Curioser and curioser: it appears that over one third of the nation's council tax bills are produced by Northgate. Northgate uses 'Oracle' relational data base technology. This is about data matching.
Some councils have contracted out the duty arising under Regulation 14 of the Local Government Act to Northgate Information Solutions UK Ltd. However, the responsibility for any alarming or offensive letters - as has been alleged to take place - remains with the council.
Here is a nice example of a council which uses Northgate, the council in question being South Holland District Council.
http://www.sholland.gov.uk/council/counciltax/news/Council+Tax+Discount+Review.htm
The council has chosen to represent this as a 'review', a term apparently derived from benefit administrative procedures and which does not appear in council tax discount law. However, though the duty under Regulation 14 applies to all residences, this 'review' only covers some. Which?
It will come as no surprise to the reader that the council misrepresents this matter. It asserts that the residences in question are ones where 'a 25% single person discount has been awarded for council tax purposes'. Discounts are deducted, not awarded. This is the second use of inappropriate terminology from an incorrect legal framework on one web page.
The council is, and again this will come as no surprise, one of those which places legally inaccurate information about the duties of discount recipients on the internet when it has a duty to put out accurate clear and fair information.
Here is the offending piece of 'advice':
Your bill will tell you of any discount you may have already been given. You MUST inform the Council Tax Section of any changes in your circumstances that may affect any discount shown on your bill.
This is junk. But you can see why it might suit Northgate to have such junk published. Because they work with Experian who claim that you can 'validate' an existing discount by matching the code used within the data base tables with data contained in or derived from the full electoral register. This would not appear to be a statutory purpose relating to crime prevention or law enforcement.
The council tax information leaflet fails to include the information required by law and instead includes this incorrect and/or misleading assertion about discounts:
You must notify us of a change in
circumstances within 21 days. Failure to do so
could result in a penalty of £70 being imposed
The net result of this misinformation is to imply that the poor sods in receipt of 'review' letters have apparently failed in a duty to provide information which they should have provided and are 'worthy of' investigation on that basis.
Worse, South Holland Council also produces 'single person discount' application forms which incorrectly state that if any of the circumstances on the claim form changes there is a duty to inform the council and that a penalty can be issued in the case of failure.
This is very serious maladministration, particularly if anybody at the council actually believes it.
For they are reasonably clear that the electoral register may be used at any time to 'check' the original information and that if the council tax department has not been told this will be regarded as a 'discrepancy' and that it will be investigated.
It would appear to be almost beyond doubt then that customers of this council are being subjected to 'investigations' on the basis of alleged 'discrepancies' which exist only in the minds of those misinterpreting council tax discount law and the personal data and meta data on their computers.
This is scandalous.
Assuming that Northgate knows what goes on, it could be argued that it is actively encouraging law breaking by councils. Certainly, Northgate would appear to be misinterpreting certain of the entries within the tables which it uses within its relational data base technology. Evidence from various web sites attributing particular motivations and reasonings to Northgate supports this view. Council tax discount law is there to be obeyed, by government as well as by taxpayers and go-betweens. This is called the rule of law. The law, and not councils or credit reference agencies, or IT go-between geeks should prevail.
Sadly, it would appear that it rarely does.
The cause of the problem: follow the money?
