I must admit - it's Monday and I'm feeling Friday'ish - perhaps it's because
I'm staring my holiday next week but surely a single person discount is a
sort of benefit in that if it is not a legitimate claim then somebody is
being defrauded. Yes, that's you and me! Is it true that if you double the
civil servants you square the cost? Why are we arguing as if we are all the
sole arbiters of the collective conscience? As soon as we sort out our data
sharing principles then the sooner we can reduce our collective costs.
Jo, sorry for the outburst but I really do have a problem with the concept
of inter-departmental Chinese walls. We do all have the same basic objective
of collecting what's due and paying what's due don't we?
David Aspinall
Datum Solutions Limited
Datum House
4 Priory Close
Fleet
Hampshire
GU51 4ED
Direct Line: 01252 612805
Mobile: 07785 234322
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jo Archer
Sent: 02 August 2004 16:02
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [data-protection] Inland revenue disclosure - again !
I agree...the closest the IR might come to requiring disclosure of
information by a local authority is paragraph 8:
"8 (1) The Board may require-
(a) an authority administering housing benefit or council tax benefit, or
(b) a person authorised to exercise any function of such an authority
relating to such a benefit,
to supply benefit administration information held by the authority or
other person to, or to a person providing services to, the Board for use for
any purpose relating to tax credits, child benefit or guardian's allowance.
(2) In sub-paragraph (1) "benefit administration information", in
relation to an authority or other person, means any information which is
relevant to the exercise of any function relating to housing benefit or
council tax benefit by the authority or other person."
http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2002/20021--i.htm#sch5
Single person discount is NOT a benefit. And the IR have no right to
investigate whether or not the data subject lives alone and certainly has no
right to know who else lives with them.
Jo Archer
----- Original Message -----
From: Roland Perry <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 3:53 PM
Subject: Re: [data-protection] Inland revenue disclosure - again !
> In message <[log in to unmask]>, at 14:12:22 on
> Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Brenda Scourfield
> <[log in to unmask]> writes
> >Following on from my last post, and having contacted the IR, I have been
> >told that they want to know if a person is receiving single person
> >discount and if not, who is living with them. As I stated before, they
are
> >quoting the Tax Credit Act 2002 Schedule 5 as an exemption. My initial
> >reaction is to say no, as the Council Tax data could be inaccurate. Some
> >one could be claiming single person discount, have someone living with
> >them, but not have been found out yet. Council Tax had have a
considerable
> >number of these requests.
>
> Schedule 5 says that you have to: "supply [housing benefit or council
> tax] benefit administration information held by the authority".
>
> Why not reply saying that the person they are enquiring about has not
> applied for nor received housing benefit or council tax benefit
> (assuming that's true). Or if they have, then you seem to be obliged to
> disclose details of their application for those benefits, where Q1 is
> "Do you have a partner who normally lives with you" (and so on).
>
> This is surely nothing to do with Single Person Discounts.
>
> Schedule 5 goes on to say: "for any purpose relating to tax credits,
> child benefit or guardian's allowance", and I'm not entirely sure to
> what extent whether someone is single affects those IR-administered
> *child*-related benefits.
>
> Conversely, if the person is fraudulently claiming either the HB/CTB or
> the discount by misrepresenting their single-ness, what business is that
> of the IR? (Apparently none under Sch 5). It's a matter for the council.
>
> Or am I missing something obvious? Are the IR going to claim that
> because the *council* might try to correlate a claim for SPD with a
> claim for HB/CTB, that the former is therefore "information which is
> relevant to the exercise of any function relating to housing benefit or
> council tax benefit by the authority or other person." ??
> --
> Roland Perry
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
> available to the world wide web community at large at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
> If you wish to leave this list please send the command
> leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
> All user commands can be found at : -
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
> (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
