to yourself.
I am at always your service. With kind regards and wishing you seasons greetings. Believe me.
Yours very faithfully,
George S Ager
The Secretary, Mr White, reported that he
had carried out the wishes expressed in the
foregoing letter. It was resolved that the thanks
of the meeting be tendered to the Chairman for
his kindness in presenting the amount specified
both to the benevolent fund and also the
general fund.
Roll on 118 years – if our current President is
looking to follow in the footsteps of Mr G S Ager
(both in terms of making a donation and filling
in his time of leisure), he should write direct to
the Deputy Chief Executive at:
Northumberland House
5th Floor, 303-306 High Holborn
London WC1V 7JZ
A donation in excess of two guineas would be
welcomed and such a gesture reported to the
next meeting of national Council. Of course,
such an invitation is open to all!
Back to the meeting – the Secretary reported
that the accounts for the past year had been
duly audited and that the balances in favour
of the Association were on the 31st ultimo,
£46. 12/1d on the general fund and £150. 0/4d
on the benevolent fund account.
The Committee then considered the two
proposed schemes about to be presented
to Parliament to alter the law as regards
superannuation to officers connected with local
government. Mr Schiller reported that he had
read extracts from a speech recently delivered
by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Local
Government Board upon the subject under
discussion. Having been proposed by Mr Foot
and seconded by Mr Schiller, it was resolved
that the Committee, having carefully considered
the Draft Bill prepared by the Local Government
Board (Officers) Association for the amendment
of the Superannuation Act 1866 (29 Vic Cap
31), expresses its entire approval of the same
and pledges itself to give it their active support.
It was then resolved (proposed by Mr Maltby
and seconded by Mr Foot) that a donation
of £10 be made to the Superannuation
Conference convened by the Municipal Officers
Association, towards the expenses connected
with promoting their scheme of superannuation
during the next session of Parliament.
It was then on to the annual dinner on the
29th instant where it was resolved the toasts be
allocated as follows:
Toast: The Queen
(proposed by the Chairman)
Toast: Army and Navy (proposed by the Chairman and reply by Mr Foot)
Toast: Metropolitan Rate Collectors Association(proposed by the Chairman and reply by Mr Foot)
Toast: Vice-Chairman (proposed by Mr Sales and reply by Mr Hunter)
Toast: Chairman(proposed by Mr Hunter and reply by Mr Ager)
Toast: Visitors(proposed by Mr Schiller and reply by
Mr Goddard’s friend)
Toast: Treasurer(proposed by Mr Westwood and reply by Mr Rust)
Toast: Secretary(proposed by Mr Ricketts and reply by Mr White)
With so many toasts, the indications are that it
would have been a very long evening with guests
having very sore knees and backs in the morning!
Readers may be interested to note that it is
(and was custom) in the British Royal Navy to
drink toasts sitting, because in old-type wooden
warships below decks, there was not enough
headroom to stand upright. Likewise, in the United
States Navy, a toast is never to be made with water,
since the person so honoured will be doomed to a
watery grave. For those who may one day look for
a career at sea... you heard it here first.
The meeting then concluded, as usual, with
a cordial vote of thanks passed to the Chairman
for his able and impartial conduct in the chair of
the Committee.
From the
“ Likewise, in the United States Navy, a toast is never to be made with water, since the person so honoured will be doomed to a watery grave. For those who may one day look for a career at sea... you heard it here first.”
Gary L Watson IRRV (Hons) is
Deputy Chief Executive of the Institute
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
11
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
12
•
IRRV Training Days Early booking advised!
T: 020 7691 8987
W: www.irrv.net/trainingdays
• IntroductiontoRecovery–Janet Alexander IRRV (Hons)
10September,London
• IntroductiontoBusinessRates–Janet Alexander IRRV (Hons)
21September,London(SOLDOUT)/30November,London/8February,London
• IntroductiontoCouncilTax–Janet Alexander IRRV (Hons)
22September,London(SOLDOUT)/17December,London/22February,London
• RoleoftheCouncilattheMagistratesCourt–Gary Watson IRRV (Hons)
19October,London/22October,Manchester/3November,Hinckley/12November,Durham
• BusinessRatesMasterClass–Janet Alexander IRRV (Hons)
16–17November,London(SOLDOUT)/11–12January,London/29February–1March,London
• CouncilTaxMasterClass–Janet Alexander IRRV (Hons)
23&24November,London/18-19January,London/7&8March,London
Fees: Introduction MasterClass
IRRV Member £125 plus VAT £240 plus VAT
BAS/Forum/Organisational Member £155 plus VAT £300 plus VAT
Non Member £185 plus VAT £360 plus VAT
SpecialOffer:
3for2onmultiplebookings** Delegates must be from the same organisation in order to receive this offer
Make critical communications easyNeed to put the brakes on rising postage and mailing costs? Day-definite delivery a must? Looking to embrace technologies like Hybrid Mail?
With Critiqom it’s easy. Transform the way you create, manage and deliver your critical communications, with a fully coordinated approach to your entire postal estate. We can help you effect powerful cost-savings, while increasing compliance, improving response and reducing risk.
For more information about Critiqom, visit us on Stand 39 at the IRRV Annual Conference. Smarten up your communications today www.critiqom.com | [email protected]
Critiqom is a supplier of off-site hybrid mail services on the public sector framework agreement for Postal Goods and Services (RM1063)
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
13
The government’s review of business rates is under way
As members might expect, the Local Taxation
and Revenues Faculty Board had quite a bit
to say in response to the recent consultation
paper concerning the terms of reference and
discussion of the current business rates review.
As always, the response sought to achieve a
balanced viewpoint, taking account of both
revenues and rating valuation perspectives. The
full seventeen page response is available on the
Institute website. Some of the matters raised in
the response are covered in this article – other
aspects will be covered in a future piece.
The paper asked what changing patterns in
property usage suggest about the fairness and
sustainability of business rates as a tax based
on property values. The response stated that
the evidence gives a clear indication that the
growth in the tax base will decline unless new
elements are brought into the scope of non-
domestic rates. The fairness and sustainability
of the non-domestic property tax base can only
be maintained if there is an injection of new
sources to stimulate growth. This growth can be
achieved by the removal of certain exemptions
and bringing new land and property assets within
the scope of the tax.
A further factor in achieving sustainability is
consideration of the methods of valuation used
to determine the tax base. There are approaches
to valuation which are based upon historical
precedent which may not be fit for purpose
in the 21st century. Rather than a continued
‘bolting on’ to existing practices through the
courts, it may be more appropriate to consider
the establishment of a ‘Commission’ to review
the methods of valuation in the modern context
and align approaches to modern established
standards, such as the development of European
Valuation Standards through The European Group
of Valuers’ Associations.
Sustainability and fairness can also be
achieved by more frequent or rolling revaluations
which would properly reflect the current market.
The practice of postponement or rescheduling
revaluations should be removed by statute.
Local government is becoming increasingly
dependent on the non-domestic rate. Any changes
to the system would require careful consideration
regarding potential impacts in terms of stability,
fairness and sustainability for all local authorities.
However, in reviewing the non-domestic rate
government must not lose sight of the intrinsic
features of the property tax which make it a
desirable fiscal tool. Recent evidence concerning
the problems of specific countries in the
European Union (i.e. Greece, Portugal, Republic
of Ireland, Spain and Cyprus) shows that both the
International Monetary Fund and the World Bank
regard the property tax as an essential and stable
element for financing public services.
There is no evidence (compelling or
otherwise) in favour of a move away from
property based business taxation. The yield
from these taxes in Great Britain is adequate
to meet current Treasury demands – without
them, significant alternative sources of revenue
would have to be found. In simple terms, the
only remedy available to wholly replace the two
recurring property taxes would be either an
increase in Income Tax or Value Added Tax, both
of which would be fiscally dangerous in terms of
the impact on the wider economic situation in
the individual countries of the United Kingdom.
The paper identifies that responses to the
government’s 2014 discussion paper on business
rates administration suggested that continuing
to base business rates on rental values would
be acceptable to businesses. This is a finding
that should not be undervalued. Furthermore, all
surveyed European countries have at least one
tax on property, and most have several. Of the
46 countries surveyed, at least 44 have at least
one recurrent tax on immovable property (Malta
and San Marino do not).
The government could also consider easing
the burden of non-domestic rates by considering
other significant sources of income, some of
which could stimulate growth and assist in
reversing the decline of the high street. Such
sources could include an introduction of a levy
on internet retailers, and a land tax, which were
discussed further in the response.
The response referred to evidence that other
jurisdictions regularly review the legislative operation
of their recurrent property taxes. There is a tendency
for the response from government in England
to weaknesses in the system to be lethargic. For
example, the response to the increased methods of
rate avoidance being used has been painfully slow,
even though the ideas for remedial initiatives were
prompted by local authorities.
The paper also asked how government can
use business rates to improve the incentive
for local authorities to drive local growth. The
response called for utilisation of the tax system
together with planning policy to bring derelict
and empty property back into use. For authorities
where business rates growth is difficult, a system
could be considered whereby they were able
to afford to finance local reliefs and exemptions
to encourage such growth. At present local
authorities have no resources to do this and so
such incentives would need central funding, even
if this was partially recovered when growth was
secured. There are dangers in centrally imposed
exemptions, in that these are not local priorities,
therefore this all needs to be much more under
local control. It is, of course, no incentive to
secure and retain growth and lose other sources
of funding. Business rates growth retention must
be visible. Another improvement could also
include some form of abatement of write-offs
caused by insolvency.
Finally, it was suggested that Central List
properties could be brought within the rate
retention scheme, so that they are part of a local
authority’s income. The current arrangements
are illogical and result in substantial reductions
in income which in some cases have plunged
local authorities into critical financial situations.
It would be a relatively simple task to apportion
these values across billing authorities in England.
“ The yield from these taxes in Great Britain is adequate to meet current Treasury demands – without them, significant alternative sources of revenue would have to be found.”
...and Moira Hepworth shows that the Institute’s Local Taxation and Revenues Faculty have plenty to say about it
Faculty Board Report
Moira Hepworth BA (Hons) is the
Institute’s Policy and Research Manager
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
14
The exemption jury may still be out for some time
Beyond its mention in council tax law
examinations, the Class B exemption has lain
fairly dormant as a result of being overlaid
by the less complex Class C exemption.
This dormancy resulted in very little need to
interpret the precise wording of the Council Tax (Exempt Dwellings) Order 1992 SI 1992/558 (as amended). However, its
moment in the spotlight came in with the
removal of Class C and the creation of local
council tax discounts in 2013. At this point,
Class B exemptions were unceremoniously
thrust into the spotlight as social landlords
made applications as a result of void properties.
It seemed that billing authorities were fairly
evenly split on their interpretation of Class
B and whether it should be granted to social
landlords or not. As is likely in such cases,
the matter was tested at both the Valuation
Tribunal and then the High Court. Many
practitioners were pleased that the matter
would be settled with a precedent that could
be applied thereafter. The case was Ealing London Borough Council and Others v Notting Hill Housing Trust and Another [2015]. Unfortunately for those wishing for a
straightforward binary answer, the outcome was
a resounding “it depends”.
SI 1992/558 provides for the following
exemption:
“Class B: a dwelling owned by a body
established for charitable purposes only, which
is unoccupied and has been so for a period of
less than six months and was last occupied in
furtherance of the objects of the charity.”
The matters before Mostyn J in the High
Court related to an appeal against the decision
of the Valuation Tribunal President in relation
to three different ‘test’ dwellings. The most
significant matter for consideration was the
scope of requisite evidence and the question
of whether the evidence should be provided
by the applicant or presumed to be the case by
the billing authority.
It was found that the President correctly
broke down the words of the exemption
as follows:
i. the dwelling must be owned by the body
in question, and;
ii. the body must be established for
charitable purposes only, and;
iii. the dwelling must have been unoccupied
for a period of less than six months, and:
iv. the last occupation must have been in the
furtherance of the objects of the charity.
The crux of theses cases rested on whether
the evidence should be provided by the
applicant (landlord) or whether there should
be a presumption in favour of the landlord. The
President determined that in relation to the body
in question (i. above) and the period that the
dwelling was unoccupied (iii. above), the duty to
provide the evidence lay with the applicant, but
that in relation to charitable purposes (ii. above)
and the last occupation (iv. above), there was a
presumption that the owner by being a provider
of social housing met these tests. However,
Mostyn J in the High Court preferred to rely on
the “normal rules of evidence” that “he who
asserts must prove”. He concluded that the
President fell into error in holding that these
presumptions existed and in doing so created
an incorrect reversal of the normal burden of
proof. Mostyn J did express an appreciation of
the need for such a presumption, but found
that this should be done by the Secretary of
State with approval of Parliament and “not by
an impermissible and artificial stretching of the
plain words of the existing law”. Mostyn J then
helpfully suggested what he would expect to
be reasonable in order to satisfy the evidentiary
requirements. He suggested a form from the
applicant that addressed the necessary four
ingredients and with some form of declaration
that could be subject to criminal proceedings if
found to be knowingly false or misrepresentative
of the facts.
It was on this basis that the detail of the
individual cases was considered. For all three
cases, it was accepted that the first three
ingredients were met. Save for the necessary
burden of evidence, the decisions individually
hinged on whether the last tenant of the
dwelling had occupied the premises in the
furtherance of the objects of the charity.
In the first of the three cases, Mostyn J did
find that the previous occupier was provided a tenancy and was paying a social rent . As such the dwelling had been occupied in
the furtherance of the objects of the charity.
He therefore dismissed the appeal by the
billing authority on the basis that the President
had reached the right decision, albeit for the
wrong reasons.
In the second case, the previous tenant had
‘inherited’ the tenancy following a breakdown
of her marriage. The High Court determined
that the tenancy, whilst being Rent Act
protected and subject to a rent below market
rates, was not necessarily provided in the
furtherance of the objects of the tenancy, as
it was not necessarily reflective of the tenant’s
personal circumstances. Mostyn J found that
the circumstances could be simply an accident of fortune due to the tenancy being inherited
and as such allowed the appeal by the billing
authority. Whilst Mostyn J acknowledged the
difficulties that such tenancies might create an
owner in being able to provide the necessary
evidence, he was very clear that was necessary
in order to award the exemption.
In the third case, on balance, the court did
find that the previous occupation had been
in the furtherance of the objects of the charity and so also dismissed this appeal.
Although, Mostyn J did mention that even in
the cases where he dismissed the appeal, the
evidence was only just sufficient to satisfy the
fourth condition, stating that it would have been
better if a little more detail had been provided.
Mostyn J also gave a view that the Secretary
of State should consider a revision of the wording of the exemption so that this issue is
removed. In the meantime, practitioners might
wish to consider how the four fold test can
be most efficiently proven in order to simplify
the application process. Clearly the different
variations of tenancies which exist do not make it
a simple process to understand whether the last
occupation was in the furtherance of the objects
of the charity and this is the most crucial element
and the one most specific to each individual
case. Those practitioners who were hoping for a
straightforward answer to whether the exemption
applies will therefore be disappointed.
Revenues roundup
...discovers Alistair Townsend
Alistair Townsend FIRRV CMgr MCMI
is Revenues and Benefits Service Delivery
Manager with Milton Keynes Service
Partnership, a member of the IRRV Council,
and Chair of the Institute’s Local Taxation and
Revenues Faculty Board
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
15
Well, my plea for article subjects hasn’t fallen
entirely on deaf ears as the content of this
particular one was suggested by a friend
and colleague from a local authority, albeit
somewhat by chance!
We were having a catch up over the
phone on a particularly warm and sunny
Friday afternoon, and when talk turned to
Universal Credit (UC), it soon became one
of those conversations where you put the
world to rights. Now we’ve both been in the
world of revenues and benefits for some
considerable time and got to talking about
the differences between ‘the good old days’
and where we are now. Staff training came up
and we both expressed our surprise at how
little staff training Jobcentre Plus staff seem
to be provided with when it comes to UC,
whilst acknowledging that the focus of their
role would now be different since they have
become ‘job coaches’.
It ’s interesting that students undertaking the
IRRV Certificate qualification actually spend
a whole day of the Welfare Benefits module
learning far more detail about UC, even
looking at some detailed manual calculations.
Actually, the IRRV aren’t alone in wanting
revenues and benefits practitioners to have
a more detailed understanding of the new
support, since many local authorities have
invested in staff training. We concluded that it
must just be part of our psyche that we want
staff to understand things fully for a number
of reasons, not only to be better able to help
the claimant but also to provide the staff with
a degree of job satisfaction. This may have
a bearing on the DWP staff survey you may
recall being the focus of an earlier article I
wrote. However there are always exceptions!
I recounted the occasion when I had
spent a whole day with some new recruits
undertaking manual calculations. They were
on a pretty intensive three week training
course and, at the authority’s request, were
to spend a whole day consolidating what
they had learned about applicable amounts,
income and capital within housing benefit,
by manually calculating claims. By the end of
the day a sense of doom was in the air, as the
new starters were clearly concerned about the
number of different ways in which they could
make mistakes when working out someone’s
entitlement, so I attempted to put their minds
at rest. I told them not to worry too much, as
the computer system used would in fact work
the entitlement out for them. I must admit I
wasn’t expecting the response I received from
one new starter, who turned to me
and told me that I should “get with the 21st
century woman” and “stop wasting their time”.
Somewhat stunned, I countered that it was far
from a waste of time, since it was important
that they understood what they were
expecting to see when they used the system
to calculate entitlement. The system can only
calculate it correctly if we put the correct
information in initially. Judging by the look on
their faces, I was clearly less than convincing.
Maybe I am ‘old school’ but to me it ’s
vital that staff, and I include managers in
this, have a thorough understanding of their
area of work. It strikes me that this may in
fact be something which is lacking in the
upper echelons of those involved with UC.
We surely don’t want to hear Carol Beer’s
catchphrase from Little Britain, “computer says
no”, echoing around the corridors, particularly
when the computer system in question seems
somewhat unreliable.
Conscious that I don’t want to appear
negative about the DWP, or UC, what I’m
suggesting is that the expertise of local
authorities isn’t lost in this process. Yes, a
handful of staff from authorities have been
seconded and we continue to be afforded
opportunities such as those offered by
‘Universal Support – Delivered Locally’ but the
very basic issue of TUPE appears to remain
unresolved. Although, actually, maybe it’s a
much wider problem we’re facing when it
comes to welfare reform. Maybe there are
actually too few people left in government who
fully understand what they are tinkering with. If
they did, maybe their approach would change
and it would be a more inclusive process rather
than, as seems to be the case, allowing one
individual to make decisions and getting local
authorities to rise to the challenge.
As an example, we only have to look at the
government response to the concerns raised
by the Social Security Advisory Committee
about the impact of extending the waiting days
within UC from three to seven, or the ‘good news’ published recently that almost a third
of authorities overspent their Discretionary
Housing Payment (DHP) allocation in
2014/15. Yes, there will be yet more increased
DHP funding to help compensate for the
latest round of reform, and yes we will spend
it wisely, but what about all the good work
authorities do putting in longer term solutions
by asking staff to learn yet more skills?
“ Although, actually, maybe it’s a much wider problem we’re facing when it comes to welfare reform. Maybe there are actually too few people left in government who fully understand what they are tinkering with.”
Benefit bulletin
...asserts Louise Freeth
Louise Freeth FIRRV MCMI is Revenues and
Benefits Change and Service Development
Manager with Liberata, and a member of
the IRRV’s national Council. Contact her on
There’s nosubstitute for grass roots learning
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
16
Valuation matters
On 29th July, the Supreme Court handed
down judgement in Woolway VO v Mazars on hereditaments, allowing
the VO’s appeal, and deciding that the
2nd and 6th floors of Tower Bridge House are separate hereditaments, although occupied together by Mazars accountants. The appeal
had sought a merger of the two office
assessments and an RV reduction
for fragmentation, and the VT, Upper
Tribunal and Court of Appeal had each
decided that the occupation formed one
hereditament but the latter two without
an RV allowance.
In a 26 page judgement led by Lord
Sumpton, examining various Scottish
hereditament cases, a primary geographical test (visual or cartographical unity) was derived, not simply a question of contiguity.
Exceptionally, where two spaces are
geographically distinct, a functional test
may enable them to be treated as a
single hereditament, “where use of one
is necessary to the effectual enjoyment
of the other” depending “NOT on the
business needs of the ratepayer but on
the objective ascertainable character
of the subjects”. This may be tested
as to whether the two sections could
reasonably be let separately. He opined
that the decision in the leading English
Court of Appeal case of Gilbert VO v Hickenbottom and Sons Ltd 1956
2QB 40 cannot be supported _
“the reasoning cannot be regarded
as authority for very much”.
The judgement viewed that the
VO’s practice of accepting that two adjacent floors fall to be treated as one hereditament was not necessarily correct unless the
two spaces directly intercommunicate.
Elsewhere in the decision two other
Lords considered that, where occupation
of adjacent floors which were self
contained and only intercommunicate
via the common parts of the building,
were not contiguous and should be
separately assessed, but that was not
the issue in this case. See https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2013-0117.html
Don’t forget that you can view the latest edition of the
IRRV’s Valuer magazine by logging on to the member
area and clicking on ‘magazines’. In this month’s issue we feature the following:
• the concluding part of Stan Edwards’s compulsory purchase checklist
• Krzystok Grzesik makes the case for European Valuation Standards
• the latest news from the Valuation Office Agency, and the Agency’s analysis
of ‘tone of the list’• forthright opinion from Tom Dixon in ‘From the trenches’• David Garnett explores ‘shared value’ – a business model for the future
• the RICS Rating Diploma Holders on things incorporeal
• Paul Sanderson’s IPTI travels continue
• The future of business rates is unpicked by Gordon Heath
• Geoff Fisher on the Canary Wharf development
• Alan Bronte chronicles a successful 2015 Northern Ireland
non-domestic revaluation.
Groundbreaking Woolway v Mazars decision is out
Valuer magazine!
The world of valuation according to Geoff Fisher is once again revealed for all to see
New Court, Carey Street is no more!
The former home of the Valuation Office
Agency HQ – New Court, 48 Carey Street, London, has been demolished to make way
for retail, office and residential redevelopment.
VOA Head Office moved to Wingate House, 93-107 Shaftesbury Avenue, London in the
1990s – the current 2010 List RV is £1.32m
(£375.90 pm2) on the 2nd to 9th floor and the
ground floor reception. The 2nd, 7th and 8th floors are now ‘to let’ at a quoted rent of
£52.50 pft2. See http://www.edwardcharles.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/New_Details_Wingate_House_WC2.pdf
Dates for your diary: The Rating Surveyors’ Association Annual Member Dinner will be held on 5th November
2015 – venue to be arranged
The Rating Diploma Conference is on
24th September at Loughborough University,
the theme being ‘Exploring the hypothesis –
rating valuation examined’. See http://www.rics.org/uk/training-events/conferences-seminars/rdhsconference2015/rdhs2015/
IRRV Scottish Conference – Crieff on 2nd
and 3rd September 2015
IRRV Annual Conference and Performance Awards – Telford from 6th to 8th October 2015
IRRV Northern Ireland Conference – Belfast
on 1st October 2015
See the IRRV website on www.irrv.net for more
details and booking information for the last
three events.
This summary represents the interpretation
of author Geoff Fisher
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
17
Valuers’ Association Monthly Page
RATINGIt is understood that in the repairs case of
Monk v Newbigin VO, Monk has been
granted permission to appeal (from Court of Appeal) to the Supreme Court, so watch this space still on the RV repair assumptions.
Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) decisions:P Harris v D Grace VO concerned licensed premises in St Helens, Merseyside, which
were occupied as a members’ club with
a low annual turnover and rent. However
the Upper Tribunal confirmed the Valuation
Tribunal decision that with a full licence, fit out, and planning consent, it was primarily a bar and should be valued on that basis, with an assumed fair maintainable
trade of £150,000 and a rent percentage
of 7.5% in line with Band 2 of the VOA’s
approved guide and in line with the VO’s
comparables. Go to http://www.landstribunal.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=1173
M Lamb VO v Go Outdoors Ltd concerned
a Stockton-on-Tees retail warehouse where
the Tribunal examined the evidence in detail
in the light of the Tribunal propositions in
the leading case of Lotus and Delta Ltd v Culverwell VO and Leicester City Council 1976. The appeal property’s letting at 2008
rent of £300,000 pa (subject to two years’
rent free with capped review rents) gave an
adjusted rental of £226,000 which the Tribunal considered as ‘a significant piece of evidence’ for AVD, and the respondent
considered should be the assessment.
However, the VO argued for a ‘tone’ value of
£345,000, supported by various comparables
and some rents. The Tribunal critically
examined the rental evidence, locations and
dates and determined that the ground floor
value of the subject property was £70pm2,
albeit that the adjusted rent analysed to
£59.36 pm2 and the tone of list values were
not established at the date of the appeal.
Following further consideration of the values
of parts of the mezzanine, the Tribunal
determined an RV of £275,000, compared to
the VT decision of £180,000 RV. See http://www.landstribunal.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=1176
BRIL 6/2015 (Business Rates Information Letter) has been published in July by the
DCLG, reporting on 1) an update on the action
it is taking to improve the administration of business rates and a summary of
interim findings, and 2) an update on tackling
business rate avoidance, including a
summary of stakeholders’ responses. It
also reports a consultation paper as to potential business rates relief for local newspapers, intended to support them as
they adapt to new technology and changing
circumstances. The BRIL contains web
references to the updates, etc. referred to –
see it on https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/62015-business-rates-budget-measures
The VT Valuation in Practice VIP37 has
been published online, with a summary of the
Valuation Tribunal Service Annual Report and Accounts 2014/15, which includes a
note of 48,500 Statements of Case received
and administered (although fewer than 1,600
of these appeals required determination)
and some 201,000 challenges against the
2010 Lists (England and Wales) in the final
quarter of 2014/15 (coinciding with changes to
legislation limiting backdating).
VIP37 also includes summaries of some
recent Upper Chamber (Lands Chamber)
decisions – reported in earlier month V@MP
pages – and Interesting VT decisions including
G-Mex Centre (Manchester Central Convention Centre Complex (contractors
test v profits), where IRRV Annual Conferences
were held in 2005 and 2008, and MCCs at Middlesbrough
car parks and Kidderminster vacant shops. There is also a summary of VTE
decisions concerning equestrian property, as to whether they were non-domestic or domestic, in two cases concerning facilities
where racehorses were kept and trained on
a non-commercial amateur basis. The VTE
President held that one was domestic (the
facilities were within the curtilage of the
dwelling and the activity was carried out in an
‘appurtenance’ (Section 66(1) (b) LGFA 1988),
and one was non-domestic, being found to
be outside the curtilage, with stables that
pre-dated the house and were out of scale of
it. See http://www.valuationtribunal.gov.uk/vip_newsletter.aspx
You can also view the latest VT User Group Minutes on http://www.valuationtribunal.gov.uk/VTUsersGroupMinutes.aspx
The VOA achieved 93.3% clearance of rating appeals outstanding at 30 September 2013 by July 2015 (the
Chancellor’s target was 95%), but many more
appeals have been received since, including
the 201,000 received in the final quarter of 2014/15, following the statutory changes
in effective dates limiting backdating (see
details above and in previous V@MP). Also
see https://www.gov.uk/government/news/monitoring-the-commitment-to-resolve-95-of-outstanding-non-domestic-rating-appeals-in-england-by-july-2015-june-2015-update
GENERAL PRACTICE On 17th and 18th September, The
Association of Chief Estates Surveyors (ACES) is holding its Annual Conference at
Salford Quays. For programme details, go to
http://acesconference2015.com/programme.html
The Central Association of Agricultural Valuers (CAAV) elected its new President for
2015/16, Charles Meynell of Fisher German
in Stafford, at its AGM and Conference in
Windermere in June 2015. See http://www.caav.org.uk/News.aspx?page=1846
The IPMS Coalition has published its draft
Residential Standard, which will impact the
RICS Code of Measuring Practice and how you measure property. See the following link
for the very detailed draft and if appropriate,
make representations before the closing
date of 30th September. http://ipmsc.org/consultation/?utm_campaign=RICS+News+27%2F07%2F15&utm_medium=email&utm_source=RICS
Geoff Fisher FRICS (Dip.Rating) IRRV (Hons) REV is a Past President of the Institute and a Rating Diploma Holder.
The views in case summaries are the author’s and should not be accepted as a legal opinion.
Valuers’AssociationMonthlyPageV@MP
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
18
The scene is set for another lively Scottish Conference It does seem that the last 12 months, since
I was putting together my notes for the 2014
Scottish Conference, have flown by. Now here
we are again heading back to the beautiful
setting of Crieff Hydro for the 2015 Scottish Conference. Yet so much has happened
within that time. Is this just me, or was Arthur
Schopenhauer not right when he said, “The
years pass more quickly as we become older”?
Well, clearly I am not that old, so that’s not
it! I think it is more that these have been a very
busy 12 months in the world of the Institute –
what 12 months aren’t? No, I tend to think the
issue is with my perspective of time passing.
Why do painful times take longer to pass
through our consciousness than pleasurable
ones? Why does waiting for something to
happen take so long and then when it comes
time passes quickly? Those of you that
watched Sky Sports News and their seemingly
never-ending previews of the 2015/16 football
season will know what I mean!
Planning for the Scottish Conference started
some months ago. This work is undertaken
by Fraser Macpherson and the Scottish
Association Executive, led by our President
Joan Hewton. Joan has been instrumental
in recent years in expanding the valuation
content of the Scottish Conference.
Part of the process in drawing up the
programme is to make it as comprehensive
as possible. The Institute has a diverse
membership and every member has the right
to expect that their own specialism will be
addressed in some way – not an easy task.
When putting together a conference
programme, we try to take into account what
has happened and what we have learned
from it. We also look at what we think is
about to happen. Last year’s conference
was overshadowed by the independence referendum that’s happened now – and
‘vows’ were made. However, as many a
divorcee may reflect upon, vows are tricky
things, easier to make than fulfil. Still, for now
matters are settled and then we had the UK general election. It was a conclusive result
and the policies which the UK government are
pursuing should come as no surprise to anyone.
On the horizon we have the Scottish Parliamentary elections in May 2016,
with the Scottish local elections to follow
in May 2017. So we may not all like what is
going on, especially in Scotland, but it is at
least predictable. There are however some
political and legal issues for Scotland in
particular, that may yet prove troublesome
for the UK government.
The conference title, ‘Service Delivery – fit
for the challenge’, recognises the reality for
IRRV members that we now must focus on
making things work as best they can. The
time for debate on the rights and wrongs
of political policies has largely passed and
whilst not over are on the back burner. Now
we must, as we have done many times in the
past, deliver the outcomes.
There are challenges ahead that are of
a more pragmatic kind, making the best of
policies for the public that we serve. Further
ahead we will face in Scotland changes to the local taxation system following the
2016 elections. What they will be is less clear,
but a never-ending council tax freeze seems
highly unlikely.
There is too extensive a programme
of speakers for me to comment on each
individually. I would however encourage
readers to look at the conference brochure
on the IRRV’s website at http://www.irrvscotland.org.uk/documents/Scottish%20Conference%202015%20initial%20brochure.pdf
Our speakers as ever come from both
Scotland and elsewhere in the UK. The range
of speakers work in a variety of organisation
types and disciplines and the programme
seeks to provide something to interest all
aspects of that diverse IRRV membership I
spoke of earlier. The speakers have common
attributes, in that they all come with expertise
in their own fields coupled with the desire
to share their experience and opinions with
those attending the conference. There will be
differences of opinion and healthy debate,
where contrary views will no doubt be aired.
This is after all the Scottish Conference and we
have a stereotypical image to live up to.
Sometimes I think we tend to forget that
the poll tax did not come to the party alone
– it brought its pals, national non-domestic
rates and the current grant system! When poll
tax left the scene it was replaced by council tax. The other two aspects remain around,
largely unaltered, until this day. Council tax
has done very well for a ‘rushed in’ tax but it
is now past its sell by date. I think when you
try explaining the basis of valuation for council
tax purposes to council taxpayers who were
not even born in 1991, that is a pretty big
clue as to how remote from reality the tax has
become. In Scotland the council tax freeze
is in its eighth year and has to all intents and
purposes become embedded. Am I being too
cynical in feeling that it may be easier for a
Scottish Government to replace council tax
rather than remove the freeze? That freeze is
funded to the level of £560m for the current
year and will rise by a further £70m for each
year that it continues.
Local government in Scotland will be
concerned that a tax change may see that
funding reduced. Has the Scottish Government
missed an opportunity in only setting up a
local taxation Commission, rather than one
that looks at local government funding as
a whole? These are questions that can be
addressed to Marco Biagi MSP, Minister
for Local Government and Community
Empowerment, who is giving the Ministerial
Address to Conference. The Minister has a
couple of hard acts to follow from previous
conferences in John Swinney and Margaret Burgess, both of whom faced and responded
to tough questioning from their audience.
“Sometimes I think we tend to forget that the poll tax did not come to the party alone – it brought its pals, national non-domestic rates and the current grant system!”
...says Jim McCafferty, as he prepares readers for a busy couple of days
Cover story
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
19
Having met the Minister, I am certain that he is
up to that challenge.
Business rates reform will I am sure be
a recurring theme in some of the valuation
presentations and we shall also hear from the
Scottish Government on the subject of local government finance reform.
For those who are unlucky enough to work
in ‘command and control’ gulags, help and
inspiration is at hand, as we have a number
of speakers who will I am sure illustrate that
life does not have to be that unimaginative!
We can all do with advice on how to do things
better and then it is our choice we follow,
or adapt that advice. The best speakers will
also explain where things they attempted
did not quite work as planned. I have always
found the honesty in this regard to be part
of why I think the Scottish Conference works
so well. We are not attending ‘sales pitches’
but learning events. The papers on managing
change and business transformation across
the public services; managing financial
assessments; Universal Credit (UC) roll-
out in Scotland – the issues; collaborative
improvements between local authorities in
revenues service delivery; reliefs – mitigating
the rating burden for ratepayers; supporting
customers through welfare reform; tackling
corporate fraud in the local authority setting;
local government’s journey since 1996 and
challenges facing public services in Scotland,
will all inform us greatly.
On the valuation side there is an extensive
programme covering analytical issues such as
market trends in different property sectors and
detailed consideration of the challenges faced
in assessing particular types of property for
rating purposes.
We also need to look at what is about to
happen to us and there a number of papers
on this too – land reform, UC – what future?, the business rates valuation appeals system – moving forward and
The Fraud and Error Reduction Incentive Scheme. The latter session is being presented
by Adrian Shooter from the DWP and I am
looking forward to this as I know Adrian will
leave time for questions and answers at the
end of his presentation. I hope this approach
catches on with his colleagues!
There are a number of informative technically
based papers covering bankruptcy and the
Debt Advice (Scotland) Act 2014 – five months in, collection and recovery after
welfare reform and Water Direct, to pick out
just a few.
We have some real problems to address
in terms of Scotland (as elsewhere in the
UK) and it is not understating the issue to
suggest that there are profound philosophical
differences on how to move things forward
between the UK government and prevailing
opinions here. These differences are probably
no clearer cut than on the issue of social housing. Bearing in mind that housing is
a devolved matter (unlike housing benefit)
and where the UK government wishes to
limit tenancy rights and force through rent
reductions. It is, in my view, inconceivable that
this could happen elsewhere in the UK and the
block grant to Scotland remains unaffected.
Perhaps we will have a clearer view of how
these issues will be addressed after we have
heard from the DWP and other speakers.
Fraser informs me the exhibitors’ area will
be full and this is testament to the level of
innovation in the suppliers market – again I am
sure we can all learn something by spending
some time there. The conference would not
be as extensive if not for our event sponsors.
I should also mention the pre-conference golf tournament. I have no doubt that I will
get the best value from this in terms of strokes
played and distance walked!
Oh yes – finally debate, drinking and
singing will take place in the Hydro bar until
late into the night. The musical sessions were
so successful at our last visit to Crieff that
other guests were also joining in and belting
out a song or two for us. My head is looking
forward to Crieff but it is already warning me
that my liver may be in for a challenging time!
Jim McCafferty IRRV (Hons) is Senior
Vice President of the Institute
“On the valuation side there is an extensive programme covering analytical issues such as market trends in different property sectors and detailed consideration of the challenges faced in assessing particular types of property for rating purposes.”
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
20
Cover story
Collecting Caledonia! When commentators write about the
Scottish political scene they reach for
the geological textbook. Ear thquakes and
cataclysms are never enough. No political
profile currently is complete without the
grinding of tectonic plates.
That the current affairs landscape is
dramatic is not in question. But no matter
which party political viewpoint you are
standing atop, the outcomes are not certain.
If a week is a long time in politics, a year is
the equivalent of a geological era, and unlike
the certainties of physics, we are dealing with
unpredictable politicians and voters.
Scotland’s current political status
is something for which there are no
precedents. As any lawyer will tell you,
where there is no case law, predictions are
not recommended. And as any gambler will
tell you, where there is no form is not the
moment to bet on the farm.
Scotland has gone from a country in the
1950s where 50% of the electorate chose
the Conservative party, through a long period
of Labour dominance, to the present apparent
triumph of the SNP. But that simple story
hides a more complex and volatile reality
where local government continues to be a
closely fought battleground between parties.
All this would be fascinating if it did not
impinge so directly on the month to month
task of collecting the funds that enable
government services to function. No-one
can be certain of what will happen in the
medium term to the key factors that influence
our work as collectors of funds at local
government level.
Scotland faces similar challenges as the
rest of the UK. As the entire welfare system
is restructured and different groups – young
people, families – move in and out of the
system, the difficulty of separating those
who can pay from those who can’t pay will
become more complex.
The austerity programme which underpins
current UK government policy is of course
at odds with the stated policies of the
government in Scotland. This is not a novel
situation – it was current through the whole
of the last Parliament. But what is novel is
the more confident mandate of both the
Conservative government in the UK and SNP’s
dominant position representing Scots in the
UK as well as the Scottish Parliament’s.
As the Smith Commission
recommendations begin to overtake the
already generous extensions of tax and
spending powers contained in the Scotland
Act 2012, the big question is how the Scottish
Government will respond. Will we see
dramatic differences between the two parts
of the UK on taxation and welfare?
As part of the Scotland Act 2012, the
Scottish Government has already set up
Revenue Scotland. At present, its powers
extend only to the collection of the
Land Fill Tax and the Land and Building
Transaction Tax, which replaced UK Stamp
Duty in Scotland. Revenue Scotland is a
non-ministerial body which reports to the
Parliament as a whole, not directly to Scottish
Government ministers.
There are no plans for the body to take
over collection of UK taxes or to collect local
taxes, but the clear message is that Revenue
Scotland has the apparatus and will develop
skills and expertise which will allow it to take
on whatever roles and responsibilities may
emerge in the future.
The turbulence of the political scene
in Scotland shows few signs of rumbling
away quietly. Indeed the aftershocks of
the referendum may turn out to be more
significant than the vote itself. And who
would deny that a passion for political
engagement is anything other than a positive
thing in a nation?
But amid the fervour, the practical work
of running the country must go on. We live
in tough times and the direction and shape
of economic recovery is not certain. The
fundamental bedrock of revenue raising and
spending is at the core of any political debate
and questions about where the focus of
taxation should lie have been raised in village
halls and in the debating chamber of the
Parliament. It isn’t just a question of whether
Westminster or Holyrood should have the
most say in revenue raising, but whether
Edinburgh or local authorities should be in
the driving seat.
These are fundamental questions
about how democracy works. There is an
opportunity to come up with new ideas - a
new system which may well create a more
workable and logical relationship between
government and governed. Connecting
taxpayer with spending decisions is the vital
relationship in a modern democracy and any
debate about revenue raising and spending
should also include discussion about the
most ef fective, ef ficient and equitable way
to collect.
Consideration of the apparatus of collection
might not be as exciting as big debates about
local and national accountability, but we
don’t have far to look in Europe to see what
happens when you have a government of
good intentions but who fail to put in place a
robust means of gathering taxes.
As those who enjoy the Annual Conference
at Crieff know very well, there is no scenery
quite as dramatic as Scotland. The robust
landscape extends right into the heart of the
capital. Edinburgh was known in the Age of
Enlightenment as the Athens of the north. An
unnecessary reminder of what can happen to
a society and a nation which gets its revenue
collection wrong.
“ It isn’t just a question of whether Westminster or Holyrood should have the most say in revenue raising, but whether Edinburgh or local authorities should be in the driving seat.”
Interesting times are undoubtedly ahead, says David McLaughlin
David McLaughlin is Managing Partner
at Scott and Co., sponsors of the IRRV
Scottish Conference
IRRV London Day Release Courses(Courses start October 2015)
T: 020 7691 8974
W: www.irrv.net/courses
IRRV Level 3 Certificate
Streams available:
Revenues and Welfare Benefits
This course is designed for both Revenues and Benefits staff who wish to gain a professional qualification and further their careers.
Business Rates
The IRRV Level 3 Certificate in Business Rates is designed for staff who deal with Non-Domestic Rates both in the public and private sectors.
Fee: £1100.00 plus VAT
IRRV Professional Diploma
Streams available:
Revenues and Welfare Benefits
Business Rates
This course is designed for those who wish to progress to senior positions. The Professional Diploma leads to the highest level qualification, IRRV Honours.
Fee: £1210.00 plus VAT
Syllabus:
http://www.irrv.tv/publications/DL/Syllabus_2015_2016.pdf
Special Offer: 3 for 2 on multiple enrolments* * This offer is valid on multiple bookings with a minimum
of 3 candidates.
IRRV Distance Learning
T: 020 7691 8984
W: www.distancelearning.org.uk
Achieve Your Potential with IRRV Distance Learning Courses
Special Offer: 3 for 2 on multiple enrolments* * This offer is valid on multiple bookings with a minimum
of 3 candidates.
IRRV Certificate Level 3
This course is designed for those who wish to gain a professional qualification and further their careers.
Streams available:
Revenues and Welfare Benefits
Business Rates
Valuation Tribunal
Fee: £1100.00 plus VAT
Certificate Syllabus:
http://irrvdistancelearning.org.
uk/admView.asp?M=GRCMNU&ID
=C20090114103259-285078102
IRRV Professional Diploma
This course is designed for those who wish to progress to senior positions. The Professional Diploma leads to the highest level qualification, IRRV Honours.
Stream available:
Revenues and Welfare Benefits
Business Rates
Valuation Tribunal
Fee: £1210.00 plus VAT
Diploma Syllabus:
http://irrvdistancelearning.org.
uk/admView.asp?M=GRCMNU&ID
=C20100115152051-562011009
Peter Brown was formerly Professor of Property Taxation at Liverpool John Moores University
Peter Brown continues his research into using technology to effectively cleans, analyse and use data
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
22
1 SAMPLE DATA AND ITS PREPARATIONAs highlighted in an earlier article, this series
will use house price data supplied by the
Land Registry for demonstrating different
techniques. This data can be obtained from
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/price-paid-data-downloads and the data is produced by the
Land Registry ©Crown copyright 2015.
As you will notice from the downloads page,
depending on what data you download the file
size can be considerable. If you download the
complete data set the download will be over
3.4GB and contain around 20 million records!
As far as Excel is concerned, you can
download and import either the TXT or
CSV file version. Importing the data should be
straightforward.
2 DATA CLEANING AND PREPARATIONRegardless of which data set you import,
the data will have no column headings.
You will need to insert a new row 1 for the
column headings.
A full explanation of the columns and
their content is available in the extended
version of this ar ticle on the Institute’s
website.
You may wish to change the headings,
but that is personal rather than required,
although each column will require a
heading for the imported table.
Prior to undertaking any analysis it is
necessary to review that data with a view
to seeing the extent to which it meets your
own requirements. Whilst purely a personal
preference, I have made the following
changes to the data:
• within the address fields, all addresses have
been converted to ‘proper’ capitalisation
(i.e. capital letter for each word). See the
previous article regarding changing case
• extra spaces have been removed in all
columns. See the previous article regarding
changing case
• duplicate sales records have been removed
as far as possible but some may still
remain and only become apparent when
analysing data
• tenure field – I have changed F and L to
read Freehold and Leasehold. I prefer
to see the full description rather than an
abbreviation and find the full description
more meaningful in reports, etc
• new/old – I have changed N (for old
property) to Old and Y to New to avoid
confusion in reports, etc. Someone could
easily assume that N meant the property
was New rather than the opposite!
• type – as with the other abbreviations, I have
changed these to read detached, semi-
detached, terraced and flat for similar reasons
• date – this has been converted to a standard
dd/mm/yyyy format
• the address data supplied for some sales
can be potentially confusing. Look at the
details for 9 Vernon Avenue, Blackpool below. Note that the locality, town, district
and county are all the same. If you were
to search for Blackpool in locality rather
than town you would only find a subset of
the records. Consequently I have deleted
duplicate references in the locality field
where it is the same as the town.
• the Transaction Unique identifier is of
questionable value for our purposes,
though could be useful for checking for
duplicate records. I have deleted this data
but the choice is yours.
There are other issues to consider depending
on the analysis you may wish to undertake:
• the data covers both England and Wales
but there is no easy means to examine just
the sales in one country. Would it be worth
having a new field headed Country?
• there is no regional field, so it is not
possible to analyse data by regions. I have
added a Region field so that this level of
analysis can be undertaken
• given the nature of the data it may be
that it would be appropriate to report that
data using maps rather than tables, etc.
Whilst the postcode will be suitable for
some programs, others require latitude and
longitude to produce maps.
Remember to back up your data
af ter each change, just in case it has
unexpected results.
References and links:An extended version of this article is available
on the Institute’s website, together with a
selection of data for regions which have been
converted to Excel and where the above
changes have been made.
“ A full explanation of the columns and their content is available in the extended version of this article on the Institute’s website...”
Data analysis
Peter Brown was formerly Professor of Property Taxation at Liverpool John Moores University INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
23
A pay rise and a benefit cut! The first solo Conservative Budget for several
Parliaments took as a main theme the role of
in-work benefits in topping up the inadequate
earnings of people working for low paying
employers. The Chancellor expects employers
to do more, through increased minimum wages
(at least for those aged 25 and over) – while
severely pruning Tax Credits, Housing Benefit
(HB) and Universal Credit (UC).
Most out-of-work benefits for those of
working age took a beating, too, not least
Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).
The coalition also made a number of cuts
to in-work benefits, but these were largely
concealed beneath rhetoric aimed at those out
of work. This time, low-paid workers feature
prominently in a game of snakes and ladders.
A new floorThe proposed National Living Wage will start
next April at £7.20 per hour, rising to £9.00
by 2020. This is in effect a higher National
Minimum Wage. It is significantly lower in real
terms than the current Living Wage (£7.85 UK
2015 rate, or £9.15 in London) as established
by the Living Wage Foundation1. Moreover,
the latter (unlike Mr. Osborne’s version) is
research-based and also assumes the current
levels of Tax Credits. But on the plus side,
the mandatory nature of the official version
will greatly extend coverage compared to its
voluntary counterpart.
In principle, the proposed increase in the tax
threshold should also help low-paid workers
(although the gain spreads right up the income
range). In practice, though, the effect at the
lower end is limited, not only because some
earn less than the existing threshold anyway,
but because for many, the increase is largely
offset by reductions in means-tested benefits.
By increasing net pay through tax cuts,
the government will be able to reduce the
amount it spends on HB and UC. At the
same time, by increasing gross pay through
the new National Living Wage, there will be
a reduction in spending on Tax Credits. It is
through these positive measures that people
should be floated free, as far as possible,
from means-tested in-work benefits. But
at the same time, the Chancellor proposes
severely to cut those benefits, which will
seriously increase in-work poverty.
Moreover, the pattern of gains and losses
that is likely to emerge will discriminate sharply
against certain groups – notably people with
children and/or high rents. This is because
wages do not take account of family structure
or housing costs.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has
observed that there will inevitably be more
losers than gainers from the Budget, as higher
wages from the increased minimum wage will
amount to £4 billion in extra income, while
the benefit cuts will amount to £12 billion.
“Unequivocally, tax credit recipients in work
will be made worse off by the measures in the
Budget on average”2.
People with children and/or those who
pay high rents are also the main ‘at risk’ groups for the benefit cap, which is to be
increased in severity. Along with the proposed
restriction of some children’s benefits to the
amount payable for a maximum of two, this
represents an approach that seems to see
children as an expensive consumer choice,
rather than young people who will grow up
to become the next generation of workers.
They will be needed in order to keep society
functioning – including supporting tomorrow’s
older people, whether the latter have
individually raised children or not.
Families, whether in or out of work who are
raising children on a low income, are likely to
be very uneasy at the direction of travel in this
policy area.
Disability and sickness benefitsOne welcome feature of the Budget was
that the rumoured taxation of Personal
Independence Payment and working-age
Disability Living Allowance did not materialise.
At the Royal National Institute of Blind People
(RNIB) we campaigned hard on this in the
preceding weeks and over 800 blind and
partially sighted people wrote to their MPs, so
we are pleased with the Chancellor’s decision
not to pursue that option and to recognise
that these benefits are there to help with the
additional costs of disability.
However, we were dismayed by the
announcement that the ESA rate for the
Work-Related Activity Group (WRAG) is to be
reduced (for new claimants) to the Jobseeker’s
Allowance level – currently, at £73.10, almost
£30 per week less (rates for those aged 25
and over).
Claimants in the WRAG are, by definition,
preparing for the point at which they will be
able to work. Most will not have reached that
point and many will not reach it for some time.
Some will be wrongly in the WRAG, rather
than the Support Group, in the first place. This
measure will push into poverty and debt many
people who have no realistic escape route via
an imminent job.
The Budget had some positive news in
terms of improved minimum wages, but overall
was deeply worrying. I have not yet mentioned
the treatment of young people, the four-year
working age benefit freeze or the detail of
the cuts to HB and UC. Doubtless we shall
return to these in future articles. Regrettably,
a positive attitude to low pay has been more
than counteracted by a negative approach to
the benefits upon which many depend in order
to make ends meet, in or out of work.
1 http://www.livingwage.org.uk/
2 IFS Director Paul Johnson, quoted in Heather Stewart and Larry Elliott, ‘Budget 2015: Tax Credit claimants will be up to £1,000 a year worse off, says IFS’, Guardian, 9/7/15.
“They will be needed in order to keep society functioning – including supporting tomorrow’s older people, whether the latter have individually raised children or not.”
Credit notes
Geoff Fimister looks at the game of snakes and ladders represented by the Chancellor’s recent Budget
Geoff Fimister is Campaigns Officer (Incomes)
with RNIB and a writer on benefit issues
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
24
Business rates billing – a roadmap to simplicity and efficiency
The tax system that we know as today’s business rates has undergone numerous incarnations since its roots in the Poor Laws of Elizabethan England. Today, the evolution of this system continues, with the government stating its commitment to improve the administration of business rates and to address businesses’ concerns about the burden of processing bills and payments, along with creating a more efficient appeals system.
By the time of the 2016 budget, the
government aims to have conducted a
full review of the business rates system.
Discussions have been initiated by HM
Treasury around the key aspects of business
rate administration – how proper ty is
valued, how of ten proper ty is valued,
how business rates bills are set, how
business rates are collected and how
information about ratepayers and business
rates is collected and used. The end game
is to create a business rates system that is
less burdensome on the business sector
and which delivers practical improvements
in terms of the clarity of bills, the sharing of
related information and the ef f iciency
of appeals.
The numbers associated with today’s
business rates system provide some
indication of the level of administrative
complexity facing England’s local authorities
and businesses across every sector. Rates
bills are generated by 326 English billing
authorities, with 1.816 million properties
valued separately as of September 2014.
20% of properties in England accounted
for around 80% of total rateable values as
at March 2013. And around £21 billion was
raised in England during 2013/14 to fund
local services.
This br ief ing paper focuses on the
col lec t ion of business rates, speci f ical ly
the means by which businesses are
bi l led. In shor t , the bi l l ing system must
meet the needs of businesses as well as
local author i t ies .
Business rates billing – the view from both sidesBusiness rates raised £22.9 bill ion in
England from 2014/15 from around
1.8 million non-domestic proper ties1.
Bills are typically despatched in February
or March, with businesses of ten electing
to pay by instalment.
Of course, for local authorities,
conducting any form of communication with
citizens comes with the pressure of doing
more for less – of being seen to deliver
service excellence whilst operating under an
intense scrutiny on costs. At the same time,
the government ’s drive to digital continues
apace, a constant and key consideration for
any local authority looking to implement
process changes. So, any discussions around
improvements to the business rates system
must take place with this challenging dual
focus as the backdrop – i.e. containing costs
whilst also ensuring that systems are highly
ef f icient and future-proofed.
Certainly, where other types of
transactional communications are
concerned, local authorities are becoming
wise to the benefits of par tnering with third-
par ty specialists in order to deliver service
excellence and ef ficiencies. Council tax and
benefits communications provide one such
example. Improvements such as clearer
billing formats and day-definite delivery
schedules enable authorities to reduce
the number of incoming queries following
a mailing and to instead focus spend on
frontline services.
There is undoubted room for improvement
in the way that today’s business rates bills
are processed. Each of the 326 billing
authorities in England has their own
preferences regarding the format, layout and
precise content of business rates bills. This
results in a wide discrepancy in the way that
business rates bills look to the recipient. For
a business with only one site in one location
this won’t be a problem. In this instance, the
business will receive its bill from whichever
local authority controls business rates in
the area. However, dif f iculties arise for
businesses that have premises across a
number of locations.
Consider a retail chain with over 300
outlets across England. Those 300 outlets
are situated across more than 250 local
authorities. The result? Hundreds of
business rates bills intended for the same
retailer, all of which are designed dif ferently,
perhaps arriving on dif ferent dates and
potentially being sent to a variety of
addresses. For the retailer this creates extra
cost and time in their business. And for
local authorities, this may cause delays to
collection or an increase in the number of
bill-related queries, placing extra demand on
staf f and resources.
The step before digital – identify and collateThe government is committed to becoming
digital by default, defined as creating “digital
services that are so straightforward and
convenient that all those who can use them
will choose to do so whilst those who can’t
are not excluded2 .” Whilst this digital vision
is a critical element of any discussion around
business rates reform, there are essential
stepping stones that are required before the
vision can become a workable reality.
There is a clear opportunity to bring
simplicity and ef ficiency to the way that
bills are created and distributed. This is the
obvious first challenge to address, given
the number of billing authorities and the
resulting processing headaches for business
with premises across multiple locations.
“The end game is to create a business rates system that is less burdensome on the business sector and which delivers practical improvements in terms of the clarity of bills, the sharing of related information and the efficiency of appeals.”
Business rates
...is revealed by David Magor and Neil McCallum in their white paper
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
25
The flow char t illustrated above represents
a solution that can deliver a swif t response
to the multiple delivery, multiple location
billing challenge. Much is immediately
achievable, and the ‘future vision’ can
quickly become a reality with collaboration
between stakeholders.
Put simply, the flow char t describes a
solution able to receive billing data from
all 326 billing authorities in England, to
identify which bills are intended for which
businesses, and to deliver a clear, simple,
single bill to that business.
This data is received as flat files or in PDF
format. Where required, business rules and
logic are applied and the bill is composed.
The critical par t of the solution is
highlighted. This solution proposes that
each business is allocated a unique
identif ier – a number or code by which that
par ticular business is recognised. Thus,
the aforementioned large retailer with 300
outlets might be assigned code #0000123.
Any bills intended for that business will
arrive with this code embedded, enabling
the software to read the code, identify the
business and group all bills intended for that
business together.
For businesses, this means that instead
of receiving tens or even hundreds of
bills from multiple local authorit ies, they
will receive just one document, clearly
designed, detailing all their business
rates charges for all their sites across
the country. Fur ther discussion and
consultation is required around how
identif iers are allocated to each business
and who takes responsibili t y for issuing
these codes. But, given that information
on each business is already collec ted
and shared, implementing this addit ional
element need not prove complicated.
At first glance, this may look like a huge
undertaking for one supplier. But volumes
of this level are already being handled
by critical document specialists such as
Critiqom. Critiqom processes revenues and
benefits communications for authorities
throughout the UK, mail-outs which couple
high volumes with robust integrity. Merging
and matching documents already happens
on a daily basis. So, for example, where a
council may previously have sent a recipient
a council tax bill in one envelope, followed
a few days later by a let ter explaining how
the new rate has been calculated or detailing
payment options, forward thinking councils
are now grouping related communications
and sending just one let ter.
The flow char t also indicates postal
optimisation at the delivery stage. Although
not a critical consideration, local authorities
would benefit from the economies of scale
that are achievable through high-capacity
communication specialists such as Critiqom.
Whether this collated business rates
document is delivered by post or via email
is down to the individual preference of each
business. The detail of this element of the
solution is deserving of its own briefing
paper but, again, with a collaborative
approach between stakeholders it is no great
stretch to deliver a database that holds the
communication preferences and email/SMS
addresses of every business.
A clear, proven path to billing reformHow the business rates system looks by the
time of the 2016 budget remains to be seen.
Many challenges lie ahead if the system is
to fully and fairly reflect the way that today’s
businesses operate.
The issue of billing forms just one par t
of a wider discussion about the reform of
business rates – but it is a key consideration.
The government wants to ensure that bills
meet the needs of businesses, as well as
local authorities, and a billing and collection
forum has been established to bring forward
practical improvements to the billing system.
Stakeholders have been calling for
simpler, standardised business rates
bills with the scope to ef for tlessly move
into digital delivery and collection. This
document makes clear that the technology
and expertise is already available to deliver
significant, far-reaching improvements to
today’s billing process.
Certainly, fur ther discussion and
consultation is required. But this can
happen in the knowledge that many of the
techniques and considerations outlined
are already being applied to dif ferent
transactional processes – and are generating
significant ef ficiencies on behalf of local
authorities today.
1 Department of Communities and Local Government – ‘Collection rates and receipts of council tax and non-domestic rates in England 2014-15’ – July 2015 2 HM Treasury – ‘Administration of business rates in England: interim findings’ – December 2014
“Certainly, where other types of transactional communications are concerned, local authorities are becoming wise to the benefits of partnering with third-party specialists in order to deliver service excellence and efficiencies.”
David Magor OBE IRRV (Hons) is Chief
Executive of the IRRV and Neil McCallumis Managing Director of Critiqom
Collection & enforcement
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
26
As anyone involved in public sector debt
recovery is all too aware, obtaining a decree
is no guarantee that the actual debt is going
to be paid any time soon. To recover money
usually requires that diligence – the word
in Scots Law for enforcement of decree – is
carried out.
Harassing debtors is never going to work,
but then neither is the bland assumption that
the law is so heavily weighted in favour of the
debtor that debt recovery is too problematic to
be an option worth pursuing.
What follows, therefore, is an attempt
to provide a sound workplace-relevant
understanding of the principles of diligence.
In actions against private individuals,
the emphasis is always on a realistic Debt Arrangement Scheme and so diligence as
a recovery mechanism should be seen as
very much the last resort and needs to be
viewed in that light. It will most commonly
arise where, for example, instalments have
fallen into arrears or where no application
was made by the debtor for time to pay. For
the avoidance of doubt, time to pay is not
an option for corporate debtors. At one time,
summary warrants, such as for council tax,
were also exempt from ‘time to pay’ orders
but this is no longer the case.
Given that public bodies particularly are
expected to have policies on debt recovery
and that, as will be found, an information
package needs to be sent out in advance of
earnings attachments, it is clearly imperative
that anyone involved in debt recovery is
familiar with the sundry diligence options.
In essence, the diligence options are
as follows:
• Bank Arrestment is a device to freeze
money in the hands of a bank or similar
third party – subject to the debtor being
left with a protected minimum balance of
just over £460 and to the proviso that any
sums attributable to payment of benefit
or tax credits are also exempt. After 14
weeks the sums are released to the creditor
unless either the debtor authorises earlier
release or the creditor raises an Action of Forthcoming - i.e. an application to
the court to release those funds. It can
be set aside if the court agrees to a Debt
Arrangement Scheme but what is not always
appreciated is that it only catches funds
available on the actual day of the arrestment
– so timing is everything
• Earnings Arrestment is the device whereby
a creditor asks an employer to make
deductions from net earnings but it must
be preceded by service of a Debt Advice and Information Package no less than 12
weeks before the arrestment. The Table of Deductions is complex but, for example,
there is special provision where there are
also maintenance orders and in essence the
first available £106.17 per week is exempt.
This gradually increases until by the time
the debtor has a free net of £576.92 the
amount arrested totals £97.17. Realistically,
given these modest figures, the threat of an
Earnings Arrestment is often more effective
than the actual arrestment
• Attachment is a device to prevent a debtor
from disposing of moveable assets owned
outright but since, essentially, it excludes
domestic property and items used in the
course of trade, it is not a device which
necessarily commends itself except in actions
against businesses. It can attach items
outside the home but a vehicle reasonably
required for transport and up to a value of
£3,000 is also exempt
• Inhibition is a device for obtaining a
security over heritable property and has
the effect of blocking completion of a sale
pending resolution of the debt. It is not
commonly used, except where substantial
sums are involved or where an attempted
sale is anticipated
• Landlord’s hypothec is no longer an option
in the case of domestic properties but it
still applies to commercial properties and
effectively gives a landlord a right to tenants’
furnishings, etc.
In other words, diligence in most cases usually
extends only to arrestment of funds in a
bank account or in the hands of employers –
where it is known that there are likely to be
funds available.
Given, however, that the effect of
arrestment is to reduce greatly the credit rating
of the debtor, it is suggested that the threat of diligence may be more effective than the
actual diligence itself.
At the end of the day, the practical law of
diligence boils down to a basic understanding
of what can and cannot be done, and the
competent professional, armed with that
understanding, should, all else being equal,
have the tools to persuade a debtor to
co-operate in his or her own best interests.
“ It will most commonly arise where, for example, instalments have fallen into arrears or where no application was made by the debtor for time to pay.”
Peter Scott presents a brief introduction of diligence in post decree debt recovery, the Scottish way
Peter F Scott is with the School of Law at the
University of Strathclyde
The principles of diligence
IRRVAnnual Conference,
Exhibition and Performance AwardsGala Dinner, Telford
6th – 8th October 2015Book now onwww.irrv.net
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
27
“ I know this may seem obvious, but a number of authorities are still holding on to cases for a longer period than they need to before moving on to the compliance stage.”
and/or consultancy is part of our ongoing
commitment to clients new and old.
To a large extent I believe the objectives
of The Ministry of Justice have been met,
e.g. a transparent fee structure and improved
collection rates at an earlier stage. Whilst
enforcement is working well, clients continue
to face the most serious challenges in an
environment where cuts continue to come
in both staff and resources. Is that light in
the tunnel getting dimmer for them? Does
the introduction of a new government bring
confidence and expected changes for the
better – or has it brought fear and uncertainty?
We are still hearing words and phrases
like ‘budget cuts’, ‘restructure’ and ‘left on redundancy’!
We have seen more and more empty desks
appearing and our contacts are changing more
and more frequently. Often our contacts are
unable to meet us as they are working longer
hours but still have less time for meetings. It
has even reached the point that in some cases
they do not have the staff to issue work.
I have already referred to added value
services that EAs make available. It is therefore
surprising that even where these are specified
in a tender they are not always taken up.
Again I can only surmise that it is because
staff do not have enough time to discuss and
implement these initiatives. So can the upturn
for the EA companies help their clients in local
government more?
I have already mentioned that EAs have
invested in new techniques and improvements
to their existing technology. They have also in
many cases expanded their call centres, but
are authorities taking full advantage of this?
The sooner cases are sent to the EA, the
sooner they can start to gather information
and collect. I know this may seem obvious, but
a number of authorities are still holding on to
cases for a longer period than they need to
before moving on to the compliance stage.
There is also a great deal of difference in
If you squint, in certain conditions you may
be able to see a glimmer of light at the end
of a very long and dark tunnel. In the world of
enforcement that light is burning brighter. The
new Taking Control of Goods Regulations
are well and truly bedded in and experience
to date suggests everything is working well.
Collection is going up and complaints are
going through the floor. The Local Government
Ombudsman has observed that as the majority
of complaints in the past have been about
charges and how they were calculated, the
new regulations and in particular the fee
structure makes it easy to deal with any
complaints of this nature.
The changes have revitalised how
enforcement agents work – the new fee
structure has enabled Enforcement Agents (EA)
to invest in new techniques and improve or
enhance the technology to aid the pursuit of
non-payers. The introduction of SMS and email
as collection tools is now commonplace. Firms
have committed significant CAPEX on enhanced
contact centres and outbound telephony.
Local authorities that are looking to re-let
contracts or go out to test the market now have
a great opportunity to select a forward thinking
company – one that can offer new initiatives
to assist their client. Councils are presented
with real choice by those companies who have
committed to the investment.
More and more tenders are being issued
asking what ‘added value service’ will
be available.
At a time when local authorities are being
more and more constrained by budget cuts,
added value services could save both time and
money, whilst providing additional services
that complement the core service areas.
At Equita we always enjoy working with
new clients to agree a tailor made collection
strategy that suits their individual needs
and makes the best use of our added
value initiatives. Designing and delivering
enhanced services in such areas as training
Collection & enforcement
Gary Carr is Business Development Director
for Equita
...Equita’s Gary Carr asks, in light of the new Taking Control of Goods Regulations
how small balances are dealt with. There is no
definition of a small balance and it is entirely
decided within each authority. It is not always
clear who decides. There can also, within the
same authority, be a different view between
parking and revenues staff on what constitutes
a small balance.
Many small balances are being created by
the local council tax reduction scheme. If
members have decided on a scheme at say
20% payment then they would expect that
outstanding debt to be collected. Failure to
do so will not only encourage a non-payment
culture but will result in relatively small debts
becoming much larger when the following
years’ debts also become due.
There is an argument that people who are
vulnerable shouldn’t have to pay, yet we all
know that within the new regulations there
is no definition of ‘vulnerable’. The cutting
back of benefits will only increase the number
of people who would describe themselves
as vulnerable.
To sum up, EAs have made significant
changes to their infrastructure, their working
methods and have introduced new ideas. All
this should mean more can be collected to
ease pressure on clients who are suffering
budget cuts. If timescales are looked at and
reduced at compliance stage, then money can
be collected earlier. Local authorities should
be proactive in taking up the EA’s added value
services. These options can provide additional
benefits other than just improved collection.
Most EAs have a back catalogue of offerings,
from mobile surgeries to the funding of an
apprenticeship scheme. By working together,
we should be able to increase the intensity of
that light at the end of tunnel for both parties.
Is there light at the end of the tunnel?
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
28
A changing landscape
The BBC revealed earlier this year that
government spending on care for people aged
65 and over had fallen by a fifth in England
over the last ten years. This is concerning
when you consider that people are living
longer. The growing elderly population depend
on accessing health and social care. In reality
we should be hearing about spending rises
rather than cuts. However, there is only a
finite amount of money in the public purse.
This means money that has been allocated,
whether it ’s decreased in absolute terms or
not, needs to work harder and help more
people than ever before.
Changing consumer behaviour is also
moving the needle – and in the current
climate, not necessarily in the public sector’s
favour. By 2025, Generation Y – the first
generation to be fully immersed in all things
digital – will be in their 30s and 40s and
shaping public sector service demand. They
will be connected, mobile, independent and
self-serving, expecting to access everything
they need conveniently through the internet
and via connected/wearable devices for both
business and pleasure wherever they are. At
present this is a considerable challenge. If local
government evolves alongside Generation Y,
their demand for greater autonomy is in fact a
tremendous opportunity – a chance to emerge
leaner and smarter than ever before.
But we’re not there yet. The Public Accounts
Committee of MPs issued a report in which it
calculates that some councils have seen their
funding from government cut by up to 40%
since 2010. The Barnet ‘Graph of Doom’ shows if spending predictions are accurate and
if councils’ statutory responsibilities remain the
same, then within the near future, let alone by
2025, statutory services and social care costs
will swallow up most local council spending.
Local authorities are working hard to find a
way to do more for less while meeting legal
duties. While many have made good progress
at transforming themselves and achieving
unprecedented efficiencies, this needs to be
the rule rather than the exception. To tackle
this problem head on, we brought together a
group of local authority leaders to discuss how
the role of the council needs to transform over
the next decade and beyond. We captured
our thinking in ‘The changing landscape for local government report’.
Radical rethink The public sector has already made significant
investment to start bringing itself in line with
the changing expectations of this digitally
savvy generation. In June 2014, the electoral
registration process became the third public
service to be digitised, following the lasting
power of attorney in 2013 and student finance
in 2012. Meanwhile, the Driver and Vehicle
Licensing Agency has replaced tax discs with
an electronic system to modernise, cut costs
and improve enforcement.
Over the next decade and beyond, local
authorities will not only have to digitise but
change the way they operate to become more
efficient organisations that focus on delivering
the strategic functions and requirements for
their local community.
The wider landscape will change so much
that it is likely more combined authorities
will be created through forced or voluntary
consolidation of current councils. Poor
performers can expect to be merged
with more successful counterparts. Those
remaining will work together to share services
to benefit from the increasing economies
of scale, partnering with third parties where
necessary to implement the technology and
processes needed to do so effectively.
Commissioning and conducting these
types of strategic partnerships will play an
increasingly important role in the model
of the future, as councils won’t be able to
deliver every shade of local service alone.
This could take many forms, from sharing
services to partnering with local charities for
their knowledge of vulnerable citizens and
outsourcing back office functions or services
entirely to third party experts. Wider industry
research we conducted as part of ‘The
changing landscape for local government’
report supports this, with 40% of council
leaders agreeing it will be the most important
characteristic of the local authority of
the future.
Strategic technical partnerships will help
enable local authorities to empower their
communities to self-serve and consume the
services they need through their channel of
choice. Already a quarter of people prefer
to use digital services when interacting with
organisations, and we expect authorities
will increasingly work with digital experts to
develop apps to offer the same services
on smartphones.
The way that authorities fund and offer
services will also be transformed, particularly
when it comes to health and social care. Our
research suggests councils will offer a basic
level of core services to everyone for free,
whilst providing personal budgets to those
with greater needs. This will enable individuals
to purchase bespoke services as and when
required, and relieve some of the financial
pressure on authorities.
A commercial and self-funding mindset
must be the central tenet of the new breed of
local authority. The ability to spot commercial
opportunities will be vital to sustaining service
delivery and better meeting the expectations
of both pensioners and Generation Y.
A deep understanding of analytical and
“ If local government evolves alongside Generation Y, their demand for greater autonomy is in fact a tremendous opportunity.”
Paul Bradbury discusses how a steady shift in consumer behaviour and the economy is forcing local authorities to radically rethink the way they do things
Customer behaviour
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
29
behavioural dynamics, intelligent data and
automation will help to enable all of the above.
Integrating and analysing data from a variety
of public and private sources and partners to
better anticipate and automate community
services will become commonplace.
According to ‘The changing landscape for local
government’ report, 24% of local authority
leaders see this as being a key focus for the
local authority of the future.
In summary, there’s no doubt that
austerity measures, population changes and
digitalised consumer behaviour are pushing
local authorities to accelerate complex and
challenging transformation, which will see
them and the services they deliver change
dramatically between now, 2025 and beyond.
Decisions taken now will determine success
by and beyond 2025 – doing nothing is not
an option.
To download a copy of ‘The changing
landscape for local government’ report
please visit www.civica.co.uk/changinglandscape
Paul Bradbury is Group Business
Development Director at Civica
Delivering integrated services(conception to death/cradle to grave)
Pre-birth • Pre-school • Education • Partnering • Community services • Health • Care • Death
Integrated platform
Elderly adult Waste
Baseline servicePersonal account
(eg domiciliary care)age/adaptations grants
Recycling and household waste collection
(fortnightly)
Enhanced service
Top up services as ‘core’ rates
Voluntary ‘early’ age adaptations
Larger and/or multiple bins
Regular bulk waste collection
Augmented service
New servicesElderly alert
Handyman jobsGrounds maintenance
Grounds clearanceHouse/garage clearance
Appliance testingTree surgery
Weekly collections
IRRV Annual Conference & Exhibition
T: 020 7691 8987
W: www.irrv.org.uk
International Centre, Telford 6 – 8 October 2015This year’s Annual Conference (and Exhibition) will take place in Telford from the 6 October to 8 October. The first day will consist entirely of plenary sessions whilst three separate streams (Local Taxation & Revenues, Benefits and Valuation) will be run on the second day. The final morning will provide delegates with a general update on everything that is happening within the Profession. The Performance Awards Gala Dinner 2015 will take place on the Wednesday evening where this year’s winners will be announced. There are a range of packages to suit individual needs. A limited number of bedrooms are also being held in the local area for delegates attending the conference. These can be reserved via the Conference Team when making a booking.
Fees:
Full conference passes available from only . . . . . . . . £445.50 plus VATFull day passes start at. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . £175 plus VAT
Special Offer:
3 for 2 on all conference passes * This offer is valid on multiple bookings, with a minimum of 3 delegates from the same organisation.
Prices Held For Another Year
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
30
You can’t ignore the fact that more and more
people are going online and authorities must
cater for this in the way that they provide
services to their residents. The latest figures
from the Office of National Statistics (ONS)
detail a growing trend of internet users.
The ONS has recently reported that in
quarter one of 2015 (January to March),
86% of adults (44.7 million) in the UK had
used the internet in the last three months, an
increase of one percent from the same period
in 2014. The ONS also reported that 11%
of adults (5.9 million) had never used the
internet, a fall of one percent compared to the
first quarter of 2014. At this rate it will only be
another 14 years before all adults are using
the internet!
But the question is, are those 86% of
adults interacting with authorities and other
public services? I’m happy to report that the
answer is ‘yes’ and that the interaction is
growing. This is detailed in OFCOM’s recent
publication, Adults Media Use and Attitudes
Report, issued in May 2015. The report is
particularly interesting as it is the tenth edition
and looks back to 2005 and where possible
compares usage and attitude over the ten
year period.
To me 2005 wasn’t that long ago and I
believed everybody was using the internet –
however the OFCOM statistics tell a different
story. For instance, internet use has seen a
27% increase since 2005 with close to nine
in ten adults now going online, compared to
just six in ten in 2005.
When undertaking their survey, OFCOM
asked six specific questions around the use
of public services via the internet. The survey
asked whether respondents had undertaken
online activity, including:
1. Finding information about public services
provided by local or national government
2. Completing government processes
online – such as registering for tax
credits, renewing a driving licence,
car tax or passport, or completing a
tax return
3. Looking at websites/apps for news
about or events in the local area/the
local community
4. Looking at political/campaign/
issues websites
5. Signing an online petition
6. Contacting a local councillor or an
MP online.
It is pleasing to note that 78% of users had
used the internet to find information about
public services provided by local or national
government. 69% were looking at websites/
apps for news or events in the local area/
the local community and 69% were also
completing government processes online.
Not only are users visiting public service
websites but they are also doing it more
frequently. In 2013, 9% of users were
reported to be finding information on a weekly
basis about public services provided by local
or national government. This has risen to 18%
in 2015.
In previous articles, I have reiterated the
need for local authority websites to be mobile
and tablet friendly. However the OFCOM
report seems to contradict my assertion,
by highlighting the fact that most users use
a laptop or desktop computer to go online
when interacting with public services. The
figures speak for themselves, with 52% of all
internet users who ever go online to complete
government processes saying they mostly use
a laptop for this purpose, with a further 26%
saying they mostly using a desktop computer.
Only 18% said they mostly use a tablet or
smartphone, with the remainder answering
‘don’t know’. Perhaps public sector websites
don’t need to be that mobile friendly after all.
But how many people are not using the
internet to access public services and why
not? According to OFCOM, 31% of internet
users have never completed any government
process online, such as registering for tax
credits, renewing a driving licence, car tax or
passport, or completing a tax return.
When asked why they were not going online
to access government services, they were
given several possible reasons to choose from.
24% said they didn’t complete any government
processes online because they preferred to fill
out a form or use the post. A similar proportion
of adults, 22%, said it is because they don’t
need to complete government processes and
22% said it is because they prefer to talk with
someone in person.
Perhaps there will always be a need for
somebody to be face-to-face or on the end
of the phone. The question is whether the
numbers that do not access public services
online can be reduced.
It appears it can, as The Royal Borough
of Kingston Upon Thames Council has
recently reported that it has saved more
than £400,000 from reduced contact centre
running costs since 2012 by improving its
website’s transactional functions. The council
has redesigned its website and improved its
customer relationship (CRM) technology to
allow residents to pay, report and request
things online rather than calling, emailing or
visiting the council in person. These changes
showed that now more than 50% of residents
interact online with the council, compared
to three years ago when just 15% of the
residents transacted online.
£400,000 is not to be sniffed at, and if the
ONS and OFCOM trend figures are correct
there is no reason why other authorities can’t
work towards making similar savings.
“Perhaps there will always be a need for somebody to be face-to-face or on the end of the phone. The question is whether the numbers that do not access public services online can be reduced.”
Technology
Getting customers to transact online for public services can be a slow process, suggests Simon Bailey, but we’re getting there
Simon Bailey IRRV (Hons) is a Director of
ISCAS – contact him on [email protected]
(www.iscas.co.uk)
Everybody’s doing it... online!
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
31
Dead easy?Six years after I first wrote about the topic, we
are still seeing councils making errors when
dealing with exemptions when a property is
no longer occupied following the death of the
taxpayer, as the following case will show.
John’s father Ernest lived alone and died in
2004. John called the council and was told
there would be no council tax liability while
the property was unoccupied and unfurnished.
He told us there was no mention of probate,
or any time limit for the exemption and he
was not asked to confirm the change in writing.
The council has no record of this conversation,
but it was aware of Ernest’s death. The council
set up an account for the executors and sent
regular bills showing no charge. In early 2005
probate was granted and John became the
owner of the property, However, John did not
tell the council as he said he was not aware of
the obligation.
Between 2005 and 2013 the council sent
bills to Ernest’s executors, all showing a 100%
exemption. We saw some copies of the bills – in
2005 the bill referred to a ‘Class F exemption’
but did not explain what the conditions were
Councils need to assure themselves that
complaints investigations carried out by their
contractors are conducted rigorously, the Local
Government Ombudsman (LGO) is advising.
Whether the service contract is for adult
social care, leisure services, or, in a case
issued recently, debt recovery, councils cannot
simply accept at face value the outcome of a
complaint review conducted by firms acting on
their behalf.
The LGO found that Bury Metropolitan
Borough Council ignored body camera
evidence when investigating a complaint
against a firm of enforcement agents it
employs to chase a council tax debt. The
firm exonerated its agent and the LGO’s
investigation found the council should have
taken more thorough steps to review the
complaint before agreeing with the company’s
version of events.
and in 2013 the bill described the exemption
as ‘Exempt: deceased awaiting probate’. The
council did not write to ask if probate had been
granted, and did not conduct reviews of Class F
exemptions between 2005 and 2013.
In autumn 2013 the council reviewed empty
properties and wrote to ask if probate had
been granted. John confirmed probate had
been granted in 2005 and the property was
still unoccupied and unfurnished. He then
received a bill for £8,532!
After complaining, a Class A exemption
(unoccupied and undergoing structural repairs)
was applied for one year and the council
decided to reduce the remaining bill to £5,432,
some of which John had already paid.
However, John was still unhappy and
complained to us. He said had he known about
the tax implications he would not have left the
property unoccupied for so long and would
have put the property on the market sooner.
Our investigation could not say if John had
been given wrong advice in 2005, but there
was no evidence he had been sent clear
information about the conditions attached to
The LGO investigation was instigated by
a complaint from a homeowner who had
allowed a friend, whose home had been
repossessed, to stay with him. The friend
owed tax to Bury council, which sent the
enforcement agent to the homeowner’s
house. The friend told the agent that none of
the property was his, but was not believed.
The friend phoned the homeowner and a
solicitor, who both went to the property. When
questioned, the agent refused to identify
himself, contrary to the code of conduct, also
refusing to discuss the situation in front of the
solicitor for ‘data protection issues’ and was
‘rude, aggressive and insulting’.The enforcement agent threatened to take
items belonging to the homeowner and so he
paid his friend’s debt under significant duress.
The investigation also found the council’s
complaint investigation was inadequate, and
the exemptions between 2005 and 2013. We
said it would also have been good practice for
the council to have carried out regular reviews
between 2005 and 2013. We said this was
fault and the council accepted this. It agreed
to our proposal to write off all of the council
tax due up to 1st April 2013 and is now
introducing quarterly reviews of probate exemptions to prevent this re-occurring.
Councils need to be careful in dealing with
this exemption. Your council is the expert in
local taxation and people are entitled to rely on
the information you provide. Careful wording
of bills and more frequent reviews when the
circumstances of an exemption may change
shortly after it is applied, will help prompt billing, more speedy collection and reduce complaints to the Ombudsman. You may
want to have a look at our website, where we
publish all of our decision statements, to see
further examples of our decision making.
relied on the enforcement company’s own
word that the complaint should not be upheld.
To remedy the complaint, Bury council has
been asked to apologise to the homeowner
and refund the money paid by him on behalf
of the man, who has since died. It should also
pay him an additional £250 in recognition of
the distress its actions caused.
The full case can be viewed through the
following hyperlink:
13019267 - BURY - BAILIFFS.pdf
“Councils need to be careful in dealing with this exemption. Your council is the expert in local taxation and people are entitled to rely on the information you provide.”
LGO update
Andrew Hobley is not so sure as he warns local authorities to take care when dealing with deceased customers
Andrew Hobley is Assessment Team
Leader with the Local Government
Ombudsman. Visit www.lgo.org.uk
Ombudsman news
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
32
Future government spending, fraud and error, and social housing rent cuts
Spending ReviewThe Chancellor has announced his promised
Spending Review and it looks to be far
more severe than was anticipated prior
to the elections. The Review will include
departmental cuts in addition to £3bn of
in-year reductions made for 2015/16 and the
welfare savings set out in the summer Budget.
Spending on the NHS, schools, defence
and international development will be
protected, which means that other departments
will have to find significant savings through
efficiencies and by devolving power.
To start the review, the Chief Secretary
to the Treasury has written to government
departments asking them to draw up plans to
cover two possible spending projections. One
will demand reductions of 25% in resource
spending by 2019/20 in real terms, while the
other will demand they set out a 40% saving.
These are the same reductions that were
requested ahead of the 2010 review, under
the last coalition government.
It is also expected that the review will
develop a programme of asset sales, with
departments asked to identify how they will
help the government achieve its target of
disposing of enough public sector land to build
at least 150,000 homes by 2020.
Responding to the announcement, the
Local Government Association said
councils have already made £20bn in
savings since 2010, following reductions in
government funding of 40% and had worked
hard to shield residents from the impact.
However, they said that a 25% real terms
reduction to the local government finance
settlement would mean a decrease of £4bn by
2020, while a 40% reduction would mean this
rises to £7bn.
You really do have to wonder how local
authorities will cope with such significant cuts,
as there must be few efficiency savings left
to be made – and what is available cannot be
enough to cope with funding reductions on
this scale. It seems to me that for services to
continue there has to be a radical devolution
of how public money is raised and spent. Local
authorities will have to be given more freedom
to raise revenues and the ability to access
devolved taxes.
Interestingly, the Public Accounts Committee has said it will scrutinise
departmental plans after November’s
Spending Review in an effort to tackle
so-called cost shunting across the public
sector. This is on the basis that there is
a risk departments will agree to cuts in
the forthcoming review without either an
understanding of where the full reductions
would come from, or the impact they might
have on other services, i.e. where a funding
reduction in one area of the public sector
leads to a consequent rise in costs faced by
another public body, it could increase if cuts
of the planned scale are not properly planned.
National Audit Office – fraud and errorIn its latest copy of ‘Stocktake’, the National Audit Office (NAO) highlights that the level
of fraud and error is a persistent concern in
benefits and tax credits. The Committee
of Public Accounts has repeatedly called for
departments to tackle fraud and error more
effectively, and to target initiatives at the
biggest sources of loss.
It has highlighted the scale of losses that
could otherwise have been spent on other
government objectives. Overpayments
increase costs to taxpayers and reduce
public resources available for other purposes.
Underpayments mean households are not
getting the support they are entitled to.
The NAO identified a number of findings:
• fraud and error in benefits and tax credits is
a significant and long-standing problem. The
Comptroller and Auditor General has given
qualified opinions on DWP’s accounts since
1988/89 and on HMRC’s accounts since
2003/04, because of the levels of fraud and
error in benefits and tax credits. In 2013/14,
DWP and HMRC overpaid claimants by
£4.6bn because of fraud and error, and
underpaid claimants by £1.6bn. In March
2015 the government restated that the level
of fraud and error in the benefits and tax
credits system remains unacceptably high
• the NAO identified four systemic issues
which departments need to continue to
address. These are a) establishing clear
strategies and governance, b) designing
controls into the way departments work,
c) implementing controls and interventions
effectively and d) measuring and evaluating
performance
• the NAO said HMRC was on course to meet
its Spending Review fraud and error target
(5.5% of tax credit spending by 2015/16),
although DWP was not on track to hit its
target (1.7% of benefit spending).
Although the NAO states that the introduction
of Universal Credit (UC) should help
reduce future fraud and error rates, the
long and complicated transition to the new
system presents a significant risk and both
“ It seems to me that for services to continue there has to be a radical devolution of how public money is raised and spent. Local authorities will have to be given more freedom to raise revenues and the ability to access devolved taxes.”
Doherty’s despatch
...are all on Pat Doherty’s mind this month, and it’s not good news
INSI
GH
T SE
PTEM
BER
201
5
33
departments were urged to strengthen how
they monitor performance, as fraud and error
will still be a problem after the introduction of
UC. DWP is predicting that around £5.8bn of
overpayments will still be at risk in 2020.
Rent cut for social housingIn a backdoor effort to reduce the housing benefit bill, the government has now written
to social housing providers, informing them
that they have to reduce their rents by 1% for
four years from April 2016.
This follows the budget announcement on
reducing rents in the social housing sector by
1% each year for four years from April 2016,
in place of an anticipated uplift of Consumer
Price Index – and 1% will have a substantial
impact on most providers’ business plans.
As with all of the regulator’s standards,
the rent standard applies equally to small
providers as well as large ones.
Ongoing welfare reform, including the
introduction of a lower benefit cap, is also
likely to have an effect on business plans. In
addition, the government points out that it
has a manifesto commitment to extend the
Right to Buy scheme to registered providers.
I imagine that there will be many providers
now having to urgently look at their budgets
to measure the impact on revenue and on
planned developments.
The imposition of previous government
policies that undermine the economics of
development – such as the inflation of right
to buy discounts – has already led many
councils to build outside the Housing Revenue Account (HRA).
It seems to me that this rent cutting policy
will only make such an approach even more
attractive, as building outside the HRA puts
councils much more in control and much less
at the whim of central government decisions.
Preparing for Universal CreditA survey of 145 council benefit managers
found that a quarter of respondents had not
started making any plans to prepare their staff
and systems for the switch to UC.
The repor t , by Ipsos MORI , which
carr ied out the research on behalf of
the DWP between 17th November and
12th December last year, found a “source
of frustration” for local authorit ies
surrounded the fact there was a “lack of
consistent or clear information” coming
from the government.
The report said, “The biggest challenge...
was reported to be a lack of clarity about
timescales and future plans from the DWP.
This uncertainty is said to be preventing
certain decisions being made, and hindering
the amount of preparation that can be done.”
Where preparations had started, the survey
found almost three quarters (74%) of councils
had established internal partnerships,
such as between social services, education,
and housing, while nearly eight in ten
(77%) had established joint working arrangements with external organisations like
Jobcentre Plus and the Citizens Advice Bureau.
However, co-locating office space with
such organisations was less prevalent –
46% said they had. This was despite the fact
the report noted respondents had anecdotally
told them co-locating arrangements were
“viewed positively”.
The report said local authorities were
“fairly limited” in the data they collected
about benefit claimants’ digital usage. The
survey found that 41% of councils recorded
the number of claimants who went online for
their housing benefit, while less than one in
ten (7%) were collecting data on claimants’
access to online digital services at home. Just
one in 20 (5%) councils recorded claimants’
use of digital services without support.
“I imagine that there will be many providers now having to urgently look at their budgets to measure the impact on revenue and on planned developments.”
Pat Doherty FIRRV CPFA is an
independent consultant and a Past President
of the IRRV. If you wish to comment on
anything in this article, please email him at
INSI
GH
T w
ww
.irrv
.net
34
Firstly, it is important to remember that without
reducing the office space and introducing desk-
sharing it is difficult to justify the investment in
home working, the advantages of which many
employees now enjoy.
The new system should not be
implemented until there has been full
consultation with staff. They are being asked
to change their working style and it may
affect their productivity. The system should
be designed with input from the users. The
real key to hot desking is getting everyone to
understand just what you hope to achieve right
from the start. Comprehensive staff training is
essential if the new arrangements are to work
smoothly. It is important that managers are
included in the training. Managers will need to
have the tools to support their staff in this new
flexible working approach.
It is essential to take away employees’ fear
of loss of ‘ownership’ of their office space
to make the change work. Doing work in a
modern office is not about owning a particular
desk, but having guaranteed access to the
right kind of facility for getting the work done.
This might be a desk, or it might be a quiet
workplace in a resource area, a training facility
or a ‘touch-down’ space. Teams should be
allowed to analyse the way they work so
they can better understand the trade-offs.
Less personalised space is the price paid for
achieving more flexibility and better team
space. The introduction of electronic-based
processes does mean that most administrative
roles can be carried out anywhere.
You need policies to make desksharing work:
1. A clear desk policy Whenever staff leave the office for
more than an hour they must clear
everything from the desk. To make this
work an appropriate sized locker must
be provided.
2. Well organised team storage Shared libraries of reference materials
have the benefit of reducing
duplication and preventing personal
silos of information.
3. Have the same agreed compendium of essential information at each desk and/or online Examples would be key dates, fire
escape routes, important telephone
numbers, etc. At the same time,
individuals should be prevented from
pinning up information by desks so
that personalisation of the space
does not occur.
4. Create the right environment Provide attractive pictures, planting,
water features, etc. as this will justify
the restriction on people putting
their own bits and pieces on their
favourite desk.
5. Ergonomic work positions Getting in the best and ergonomic
workplace layout will help people accept
working in different positions. Chairs
must be adjustable, or some people will
claim they have to sit in a certain place
each day.
6. Laptops are preferable to desktop PCs That is because they can move
everywhere with one member of staff,
and any specialist software installed
moves with them. This will prevent
people laying claim to one particular
space for IT reasons and enable more
flexibility. When working in one position
with a laptop for a long time, a keyboard
and mouse, laptop stand and/or
additional screen should be used.
7. Provide ample touch-down space to cope with peak demand That is, places where people can
connect their laptops to work for
short periods.
These can be touch-down bars or
locations in resource areas, informal
meeting/refreshment areas, etc.
8. Have a good telephony solution People need to be able to log in to their
extension whether in the office or out,
and from whichever desk they sit at.
9. Encourage flexible working People working from home and on the
move, and working compressed working
weeks in particular, will reduce the daily
demand for space.
10. Encourage people to move around Getting up from the desk every hour
can help protect workers from the
damaging effects of prolonged sitting,
according to research. Staff should be
advised of the benefits of using the
stairs rather than the lift and encouraged
to talk to a colleague in another part of
the office rather than using email.
It is important to remember that not
everything will go smoothly, so things need
to be kept under review. Some practices may
not be working too well. It may be that more
training or gentle pressure is needed, or it may
be that certain practices need modifying.
“ It is important that managers are included in the training. Managers will need to have the tools to support their staff in this new flexible working approach.”
Ian Nisbet is Subsidy and Overpayments
Officer with Agilisys’s Enhanced Revenue
Collection programme, in partnership with
LB Hammersmith and Fulham. Contact him
Management
...so how can authorities get it to work? Ian Nisbet investigates
The business case for space sharing is overwhelming
T: 020 7691 8987
IRRV Professional Meetings
www.irrv.net/conferences
Non-Domestic Rate: 20 Areas Billing Authorities Need To Focus On4 November: Manchester • 17 November: Hinckley 1 December: London • 14 December: London
The meeting is aimed at those working within Local Government. Since 1st April 2013, billing authorities have been faced with many challenges when administering and collecting the non-domestic rate. This will be a practical meeting with delegates considering a range of scenarios throughout the day. Areas to be covered will include:
• Valuation (rating lists and relationship with the valuation officer)
• Liability (occupied and unoccupied rate, including avoidance / evasion)
• Reliefs (with particular emphasis on discretionary relief and part-occupied relief)
• Recovery (what can be done to maximise recovery)
This meeting will be delivered by Gary Watson IRRV (Hons), Deputy Chief Executive, IRRV.
(Note: As numbers at any one meeting are limited to 25, early booking is recommended)
Fees:IRRV Member £135 plus VATBAS/Forum/Organisational Member £165 plus VATNon Member £195 plus VAT
Special Offer:3 for 2 on multiple bookings* * Delegates must be from the same organisation in order to receive this offer.
The lowest fee will not be charged.
Completion Notices5 November: London • 3 December: Manchester tbc: Hinckley
Since June 2014, the Institute has run 17 Professional Meetings on completion notices in partnership with the VOA. In that time, we have seen some key decisions in the courts. In addition, billing authorities are now increasingly looking to serve completion notices in respect of both Council Tax and Non-Domestic Rate. The latest series of meetings, aimed at those working within both Local Government and the Private Sector, will be of interest to practitioners irrespective of whether they attended the earlier meetings. The morning will focus on the importance of serving completion notices for Council Tax and Non-Domestic Rate, when (and when not) they are served, how they are served and the options then available to the owner, billing authority and valuation / listing officer. This will include looking in detail at recent case law. The afternoon will consist of a workshop where delegates will consider a series of case studies. In addition, delegates will review the format of completion notices and give consideration to what could be considered ‘best practice’.This meeting will again be delivered by Gary Watson IRRV (Hons), Deputy Chief Executive, IRRV, Chris Brain, Local Authority Relationship Manager and Technical Advisors from the VOA. (Note: As numbers at any one meeting are limited to 25, early booking is recommended)
Fees:IRRV Member £135 plus VATBAS/Forum/Organisational Member £165 plus VATNon Member £195 plus VAT
Special Offer:3 for 2 on multiple bookings* * Delegates must be from the same organisation in order to receive this offer.
The lowest fee will not be charged.
IRRV Publications
T: 020 7691 8977
W: www.irrv.net
Annotated Council Tax Legislation is a comprehensive 3 volume set, containing all the relevant parts of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as well as appropriate sections and schedules from the Local Government Acts of 1997, 2003 and 2012, the Human Rights Act 1998, the Greater London Authority Act 1999 and the Localism Act 2011.
All statutory instruments from 1992 to the publication date are included, and all amendments brought about by these regulations and orders have been made to the originating text.
Annotated Council Tax Legislation is supplied in hard copy format together with an electronic PDF version.
Fees:
New Subscription . . . . . . . . .£195.00 plus VAT and £17.00 p&pUpdate Fee . . . . . . . . . . . .£145.00 plus VAT and £17.00 p&p
Please Note:
Postage fee is for UK only. Additional postage costs will be charged for the rest of the world.
Annotated Council Tax Legislation (OUT NOW)
+
IRRV Publications
T: 020 7691 8977
W: www.irrv.net
This acclaimed publication explains in detail the complex legislation governing the transition scheme in England from 1 April 2010, and provides an invaluable source of comprehensive reference/training material, including 37 worked examples with 2016/17 estimated charges and associated explanatory notes. Topics covered include phased transitional charge eligibility and calculation, material change and split/merger/reconstruction list amendment charge calculation, transitional certificates, additional charges for London hereditaments, unoccupied rate and relief adjustments, localism discounts (including discretionary transitional relief), appeal charge recalculations and overpayment interest.
2010 Rating List Transitional Arrangements Manual is supplied in A4 hard copy format with an electronic PDF version.
Fees: £195.00 plus VAT and p&p
Special Offer:
Buy this publication and receive the 1995 / 2000 and 2005 editions absolutely free!
2010 Rating List Transitional Arrangements Manual
ISBN: 978-1-905782-68-0Publisher IRRV2015
2010 RATING LIST TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS MANUAL
Anne Firth FIRRV
2010 RATIN
G LIST TR
AN
SITION
AL A
RR
AN
GEM
ENTS M
AN
UA
L Anne Firth FIR
RV
2010 RATING LIST TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS MANUAL
This acclaimed publication explains in detail the complex legislation governing the transition scheme in England from 1 April 2010, and provides an invaluable source of comprehensive reference and training material including:
> Phased transitional charge eligibility and calculation;> Material change and split/merger/reconstruction list amendment charge calculation;> Issue/implications of transitional certificates;> City of London Corporation additional charge calculation;> Crossrail business rate supplement liability and calculation;> Unoccupied rate and relief adjustments;> Small business multiplier and percentage relief eligibility until/from 1 April 2012;> Localism discounts, including discretionary transitional relief;> Appeal/correction charge recalculations, including total savings/adjustments;> Overpayment interest entitlement and calculation, including list deletions; > Stage by stage method of calculation for each main type of list amendment;> 37 worked examples, with 2016/17 estimated charges and accompanying explanatory notes;> Interaction of the Transition and Appeals Regulations, including restricted effective dates;> Useful summary and parameter charts.
![Irrv Presentation Lbbd Havering June 09[1]](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5560d2cdd8b42a0d088b52ab/irrv-presentation-lbbd-havering-june-091.jpg)
