Unaccountable Civil Servants

 

WHERE DOES ONE START? THERE IS SO MUCH TO CHOOSE FROM, Civil Servants in Jobcentres, The Inland Revenue, The Department of Work and Pensions, The Council and Councillors, Members of Parliament, National Health Service and a Mayor...... we will show you all of these, name them and reveal how they are fleecing the taxpayer and covering their tracks with lies, deceit and corruption.

DESPITE CORRUPTION AND MANY OTHER ACTS OF DECEIT AND LIES, NONE CAN BE JAILED OR MADE ACCOUNTABLE ACCORDING TO CONSTITUTIONAL LAW WHEN THEY ARE ACTING FOR THE STATE!

What you see on these pages is only the tip of the iceberg, we only get to do a fraction

IF YOU HAVE ANY 'SENSITIVE' ARCHIVE DOCUMENTS YOU'VE HELD SECRETLY ON THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND LAW WE'D LIKE TO KNOW AND HAVE, IF YOU FEEL THE MATERIAL OR DOCUMENTS NEED REVEALING TO A WIDER AUDIENCE ---- Just contact corruptionseeker@hotmail.com

 

An opening note here must reveal the following as it was authorised by government, condoned by the court, and carried out by law enforcement:

1816 - FOUR BOYS BETWEEN 9 AND 13 WERE SENTENCED TO HANG BY THE PEOPLE'S COURT FOR BEGGING!  (Historic Fact)  The torrid judicial affair was watched by a crowd......It was a State Murder.

They also hanged 15 year old John Harris on a similar charge in 1820, once again nothing less than State Murder....and no remorse from them!

 

' Where Government Corruption Started '

Early information tells us mostly about individuals such as CORRUPT POLITICIAN FRANCIS BACON (1561 to 1626), a well know politician who was found guilty of bribery, favouritism and extortion.  In fact he was actually The Lord Chancellor and even though he was in a major position within government, it is historically stated that he accepted money from defendants to influence court judgements.  In 1621 he finally in the face of being rumbled, confessed to his peers that he was 'guilty of corruption' --- It is said that he studied law at Grays Inn and was called to the Bar in 1582, and only stayed a short while in practice before becoming the MP for Melcombe in Dorset.

So moving on:

IT MORE OR LESS STARTED IN THE 16TH CENTURY, as with the Police, corruption in government isn't a new thing, no, it began around 1700 with ' THE SOUTH SEA BUBBLE ' a bubble that burst exposing the government and those who dealt with shares and a company that had no assets.  It led to a financial scandal of huge proportions.  Investment and shares was the game (not unlike the recent banking scandal), and the government were in the thick of it.  The South Sea Company was in trouble, it showed a deficit in the accounts and owed the Chancellor £14million (in that time!), which was half the size of the National Debt.  Thomas Brodrick for the Government was looking into these affairs as they had become very serious for the country.  He told MP's he had uncovered the largest scene of villainy and fraud that was ever perpetrated.  ' The Committee of Secrecy' - yes, one can hardly believe that eh?  a government department said the company ledgers had false and fictitious entries.  Before they could complete their findings, some of the Company books went missing and others were destroyed.  Brodrick dropped a 'bombshell' in the House of Commons, as he declared that he had evidence of corruption at the heart of government -- exposing that Sunderland had taken bribes, and that Robert Knight had concealed Sunderland's role at the request of John Blunt.  Deputy Governor Charles Joye said Knight insisted that £100,000 worth of stock shares should be reserved for ' the friends' of Sunderland.  The Commons listened to news of corruption on a staggering scale -- and share dealings carried out by the Treasury Secretary Charles Stanhope that were amazing.  The Committee could not find any evidence of Stanhope paying for 10,000 shares he claimed, then worth £25,000.  As the calamity unfolded more names in the house were exposed all going up to the King, professional investors and the Church.  Yet when it came down to charging them with crimes,  (the government lawyers were hurriedly changing the law and its interpretation) - they were all protected from the full force of justice?  The Public were outraged, but there was little they could do, they didn't have power over soldiers, legislators, all favourable to the government and Crown, and it just faded into history.

DOESN'T THAT ALL SOUND FAMILIAR TODAY?

Digging deeper into government we have to go to the 17th Century and 1648 for the birth of modern State Crime:

'THE KING VERSES PARLIAMENT'

It was on January the 4th 1642 when CHARLES the First, King of England, made his way into the House of Commons to 'arrest five MP's' on a charge of High Treason......It would have been quite an occasion if he had succeeded, but the MP's had been 'tipped off' by certain members of the hierarchy, and they escaped in time!

'THE BEGINNINGS OF A ROGUE STATE'

Setting the scene, we have a revengeful king and a Parliament hurriedly switching sides to save their necks, and the need for scapegoats:  the Law must act swiftly to make all this possible, even if it means perjury, conspiracy and perverting the course of justice.  Deceit must be the continuance and thread in order to satisfy Charles the 2nd. ............................ It was the end of the Civil War.   The trial of Charles the 1st had being arranged by The House of Commons Committee; Charles the King, was the prisoner of Parliamentary Forces.  The House of Commons ordered that 135 Commissioners should form a High Court of Justice which would meet in the 'Painted Chamber' (8th January 1648) to settle procedures for the King's trial.  The President of The Court was Lawyer John Bradshaw and John Cook was Chief Counsel for the Prosecution, they had a clerk to the court, a crier and ushers in attendance.  It says that some 'apprehensive politicians' refused to attend the court... Cromwell came to all of them!  Things began badly, as Charles demanded proof of the Court's legal authority.  The trial President, Bradshaw, became 'rattled' and said he had no right to challenge the authority of the court and that he should refrain and consider his answer to the charges.  As time went by and exchanges continued, the court as expected, found him guilty as they had intended, and Charles the 1st was beheaded............................Charles the 1st was dead, Cromwell was in his grave, England had another king and Charles the 2nd was restored to the throne, and he was out for vengeance, 'a Royal Vengeance' on those that had been responsible for the previous king's execution even though the court that had sentenced him merely carried out the orders of The House of Commons. He 'pardoned' his subjects, the people calling them 'The State' (which as you will see gave the government a card to play).  He set his sights on a handful of MP's, noting that the Commons group had been under the control of Army Commanders loyal to Cromwell and ordered that they be found.  He even went as far as having Cromwell's body dug up and hanging in chains with other deceased leading players at the trial.  Luckily for the 'worried' government, Charles the 2nd didn't actually know all of the players at the trial which again worked for them.  Firstly, they pointed out to him it would be difficult to get this new trial going, because if the State was 'The People' and the government was the 'Servant of the people' and the pardon covered this, then who were the accused and guilty?.....Charles was not happy with this and insisted someone must pay and be made an example of if Royalty had any meaning.  The House gave thought to this and realised if they grabbed some who were 'expendable' the King would have his trial....................Ironically, in this new government many of those Parliamentarians who had approved the King's execution were still alive and had 'switched sides'  The trial of these 'captured Commons plotters' began at the Old Bailey in October 1660.  Getting a Grand Jury proved difficult, many London citizens were still loyal to the old regime, and given a chance, might have voted against proceeding to trial. The newly set up Parliamentary Commission consisting of 34 people actually contained 15 members who had taken part against Charles the 1st right up to approving his execution in that very chamber!   One member Holles, a staunch Parliament man whose arrest had been ordered by Charles the 1st sat alongside Monk, a leader of that Parliamentary Army, who was now the Judge and was to preside over those whose actions he had approved at the time when they were committed.........It was certainly a vindictive 'revenge' trial no matter how one tried to make it seem 'just'....people had turned on each other and the defendants were a 'mixed lot'....some only guilty of insulting the former king in his misery as he went to execution.  The real band of Parliamentary overlords and lawyers were nowhere to be seen, after all, those who had carried out the sentence had been commanded by 'The State' to do so, and the State was The House of Commons.  If it was now wrong to have executed the previous king, the guilty ones were the State and all of the people of England who were on the side of Cromwell and Parliament.  Of course, the new trial and commission had to show this was not so and play their cards wisely, and that meant the careful manipulation of the law and previous rules to make them look new when in fact nothing had changed at all...........32 Prisoners were 'taken' to satisfy the new King's need for reprisal and Bradshaw was not one of them!   Out of the 32 they only had a handful of the ones that took part.  The trial in essence, was a farce and show trial with the law being misused and abused throughout and prisoners rights being ignored, so it was not surprising they were all found 'guilty'...the new Parliament needed this to go away fast and please the new king....the prisoners were all executed, some so barbaric diarists at the time found it hard to believe what they were witnessing......and so ends another chapter on 'government' --- a Parliament without morals or honour.   

A PREQUEL TO THIS WAS:

'THE APPALLING CASE OF JAMES NAYLOR (QUAKER)  1656'   (Another State Crime)

The Government was struggling to 'put down' all kinds of wild libertarian groups, and they fiercely opposed any extremists even more than the persecuted Catholics.  To this end they picked on James Naylor who had been arrested with his followers in Bristol and held in jail.  The House ordered that they be rounded up and sent to London to be 'tried' by Parliament.  In 1656, Parliament without a House of Lords, took upon itself to try a number of cases, especially religion!  Even though it was the House of Commons job to make laws and not administer them (apart from offences against the privileges of Parliament), they resisted the powers of Cromwell and ignored this.  Shortly after Naylor arrived in London, he was examined by a Committee of the House which reported to the House in December 1656.   Charges were brought against him by the town clerk of Bristol who was a Puritan member of Parliament.  In the 'Painted Chamber' of Parliament a war of words ensued by the accusers who began 'putting words' into the mouths of witnesses and indeed, words of the accused also, at every turn refusing to acknowledge that there could be no other answer but the one they already had.  Naylor was not so easily bullied or be drawn in, so he replied 'Do not ensnare the innocent' to great effect, and denied that he had said he was categorically the son of God, and that the son of God had many brethren and that we were all sons of God.  This angered the MP's, especially finding that Naylor was a formidable opponent, and one they must beat at all costs no matter how.  They brought up the fact that his followers had worshipped him and that he had not done anything to stop it!  Naylor didn't deny this but said he didn't really accept it should be for him.  Parliament and the Committee were shocked at this and adjourned the hearing for 11 days to debate what to do with Naylor........................He was eventually brought back from his cell and again questioned by the Speaker of the House.  Naylor denied the charge of 'Uncivil and wanton carriage' made by the Chairman of the Committee.  The Hearings became longer and lasted several days and the charges were constantly being changed and added to.  Many were frivolous and only made when he replied to accusations that required a second choice or option which they denied, even though it was one of interpretation (frequently used by the court and lawyers).    Naylor of course was riding a losing horse from the moment he was brought into Parliament, and he was found guilty because there was no other verdict on offer....than this.  The Lord President made a long speech to extenuate the offence and proceeded to discuss the punishment!  It was a 'cruel' age and Parliament seemed to enjoy administering cruel laws and the most cruel deaths they could come up with (It was Parliament in 1605 who decided to try Guy Fawkes in case other courts might not inflict sufficiently horrendous punishments they had in mind).  It was decided that Naylor should be set on the Pillory for 2 hours in the worst position possible, followed by being whipped by the hangman through the streets of Westminster, and that his tongue should be bored, whipped for a second time before being incarcerated in Bridewell Prison...sentenced to hard labour.  Naylor recognised none of the crimes he was accused of, and even Cromwell when he got to hear of it, challenged Parliament's right to inflict a non-capital offence.  In 1660, Naylor was released, and on his way to join his family in York, he collapsed through weakness and poor health and died on the roadside!

We now turn to the 1800's

What you're about to read now was one of the most treacherous crimes ever perpetrated by government which proved to be cunning and deceitful as it was devious and destructive to honour and truth........

It is called 'The Cato Street Conspiracy'   (1820)

This was a time when deceit and greed existed in government on a daily basis, and despite a call from opponents in the two party system, to share power, for the greater mass of people there was no share in the government of the country.  The Politicians were divisive, nasty and self-centred, and at a time of economic depression, poverty and misery among the working classes growing (with wages reduced below subsistence level) factories were closing down and there was widespread unemployment in Industrial areas.  The 'Poor Law' was in force, yet abused by those in government suggesting it was dragging down the country's finances (a little like the Tories and benefit restrictions today), and there was a thirst for a political change.                                                                                                                                                                     Social Injustice was the main bone of contention and people wanted a more representative government.  Deeply angered as they were. the government introduced Reform Bills which extended the vote until it allowed every man to have a say.  But behind the scenes government used the extravagance and folly of rebels as a means of 'blackening and slandering' the radical reformers, encouraging plots for the dramatic and political value of crushing them.  Behind the closed doors of government they embarked on a cunning and treacherous plan to send 'secret agents' to mingle and take part in political groups and spy on them, and to encourage them to step over the line in order that the government could swoop down and seize them and bring them before the magistrates, who were at the time, another government tool.  In 1817 there had been riots in London in connection with this and one particular political group run by Arthur Thistlewood called the Spenceans were charged with causing it.  They were charged and put behind bars, but later released due to a lack of evidence provided by their chief spy who was formulating a devastating evil plan. But the thwarted angry government had Thistlewood re-arrested and jailed for a year on cooked up charges.  Edwards (George Edwards) the government spy approached several members of the government in a private session told them he had a 'successful evil plan' which could use Thistlewood's resentment to their benefit, and that he would on Thistlewood's release coerce him to take direct action and seize power by force.                                                                                                                                                              On the 28th of February 1820 Cabinet member Lord Harrowby took a letter to the Home Secretary saying it had been given to him by an 'unknown man' (Edwards) which stated that 'a gang of assassins were going to murder the entire Cabinet as they sat down for dinner at an arranged Parliamentary function.  The Home Secretary without any checking of the document because of the member's status, called in the police and they raided the house in Cato Street to arrest the political group with Thistlewood,; some 20 to thirty men.   Many were transported and ten prisoners sent to the Tower.   Five were singled out of which Thistlewood was one.   Strangely, Lord Sidmouth for the government prevented contact with the five men who were to be executed, especially Thistlewood.  But Alderman Wood MP having qualms about this case in particular and the speed of the trial managed to see him for a few minutes and get his side of the story.  At this point the plan by the government misfired, and 80,000 people demonstrated against the execution at St Peters Fields and the government sent in the troops.  11 people were killed and 100's injured.....it was known as 'The massacre of Peterloo' which had followed the government's repressive regime leading up to this moment.  The 'Six Acts' as they were called, gave the authorities extra power to clamp down on anyone who was difficult, prohibiting their weapons, more power to magistrates, sedition, restricting the rights to hold public meetings and treason.  However, things were beginning to unravel, especially in the House were opponents were looking into the 'loaded file against Thistlewood and the court's witnesses now that he had been executed with the others.                                                                                                                                                 It seemed to many, that the government were actually provoking rebellion in order to crush it, and it became obvious that it was a folly for Thistlewood to believe he could form 'a provisional government' with just 20 to 30 men, so why did he attempt this?  and the questions did not go away despite attempts to do so.  During the trial of the men, defence lawyer Mr Adelphos 'extracted' bits of information that didn't add up (even though the Judge ignored them), especially from Government witnesses!   It was learned that the authorities were aware of this plot for two weeks before the letter? before it happened, and it came out that Edwards had done the 'recruiting' for the 'gang' and the placing of the weapons had been 'easy to find' when the raid took place.  Public anger turned on the 'government spy' George Edwards, and Alderman Wood MP raised the matter in the House of Commons demanding that 'Chief witness and spy Edwards be brought to the Bar of the House.  Again Lord Sidmouth opposed this once he realised the MP was intent on bringing proceedings against Edwards, so he refused.  Several days later news arrived that Edwards was preparing to leave England for America.  Sidmouth and the Home Secretary refused to take any action.  Wood who knew time was running out turned to 'ordinary' justice and eventually presented enough of a case against Edwards and a warrant for his capture was issued (despite government interference).  100 guineas was offered to anyone finding him, but no-one could, he had served his masters well and he just disappeared.  Some said he got the fullest assistance from his 'handlers', but no member of government was brought to book (a little bit like Special Branch today).....and all proof of Edwards being connected to a minister mysteriously vanished too.

PS: many people will say that was then, and this is now, but it has many similarities to today's political dealings!

NB: for a complete detailed account of this you will find the book 'STATE CRIMES' listed in the 'General Information' page.  'reference source'

'19th Century and on...Government Sins....the Corruption takes a hold!'

Research and History tells us the following: 

At the turn of the 19th Century the main hub and unit of local government was the vestry, and there were 15,000 vestries based on the ecclesiastical parish.  Only in theory could the 'inhabitants' of the parish could participate in the activities of the vestry -- because in practice, the vestries were run by 'a handful of individuals holding 'certain' statutory' offices dominated by the local magistrates.  The only other form of local government was the municipal corporation, a self governing town, and these totalled around 200.  Control of resources and statutory offices in both the vestry and corporation encouraged the basic functions of local government and while misconduct and incompetence varied in both camps, the potential for bribery, fraud and extortion, was a present reality, and indulgence enjoyed by those who could take advantage of the situation happened all too frequently.  It was stated that the practical working of the municipal system could be summed up in bribery, invasions of personal liberty, and the destruction of individuals habits among the Freemen, the election of local functionaries, by whom official power is abused and official duty is neglected.

One example cited of common abuse was that of Mr Renter Warden, Freeman and Chief Magistrate who spent most of his time with an 'inmate, a prostitute who smoked, drank to excess and indulged in indecent language, was in the 'gift' of the corporation who enabled him a pension and a charity bed 'for his vote'.....the town's law enforcement of 4 sergeants and 23 constables were so inefficient that 'respectable females' were said to be exposed to insult as they pass along the streets.  The town's corporation was also financially as well as morally bankrupt, the treasurer kept no accounts, and public money 'passed through private accounts'

We now move onto a 19th century scandal that could have brought down a government:

'The DPP, PM and the Cleveland Street brothel scandal 1886'

One could say this all happened by mistake, a mistake that would take down the solicitor who for his client, tried to have certain people including his client protected from public scrutiny.  Newton ran a successful practice in the city, and he prided himself on the type of client he attracted.....that was until the day LORD ARTHUR SOMERSET consulted him and needed him to act on his behalf.  Lord Somerset had been named in connection with a brothel that provided boys for the rich and nobility.  A 15yr old boy had been picked up by police and questioned by Inspector Abberline of Scotland Yard.  The boy had confessed to being a boy prostitute at the Cleveland Street Brothel run by Charles Hammond, and during the interview became annoyed at the injustice of his situation which led to him saying 'if he was being arrested, then why didn't they have Lord Somerset, the Earl of Euston and Colonel Jervois there, because they used the brothel and boys regularly'  This was news to Abberline and another boy, Algernon Allies was picked up and he identified Lord Somerset as a regular.  Somerset immediately went to solicitor Newton and asked him to make sure it went no further.  Newton resorted to 'a delicate act of blackmail' as he approached the Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, Hamilton Cuffe, suggesting that if his client Lord Somerset was prosecuted he would name the Duke of Clarence as one of the brothel's clients along with others.  The message was passed along to Lord Salisbury the PM, and he assured the lawyer that he would not be arrested or prosecuted.  However, by now, the 'secrets of nobility' were no longer 'containable' and a move by the Earl of Euston Henry Fitzroy, against the newspaper editor Ernest Parke for mentioning him in the 'scoop' on the brothel, led to a libel trial that Lord Somerset did not want.  In the trial against the North London Press  the Earl said his visit to Cleveland Street and the brothel was a misunderstanding.  But Editor Parke was ready and he called several witnesses who identified him as being a regular visitor to the premises at 19, Cleveland Street.  One of the boy prostitutes 14 yr old Algernon Allies said he had been picked up by Lord Euston and taken to the brothel, and that he stayed to enjoy the pleasures on offer.  Editor Parke in frustration told the court that before his paper got involved fully, 'powers on high' had suppressed the names of Somerset and Euston, even though there were investigations going on at Scotland Yard into the brothel and its customers.  Despite Parkes putting in a good account of overwhelming witness testimonies, the Judge amazingly allowed the Earl of Euston to win, which shocked many in the Public Gallery.  Sadly, Parkes was jailed for a year.  Unexpectedly, the lawyer Newton was jailed for six weeks being found guilty of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice for attempting to smuggle out boys from the brothel so that they could not attend court, and interfering with the witness Algernon Allies who he was seeking to have words with.

'THE VIOLENT MP - AND BRIBERY'

COLONEL JAMES LUTTRELL MP 1774.  It's hard to figure other than a 'fix' that a man such as Luttrell was a Parliamentary choice of anyone, especially as he had a reputation for 'extreme personal violence'  It was known that he cheated on and had many mistresses, seduced the young and innocent, and on one occasion had 'kidnapped' an 11 yr old girl, debauched her and avoided prosecution by 'bribing' witnesses.  There was also rumours that he paid some to swear that the girl was a known prostitute!  It was also a fact that at an election against John Wilkes, he lost and Wilkes won the seat, only to be expelled and Luttrell elected MP despite Wilkes getting 1143 votes and Luttrell 296 votes.

'THE MP WHO USED HIS POSITION FOR GAIN'

BOB MACKRETH MP it was said, became an MP in unusual circumstances when he made his debut to the constituents of Castle Rising.  No-one knew anything about him!  All he ever disclosed was that he worked as a waiter and billiard marker at a gentleman's club.  Mackreth now MP enjoyed his new position and what went with it, and began to build up a fortune as a usurer in 1786, lending money to aristocratic spend-thrifts.  However, as good as it had been, an accusation by James Fox Lane went up to the Master of the Rolls that Mackreth had 'defrauded' him whilst he was a minor, and took advantage of his inheritance.   At a special hearing, Mackreth was ordered to repay £20,000, a judgement that was confirmed on appeal to the House of Lords.

'THE CASE OF HORATIO BOTTOMLEY MP - POLITICIAN AND SWINDLER'

HORATIO BOTTOMLEY MP 1860 -- 1932.   One time Liberal MP for South Hackney, Bottomley was nicknamed 'the most remarkable swindler of all time'  It was stated that he took £60 million pounds of Public Money and transferred it to his own accounts. Due to his flamboyant style in 'business' it was said that he dodged a prison sentence on many occasions until he attracted the attention of the aggrieved Director of Public Prosecutions and was finally caught and went to jail for seven years.  Interestingly, it was said that he acquired his fraud skills from having a friendship with a dishonest managing clerk of a Solicitors Firm!

'FRAUDSTER POLITICIAN RAYMOND BLACKBURN (1915-1991) -- He was MP for Kings Norton in Birmingham, the Labour MP once praised by Winston Churchill.  It was said his career started on the UP, then spiralled DOWN and ended up as a public nuisance.  In 1947 he was charged with being 'incapable' (drunk) of which this was a regular event.  Later he was arrested and charged with fraud over a scheme involving the public to lease plots of land on a caravan site, and was sentenced to two years in jail.

'CONTEMPTIBLE POLITICIAN HOLDS ON TO JOB'  that was ANTHONY HENLEY MP for Southampton....and we go to 1730 in which time this Parliamentary member stood out from other politicians mainly because of his attitude and disrespect for his constituents.  Amazingly, he was openly hostile and arrogant and didn't care who knew it.  It is noted that when he was requested by a group of his constituents to vote against some tax changes, his open letter in reply was highly offensive with outrageous suggestions to the women and what to do about it!

'POLITICIAN IN COURT FOR FONDLING UNDERCOVER COP' moving forward to more recent times, 1984, we have Tory MP KEITH HAMPSON who represented the constituency of Leeds North West.  He appeared before Southwark Crown Court charged with 'Indecent Assault', that of a table top dancer at a theatre club in Soho.  Instead of just any girl, he had according to staff 'brushed up' against the undercover policewoman. He was thrown out of the premises and charged with fondling her, but powers that be got this matter settled in 'private'

It's not a pretty history of government and the people who ran it......and it hasn't fundamentally changed.

We now turn our attentions on modern contemporary Britain which denies its links to the past by wearing a 'false mask of respectability'

HOWEVER, TO DO THIS JUSTICE WE MUST FILL IN SOME OF THE CRACKS AND LOOK BRIEFLY AT A 400 YEAR PERIOD AND LOOK AT THE VILLAINS THAT MAY THINK THEY GOT AWAY AS MATTHEW PARRIS PUTS IT IN HIS BOOK 'GREAT PARLIAMENTARY SCANDALS' -- SOME WE'VE ALREADY COVERED AND RESEARCHED, SO WE WILL CONCENTRATE ON THE ONES WE ALREADY HAD ON OUR WAITING LIST AND WOULD HAVE GOT ROUND TO EVENTUALLY:

And we begin with a look at:  

SIR JOHN TREVOR (The House of Commons Speaker 1694)  He had a reputation for taking bribes to secure desired outcomes in Parliament. He was gradually unmasked by the evidence over the sum of 1,000 guineas paid to him on the passing of a Bill by an interested Party?

MP JOHN WILKES (MP in 1763)  He was eventually convicted for libel and was imprisoned as a result.  Other things arose when it was said that he bribed his way into Parliament with one of his intentions was to escape prison because in Parliament one could not be arrested for debt)  It was also said by others in the chamber that he was expelled from Parliament many times.

GEORGE HUDSON MP (1849)  Widely known as a politician who had a 'Railway Mania' -- the MP overstretched himself financially despite being a businessman, and ended up 'falsifying the accounts and fraudulently paid dividends to share holders out of borrowed capital in order to mislead and create the impression of success.  Which today is known as 'creative accounting'.....he was forced to resign!

CHANCELLOR ROBERT LOWE (1873)  It was said that he led two financial scandals, both within a short time of each other.  Lowe played a dangerous game, especially in his connection with chancer and opportunist, Frank Scudamore, and Parliament pressured Lowe into holding an investigation into who he was dealing with.  Lowe being one of those was quick to use his position and power and instantly dragged things out using delay, and was short on apologies.  This annoyed the House and suspicion led to him being demoted in a Cabinet reshuffle which made him The Home Secretary, his last post in Government!

MP CHARLES DILKE (1885)  He was a prominent Liberal Politician whose interests led to his downfall.  It's probably referred to as womanising and Dilke enjoyed affairs so much so that he found himself 'blindsided' in a major trial when he was called as a witness.  After the woman pointed him out, Dilke's pleas of innocence in the affair were soon ignored, and Gladstone was not prepared to keep him in his administration as he viewed 'infidelity' unacceptable in Public Life.

MARCONI AND THE GOVERNMENT  1912  A twisting scandal that was never going to conveniently disappear without raising concerns of who benefits first?  A question of a conflict of interests in high places and the passing around of shares!  This remarkable invention was bound to attract the treasure seekers and opportunists.  Asquith was pushed into appointing the Select Committee into investigating the matter as rumours of 'Insider Information' dogged ministers who grew uneasy about the fact that £9,000 of Liberal Party funds had been gambled on Marconi by former Chief Whip Alexander Murray.

MP LEWIS HARCOURT 1922  Who was a member of Parliament from 1905 to 1916.  The damning scandal here was the fact 'Loulou' Harcourt as he was fondly called, was a practising paedophile, which the family mostly ignored --- and it was his indiscretion that finally ended his career.  Rumours reached the notice of the police as it became known that boys at Eton were warned about being alone with Lord Harcourt or Lord Esher.

THE BLACKMAILING OF A PM 1929 ---  This case which rarely saw the light of day (because of who it was), concerned Ramsay MacDonald who was being blackmailed by 'a Lady' in Horseferry Road.  She extracted several payments over a period of time, and got £20,000 for some correspondence she held.  Ramsay left the matter in the hands of Sir Charles Mendl to take care of the problem and destroy the material, which happened to be 'Pornographic poems' MacDonald had sent to her.

THE RAIL TICKET DOWNFALL OF AN MP  1930 --  unlike the outcome of Tony Blair's wife and the rail ticket incident, the struggling MP Mardy Jones, Labour, committed an offence of 'transferring two 'non-transferrable' tickets to his wife and helping her to travel without paying a fare.   It was said and felt by the people that the Great Western Railway Company acted disgracefully in pursuing the matter to court seeing that they both didn't have enough money to get them through until pay day.  They were both fined and admonished by an unsympathetic magistrate, which resulted in Mardy Jones losing his Parliamentary seat.

ROBERT BOOTHBY MP 1940 -- Another Politician who not unlike solicitors these days, engaged in a conflict of interests, a scandal which ultimately ended up in his resignation from Parliament.  Another so-called weakness in the MP was his gambling addiction, one that would keep on giving him problems financially!  It was also a fact that he had a link to the mobsters the Kray brothers, and kept a photograph of him and Ronnie Kray in his flat.

PAUL LATHAM MP 1941 -- Whose homosexual tendencies led to fourteen charges and a jail sentence of two years.  It was said he faced a Court Martial at one time and became Sir Paul Latham.  His days in the Army had been marred by stories of his misbehaviour with other soldiers.  He was eventually forced to resign as the Conservative MP for Scarborough and Whitby.

THE MP WHO TOLD TOO MUCH, 1947  --  This was the amazing story of GARY ALLIGAN, the MP for Gravesend, who not only spoke of, but put it into print that MP's got drunk routinely, and that many of them 'leaked' news and stories to the Press for favours (which he would know because he was an MP and journalist).  It was said that the House of Commons were outraged and took action against him (more out of indignance and revenge).  It was decided that they would put forward a motion to the Privileges Committee and discharge Allighan for the Contempt he had shown for colleagues.

WILLIAM FIELD MP  1953 -- He was a staunch Labour man, and homosexual who appeared before Bow Street Magistrates Court charged with importuning men for immoral purposes.  Field though objected saying it was known in Parliament that he was who he was and therefore felt he didn't need any excuse.  The MP for North Paddington was eventually forced to resign his seat despite putting up a strong fight to remain in Parliament.

CAPTAIN PETER BAKER 1954 -- Member of The House Of Lords and MP for South Norfolk.  This Peer of the realm was headed for Wormwood Scrubs after being convicted of multiple forgeries, and was sent to prison for seven years.  He apparently forged bills of exchange for £1000's of pounds, forging signatures.  He appeared before Bow Street Magistrates Court.  He resigned from both positions in the government.

IAN HARVEY MP  1958 -- A rather 'risky' Tory MP who believed in not getting caught, and thought this would be the case.  He was MP for Harrow East in 1950.  Although his belief risked the inevitable, he was surprised it didn't work when as a Minister he was caught 'picking up' troopers and guardsmen from the barracks, and in December 1958 he was arrested, charged and fined for indecency.  The Junior Minister appeared in court where they read out that he'd been caught in the public toilets for importuning, he was forced to resign!

REGINALD MAUDLING -- Home Secretary  1972  --- It was a case of dubious business activities that brought this MP down, and before things broke publicly, he offered his resignation to Edward Heath the PM, who at first wanted him to change his mind.  It is still said that Maudling escaped criminal charges despite walking away without any repercussions.  It was as they said at the time, his dealings with Poulson had been a deadly move to his political career, and it was for this reason he resigned very quickly.

THE CALL-GIRLS SCANDAL AND TWO LORDS?  1973 --- this was yet again another problem and blow to Prime Minister Ted Heath's cabinet, as two Ministers, Lord Jellicoe and Lord Lambton.  Lord Jellicoe was linked to a drug ring inquiry and Vice Ring investigation being carried out by Scotland Yard Police.  Lord Lambton was making regular visits to the latter subject, the vice ring, and talk of such had already reached the attention of MI5.  Heath was forced to set up an Inquiry, a Parliamentary obligation....and two resignations soon followed!

HAROLD WILSON PM 1974 -- 'The Slagheap Affair' --- This was the matter of 'Land reclamation scheme', said not to be 'speculation' which many suggested it looked like it and to some extent was.  Tony Field had managed the Commons Office, he approached the Land Agents, which in turn led to broker Ronald Millhench, who later was arrested for forgery and was jailed for three years. Having said that, Wilson was dogged by other activities, those of MI5 who were out to discredit the Wilson government.

JAMES DUNN MP - 1980 --- The downfall of an 'alternate shopper?'  Dunn was a Labour Minister given the position of Junior Northern Ireland Minister in Callaghan's Cabinet.  It was recorded in the Press at the time that he went into a branch of the Army and Navy Stores on a quick shoplifting spree. stealing two ties, two armbands and a sweatshirt.  He was hauled up before the Inner London Crown Court.  The MP for Kirkdale, Liverpool, was found guilty and given a conditional discharge, and ordered to pay costs of £100.  He later left the Labour Party and went into the SDP, and lost his seat!

THE OUTRAGEOUS ALLAN ROBERTS MP 1981 -- A Politician who created news and attracted enemies to his unusual lifestyle.  It was said that neighbours complained of his many rowdy parties when he was in residence.  It was also revealed that he engaged in S & M activities when he was in Berlin, having been seen visiting clubs in a SS uniform or leather bondage gear.  He also lashed out at 'Private Eye' over articles they printed.  Despite this adverse attention, he somehow gained one of the biggest majorities in the House of Commons.

NICHOLAS FAIRBAIRN MP  1982 -- A man who loved women and courted their attention much to the dislike of the Tory Party.  Some branded him a 'lecher' hoping that Margaret Thatcher would give him his marching orders.  But not so, as she considered his behaviour a private matter.  His downfall eventually arrived over the breaching of one of Parliament's hallowed rules.  The MP for Kinross and Perthshire, also the Scottish Solicitor General and Cabinet Law Chief was after consideration, sacked by Thatcher, which reached front page news.

KEITH HAMPSON MP  1984  --- He was the Parliament Private Secretary to Michael Heseltine.  The Tory Politician liked to spend time in Gay Theatres to watch male go go dancers.  He was primarily the Tory Mp for Leeds North West.  It was said that he kept quiet about his arrest at one of these clubs, and later appeared before Southwark Crown Court charged with indecent assault.  It was said he narrowly survived what might have happened if the Attorney General Havers hadn't intervened and scrubbed the trial!

KEITH BEST MP -- 1987 -- He was the MP who forgot about how he had breached the shares allocation with BT (which he was not entitled to being a politician).  Many said the Tory Mp almost got away with it had it not been for Labour who sent in a bloodhound and uncovered the fact the politician had used at least three variations of his name to obtain six times more shares than the 800 permitted.  Labour demanded his arrest and resignation....he was later charged and appeared before Southwark Crown Court, fined £3,000 with £1,500 costs... and narrowly missed a jail sentence!

JOHN BROWNE MP -- 1990  --- Disclosure wasn't at the top of this Tory MP for Winchester's list, and the thought of embarrassing the Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, hardly entered the subject when he was pulled up for failing to disclose a £2,400 retainer from a Lebanese Consultancy Company.  The Tory Party was already going through n embarrassing, messy 'cash for questions' scandal, and Browne was suspended without pay for twenty days.  He stood down at the following election!

ALAN AMOS MP  1992 --  It was a rather awful day for this MP who represented the constituency of Hexam...... as he was arrested by police on London's Hampstead Heath on the 7th of March.  This was not good news for PM John Major who had just been elected a few days earlier.  And it was the Hexam MP's bad luck to be in the vicinity of a police raid that was cracking down on gay encounters in a public place.  He admitted to what he said was a foolish and stupid act and the matter was resolved by him resigning his seat.

MICHAEL MATES MP  1993 --  A Junior Northern Ireland Minister who in essence made the blunder of being a mate to the Turkish Cypriot millionaire Asil Nadir who was involved in 'The Polly Peck Scandal'.  Nadir was being investigated by The Serious Fraud Office for fraud and false accounting to the tune of £30 million pounds.  He jumped bail before the trial and fled.  Michael Mates was suddenly dealt a blow by being praised for his 'unflinching help' which embarrassed the minister acutely.  It was later discovered that Mates had written to the Attorney General on Nadir's behalf (to get some leverage), but worse was to come when it was revealed that the Tory Party had received  a £440,000 gift from Nadir who owed creditors millions of pounds.  As new revelations arrived (mainly Nadir's doing from a place in exile) it looked like a 'Watergate' affair was about to threaten the government's safety and expose them.

BACK TO BASICS 1994 --- The call from Prime Minister John Major was all well and good if your ministers weren't up to no good, and in 1994 there was a dangerous situation building as 'The Cash for Questions' scandal was gaining momentum in the Press.  Tory MP's were accused of selling questions in the House of Commons at around £1,000 pounds each.  Some fell into the 'sting' that Fleet Street organised setting up around 20 politicians.  Tory MP's Graham Riddick and David Tredinnick took the bait all too easily, but that didn't stop there, other names followed such as Tim Smith, Neil Hamilton and many more, including Jonathan Aitken Chief Secretary to the Treasury, who gradually got himself into a more serious mess and went to jail.  The affair did no favours for the Tories, and in the not too far distance there was yet another big scandal to come, and that was 'The Expenses Scandal'

 

more to come

 

CIVIL SERVANTS are supposed to be ordinary people just making a living, but don't be fooled, they are nothing of the sort.  They agree to sign up to the Official Secrets Act and have Crown Protection, they are bought and paid for in their salaries, and they will treat other members of public with contempt and complete disregard if they choose to do so.  They cannot be challenged with total success and proving anything against them is a waste of time, you will lack evidence and they will subvert all and any enquiries. Any decision made against them will be internal and they claim that data protection covers this even if they uphold a complaint, any action disciplinary or otherwise will not be published or known to the complainant.

The Complaints system in the DWP and Jobcentre is designed to take six months (with several tiers)

The  Complaints/Appeal system in the Tax and Inland Revenue will take four months or even longer.

The Complaints system in the Council can last over twelve months or more.

Most Court Actions rely on the claimant going through one of the systems mentioned and if you chose not to (because you cannot trust them) the Judge will probably strike out your claim  ----  your freedom of choice has been eroded completely.

Just lately, in the Spring of 2009 The Daily Telegraph exposed the Fraud and Corruption in the House of Parliament, and it went very deep.  The public were shocked at how many pigs were in the trough helping themselves in the grand name of expenses - The Expenses Scandal - the attempted cover-ups and denials.  But one group has been missed in this expose by The Telegraph --- The Civil Servants.

So let us get down to business and expose some of them here:

 

SO LET US LOOK AT A QUENTIN LETTS ARTICLE OF 2016 ON THE CIVIL SERVICE IN THE UK:

The creeping corruption of Britain's civil service 

10 February 2016  By Political Reporter Quentin Letts

The National Audit Office has published a report into civil servants’ freebies. It runs to 40 pages and its findings should trouble any taxpayer.

Whitehall officials, their spouses and in some cases even their children, have been entertained by big business at some of the most expensive troughing places in London. he report lists splashy restaurants such as the Savoy Grill, where Gordon Ramsay runs the kitchen and, I am told, the charcoal-grilled Chateaubriand can make the drabbest civil servant feel on top of the world, provided he is not paying for it. Personal gifts to officials have included a £300 painting, a £300 Mont Blanc fountain pen, iPads, a Fortnum & Mason hamper, a trip to the Harry Potter film studio and attendance at an FA Cup semi-final. Some of those items were ‘surrendered’ to departmental bosses by their recipients, but the very fact they were offered may tell us that the donors expected them to be retained.   The investigation found that BAE Systems, one of our biggest arms manufacturers, last year entertained 581 defence equipment officials — ie arms procurement officials, employed by the State to buy weapons for national protection. If any area of spending needs to be above corruption, this is it. Our service personnel need to be equipped with arms chosen on merit alone. It would be a scandal were kit to be bought on the basis of a freebie-oiled relationship between the arms industry and a civil servant.    BAE Systems was not alone. Other companies which schmoozed more than 100 defence officials were Finmeccanica, Thales, QinetiQ, Airbus, Lockheed Martin and Rolls-Royce. These are manufacturers of big-ticket defence hardware bought by the Government.  In a world where each sales item can costs millions, what is a few thousand pounds here on corporate hospitality if it allows the sales team to socialise with civil servants who oversee budgets? Private enterprise’s desire to suck up to civil servants is understandable. The readiness of our Civil Service to tolerate such practices is more open to question.

Civil servants at Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) were popular guests of many a financial firm.

Was it their sparkling repartee, magnetism, their glamour (those polyester ties) that made them such an irresistible company for the likes of professional service companies like Accenture and accountancy firms like PricewaterhouseCoopers, BDO and Deloitte? All threw lavish hospitality at HMRC personnel. Or was it that those companies discerned a commercial advantage in becoming better acquainted with the decision-makers in the Whitehall machine?  This is the same HMRC which has in recent months been the subject of numerous allegations of cosy-dealing with certain firms which have come to oddly small tax settlements. The Audit Office report observed that Whitehall’s hospitality rules are less strict than those of the UN and that, ahem, temple to probity, the EC. 

Anything else, and I say this with regret, looks like corruption.

 

We looked for an actual solid investigation into the UK's Civil Service and found nothing, suggesting that they are indeed protected from such measures, whereas the following piece shows you that Jersey isn't tied to any get out clause or immunity considerations:

Civil servants investigated after 13k spent on flights

Jersey's Chief Minister has called for a review into government travel policy and a disciplinary investigation into the actions of civil servants Mike King and Wayne Gallichan.

It's after the civil servants booked business class flights to South Africa which cost taxpayers £13k.

 

HMRC - the untouchables -- or corruption on a new level?

ONE GROUP OF CIVIL SERVANTS HAVE MORE PROTECTION AND POWER THAN THE OTHERS and that branch is known as HER MAJESTY'S CUSTOMS AND EXCISE and THE INLAND REVENUE -- HMRC --who can practice it in the utmost secrecy without fear of prosecution or investigation -- No Minister has authority over them -- There is no known investigation that has ever been successfully lodged against this branch of civil servants because of the immunity they have been granted. The power they have was never granted by the people of Britain it came from the politicians and the judiciary.

610 hmrc staff disciplined, dismissed and other - this recently found report comes from when the merger of the Customs and Inland Revenue became one.  It was claimed at the time that this was the total for 3 years and only represented one percent from 2005 to 2008.  We did one of their type taxman assessments and arrived at a possible figure of now 2,440 and a rate of just around 5 per cent 'bent' staff existing nowadays.

The full article can be seen further down the list, much further down I may add.

We list the following cases, reports and articles in support of another Web Owner who contacted us for information to put on his site which entirely focuses on the Inland Revenue and Excise Officers.

' Customs and Excise Elite Squad investigated for Corruption '

Police claimed that officers of the Customs National Investigation Service were being investigated for corruption.  They said some officers in Customs Excise were allowing informers to sell on heroin.  It is stated that Customs officers have skimmed off a proportion of seized drugs to resell on the black market.  The inquiry will look at a number of officers who have perverted the course of justice.  Doubts over covert Customs operations have seen four separate major court cases collapse during a three year period.  The Police would not say how many Customs officers were under investigation claiming they did not have the power or authority to act as they normally do in other cases.

' TOO MUCH POWER GIVEN TO CUSTOMS '

GRAHAM ZELLICK a former Principal of Queen Mary and Westfield College was alarmed that a customs officer should have the power to override a decision in the criminal courts.  Such power should rest with the Home Secretary.  A review of their status should be checked as they are not above the law even though they think it.' he said in a statement.

'TWO CROOKED HMRC CUSTOMS OFFICERS JAILED'  -- The report says that two customs officers were part of a smuggling gang operating in Ramsgate.  It revealed the role of two HMRC employees, PAUL WEAVER and colleague STEVEN PHILLIPS of Folkestone.  It was stated at Southwark Crown Court that the officers waved through lorry loads of contraband destined for Manchester.  The Tax Scam was fairly massive as five shipments of bootlegged vodka and cigarettes valued at millions of pounds were taken through to their destination by the two officers who were notified by the gang when the lorries would be arriving at the port.  Being in receipt of a good payout the two customs men made sure other officers were not around when these shipments arrived.  We were not told how they could effect this.  They both admitted to one count of conspiracy to contravene customs duties and tax evasion.  Weaver received 4 years and Phillips, four and a half years by Southwark Crown Court.  (Aug 2006)

'HMRC CUSTOMS MAN IN DRUGS PLOT'  --  RICHARD RILEY was thought to be an upstanding officer according to many others in the fight against tax evasion and smuggling.  But in reality he was making huge sums of cash from drug smuggling deals he struck with some Caribbean Drug Lords.  It was said in court that he simply used his position for self gain and used anyone in his scam, including his wife, kids, social worker and friends, and he was living in a grand house in Dulwich, London.  The Judge at Southwark Crown Court said 'Instead of protecting public money, and helping to stamp out crime, he was actively engaging in it.  He was sentenced to 15 years in jail.

'HMRC CUSTOMS OFFICER DENIES HELPING GANGSTERS FOR SHARE OF LOOT'  -- PAUL COOK, a HM Customs and Excise 'handler' for two gangsters, appeared at Kingston Crown Court on a charge of helping the men scam their way to a Royal Pardon, which enabled them to get out of prison early.  Both prisoners had turned 'Grasses' - 'giving Queens Evidence' at the time when they were arrested for heroin trafficking in 1993.  They told Cook where a cache of guns and drugs could be located in Merseyside.  Cook is charged with helping the two men pervert the course of justice and misconduct in public office.

' Customs Officer arrested for groping women in trains '

A SENIOR OFFICER NICHOLAS SHAW appeared in court accused of groping women in busy and crowded trains.  Manchester Crown Court heard that there were a number of incidents involving women who claimed they had been touch up by Mr. Shaw during their journeys. A fifth woman said she felt uncomfortable when Shaw stood so close to her on the train.

HIGH RANKING CUSTOMS OFFICER'S NAME KEPT SECRET BY OFFICIALS - We have been prevented from naming a senior customs man by the Ministry. Our Private Detective Richard was following a lead based on a tip-off that a senior customs man was corrupt and in the habit of taking bribes in order to make things okay for his contacts.  Richard found this to be the case and made enquiries about the man and his personal life that in turn showed us the cause and reason he was engaged in certain activities that would eventually jail the ordinary man in the street. However, when we checked with the customs and excise we were forbidden to name the man, and there has been no case in the papers relating to it, so it appears to be secret and one of those things that this government are good at, and that goes for the police who we mentioned at the beginning who were investigating several customs men in our first article

NO CUSTOMS OFFICERS HAVE BEEN NAMED OR CHARGED -- THE INVESTIGATION AND DETAILS HAVE JUST VANISHED?

'HMRC CUSTOMS OFFICER IS CONVICTED OF RAPE' - Customs Officer KELVIN BENNETT of Birmingham appeared before a jury at Maidstone Crown Court, accused of raping and kidnap.  The woman who was not named for legal reasons said she was 21 when Bennett forced her into his car and drove to a quiet remote location to commit the crime.  She gave testimony to further attacks by Bennett who almost seemed to get away with it due to his position in the Inland Revenue!  The Judge said Bennett had totally betrayed his position of trust.  At the time of this report his sentencing was deferred to another date.  (6/8/2008)

' Customs VAT man in spanking tax dodge '

CUSTOMS TAX INSPECTOR PHIL McHUGH only spanked female bottoms, shapely ones, and gave the girls £30 to £100 for photos while he spanked them.  He said ' you won't have to pay any tax -- it's all cash in hand '.  He worked in the Customs and Excise Investigations Department in Blackburn, Lancashire.  The Department later said they were looking into his activities.

TAX INSPECTOR JAILED OVER BLACKMAIL -- PHILIP McHUGH was found guilty at St Albans Crown Court of Blackmail. It was said that he made a demand for £1million from TESCO and threatened to bomb the store if the ransom was not paid.  The 52 year-old also threatened to contaminate products at the store in Lancashire.  It was stated that he was addicted to gambling online and had debts of £37,000.

NB: The HMRC refused to say whether the 'two' McHugh's were the same....and pretended not to know!

Yes you're not seeing double, we know it is the same taxman involved in the two cases. Having now linked these cases together it certainly needs questions asked at the HMRC in Blackburn, and answers?   - What activities did they look into regarding the spanking situation and how is it they missed the gambling debts and his eventual prison sentence for blackmail.

HMRC Customs officer grabbed in Corruption Raid by Cops'

The following reports may be linked by the mere connection of it being a '50 year old HMRC Officer, totally unnamed of course!  So we go first to -- A/  This is OPERATION ELVEDEN Scotland Yard's investigation into allegations of corrupt payments to police and public officials.  The Report says at the time they had made the 29th arrest, they claim to have arrested a 50 year old HMRC employee, who was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office contrary to common law and suspicion of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906.  The report hints at 'Phone Hacking' in conjunction with another police operation called 'Operation Weeting'   16th of August ?  London. 

B/ We now go to 'Customs Officer Arrested' 30th June 2009 --- The Kent Police stated that among seven people arrested on the suspicion of drug trafficking, a Customs Officer aged 50, was involved.  The name of the man was withheld for apparently no reason one could ascertain, and it says he was subsequently granted bail?

So, is this one officer, or is it two separate cases?  we couldn't find anything else on this, so we'll leave it with you.

FORMER CUSTOMS MAN TELLS OUR PRIVATE DETECTIVE THAT THEY GET TIP-OFFS WHEN TROUBLE SURROUNDS THEIR DEPARTMENT OR AN INVESTIGATION IS ABOUT TO BE MADE --' PAPERS GO MISSING AND OTHERS ARE SHREDDED - WE ARE GOOD AT THAT - He said.

'Customs Withhold vital evidence from Defence Lawyers'

In this Customs case we see the darker side of their lawyers and what they are prepared to do --- The report into the HMRC Customs Court Case involving 7 men convicted of a 105 million pound fraud reveals that the men had their convictions quashed because of the 'Misconduct of HMRC Lawyers' who kept vital information secret from the accused men's solicitors and Lawyers.  The report goes onto say this is but another failure amid allegations of misbehaviour by Customs Investigators.  It says out of 90 defendants accused by the HMRC, 30 or so had their convictions overturned with the expectancy that the remainder would follow.  It is said that these failures have been at a huge cost to the taxpayers, around 10 million pounds, and those who had already been imprisoned (due to suspect evidence) were in line for millions of pounds in compensation.  Crown Counsel Noel Lucas said in court that the Customs did not accept that officers deliberately diverted fraudulent traders from the London City Board to Fort Patrick as part of an 'illegal' sting operation.  Mr Justice Butterfield after the collapse of the case made it understood that he was to be given unrestricted access to customs staff, papers and facilities, so that he could make a report for Parliament with a view that they would take action on the department.  (22/1/2003)

NB. One should note that although these HMRC lawyers practised to deceive by withholding evidence, they can't be got because of the present law and the Legal Profession that allows this....there were others within the Inland Revenue that were part of that cover-up who relied on the Law to work in their favour.

'Two Senior Customs Officials (one a Lawyer) are Suspended'

This case or Fraud Inquiry netted two Senior HMRC men for activities into 'non-disclosure of evidence' in a major fraud case (not unlike the above case).  TERRY BYRNE, the Director of Law Enforcement and DAVID PICKUP its Chief Lawyer, were on a list of 20 names which contained retired and serving officials held by Scotland Yard Police as being under investigation in the fraud case.  This was at a time when HMRC enjoyed the privilege of its own autonomous powers to investigate in fraud cases itself, and this troubled other departments who criticised them for such actions as 'non-disclosure' and other failings.  They were allowed to use their own Lawyers rather than the CPS....soon after that privilege was ended.  John Healey, Treasury Minister, announced that a new structure would ensure the external scrutiny at the Customs in order to show the Public accountability and assure them about the honesty of the Customs which up to then had ruled itself.                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Five of the Customs men on the list and involved in the fraud were moved to other duties, while six other officers were returned to work as it was said 'they didn't deal with anything sensitive', one other officer was classified as 'a witness' and six others were never referred to as if they'd disappeared, and what happened after that was kept quiet?

NB Yet again we see some fancy footwork by ministers who seem determined to fend off all attacks or scrutiny of the HMRC.   (30/9/2004)

 

'A State of Corruption: Fraud and the birth of British Customs Taxation c.1550 to 1590'

a look at the taxation beginnings -- This was written by Oliver Buxton-Dunn in 2015 in a short publication that can be seen online:

'Fraud and corruption were not side issues, but rather intimate with the very birth of this new modern taxation administration'                                   

' HMRC Investigator in fraud '

JONATHAN MIDDUP an Investigator with the Inland Revenue was found guilty of fraudulently obtaining £16,000 in benefits for his wife -- he aided and abetted her scam to swindle for income support, housing benefit and council tax in Hucknell.  The deception was calculated and the plan to let his wife sign on as a single parent was carried through.  Nottingham Magistrates Court found Middup guilty of dishonesty, the Judge said ' It is appalling that this man was a criminal investigator for the HMRC '  He was given an 8 weeks suspended prison sentence suspended for 12 months.

' Those H & M Revenue & Customs blunders '

HER MAJESTY'S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS, yes, not so squeaky clean either as we show you here.

Retired David Betson had regular problems with tax codes etc, and what was annoying was that this kind of thing continued over and over again despite contacting them he said. He made a formal complaint, but guess what? he hasn't had a reply or anything from them.

Elizabeth Booker had a tax demand for £858 going back over a two-year period. She was now retired and the mix up again was tax codes, but still the matter had not been sorted. Even after contacting them she still was sent the wrong codes.

George Stewart tried to get two tax rebates owing to him after tax was taken incorrectly from his saving accounts. This matter went on for 18 months, yet he was promised by someone at the centre that he would receive a response by September 2010, it never happened?

Mary Stephen got a shock when the tax people said she owed £3,207 in underpaid tax. After approaching the tax office on several occasions and getting more stressed she was dumbfounded to find out that they thought she had a second job at a place she has never worked?

Stan Bradburn was sent a bill by the tax people for £3,200 which stated he had been underpaying for two years. After much effort and running around for faceless tax collectors, he discovered it was all based on incorrect tax codes. The Tax people had confused information due to three sources of income, but couldn't get the matter right with all the expensive expertise they claim they have. A spokesperson said they were looking into it as a matter of urgency?  --- not a lot of hope there eh?

' THE CASE OF THE INLAND REVENUE OFFICER WHO LIED '

AN Unidentified civil servant at the Inland revenue seemed unconcerned that a lie interfered with a claimant's valid request.  He actually said the info was on the pc regarding a claim for Income Support, whereas the claimant had never claimed income support at any time.  His bungle and false statement quashed the claim and it was only after trouble and delay to the claimant that it was finally put right.

They were requested to reveal the civil servant, but denied this and said there was a clerical error??

HMRC GO AFTER INNOCENT PEOPLE AND THREATEN THEM --- Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs staff are continually getting away with the crime of threats and harassment and they get away with it without any fear of prosecution, and why is that?  they have immunity provided by the police and Crown, they cannot be touched. They are above the law. The new report says they threaten to take possessions over tax demands to those who already agreed to pay off bills, and they do it to people who owe nothing. Any errors they make are not errors? simply just something that happened -- just like one un-named civil servant who wrongly assessed some claimant even though he had other information to the contrary, had their claim denied and was not held accountable when the mistake showed up. The HMRC would not investigate him, suspend him or hold an inquiry into his behaviour because he was protected.  The report highlighted the fact that these threats flouted the Office of fair trading rules -- guidance to debt collectors --- yet amazingly the HMRC is not bound by the rules because it is a government department?  This situation revealed itself when Mrs Perry was hounded by the HMRC debt office in Glasgow and then by another debt office in Croydon.  The Office of Fair Trading was contacted and that's when it was revealed that they were above the law and could not be investigated by the Ombudsman or Office of Fair Trade, even the police are tied when attempting to investigate, they are immune from prosecution.

TAXMAN FAILS TO WIN CASE AGAINST MAN WHO WINS APPEAL -- Tax Inspector Hayden Hart thought he would nab his man easily, and said he was attacked by him whilst doing his duty. Initially in a lower court the taxman got his way, but Paul Clarke took his case to the Appeal court and the judge overturned the decision saying the facts were exaggerated, and it could not be proved by just a few marks that Clarke did it. Lawyers for the taxman tried to change the charge, but the judge would not let them.

'Tax Revenue Officer is Jailed for Fraud'

In Court, CHANDRAKANT PATEL of Harrow was jailed for inventing false repayments to the tune of 76,000 pounds from his Edgware Office in London.  Civil servant Patel pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy to cheat the HMRC while being a trusted employee who let down the taxpayers.  He was sentenced by Judge Hardy at the Crown Court to three years in jail.  It was said in court that he had two co-conspirators in the fraud and intent to rob the tax system.  (May 3 2001)

IN RELATION TO HMRC THREATS one MP said ' The tone of these demands were deeply offensive and threatening ' ' In some cases they are sent to the wrong people saying they will seize possessions and take property if the bill isn't paid'  The MP said this was disgraceful. especially as it was a public body paid for by taxpayers.

' HMRC Tax Officer is Jailed '

SENIOR TAX OFFICER MARGARET SCARGILL was found guilty at Leeds Crown Court of taking more than £10,000 in false tax payments.  It was discovered that she had perpetrated the crime over five years under the noses of colleagues at the Dewsbury HMRC Office.  She opened two accounts in order to place the stolen money. It was amazing to learn that she had acquired a senior position during those years, and all the while fiddled and falsified documents.  It was said she altered correct details on existing records or created false employment pay and tax returns which ensured repayments for three women.  It was also found she had made false repayments; just over 10,000, which had been sent to two of her sisters, one a Police Officer, and a niece.  She was found guilty of cheating the HMRC and jailed for six months. (7/2/2005)

' The Taxman in blunder refuse to accept the facts '

THE INLAND REVENUE in Preston do make mistakes, do enter false information, deny it and carry onto the next occasion -- Miss Tonie Francis was dead according to their records, another gaff, but when she actually phoned to correct this, the operator said she could not enter into any dialogue because she was dead?  The mother of two from Northamptonshire had her benefits frozen because of it as they had classified her as ' deceased ' even an officer from a department said he could not enter into any conversation?  Amazingly, the civil servant on the phone actually asked the deceased!! for a copy of her will and details of next of kin. She has since consulted with a solicitor and intends to sue the tax authorities who claimed this was a 'computer error '

THE INLAND REVENUE THREATEN WIDOW --- Indeed, A case has come to light that clearly shows the HMRC   have shown their true colours again. A 95 year old widow was threatened with bailiffs over a bill that was actually wrong and their mistake. This comes at a time when a Commons Committee hauled them in over the chaos and complaints by the public.  Widow Beryl Frew was told in a letter she would have her possessions seized for non payment. It was only after outside forces went over their bills that it was found that she had actually paid £380 more, and that was what they owed her. This example clearly shows how insensitive these people are and that they are quite unconcerned about using their power to crush anyone, even when they get it wrong.

' VAT Taxman Jailed '

RICHARD THORNTON, a VAT Inspector with the HMRC was sent to prison for two and a half years for swindling taxpayers out of £32,000 at Mold Crown Court.  It was heard that the tax Inspector set up a fake company with fictional directors to help him make a bogus sale and claim back on VAT.  He was convicted of fraudulent evasion.

IT HAS BEEN REVEALED THAT MISTAKES ARE NOT ALWAYS MISTAKES as claimed by the tax departments of the UK Government.  An internal document showed that Officers often deliberately try to trap and cheat claimants in order to reduce any tax benefits or rebate. It showed the staff had a system geared up to performance targets within offices.  Often they knew that a wrong demand had gone out, but ignored this in case 'the fishing trip' netted results.  One trick was to get people to rewrite claims and compare them word for word, and if it didn't do that, they then had another worker lean on that taxpayer with more requests for information in the full knowledge that they were running a subtle intimidation that the claimant could do nothing about.

' Dishonest Tax fraud Officer on the fiddle '

CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER AT THE REVENUE AND CUSTOMS PROSECUTION OFFICE DAVID PARTRIDGE, found himself being prosecuted instead. He was found guilty of gross misconduct and dismissed for awarding his wife a lucrative contract said to be around £100,000 of taxpayers money.  He was found guilty acting dishonestly over a period of eighteen months.

TAX OFFICE COVER-UP OVER BOTCHED ASSESSMENT FORM -- Why the tax office lie, cheat and deceive is a mystery, but they do; even over the little things.  The North Country Inland Revenue Tax Dept made what they call an 'error' yet kept the identity of the civil servant a secret and would not have him identified when requested by the taxpayer/claimant.  The claimant had given in forms that showed the exact circumstances, yet, the civil servant wrongly filled in another knowing that he'd received other paperwork that could not be right and its status wrongly listed.  But this officer continued with the incorrect assessment which affected the claimant badly and delayed him, thus causing stress and further trouble. 

HMRC TAX DEPARTMENT THREATENS LEGAL ACTION in letter to 69yr old Widow in regard to bill that was incorrectly assigned to her when they knew it was the responsibility of a former employer. Yet they demanded that she paid £217 a month to clear the £2,607 bill of which she was first told to pay within one month.  The pensioner already lived on a strict budget and found coping very difficult.  A watchdog contacted the office, and in seconds the mistake was seen; but only because someone in the newspapers intervened. It is quite clear that they would have hounded her and taken the money --- and never looked to see if it was correct, accusations levelled at the tax staff of bullying and threats is well founded, and someone likened them to back street money-lenders who put the frighteners on debtors --- this describes the Inland Revenue exactly.

FORMER HMRC EMPLOYEE DODGED TAX -- Well versed in the ways of the tax system, JONATHAN HILTON decided not to declare a second job even while working as an official in the Inland Revenue during 2002.  In court it was said that he evaded tax over a 14 year period.  This all came to light during an internal investigation at the HMRC.  He appeared at Manchester Crown Court and was sentenced to fourteen months suspended for twelve months.

CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST HMRC PERSONNEL ARE FLAWED -- Investigations are carried out by the Police Complaints, and as we already know they are notoriously a whitewash in the case of suspected police wrongdoing, so it doesn't carry much weight when one considers they handle criminal charges against tax staff at the Inland Revenue Departments. Our Investigator Richard asked them for details of how many tax people they were currently investigating, how many had been to court and how many had been jailed as a consequence of criminal acts, but they refused to give any information.

TAX INSPECTOR AND TWO STAFF RESIGN over harassment charges by pensioner. A leaked internal memo from one department to another says that 'there is no reason to take the matter of harassment claims against the dept any further as resignations have been accepted and the pensioner has received a full apology for the distress.'  We have learnt since that the tax premises in Bristol have closed and staff moved to other areas??

HMRC face angry Treasury Select Committee over only 40 telephone calls in every 100 are answered by the tax office staff, whereas their published target said only four calls in every hundred can be allowed, which shows what this department is up to. HMRC Chief Executive Dame Leslie Strathie did not seem all that bothered about the horrendous record and glibly said ' Let me accept that as a challenge? '  A thirty minute call held at their office can cost a staggering £12.30 to the worried caller, one pensioner spent £54.12 as he waited two hours on the line. HMRC Managers are to be hauled in over the chaos the dept is causing to the taxpayers.

PAUL FOOT REVEALS LOCAL TAX OFFICE DILEMMA -- Back in the 80's the Investigative Journalist revealed that tax blunders were rife due to the hire of students in many offices, hired to fill the gaps needed of staff away or just not able to cope with workloads. But this led to wrongly assessed people and more outrageously the purge on innocents that became like a game to many of the civil servants that had a free hand to choose what they liked. No proper checks were being made of their work when in fact, they were not properly trained and many could not understand what the system was about anyway. One senior tax officer admitted it was going on, but he did not have the time or resources to put all of it right, ' some things just had to be pushed through right or wrong, and you just hoped the outcome would not seriously get anyone into trouble.' he said.

' Tax Office Cover-Up over Vodafone Interest Mystery '

The more this department try to bury the issue of the unpaid interest involving Vodafone, the more the questions are asked -- without any satisfactory answers?     It became such an issue that the Commons Treasury Select Committee called in top civil servant, Dave Hartnett  who by some strange moves -- became a top official at H.M. Revenue and Customs.   Time and time again Tory backbencher Jesse Norman, pressed him about the ' smelly ' deal that had allowed Vodafone to settle its tax debt which had been overdue and incurring interest, but Hartnett become more unconvincing as he threw in ' Government errors' as a cover-up, and we've heard about these 'errors' that civil servants cling to as a way out to get the public off their backs?    As to the matter of the unpaid interest? well according to law it is a criminal offence not to pay interest on tax owing....but the HMRC is above the law and makes its own rules as we have shown....they have Crown Immunity!!

' Rogue Tax Inspector becomes Whistleblower on HMRC '

PETER CLARE, a former Tax Fraud Investigator with the HMRC for 22 years has appeared on the web offering two CD's of interviews in which he claims to expose the secret and nasty tricks that the civil service staff use on the public in their game of cat and mouse -- which they perversely enjoy!  He cites disgruntled employees who could and did fit up people and fabricate evidence against them.

' USELESS INCOMPETENT HMRC '  --- Mr K. Bland of Isleworth reminds us yet again of the overall incompetence of the Tax civil servants throughout the UK.  He tells us of a demand sent to a client of his telling him to pay a penalty of £100 for non-completion of a tax return.  It wouldn't be so bad if this could be considered a fair mistake? but it wasn't, the man had died two and a half years earlier!!  and what makes matters worse, some idiot member of staff addressed it to ' Mr. P. Warbrick Deceased '  Mr Bland and many others wonder what kind of civil servants are they recruiting and the obvious answer is -- not up to the job and clearly incompetent.

' Tax Inspector is suspended and Arrested '

PRIDE OF THE HMRC MICHAEL ALLCOCK found himself suspended and then arrested when bosses turned against him. Amid rumours of bribery, that never went away, the seemingly successful tax investigator was being accused of 'improper collusion with the Serious Fraud Office '  He was told there was a possibility of charges being brought against him under the 1906 Corruption Act. -- Unfortunately we cannot report any more of this peculiar case because it suddenly went underground and silence followed???

TAX INSPECTOR MICHAEL ALLCOCK FACED THIRTEEN CHARGES OF CORRUPTION.

Research has revealed that Michael Allcock used bullying in his techniques, and was not a pleasant man?  so I guess many ordinary citizens hope that he was prosecuted or even jailed. ( he was jailed see later article)

'Tax Officer in Theft and Burglary '

TAX OFFICER STEVEN SMITH of the Kingswinford area was found guilty at Wolverhampton Crown Court of theft and burglary  --- he stole a key to the property of a woman and took £25 from her purse  --- he was given a community order and court costs of £750, plus an oreder to pay back the money he stole.

CALLOUS ACTS BY HMRC -- Mrs. Brenda Williams tells us a woeful tale of civil servant aggressive behaviour, when she wrote to query a demand sent to her which turned out to be completely wrong and based on the wrong tax assessment and numbers.  She was told by a member of staff ' We don't really care what you think of us, if we say you must pay this then you will or we shall take your house and anything else, we have the power to do so '  After several other attempts and on receiving a notice that a debt agency was now handling the claim she approached a watchdog in her local area for help.  It was just a matter of days and they found that the tax office had made error after error. The ombudsman was sent copies of letters and the HMRC backed off and claimed that somehow she had been given the wrong data.  They never apologised for this harassment and got away with it -- no civil servant was brought up on charges nor identified.

' Tax Officer Accused of Theft '

HMRC's JOHN MEAKIN faced theft charges brought by a member of the public and claimant.  It is said that The Tax Credit Claimant Compliance Officer abused his position and withheld documents in order to disable a valid claim and cause maximum distress.  Of these charges of wilful misconduct, the HMRC said they were looking into the matter and needed time to respond?  Beyond that, they wouldn't comment!  See 'Tax Inspector and two staff resign), as with Meakin, this again was the Bristol HMRC.

HMRC TAX BLUNDERS TO BE WRITTEN OFF --- A report has shown that billions of pounds are to be written off involving unpaid bills that go back several years.  They claim it is a result of the PAYE system going back to 2004. The HMRC are to send out letters to those who overpaid in 2003 to 2004, those who owe will be required to pay £600 each on an average. It says the HMRC has been in a shocking mess for a number of years, but they deny this and do not accept the criticism?    Yes, that is them and business as usual.

' Tax Boss denies Lying '

In the GOLDMAN incident, HMRC boss, Dave Hartnett denied telling lies at a Parliamentary Committee when he was repeatedly accused of lying over a settlement with the U.S. bank Goldman Sachs, which cost the taxpayer almost £8 million. He claimed he had not overseen HMRC's dealings with Goldman. But a leaked confidential document shows that Hartnett had been involved in settling a dispute over taxes with Goldman Sachs. He later admitted to assisting colleagues to deal with the difficult issue??

THE TAX BOSS HAS BEEN OPENLY ACCUSED OF COSYING UP TO CORPORATE TAX AVOIDERS WHILE PENALISING ORDINARY TAXPAYERS.

' Swindling Tax Officer in elaborate fraud '

HMRC TAX OFFICER ELIZABETH GIBSON deceived colleagues and others making claims totalling £58,042 using dead people's identities and non-existent relatives.  To support the fraud she acted as agent in respect of the claims and deposited cash into her own bank account.  It is claimed by the HMRC that they were unaware of this? -- but seven years is hard to swallow despite this feeble claim by the tax authorities.

' H M R C hide errors to stop taxpayer appeals '

Evidence has been revealed that indicates that HMRC is suppressing and concealing mistakes and information from the taxpayers. An internal memo leaked events surrounding secret decision making when dealing with appeals, and shows they are denying leniency in matters of unpaid income tax. It shows that the tax officers chose to conceal the details and went on to demand thousands of pounds despite being able to approach claims fairly.  The discovery of HMRC refusing to accept official employers' forms in appeals cases is widespread in different districts. It showed that many claimants would not get a fair hearing at their appeals.  The memo shows the true arrogance and incompetence at the HMRC.  Experts say the revelations cast grave doubt on the decisions made against more than 100,000 taxpayer's appeals which have been rejected this year alone.

' Tax Officer's Fraud and Double-Dealing '

Assistant Tax Commissioner NICK PETROLOUS was accused of dishonestly benefiting from rulings he gave as 'gamekeeper and Poacher ' in his intentions to deceive and play both sides.  He is said to have received profits from a company to which he ' looked after favourably '.  In court it was heard that he used his position as Senior Tax Officer to obtain information on tax schemes that exploited ' loopholes'  -- he then passed on that information to former associate Richard Morgan who turned it to both their advantages financially.

' Mastermind Taxman behind £4million Scam '

SENIOR REVENUES OFFICER BRENDAN MURPHY of the HMRC appeared before a special sitting of the Circuit Court at Ennis.  The Criminal Assets Bureau's Detective Inspector told the court that he did not believe the story Mr.Murphy gave in evidence and that he masterminded the £4million VAT fraud.  Mr. Murphy pleaded guilty to conspiracy with others to defraud the Revenue Commissioners.

THREATS BY HMRC ARE OUTRAGEOUS SAY TREASURY COMMITTEE --Deputy Chairman of The Treasury Committee, Labour MP George Mudie said ' I think it's disgraceful to treat elderly people and taxpayers in this manner and it offers no respect or concern for the people who pay their wages.'   The Treasury Committee have urged Ministers to make 'Menacing Letters' sent out by the Tax Office illegal in the light of new threatening demands being sent out by the HMRC. Ministers have been asked to urgently consider drafting new regulations to curb the abuse of power the Inland Revenue have at the present time.

TAX OFFICER IN COMPLICITY TO WITHHOLD BENEFITS is now known, PAUL GERRARD has been named in a case as we  cover the issue of penalties the HMRC can inflict at their own discretion on people who 'they believe have cheated the system let alone made a mistake' --- yet by the same token if they make the mistake on the taxpayer they pay nothing, no compensation and nor can they be penalised.  But we are here to remedy that by naming them and we have our first -- Paul Gerrard a taxman in Preston, who is using bullying tactics and more. The case concerns a struggling bookseller in Hampshire whose receipts don't buy the bacon and a little support from tax credits keeps the wolf from the door.  In collusion with John Meakin who arbitrarily axed the credits, he too on the 17th of October acted immediately to close the claim, yet the pair were from two different offices, Meakin at Bristol and Gerrard at Preston, yet they both acted swiftly to end the credits, but Gerrard was prepared to do more. The claimant never received any notice, and Meakin stole his documents. On the 3rd Nov he discovered when ringing Bristol on the letter from Meakin asking for documents, that they'd upped and went leaving a recorded message saying contact Birmingham. The claimant contacted Birmingham and was told his claim had been terminated. Mr Somal told him to appeal and send the appeal immediately. On the 9th Nov, the claimant had to attend an interrogation at Cosham over ID caused by Preston!!  He was successful. On the 10th his appeal had succeeded and was confirmed by Mr.Somal in Birmingham. However, still by the 15th things were not right and Mr.Somal could not understand the delay, Preston were ignoring the decision.  On the 17th Nov two days later and 7 days since the appeal decision, he wrote and said the claim was being shut down,  and on the 21st he confirms that it is his final decision despite being overturned at the appeal. In revenge or an act of vendetta he tells Glasgow to turn the screw and go after the claimant and they issue an overpayment demand. The claimant sent a complaint to Preston on the 13th mentioning the appeal, but they do not reply until the 21st - the same day as Gerrard acts against the claimant, which is more than a coincidence.  The Complaints write to say they will sit out things until the 9th of December, taking nearly a month? yet when Gerrard and Meakin acted together it was done within a day...what does that tell you?   Corruption, nothing less and collusion.

DATA BREACH BY HMRC is down to PAUL GERRARD we can reveal. It appears in a report that 50,000 people suffered as a result of his incompetence and staff at Preston.  Gerrard is the Director of Tax Credits in Preston and Deputy Head of Enforcement no less, and we can also say that it is Gerrard who pushed for compliance investigations in all departments of tax at a meeting with bosses.   It appears after waiting several days to see if things would conveniently blow over, that he had to apologise for the Data Breach which resulted in thousands of people being compromised in having their personal details read by others. Getting details on his personal life is well guarded as we tried to unearth some background on him only just to get as far as his relatives (Denise, Anthony and Winifred). The strange thing here is that he was not called on to resign, yet another officer did, Paul Gray, who caused the data breach allowing details of 25million Child Benefit claimants to go missing on two unsecured disks.  Legal wise -- The law says it is an offence to breach the data protection act -- The Information Commissioner's Office was recently granted powers to fine firms and bodies £500,000 for serious or negligent breaches of the Data Protection Act, but no action was taken against Gerrard, so we can take it that he has pals in the Government prepared to get rid of any occurrences and have him remain immune from prosecution??

We are staying on Paul Gerrard as there is something else not right about this tax officer, and we are following up a lead that has some nasty background to it. At the very least this man is guilty of misconduct and should be dismissed by a Disciplinary Tribunal.

 

A Report to Parliament revealed that 116 HMRC staff have been sacked for 'undisclosed reasons? ' among a total of 369 who have been disciplined.  However it goes onto reveal a more true picture when it says 294 members of staff were sacked in relation to performance issues?  Tory MP Priti Patel asked how many staff were sacked for errors?   The Department replied -- 'It does not record 'error' as a reason for dismissal? As one can see by this report, it doesn't actually reveal anything other than the tax office maintain their secrecy and will not be transparent about anything. It's interesting to note that they led with a claim of 100 instead of the true figure 369.

 

' Inland Revenue telling 'Official' lies over figures '

We can now say categorically that the HMRC lie when publishing or divulging figures on sackings like the above. A former employee who left because they didn't like the way some senior staff dealt with people told us that these official figures were massaged to look less than what they are. He said some people are urged to leave very strongly and when they do, they are not in the official figures.  ' You are taken to one side if you disagree with the aims or work ethics of the Department and you are in no way allowed to comment or say anything against a fellow employee. They are very tight knit and it gets around if you have said the wrong thing or are outspoken. Head of operations or a manager will suggest this is not the job for you and before you know it they are putting pressure on you to leave before they push you out or take a 'sanction' -- this literally means doing a report on you that is not favourable and adding opinions and making references to your unsuitability, and if that doesn't work they make something up that makes working there nearly impossible.  One chap I knew worked to the letter of the department protocol but strayed when he offended a senior member of the Investigative Branch by likening him to Hitler as a joke. But in a matter of weeks he was out, the guy in question with colleagues had embarked on making his life a misery, and after a while he just said he'd had enough and left. the others claimed that he would have been sacked, but I doubt that because he was a pleasant sort; not like many others, who actually cared about the public.

' Former taxman is jailed for fraud '

HMRC Employee ERROL MARK was jailed for four years after defrauding his bosses the Inland Revenue out of £185,000. The former tax officer arranged false tax repayments over a period of four years before being caught out.  he created fictitious records to generate repayments on tax actually never paid, and covered his tracks by using false passwords and created identities.  it was said in court that his scheme was hard to detect and his skill to deceive had been remarkable in that it lasted four years.

TAXMAN DELIBERATELY DELAYS CLAIM -- We have come across a case where the Preston Office of the HMRC have deliberately gone out of their way to delay a process on a claim. We can confirm that they knew about an order to reinstate a claim issued from Birmingham after a successful appeal by the claimant. An officer told us that he was amazed to find that the claim had not been rectified by Preston as he'd already issued a notice on the computer, which they would have seen, but did nothing about it. We have learned that the order had been put out the same day of the appeal and the staff in Preston would have had it several days. no other conclusion can be arrived at other than a deliberate attempt to interfere with the claim. We also have confirmation that the Birmingham Tax Office deliberately do not answer back on telephone calls, and one case in particular said they left a message every day for more than a week and no one bothered to get back to them?

' HMRC break Data Protection Laws '

THOUSANDS OF TAX CREDIT DETAILS WERE SENT OUT TO THE WRONG PEOPLE -- The HMRC said they were sent out ' Accidentally' but we can tell you they do not 'accidentally' do anything, quite the contrary in fact.  A Spokesperson used that tired phrase -- 'error' to describe the appalling Data Protection Breach, which is for mere mortals against the law, but not for the HMRC of course as they are above it.  A Greater Manchester recipient got her neighbour's details of earnings, bank account records and more -- which could have been used in ID theft, a charge they level at many taxpayers!!  Several thousand people received other taxpayers personal and private details because of the HMRC -- and we are told that all of this originated in the Preston Tax Offices.

SEE THE PAUL GERRARD ARTICLE ABOVE and why he was not ordered to resign?

TAX AUTHORITIES CONCEAL MISTAKES ---  Workers at several tax districts throughout the UK, London, Newcastle, Preston, Bristol and Birmingham have had their lies exposed in a 'leaked Memo' sent to the Mail Newspaper.  It showed that 1241,000 people had applied for the A19 concession, and as many as 5.7million people had paid the wrong tax.  It showed that when the taxmen realised they'd made mistakes they levied these on the taxpayer.  It also revealed that they fail to act on information requested and sent by claimants, or simply ignore it, thus causing stress and great problems for the individual.  The HMRC make the hollow claim of 'sorting things out quickly ', but we have evidence that this is a complete fabrication of the truth.

On one rejected appeal -- it said Mr. Williams had queried his bill as he knew it was incorrect. However, the HMRC mistakenly in posting a reply - enclosed an internal memo not meant for him nor to be seen by him -- from a technical advisor to a tax officer telling him a very different story. revealing the deceit by HMRC managers.

' Insider Dealing Taxman is jailed '

BIRMINGHAM TAX INSPECTOR LAWRENCE CHAMPION of Harborne Park Road, Harborne was discovered to have abused and used his position as assistant technical administrator in the Capital Gains and Clearance Section at the Inland Revenue Office to make a profit of £15,000 with insider dealing. He pleaded guilty to 13 counts of Insider dealing in court.  Being able to access all the information needed, he confessed to using confidential data regarding company take-overs received at the Solihull Office which enabled him to buy the shares at a low price.  50 year old Champion was suspended without pay once the trading was exposed. The money was said to have supported his children's school fees. He worked at the Solihull Tax Office. He was sent to Prison for six months. (May 7. 2000)

HMRC SUSPECTED OF CORRUPTION OVER CORPORATE DEALS -- The National Audit Office is to go up against the might of the Inland Revenue to investigate the 'cosy deals' with Vodafone and Goldman Sachs. It says outsiders will be brought in to scrutinize goings on at the HMRC, as they revealed they need tax experts to uncover impropriety and underhand deals struck behind closed doors.

' Former Tax Inspector 'Untruthful ' about assets '

A HIGH COURT JUDGE WARNED TAXMAN MR SHAY DALY that he could face jail if he did not disclose the full extent of his assets to the court within two weeks.  The Judge said that his answers and disclosure presented was 'untruthful' in the case of ACC Bank and Inland Revenue seeking to get back £4.5million.

UK REVENUE AND CUSTOMS ASSIST FRAUD OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUPER RICH -- Martin Deighton in a letter explained how the HMRC were making it easy for the yacht owning rich to grab half of their tax money back in '  reclaimed expenses called business amenities set up as tax losses.  The Tax collected is around £160 billion, but £80billion is paid back. He mentions ' Carousel Fraud' which enables 'criminal elements' to illegitimately reclaim around £200 billion in VAT, all negotiated and done with ease and expertise. he says the cost of administering the reclaimed tax and paying it back is staggering and not something they are willing to discuss.

£75,000 FRAUD BY HMRC OFFICER -- LEIGH HAY is to stand trial for fiddling the Inland Revenue out of £75,000.  The Tax Credits Team Leader who worked at the Dundee HMRC is accused of committing fraud.  It is said she engaged in forgery on two claims.  Her trial at the time of this notice was still ongoing, she is to appear at The Sheriff's Court in Dundee.  (2017)

THE HMRC COMPLAINTS THAT ISN'T --- The farcical nature of the HMRC is to put up a Government website that tells you how to complain, but not exactly where? it can and does tell you to leave the matter in the hands of the department you wish to complain about? which is like letting the enemy decide your fate. Anyone can see at first glance that this is not suitable at all and is a scandal. It mentions getting small payments if the the tax office caused you worry, handled your complaint badly, or took too long -- but try and get this? and in more cases than not you will be told they don't pay costs or compensation by many staff. They and this goes for most of them, do not even know what the rules are or the pages on the HMRC.Gov site. They also have contact us, but not by e-mail, one click on that meets a dead end, and a flimsy explanation saying how much they'd like to be able to deal with e-mails!! ---Government Joke -- and in pretty bad taste.  All in all, the complaints procedures are not worth a bean and anyone going on the site are wasting their time.

HMRC WORKER IN FALSE CLAIMS CASE --  HMRC Helpline Officer SUZANNE WILSON admitted to a fraud involving around £30,000.  It was said in court that she involved her 60yr old mother, encouraging her to fabricate letters and produce false accounting documents in claims for childcare.  The Newcastle Crown Court Judge gave Wilson a 12 month suspended sentence, and ordered her to carry out 240 hours of Community Service.  (2012)

£100 MILLION POUNDS SPENT ON STAFF TRAINING IS A WASTE SAY WATCHDOG ON HMRC SPENDING -- The latest report condemns the huge spending bill of £100million on one year training courses for staff. The National Audit Office said these courses for the 2010/2011 period had revealed a poor benefit in terms of money spent. It was hard to conjure up 38percent of staff who claimed they'd learnt something. One in five said they didn't really like working at HMRC and wanted to leave?  The Audit Office said the scheme lacked strategy hence the poor figures and waste.  The tax organisation had taken on 730,000 courses and spent on average £1,419 on each member of staff in order to improve the system. It would be fair to say this was a failure as staff we have featured here do not possess any skills in handling taxpayers properly and with decency Mr.Gerrard!!

'HMRC Tax Officer is Jailed for 18 months'

TRACEY OAKLEY worked at the HMRC Office in St Austell, Cornwall.  It was said in court she swindled the Inland Revenue out of £93,000 in tax credits, despite knowing she had falsified her own claim entering her status as single when she was not.  She entered a plea of guilty at the Truro Crown Court.  (2013)

INLAND REVENUE AND MONEY-LAUNDERING CONNECTION --- Concerns are growing over how the HMRC are actively helping crime bosses and syndicates, prostitution rings and other illegal operations to launder millions of pounds every year.  Andrew Alderson in his article of 7th Dec 2011 points out criminals are using the HMRC to set up and take over illegal companies, bogus claims and predictions of company profits so that they can offload ' dirty money' from crime and then wait for a rebate - refund from overpaid tax -- which turns crime cash into clean currency!!

DIRTY LITTLE 'FISHING TRIPS' BY HMRC -- Devious, underhand, corrupt, yes, possibly all three -- yes, it's the HMRC Business Records Check -- When Inspectors randomly and otherwise pick out names for their ' inquisition practices' -- they merely just mail a businessman, company or individual and tell them they wish to call on them.  One accountant says - ' These checks are not for the client's benefit at all, it's just an excuse for a fishing trip expedition in the hope they get a reason to claim extra tax -- and as a warning he said -- 'every answer can be twisted and perverted (just like the inspectors themselves) so say very little and reply cautiously '

' Suspended sentence for Former Tax Inspector '

TAX INSPECTOR RICHARD GRIFFITHS from Bridgend was sentenced to a 10 month suspended prison sentence after he pleaded guilty in court. He was convicted of running an illegal money-lending operation that had 54 customers. It is said that he set up the loan company so that he could spy on women.  It was stated that he chose single women and women who were in a dire financial position, some of whom were on benefit.  It was revealed that he had no licence as a money-lender or loan company.  And they discovered after raiding his home that he had benefitted to the tune of £12,370 in the unlawful enterprise.  The report said that he refused to co-operate with police over identifying his victims --- he also was said to have targeted the most vulnerable people in society.  (23/2/2010) Cardiff Crown Court.

TAX OFFICE AT PRESTON SUPPRESSES INFO ON REDUCTION OF PUBLIC SERVICES -- Preston Tax Office came in for criticism by the Union PCS over its high handed tactics in reducing opening hours to the public, which would seriously hinder the tax payer. The union said that the HMRC did not consider anyone else in its move to force people to go online whether they liked it or not.  They did liaise with the union on the matter, and that this was typical 'running roughshod' over anyone else.

HMRC WRITE OFF £27BILLION BUT ONLY FOR THE CORPORATIONS -- The Inland Revenue could not prevent a report showing them having to write off 27.4 billion pounds in five years to corporations and those who could afford to challenge them. Ordinary taxpayers were treated entirely differently and of course ended up footing most of the revenue the tax man wanted.  Letting off the big firms is not new in tax circles, the denials from them have always been seen as lies and mistruths.  Getting any information about the Inland Revenue is difficult and often blocked by the powers that be.

IN 2008 THE TAXMAN IDENTIFIED 57 BARRISTERS AS FAILING TO NOTIFY THE INLAND REVENUE in regard to unpaid tax -- As yet, this has not led to any prosecutions?

'HMRC Officer in £1.2 million PAYE Fraud'

Working as an 'Insider' for 14 other people, Tax Administration Officer MICHAEL KITCHEN made 158 transactions for defrauding the tax system while he was on allocating PAYE accounts it was said in court.  It was said in court that he diverted £1.2 million in the enterprise using a very sophisticated fraud system.  He was jailed with his fellow conspirators when he was sentenced at Liverpool Crown Court.

FORMER TAXMAN WARNS HMRC AGAINST THE SUSPICION OF CORRUPTION -- Claude Currey of Portishead, Somerset, a taxman for 42 years both at the Customs and Excise and re-developed Revenue and Customs HMRC, warns the staff and Inspectors about perks and hospitality new taxmen take up raising the suspicion of corruption. He tells how it was thought risky accepting a cup of tea or coffee at most and that management stressed they were never to accept hospitality in case it was seen as accepting bribes. He says today's standards have slipped in the HMRC which is very sad by those in the organisation ready to accept big bonuses and hospitality packages so readily.

LIES AND MORE DAMN LIES AT HMRC - It appears they tell all investigators to say the same thing in parrot fashion, -- 'We want the money to go to the right people who need the help' --- so this validates their extreme campaigns to pick on anyone, because who is going to check to see if that's what they are doing? good question, but you will not get an answer that satisfies.  Recent news tells us that two out of three big firms win over VAT payments, and the taxman has been accused of serving up fines in order to confuse while penalties relating to tax disputes have been overturned on mass.  The report says that thousands of taxpayers have been unjustly penalised and where not equipped to challenge the HMRC decisions while big business had a field day getting cash back.  25,633 tax decisions were found to be incorrect. Their arrogance even stretches to them saying that even if a decision 'appears' wrong it doesn't mean that the figure was wrongly levied?

' HMRC Taxman fiddles on benefits '

TAXMAN DANIEL BELL of West Lothian, an HMRC Tax officer was found guilty of a £6,000 fraud.  In court he pleaded guilty to falsely claiming £3,413 in benefits during 2007 to 2010, and falsely claiming travel expenses amounting to £2,907 in 2009.

THE HMRC IN 2008 ADMIT TO HAVING DISMISSED 610 MEMBERS OF STAFF from various tax departments over a three year period and 192 members of staff disciplined in 2007 to 2008. This report was followed by insider claims that the figures were massaged in order to lessen the impact.

HMRC TOLD TO PAY COMPENSATION OF £100,000 -- Judy Clements of the Adjudicator's Office stated that complaints have risen sharply in just one year over the way the HMRC sought repayments even though they'd already been paid.  She accused them of targeting pensioners and vulnerable groups of people having to pay unexpected tax bills, which they didn't understand. She said most of the complaints came over the way they are dealing with tax credits and as a result of failures by tax staff who fail to act on information it had been supplied.

THE HMRC AND THE CARELESS MISTAKES LEAD TO SUSPENSION OF A PENALTY -- Phil Benwick a Director of Tax investigation admitted in a case that the tone of the correspondence sent by the HMRC was not appropriate for an unrepresented taxpayer according to the guidelines because there was no dialogue about the error and what category it fell in. he accepted it was a mistake on behalf of the department.

'Former HMRC Taxman in £190,000 Fraud '

TAXMAN CRAIG GORDON went on trial in Edinburgh for defrauding his bosses of £190,000.  It was stated that he committed the offence while being employed at the HMRC Lothian 2 Area in Broomfield Drive, and formed a fraudulent scheme to obtain money.  It was said he set up a business called Capital Tax Services, opened a bank account under a false name and created false income tax repayment claims, and then as a tax officer, processed them for repayment. Interestingly, he has claimed that other people did it in his defence!  (FEB 2008)

HMRC INVOLVED IN MAKING NUISANCE CALLS --- Nuisance telephone calls are an offence according to the Telecommunications Watchdog, yet the HMRC have been making around 300,000 of these, and getting away with it due to their immunity.  The menacing silent phone calls were instigated by their automated dialling systems which chase late payments it is said, However, Lib Dem MP John Hemming said the practice must end and warned the HMRC it risked fines of up to £50,000 each one. The Ofcom Regulator said ' It is quite clear that the taxman is responsible for persistent nuisance calls'  One other MP remarked that the HMRC should be fined £15billion -- the culmination of 300,000 calls, and that they should appear in a public court charged and found guilty.

TAX OFFICER IN HMRC COMMITS FRAUD -- EMMA CHANTLER of Atherton appeared at Manchester Crown Court, where it was said she claimed around £40,000 to which she was not entitled.  Her position with HMRC was a Contact Centre Manager.  She was sentenced to 36 weeks in jail suspended for a year, and given a 160 hour Community Order.  (2014)

SUCCESSFUL CHALLENGES ON HMRC HAVE QUADRUPLED -- Due to major errors by the HM Revenue and Customs, challenges that overturned their judgements have soared by four times.  446 complaints handled by the Adjudicator were upheld in 2009, and in 2008 out of 229 cases -- 108 claims were successful.

THE HMRC AND THE PHONE LINE SCAM --- The Money Mail reports of the HMRC phone line that intentionally keeps people on hold for up to 30 minutes, and then redirects the person to their Internet site before cutting them off.  The Mail also claims that they have revealed cover-ups, evidence of tax errors and ineptitude such as: Failure to respond to letters and phone calls --- Giving out incorrect and misleading advice to pensioners  --- Sending out aggressive and threatening demands -- Showing a lack of consistency in dealing with appeals. It also points out that accountability is zero, as we said at the beginning of this list --- there is no Cabinet Minister specifically dealing with the HMRC, and this comes as a stark fact and worry when you find out that all other departments are responsible to a Minister in The House Of Commons.

'Two and a half years jail for thieving tax man '

HMRC  OVERPAYMENT TAX OFFICER GEOFFREY ELEY is jailed for stealing.  Civil Servant Eley was at the HMRC in the 'Overpayment' benefits section collecting overdue payments from taxpayers.  He appeared before Hereford Crown Court to answer charges of theft, in which it was said that he visited businesses and door-to-door individuals between 2001 and 2007 taking cash payments from 15 taxpayers, which he then kept for himself.  To keep the scam safe he gave them photocopies of official receipts so that they would believe that they had actually paid their tax.  It was said in court that he had been with the Inland Revenue for 27 years. (21/6/2010)

' The HMRC Bribes Scandal '

THE JAILING OF MICHAEL ALLCOCK who worked at the Inland Revenue Special Office No 2 for accepting cash bribes to support a lavish lifestyle has initiated calls for another corruption investigation into the HMRC; especially in the light that Allcock was one of their top investigators. Members of the Commons Public Accounts Committee are being pushed by another former taxman John Gwyer, to look into matters more closely when they question Inland Revenue Chairman Montagu about Allcock and the freedom he had to move around in that allowed bribery to take place.

Note: Allcock is being sued by the HMRC for the return of £150,000 he took in bribes.

'H.M.R.C. Lose tax evasion case against Rednapp '

THE TAX OFFICE PURSUED HARRY REDNAPP FOR 6 YEARS ACCUSING HIM OF CORRUPTION AND TAX EVASION, the case cost the taxpayer £8million and was backed by the CPS. In court barristers for the HMRC accused him of criminal activities and secretly hiding money in off-shore accounts. Mr.Rednapp told of the sheer pressures inflicted on him by the tax people, making his life a hell. The spokesman for the Inland Revenue acted unconcerned and just said they did what was necessary to stem tax offenders. It is time, and we hope that Mr.Rednapp sues the Inland Revenue for multi thousands for bringing criminal charges against him. £5.5 million would be a fair price for the HMRC to pay in this case.

ANOTHER CASE OF VICTIMISATION BY HMRC -- The VAT Inspectors swooped on Richard Williams of Leeds who has a scaled replica of a U-Boat. They arrested him as part of a fraud probe. His German type U-Boat was modelled and converted from a narrow boat to be a floating museum. A Spokesman -- Mike O'Grady of the HMRC was vague as usual as he pattered out the 'party line' saying the 64 year old was on their list and investigation into VAT fraud called Operation Cloudcastle looking into the laundering of criminal profits?? no doubt they think Mr.Williams the 'Mr.Big'. Maybe their probe into his U-Boat my unearth some nasty German Troops with treasures hidden from the war!!

TAX BOSS DAVID HARTNETT IS REPLACED BY  CIVIL SERVANT OF CHAOTIC BORDER AGENCY FARCE -- The press are quick to point out the reward for failure is another top job for LIN HOMER who took around a £1million in salary for the border agency position.  Despite scandals surrounding her last post she has now been made chief executive of the Inland Revenue. 

' Whistleblower's Tribunal claim reveals deceit and malpractice in HMRC '

TAX INSPECTOR ALAN CURTIS appeared as a whistleblower when he stood before a tribunal explaining why he was unfairly ruled out over pay. He stated that he had been examining other officers work and taking details of how they fiddled tax details.  He said they unfairly charged traders too much tax to make it look as if they had successfully solved cases and in turn, deserved performance related pay bonuses. He said hundreds of thousands of pounds had been illicitly obtained from unsuspecting businessmen. He named Mr IAN LOBLEY an Area Manager for local compliance at the Reading Office and IAN RAWLINSON as being involved in a conspiracy to cover-up in a case file. He condemned the practice as a 'criminal offence'.  He also added that since 2008 and 2009 he had been on the receiving end of persecution for raising the matter. He said certain colleagues at the office deliberately over-taxed businessmen so that they could boost their pay packets. Of course, the Tribunal went against him saying that he brought the allegations forward because of a grudge.....but the grudge element was not proved only suggested, and although they dismissed what he said, there is no reason to believe it was not true....because as we have seen before, when employees get annoyed, they often have the courage to tell all....and what he has told has a ring of truth about it.

Further details in the Curtis v Commissioners for the HMRC says he was accused of making 'protected disclosures' available to the taxpayer, sending one man a letter in which he said 'he believed the HMRC was involved in corrupt practices concerning the assessment of individual taxpayer's tax liabilities.  'corruption in the HMRC' was how he put it.  Amazingly, the Commissioners decided his letter to the taxpayer was 'very clearly capable of bringing HMRC into disrepute'....which we very much doubt, obviously they don't read how much the public distrust them.  To our way of thinking, this was an exercise in gagging, apractise employed by HMRC on numerous occasions.

TAX OFFICER CREATES FALSE ACCOUNTS IN FRAUD --- JONATHAN DAVIES, a Revenue Executive Officer at the Wrexham Tax Office, was jailed for eighteen months after admitting to three counts of conspiracy to defraud. He created bogus National Insurance Numbers and a network of false accounts, nominating several friends who would receive the payments. He falsified all the tax returns and managed the whole fraud methodically it was said at Mold Crown Court. He was incidentally, promoted just days before his arrest and said the reason for his crime was that he earned low wages.  (he was a £15,000 a year executive in June 2004)

£2.3MILLION WAS STOLEN BY HMRC STAFF IN 2008 --- An internal memo of findings of fraud inside the Inland Revenue revealed that a clerk stole £220,000 from taxpayers and a senior member of staff fabricated her expenses claim to obtain £100,000 by deception. Nine people were convicted of serious criminal offences and others disciplined were allowed to resign. A total of over two million pounds were lost to those inside the tax office during a twelve month period. A report in the following year said that fiddling in the HMRC had actually increased and the figure of £3.6million was put forward.

'HMRC Employee in Tax Credits Fraud'

TAX EMPLOYEE BOLANTE SHOTE appeared before Basildon Crown Court, charged with falsely obtaining tax credits to the value of £86,000 according to HMRC paperwork (and assessments?)....often greatly exaggerated.  Shote pleaded guilty to ten offences of dishonesty, and resigned from the HMRC in November 2013...she was jailed for 8 months.  (Jan 2015)

TAX INSPECTORS SNOOPED ON 25 MILLION --Branded as Intrusive --They logged in details of anything and everything that could be either misconstrued or vaguely taxable that added value to properties including sideline activities, even charity work, in order to get more tax revenue.  This intrusive information was gathered secretly and ordered by HMRC bosses. Minister Eric Pickles said he was appalled by the extent of the intrusion into privacy by tax inspectors. He promised to reign in their right to enter and access properties on a mere whim or suspicion.

TAX INSPECTOR FOUND GUILTY OF EXPENSES --- Tax Inspector JOHN EVANS appeared before a tribunal after his own employers the HMRC looked through six years of records when Evans left the tax office.  They discovered that during the six years, he had been overclaiming on employment expenses. The tribunal charged him tax penalties for negligence?  (7th March 2010)

PETTY CASH COMPENSATION PAYOUT BY HMRC FOR CAUSING DISTRESS  --- If you qualify? Yes folks they come up with a piggybank sum of £25 for any injustice, distress and alarm etc, so don't spend it all at once -- but if it's the other way around you could well face a penalty of hundreds or thousands of pounds? fair justice eh?

HMRC INJUSTICE -- The taxation of Savings Income, a tax on interest, according to annoyed David Cardale of Tetbury in Gloucester. He says that this tax on interest -- already negative after inflation -- is pure confiscation and a blatant injustice perpetrated by the Inland Revenue.

' Tax Inspector goes to jail for fraud '

TAX INSPECTOR MARK RICHARD BAKER created 44 false identities in order to make tax repayments to himself -- Swindon Crown Court heard that Baker who worked at the Swindon HMRC defrauded the taxpayer out of £300,000. The Judge said he had misused his position!  Baker was jailed for three and a half years.

Update.  Baker was brought back to court where the Judge ordered him to pay back £63,909 of his ill-gotten gains or face a further two years in jail.  Apparently, Baker was a 'Repayment Security Officer' with HMRC whose job it was to detect under-payers of income tax?

THE DENIED HMRC FINANCIAL INCENTIVES -- Every time they were asked about the incentive question, the HMRC denied all knowledge -- but a Freedom of Information request revealed it did exist. A Grade 7 member such as an Inspector gets a bonus of £1,549 on top of around £51,000 a year. All employees who deliver a high level of performance and behaviour which exceeds the required standard level set, can receive bonuses or promotion known as ' A Performance Award'

TAX OFFICER IN £3 MILLION FRAUD IS JAILED -- A Tax Administrator, IMRAN AJAIB worked at the Yorkshire, Shipley branch of the HMRC for just six months, in which time he passed on confidential data to use in a multi-million pound scam with others.  The info about company's details were passed to the members in order to claim £3 million in rebate payments.  Bradford Crown Court heard how bogus addresses and false bank accounts were drawn up, and false applications submitted for tax repayments. Ajaib from Bristol, was jailed for 2yrs-9months.

'HMRC 'Secret Tax Policy' revealed in ruined fraud case'

The Judge at Leeds Crown Court hit out at the HMRC over a 'secret policy' they had NOT TO PROSECUTE fraudsters who may have cheated the taxpayers out of millions in a car scam. This revelation happened when a case against nine defendants collapsed. The Judge discovered that not only he, but the Police and CPS were unaware of the HMRC Policy, when they were informed by a tax official that two of the men accused were given immunity from prosecution. The Judge told the Inland revenue that huge amounts of time had been wasted and a police investigation to get the case to court. The wasted costs were said to be approximately £500,000?

FIFTEEN MILLION CALLS UNANSWERED AND IGNORED BY HMRC --- One in four taxpayers are unable to discuss their tax problems or get a polite reply, that should be protocol.  Only 74 per cent of callers were actually able to speak to someone.  A consumer group said 'it is like a lottery where most of us lose' and that can have dire effects for many callers who are caught up in a claim. They actually say they have improved and admitted to only 48 per cent getting through to an advisor in 2010. (And in that year they claimed improvement, familiar?)

In 2010 there were 73,455 complaints lodged against the HMRC -- During the period of eighteen months April 2010 to September 2011 it only revealed that 212 behaviour related complaints had been investigated categorising them as 'compliance stream work' so as to avoid comment on the majority of the other complaints received??

HMRC CONCEALS ERRORS TO CURB REFUNDS -- Money Mail informed the public that they had been able to get a look at a secret confidential internal memo that revealed the HMRC was actively hiding mistakes by staff and inspectors, concealing vital information and did so in order to lessen claims for refunds that would have been due.  One notable comment they singled out was the following -- ' Although we made errors, the taxpayer should have picked up on them and pointed them out, which I know seems unjust'  -- which more or less says - if they don't call us (catch us) -- we don't call them'

HMRC INSPECTOR and his Lesbian Fetish --- One of Cynthia Payne's clients at the later described ' house of personal services, sex, spanking and ill-repute' by the court, was a Tax Inspector (un-named) who wanted to pretend to be a lesbian. This was mentioned in the autobiography book - 'An English Madam' by Paul Bailey.

HMRC DIRECTOR FEATURED IN PROGRAMME OF TAX AVOIDANCE - The Director Phil Hodkinson ducked and dived turning black into white as the programme made suggestions of him being involved with an 'off-shore- Guernsey Company who were implementing measures to avoid paying tax in the UK....this link went onto involve the HMRC debt collecting Agency APEX which was connected in the equation. It was evidently clear that some sort of 'slight of hand' manoeuvres were being made by the group he was involved in! 

TAX INSPECTOR OVERCLAIMED EXPENSES FOR SIX YEARS -- Chief Taxman Mr Evans got the post of Clerk to the Commissioners, a job that involved attending and overseeing tax tribunal hearings. He had just left the HMRC....who kindly looked at his tax situation and discovered that he had been over-claiming on his expenses for six years!  The HMRC charged him tax penalties for negligence?

HMRC BEHAVIOUR REPORTED TO ADJUDICATOR --- Tax Man threatens yet again, not surprising having seen all these items about the Inland Revenue -- all a fact, and every item true.  Taxpayer Brian Costigan was suddenly presented with a tax bill of £2,500 in 2010...... he was a victim of the HMRC Chaos......he'd retired at the age of 60, so he decided to help in the local charity shop Age Concern.  It was a part-time job and he did everything by the book -- sent in a P46 form, and thought no more about it.  Then in 2010 he received the bill for unpaid tax 2008/9 and 2009/10... he found that the HMRC had awarded him two personal allowances -- one for his pension, and one for the small salary at Age Concern....which had triggered this bill because of their negligence and in-house accounting....they have told him they want £57 a month.....for a clerical error and negligence on their part.

'Customer Advisor at HMRC given Suspended Sentence'

In 2016 REBECCA GRAY who worked at the HMRC advising on Tax Credits, admitted to fraudulently obtaining and claiming tax benefits when she appeared at Walsall Magistrates Court.  The court expressed shock at the fact she advised others on benefits and tax while carrying out a plan to help herself to taxpayers money by fraudulent means.  They gave her a 2 year suspended prison sentence, and she was dismissed from her position at the tax office.  (2016)

HMRC WHISTLEBLOWER GROUP - 'DISSENT' have said they will expose abuse of expenses and benefits by Senior Management.  The disgruntled workers in the HMRC say they have members with similar aims are in every tax office in the UK. They claim that they have taken the blame for far too long while Senior Management have stood by enjoying fiddling the system without being brought to book.

THE SHAMEFUL PENALTY CHARGES LEVIED BY THE HMRC -- A report says that 850,000 people are about to face the dreadful £100 penalty, that is neither fair or justifiable in a 'natural justice' belief held by the public but rarely called for.  They say the £100 is demanded if even if you don't owe any tax just because it is late, and it covers tax already paid...its just about their 'jobs worth form'......its strange how this can be regarded as legal, yet if you sent them a bill for their lateness or negligence, you're not entitled to a penny....in fact it did say on a form where you complain...that you 'may' get £25 or a payment?     so as you see it doesn't work fairly at all, your demand for recompense is examined by them before they pay, and it's not even an independent investigation into your complaint...the aggressor gets to decide.....and your only course is the Ombudsman, but he has no power with the Inland Revenue to make them pay anything.......and after that you are left unable to sue them.

'Suspended Sentence for former HMRC Employee'

INLAND REVENUE'S KAY MAXWELL decided to steal around £40,000 in tax credits, and falsify her own claim.  It states that she was a tax employee at the Newcastle Contact Centre as an Advisor.  She was arrested in 2016, she had been a HMRC employee for 13 years.  She claimed tax credits from 2011 to 2016.  She was given a suspended jail sentence at South Tyneside Magistrates Court in October.

HMRC MAKE ANOTHER BLUNDER -  Anna suddenly received a notice out of the blue informing her that they had changed her tax code.  Anna could not find out why or how this should be as nothing in her circumstances had changed.  Even when she approached them they led her in a merry dance of circles.  Eventually after making a complaint they said there had been an error, but it would take a year to amend the mistake.....and told her the problem was really hers!  Not satisfied Anna hit back, and sometime later they apologised and put her code right.

'Thieving Taxman'

TAXMAN JAILED FOR STEALING -- WILLIAM FRANKLIN, Tax Advisor, handled the accounts of a Surrey Solicitors -- was found guilty of stealing £1.8 million.  He admitted to 217 counts of deception at Woking Magistrates Court, and was sentenced to seven and a half years in prison.

BUNGLING TAXMAN HELD TO ACCOUNT? -- Service, Particularly Customer Service and The HMRC have lurched downwards for years according to James Coney of The Mail.  He cites a NAO report that the targets the Tax Organisation sets itself are way below similar public bodies.  One of those targets was to answer fifty-eight per cent of telephone calls made by the public.....

THE IPCC SAY INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS AT HMRC ARE WOEFULLY INADEQUATE -- The Police Investigation Authority have said that Internal Investigation Processes at HMRC are 'Woefully Inadequate' and that things are not getting better despite targets being issued and later being missed.

HMRC RESIGNATIONS ON THE INCREASE -- A Report has revealed that they are up by 45 percent in just one year - 2011 -- Forty Two managers gave in their resignations in 2011 to 2012.  In the year 2010 it was only 29.  It is said that some of the resignations centred around the PAYE Code mistakes....an insider said quietly, 'you could also not rule out the working tax credit situation -- things have not been going well there either'

'HMRC Staff Tutor in £15,000 Fraud'

TAX CIVIL SERVANT FIONA LYNCH was found guilty of dishonesty when she appeared before Livingston Sheriff's Court in the West Lothians. It is said she blatantly claimed £15,000 in tax credits to which she was not entitled to over a five year period.  After pleading guilty to the offences she was ordered to do 300 hours of community work and pay back the money.  (Aug 2017)

HMRC NEW TAX 'IT' SYSTEM CAUSES  WIDESPREAD ERRORS --- The HMRC merged 12 regional computers into one system --- which caused widespread errors with tax bills affecting around six million people, who are now to be reimbursed for making overpayments.  An Insider who said 'they wish to remain anonymous' said of the new system, 'when a mistake is made, it's a big one, and very instant'  they blamed this on those who were running the system ' the intellectual quality is just not there, errors are commonplace '  It is said that the merger of the 12 regional computers has sent the tax coding system into chaos.

HMRC CHIEF HUMILIATED IN QUESTIONING BY PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE -- David Hartnet the former boss of HMRC found himself being grilled by Margaret Hodge Chairman of The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee over a deal that let Goldman Sachs get off with a deal involving only £10million of tax. He was criticised for for a failure to seek proper legal advice involving specialists and not taking notes during negotiations with big companies.  When he retired he did a deal with the HMRC to work for up to 40 days, and the pay is not being disclosed!

HMRC LOSE £2.36 BILLION MOSTLY OVER MISTAKES!  The National Audit Office reported that the conservative estimate of £1.6billion was lost by the HMRC as a result of mistakes in their tax assessment departments rather than fraud by claimants.  The report went on to take its usual course of exonerating the tax principles, rather than own up to its own dodges and short-comings...and as reports usually go...tell of how they are managing to over come difficulties despite missing their targets?

'HMRC Lies revealed - Lawyers tactics'

As the Public become more aware of the 'gagging' orders frequently put in place by government on civil servants; something that has been going on for many years, we managed to search out and contact a 'victim' employee of the HMRC and their lawyers.   Mr R. says he was unfairly made the scapegoat in an incident when he pointed out to Senior Staff at the HMRC that they had deliberately tampered with paperwork that clearly showed they had compromised a claimant wrongly (but wouldn't own up to it) -- deciding in their 'wisdom' to carry on with the 'cover-up' and action against the claimant knowing that they had found an error, because it would show them in a bad light and lead to recording the incident showing faults in the tax system.    When Mr R. appeared at a tribunal for the Inland Revenue (already geared up to win against the appellant), he was told by their impressive group of lawyers (who'd arrived mob handed), that he was only to reply and say what they had briefed him to say (even though it wasn't the truth).  One lawyer took him to one side ' failure to repeat what they had told him may have an effect on your employment at HMRC' he said reminding him of the consequences of making the Inland Revenue look bad.  When Mr R. read what he was told to say prior to going into the tribunal, he said he couldn't agree with the prepared statement and wasn't willing to be involved in a lie and cover-up.  This caused a bit of a shock to the lawyers gathered, and within minutes he was withdrawn as a witness and told he was not needed.  Mr R. said he was willing to go in, but only to tell the truth...but at that point he was barred from entering the tribunal that had got under way.   Within a month following that day, he found himself 'dismissed' and his employment terminated on the grounds of misconduct --- and to make matters worse, he suddenly became aware that his colleagues deserted him, and the union didn't want to know; even though the literature and conditions of membership said they were there to protect the rights of members in all kinds of disputes arising from their employment.  One other worker eventually told him that they were not allowed to converse with him because a 'gagging order' was invoked preventing discussing anything with him, 'you don't say anything against management or other employees, you should know that'

'Corrupt Taxman is jailed for 4 years'

It was said in Court that JOHN FIDDLER stole around 250,000 pounds from the taxpayer at his tax office in Bootle on Merseyside, where he accessed tax details for people who he had met in the Public House.  Liverpool Crown Court learned that he had set up and authorised false tax rebates and sent out cheques to the people he had met.  In order to cover his tracks, he created false documents to back up the many refunds.  He also had help from and recruited HMRC colleague MARIE TILL, and for her part in the tax fraud, she was jailed for ten months.   (2nd Feb/2004)

HMRC CIVIL SERVANT ARRESTED IN CORRUPT PAYMENTS PROBE -- An un-named tax employee was caught by the police team investigating phone hacking 'Operation Elveden'   The civil servant a 50 yr old man was taken with a female from their North-West London home to the Central London Police Station in connection with the making of corrupt payments and on suspicion of misconduct in public office.

CUSTOMS CORRUPTION CASE ORDERED TO STOP BY GOVERNMENT -- The Government ordered police to drop a corruption case against the HMRC Customs Department involving 20 customs officers.....An investigation by the police which had cost the taxpayer £5.5million and six years, was unexpectedly brought to a sudden halt by the government.  Customs Director Terry Byrne and HMRC Lawyer David Pickup, were ordered to stay away from their offices while police examined allegations against them. The focus then turned towards the investigation of twenty customs officials.....the inquiry concerned smuggled alcohol besides a number of other incidents besides Senior Customs Officials.  But suddenly out of the blue, the CPS without explanation, said that 'it was not in the public interest to continue the investigation' despite the cost to the taxpayer.  MP Norman Lamb said 'it was disgraceful' for the government to be so secretive and decide the public should be kept out.

NB: As we said at the beginning of this list, this department is 'untouchable' if required, and any threat to them such as a huge corruption investigation against the HMRC can and will be dropped......just like the above......it happened with the heroin case and officers in an earlier corruption case......it was stopped by the government.

FORMER HMRC 'FRAUD BUSTER' CAUSES ANGER -- Former Inland Revenue Chief Richard Alderman angered MP's because of 'The big pay-offs to pals' at the S.F.O. where he works now, especially the generous travelling allowance of £27,600 he gave to Ms Williamson (who was a former colleague at the Inland Revenue when he was there).  MP's branded Alderman as 'dilatory, sloppy and slovenly' and were angered by the big pay-offs which he handed out to Senior staff without consulting the Treasury.  He also approved payments of £15,000 to Williamson and Chief Capability Officer Chris Bailes, to head off legal claims that the two were planning to bring in relation to 'whistle-blowing' allegations made by SFO staff on the advice of his HR Chief, rather than the lawyers.

' HMRC Officer jailed over £12,000 Theft '

KAREN HINDLE a Co-ordinator with the HMRC was jailed at Southampton Crown Court for 12 months after she was found guilty of stealing £12,000.  It was said in court that she had plundered the accounts of those she was asked to pursue over unpaid tax,  The Hampshire Tax Official had bank details of around fifty taxpayers.  She was found guilty of 67 dishonest transactions.

THE HIDDEN WRONG-DOING AT THE HMRC  ---  Concealing data on those tax officers and employees who have committed 'minor offences' has been revealed by a former worker who we sadly cannot name due to what is termed as a 'Compromise Agreement' roughly translated as a gagging order, which prevents them officially from 'spilling the beans'.....however even so, the whistleblower said there are deals done between the DWP and HMRC behind closed doors in regard to the real 'discipline figures' and the figures for public consumption.  She tells that the cases are looked at over and over again by 'legals' in an attempt to find a way of 'downgrading' an offence or complaint so that it can 'disappear' officially....and be dealt with in-house.  She said that some of those involved call it 'the dilution process' which enables the team to submit fewer cases to the final panel.  Then there are the 'Assessors' a group who sanction the use of 'written or verbal warnings' to errant staff who have not wriggled their way out of the situation....these are kept out of the figures for submission to the Standards Committee.....who then issue the final 'doctored figures' for the Press and Public to see.  Of course, the union of Public Servants in the Civil Service are consulted at that point so that they can agree that figure......and that's how this whitewash can be done......nice and tidy eh?

HMRC PRESS OFFICER CHARGED OVER MISCONDUCT -- A recent case, quickly shoved out of the way....it concerns Press officer at the HMRC Jonathan Hall who was caught in the 'Operation Eleveden' for exchanging Revenue Information for payment according to the Internet article.  The CPS said that Hall and partner Maria Bukarwicz, and a Sun Newspaper Journalist Clodagh Hartley will be charged with conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.  Details say that The Sun Newspaper paid £17,475 to HMRC Press Officer Jonathan Hall via his partner Maria Bukarwicz. The file on this case was submitted by The Metropolitan Police.

MAN TO SUE THE HMRC OVER ARREST --- Public Relations Executive Richard Hillgrove has threatened to sue the Tax Office and his accountants over a wrongful arrest.  He said that the HMRC and Police arrested him in Somerset and subsequently charged him with cheating the public revenue of £10,000 when he appeared before Taunton Crown Court in September 2012.  'I shall be making an official challenge over this arrest' he said.

'Another Tax Officer goes to Jail'

SWINDON HMRC TAX OFFICER IS JAILED -- Tax Man Pervaze Masih's cancelling tax penalties for a friend led to his downfall and a jail sentence.  Masia was found guilty of 'defrauding the HMRC' of £43,327 by the court, who heard that he had decided to help out a 'childhood' friend and pal, Paul Cole who was having financial troubles. The court found the taxman guilty on four charges and said that he had abused his position in the HMRC for his own benefit and that of his friend.

THE HMRC 'DEBT COLLECTORS' CONTRACT -- Debt Collection Agencies and the Government Tax System would at first seem unreal, but it isn't, this abomination of twisted legal practice could only be invented and carried out by 'the civil service' and the many employees at the various tax offices.  It's no use calling them 'heartless' as one former taxman, Mr Avery, admits it's like water off a duck's back to most of them.  He tells us he has worked in London, Birmingham and Preston, and has frequently seen 'mistakes and callous vengeance' exacted  on some claimants leading to 'falsified paperwork' (when someone alters a form rendering it suspicious and wrong)  leading to demands of payment being handed over to 'debt collection' without any real checks having been made -- often made an excuse with that phrase 'work overload'.  He tells us it is quite a 'cosy' relationship they have, one the managers enjoy.  Mr Avery tells us that many people have suffered hardship and wrongful accusations, and when on occasions it has discovered (because the claimant has complained and fought back) no-one at the tax office has been brought to book, dismissed or penalised? -- and neither was the debt collection agency!  He informs us that many officers and staff in the tax office just laugh and put two fingers up at the successful claimant...... that is the tax office, and how they react to the public.

HMRC BOSS and Chief Executive Lin Homer tried to quash allegations that the HMRC were acting in a 'brokers' roll by introducing tax advisors to private companies.  He denied the accusations challenging the press to show evidence to support it........probably knowing if there was any, the HMRC held all the cards!

HMRC KNEW ABOUT TAX LOOPHOLE FOR COMPANIES BUT SAID NOTHING  -- The HMRC let several government contract companies on lucrative contracts use a legal loophole to avoid tax.  The private Care Companies cut their taxable UK profits by taking high-interest loans from their owners through the Channel Islands Stock Exchange.  They racked up large interest payments to their parent companies so that they could reduce and cut their tax liabilities. A watchdog said over thirty companies were benefitting from this, and the Inland Revenue knew about it.  The Government introduced the quoted' Eurobond Exemption' in 1984, which received very little public attention....definitely hardly at all outside the financial institutions.

THE STRANGE BUSINESS AT THE HMRC -- Tax Avoidance Scam? within the HMRC!  Well it seems that the HMRC are not all that squeaky clean, especially with tax deals made behind closed doors.  One hears of the case of Mr Ed Lester and the HMRC agreeing that 'no PAYE to be deducted in a nice deal that the treasury was not aware of' and the one about IT Officer Deepak Singh who was turned down for promotion......resigned, and then was rehired to do the same job, and given a 'tax free lump sum'  said to be £19,200.... and what others have benefitted from moves like this?  obviously you'll not find them....the HMRC will take care of that.

' Nine HMRC staff in racial misconduct case '

THE REPORT HEADS WITH THE MISLEADING 'SEVEN WORKERS SACKED' --  But two others resigned before going in front of the Internal Inquiry.  They tampered with office records and deliberately underpaid child benefit to people from ethnic backgrounds.  The HMRC officials who worked in a Belfast Office were dismissed for racially motivated gross misconduct.  It was found that they altered and tampered with claimant forms and data in order to deliberately reduce the proper entitlement to which they should have been paid.  Interestingly again, the HMRC refused to identify the people involved!  (Aug 2010)

NB: Tagged onto this Belfast/Northern Ireland item is 'A Coercion racket going on regarding VAT Registration'

HMRC TAXMAN RESIGNS AFTER SECRET FILMING --  David Heaton was caught in a camera sting and probe by BBC's Panorama team and Private Eye..... he was caught on camera offering advice on how to avoid tax.  The Government Tax Advisor resigned shortly after the programme..... saying he had 'done nothing wrong ( a somewhat familiar and tired phrase used by Government workers).   The HMRC immediately began to distance itself from the tax man,,,,,,,which comes as no surprise!

HMRC WORKER ARRESTED BY POLICE --  a Bootle HMRC employee was jailed for four months at Liverpool Crown Court because he appeared to be a risk to the public.  Gordon Redfern an HMRC worker phoned the police to warn them that he was having thoughts about killing fellow workers at Litherland House in Bootle.  A hunt was launched and he was tracked down and arrested.  It was stated that he had been suspended and then dismissed from his work for gross misconduct in 2012.

HMRC ADMITS TAX MAN IS AT FAULT -- As 57 per cent of claims made against the HMRC are won by the claimant. Internal Data says that over half of the challenges to wrong tax are upheld on appeal.  In 2011 out of 58,110 complaints made against the HMRC over half were won by the public.  Many complaints were about the Debt Management Office,,,,complaints received often said there was poor treatment by staff, delays and errors and mistreatment by staff.  In 2011 to 2012 HMRC paid out £363,954 in compensation along with a total 'errors' cost of 1.3 million.  In 2012 they received 75,000 complaints.

TEN HMRC CUSTOMS MEN were accused of organising drug runs into Britain to boost arrest rates -- It is said that Customs Officers encouraged smugglers to send shipments to the UK so that they could swoop on them.  See the full article and details at www.thefreelibrary.com

HMRC BOSS FACES PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE -- Not for the first time either.  JIM HARRA The Director General of Business Tax has been called by the Commons Committee to explain accusations against his department of letting several firms breach tax rules.....this came about as Google and other giant Internet firms used the immoral tax avoidance ploys to dodge paying the right amount of tax.  Harra is one of three Inland Revenue Officials who will be called by the Committee.

'Former Tax Inspector Jailed '

FORMER TAX INSPECTOR (TRAINEE) MALCOLM MACLEAN previously with the HMRC was said to have used his knowledge to defraud the taxpayer of £358,000.  He was jailed for 3 years after pleading guilty to fraud.   He appeared before Newcastle Crown Court, it was said he and two others running an accountancy and taxation firm falsified documents and manipulated clients' accounts to cover up the tax fraud.

HMRC 'BULLYBOY' TACTICS - Yet again we find that the Tax man has no qualms about sending threat letters to even innocent families in an attempt to get tax owed or otherwise.  This new move rests on the tax staff thinking you owe more than you say, and the amount of tax they expected.  It is said that nearly 11 million people file self-assessment forms each year, yet officers are making assumptions that have menacing consequences to the person.  It says most of their targets have been in the self-employed professions...where even coming out without a loss is hard, never mind a profit...but the tax staff continue to think they're lying and concealing a stash of cash......and why is this happening?.......because they have a shortfall of £35 billion (the tax gap).

HMRC HUMILIATED BY AUDIT OFFICE - THEIR SUMS ARE OUT BY £1.9 BILLION --- Well, humiliation doesn't last long with these people, its like water off a duck's back... The National Audit Report said the tax people had wrongly claimed to have beaten its targets by £1.9 billion a year since the coalition government arrived.  The Accounts Committee said it was a 'serious error' which brought into question whether the tax people were up to doing the job properly.  They said if the HMRC get their own figures wrong then how can they go attacking the others hurling condemnation they filed inappropriate tax returns.......... they can, and do, an error to them means nothing.....they have immunity from the state.

HMRC PICK ON EASY TARGETS TO BULLY -- A report shows that the Big Corporate Tax Avoiders are doing rather nicely, and that is backed up by the Parliamentary Watchdog -- The Public Accounts Committee. Margaret Hodge the Chairman said tax officials are holding back from using legal sanctions to recover money from large companies who use aggressive tax schemes to minimise their bills....leaving the small firms and individuals to make up the shortfall of what the revenues should have taken.

HMRC ' HOUND' CAFE OWNERS...JUDGE TELLS THEM THEY WERE WRONG TO.......The HMRC yet again chose to pursue and victimise a target they said owed them £500,000.............but Judge says the Cafe Owners were 'transparently honest' (unlike the HMRC)... Icilda and Hugh Newell had a small takeaway cafe in North London, they didn't make much money....and because of this tax staff and Inspectors became suspicious....they came to the conclusion that the Newell's were hiding the true profits.... because they can never accept someone runs a business on a 'shoestring' ( because they like what they're doing or indeed have to).  HMRC and their suspicious little minds made their own 'dreamed-up' estimates  saying they were hiding £700,000 in profits....which didn't actually exist.  But they were having none of this, the Newell's had to be exposed and brought down as true criminals of the system....that is how the staff at HMRC see people.  They constantly demanded payment and the case went before a tribunal.  The Judge Roger Berner said on summing up the case ' The HMRC was wrong to demand extra tax and ruled in favour of the Newell's who'd suffered months of stress and worry caused by the staff at HMRC.   A spokesman for the HMRC said they didn't comment on individual cases? ...... especially when it shows how callous they really are!

'BLATANT REVENGE TACTICS BY HMRC' -- Becoming obvious isn't something the HMRC care about any longer and taking revenge on a critic is seen as fair game and within their remit.  Reporter and Journalist Alex Brummer revealed this when he was prepared to say that he had been targeted as a result of doing articles on the  HMRC and what they were up to.  He said he was recently the subject of an HMRC inspection, and his tax affairs were highly scrutinized..... for any sign of tax avoidance!  This inquiry certainly followed  two opinion column pieces questioning the alleged sweetheart dealings of former HMRC Boss David Harnett....and he believes this led to an order being made to go after him.

'Arrest of HMRC taxman halts expensive court case '

A CASE CONCERNING £31 MILLION was adjourned and halted as news broke that DAVID DUTHRIE a Tax Revenues Officer in Edinburgh had been arrested by police..... relating to 'Criminal behaviour in relation to the officer's role as a tax official'    Duthrie at the time (2008) was involved in a 12 man team investigating firms and preparing witness documents.  A Spokesperson for the HMRC said that the adjournment of several months could be very costly to the taxpayers, and improper behaviour lodged against a staff member is taken very seriously, and we cannot comment further?

UNIT MANAGER AT HMRC IS SACKED --  The un-named woman, a line manager in 2012 was dismissed but not charged by the police despite an IPCC recommendation and the CPS knowing of it.  It was discovered that she was involved in a £10,530 credit card spend over a 12 month period.  Being a 'team leader' she had access to a number of HMRC credit cards, and the money she spent on 'Intelligence Purposes' in her claim was disbelieved by the tribunal who said that it was highly implausible.  She said some of it had gone to the Unit's petty cash, but the Internal HMRC Disciplinary hearing decided on her being dismissed.

HMRC IN PENSION FIDDLE? -- Possibly so as they win even if you suffer a loss.  One man invested his £37,000 pension pot after being advised by one of these Pension Companies.  He later found out that his £37,000 was reduced to about £25,000 after their fees etc, and then the HMRC reduced this to around £10,000 saying that he'd been misled by the info given and the tax had to be paid......so he lost £27,000 for trying to do right for his pension and HMRC made out that it was his fault.

HMRC IN TROUBLE OVER WINDING-UP PETITION PAY COMPENSATION --  'The whole episode can be described as 'Civil Servants Syndrome' said Enta Chairman Jason Tsai, 'there is no accountability when civil servants make mistakes.  The HMRC should not have placed the petition in such a hurry, and luckily the Royal Court of Justice has ordered HMRC to compensate Enta for all legal costs incurred in us having to defend the petition.   Enta Technologies were served with a petition from the HMRC.  An HMRC solicitor refused to comment about it, and would only confirm that the petition was no longer 'live'

' Taxman guilty of £17,000 fraud '

NICHOLAS KNOWLES an HMRC Employee from Rochford, appeared before Basildon Crown Court on seven charges of fraud, and was found guilty of stealing more than £17,000.  It was said that he submitted 47 fraudulent invoices to the Benenden Healthcare between 2005 and 2011.  He submitted 'home made' invoices totalling £17,610.20 for medical treatment he had never received.  It was heard in Court that he intended to challenge his dismissal?  and that his crime had been affected by a Drink Driving conviction and marriage trouble.... the Judge gave him a community order with tweve months supervision.

HMRC TOLD TO PAY £246,000 IN COMPENSATION TO COMPLAINANTS -- The Tax Adjudicator said the HMRC were very poor on treating complaints, and that the Independent Watchdog found for nine people in every ten who had lodged claims against the HMRC.  He said many of those dealt unfairly by the Tax Office endured many months of stress fighting the HMRC for justice, which was never likely to come their way had there not been an appeal system.  The adjudicator said over a 12 month period he had received 12,074 complaints about shabby and awful treatment at the HMRC.  The Watchdog resolved 2,311 complaints, and of this number, 2,7073 went in favour of the complainant.

THE HMRC 'HIDDEN AGENDA CASE' -- Secret actions, no public accountability.  'The Baxendale Affair' a case that the HMRC would not like to be shown -- but here it is -- This involves secret identities, The Inland Revenue and the Legal Profession (more details of this are revealed in Featured Lawyers).  The Baxendale Case ended up in the High Court far from Press interest and public view via The Queens Bench.....it involved a  Mr David Keys referred to in court as BWS....Keys was a fictitious name.....his real name was Paul Baxendale-Walker, who was a player in the Law Firm of Solicitors.. Baxendale Walker.  He was taking on 9 prominent defendants.  'David Keys' was posing as an Investigation Director with The Special Investigations Section SIS... said to be working for the HMRC as part of its Private Investigation Initiative......He later denied being an HMRC OFFICER?  He claimed to be a very well known and high profile expert in tax matters!  who devised schemes for clients (the nine defendants) who made accusations of fraud against him....saying that he'd never been challenged by the HMRC on this matter.....he also uses the word 'Successfully' in relation to this too?......Baxendale said that prior to the events and leading up to the court case, he was a Solicitor of the Supreme Court?.......You may be puzzled by all of this and asking what the HMRC was up to?......sadly we don't have those papers or documents, our source managed only to supply these.....but what we do know is that The HMRC do get up to some activities they want kept very secret.

NB: A law firm involved in the above was DELOITTE LLP and that comes up again in the next article?

We have decided to print this next case in full so that you can truly see how the HMRC operate when they wrongfully tried to destroy a company, families and jobs based upon false evidence and lies...... read it all and see what you think of a department that bends the law to suit and protect itself..... but in this case, they are now being sued........

How one family were brought to their knees by the taxman

One businessman tells how his life was destroyed after being wrongly accused of fraud by the HMRC.

By Alasdair Palmer

9:00PM GMT 01 Dec 2012

Rick Hone will never forget the morning of February 5, 2009. “I was in the car when I got a phone call from the office. The voice at the other end of the line was hysterical. I couldn’t really understand what was happening. I just knew I needed to get back to base immediately.

When he returned to Abbey Forwarding in Woolwich, London, the drinks warehousing business of which he had been a director for five years, he was shocked by what he saw.

”There were about 20 officers from HMRC [Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, the tax authorities],” he remembers.

“Some of them were already changing the locks on the doors. Others were going through the company’s documents and computers, packing them up to take them away.”

One officer came up to Mr Hone and told him: “You owe over £5million in taxes. You can’t pay it. The company will be closed down to protect the creditors.”

He introduced a woman whom he said had been appointed liquidator by HMRC to liquidate Abbey Forwarding.

“She told me that I had just been sacked, along with half the other staff,” Mr Hone remembers.

“She would sack the rest in four to six weeks time: for the moment, she needed their help in winding down the company.”*

The woman was Louise Brittain (correct). She now works for Deloitte, charges around £750 an hour, and is described as very tough and experienced. In 2010, she was ranked 17th in Accountancy Age’s list of the industry’s top 100 power players.

She has said that she works out “the pinch point for the fraudster in advance. It could be their family or a house they’re particularly emotionally attached to.”

Having identified it, she goes for it. Mr Hone’s 'pinch point’ was his business. He and his fellow directors, Richard Mills and brothers Pat and William Owen, whose father had started the company in 1971, didn’t know what to do. “We were looking at financial ruin. Louise Brittain told us our personal bank accounts had all been frozen. We had been ejected from our own company. Thirty-two people had lost their jobs. We didn’t even know where we would get money to live on.”

The action by HMRC had come out the blue. “Our business, systems and accounts had been given a very thorough going-over by a man from HMRC only a month prior to the liquidation order,” Mr Hone recalls.

“We had a letter back from him which gave no hint that we were suspected of fraud. In fact he said our accounts were in order.”

I have seen that letter. It identifies a failure to keep some records according to approved protocols, but also states that “no inaccuracies were identified.”

So what had persuaded HMRC that Abbey Forwarding was “at the centre of a large, multinational, multimillion pound fraud”?

It had a turnover of several million pounds a year on the business of storing and arranging the transport of beer, wines and spirits. The taxes on alcohol are a large part of the retail price, and a great deal of money can be made by avoiding them. But why, having been through Abbey’s books and not identified anything which indicated fraud, did HMRC think the company was engaged in avoiding taxes?

The details of HMRC’s case changed several times: its essence was that its directors had systematically aided and abetted the evasion of the duty on the drink they stored and transported. But it was based on suspicion, assertion and the conviction of its officers that fraud was being perpetrated, rather than hard evidence.

“It was a nightmare, everything that we had built up over years of hard work was destroyed in an instant,” says Mr Hone.

“And the worst thing was, we couldn’t even appeal against HMRC’s order to liquidate Abbey because of its assessment that we owed £5 million.”

When the liquidator takes over a company, and the employees are sacked, the directors all become ex-directors. They have no standing in the company - legally, they no longer have any relationship with it. So, in law, they cannot appeal a judgment affecting the company. The person who can appeal is the liquidator. But the liquidator, although appointed by a judge, is selected by HMRC.

That Catch-22 situation looks very unfair to the ordinary citizen, who can be crushed beneath the juggernaut of a huge state agency, without most of the usual checks and balances to ensure that it is not misusing its power. Mere suspicion by HMRC officials that fraud is occurring can be enough to ruin a business.

HMRC can apply to a judge at an “ex-parte” hearing: one at which the company it wants to liquidate is not represented, and so cannot defend itself.

That is what happened in the case of Abbey Forwarding. The judge admitted he did not have time to go through in detail the evidence that allegedly proved their involvement in “large-scale fraud”.

He was persuaded that “these gentlemen are fraudsters.... there must be a risk, if they are given even a chink of light, of moving assets, removing computers, shedding documents. [But if] a liquidator can go in, properly armed in terms of numbers of people, none of this will be possible.”

The judge agreed to the appointment of a liquidator. But in fact, “these gentlemen” were not fraudsters, and HMRC’s “evidence” turned out to be spurious. The judge who granted the liquidation order could not have known that at the time because he was not given the opportunity to test that evidence. And what happened subsequently shows the dangers of granting liquidation orders on the word of HMRC alone.

Eighteen months later, a different judge was given the opportunity to assess HMRC’s evidence in detail. Ms Brittain, as liquidator, decided to sue the former directors for “malfeasance”: they had failed in their duty to operate the company honestly. Judge Lewison was given the task of assessing whether or not HMRC’s claims about Abbey’s former directors were true.

He found that they were false. Ms Brittain had, for example, alleged that on 301 occasions, HMRC had stopped lorries recorded as having picked up cans of beer from Abbey’s warehouse -- but each one of those lorries had, when stopped, been empty.

This showed that Abbey was part of a conspiracy to sell the alcohol without paying the duty owed on it.

But Judge Lewison discovered that, in fact, there were only three occasions when HMRC stoppped empty lorries from Abbey. As the judge pointed out, HMRC and Ms Brittain had exaggerated “by a factor of a hundred”.

How such an allegation came to be made was, as Judge Lewison dryly observed, “unexplained”. But, whatever the explanation, HMRC presented sworn evidence to the court that was untrue. Furthermore, on each of those three occasions, there was an innocent explanation.

Judge Lewison was astonished when one HMRC employee admitted that he had no evidence that Abbey had been involved in fraud, but maintained that he had no proof that it was not involved in criminal activity -- which, as the judge pointed out, is not grounds in law for liquidating the company.

In July 2010, he found that there was not a single item that proved that anyone at Abbey had been involved in any conspiracy to defraud HMRC, or indeed any fraud, and he dismissed the action against Mr Hone and the Owen brothers.

It was an enormous vindication for them. In the 18 months since Ms Brittain had taken over their company in order to liquidate it, their lives had been total misery. “I came very close to suicide”, Mr Hone told me.

“It just seemed so hopeless. Every possible way of proving my innocence, of getting my business and my life back, was blocked. The strain on our family was terrible. My son felt he couldn’t go to university: he had to start earning. My mother’s pension was tied up in the business. The legal bills were huge. We had to mortgage everything, and borrow as much money as we could.”

Mr Hone, from Chiselhurst, Kent, who has been married for 26 years, said: “The liquidator took possession of my mobile and called every single person in my address book, including my mother and godson, and asked them how much money I owed them.”

HMRC and their lawyers were ruthless. Two months before Judge Lewison reached his decision, they sent a letter reminding the directors that they were “bound to lose all of their assets and are all likely to go bankrupt”, and that there would be actions against their “family members who have profited unduly from Abbey”.

It warned them that they could only “avoid complete ruination” by admitting their guilt and settling the case.

”We knew we were innocent,” stresses Mr Hone.

“We were never going to give in, not even if they took everything from us.”

And despite Judge Lewison’s ruling, they came very close to doing precisely that.

Not only did HMRC maintain they had been right to close the company, they increased the amount owed to £7million. Ms Brittain, the only individual with legal standing to appeal HMRC’s assessment, refused to appeal it. HMRC’s strategy seemed to be to wear down Mr Hone and his fellow directors by attrition: there were further hearings, costs mounted.

Backed by the state, HMRC had infinite funds. They knew that their opponents had very limited resources.

But they did not give in. They won a series of rulings against the prevaricating tactics of HMRC. On August 4, 2011, five days before their appeal against HMRC’s assessment and tactics was finally to be heard in court, HMRC withdrew their claim that Abbey’s ex-directors owed £7 million in taxes and duties.

In a highly unusual step, Ms Brittain stepped down as liquidator. A new liquidator has been appointed on the recommendation of Mr Hone’s lawyer. He is still awaiting delivery of the relevant documents.

Last week, Mr Hone and the Owen brothers were in court again, suing the liquidator and HMRC for damages for having wrongly frozen their personal bank accounts. After that, they hope to launch a case against HMRC for the loss caused by the liquidation of their company, which amounts to millions of pounds in legal and other fees.

What happened to Abbey Forwarding is not an isolated case. Lawyers who specialise in liquidation proceedings note that HMRC frequently use ex-parte hearings to obtain liquidation orders against companies they suspect of fraud. Of course, many are guilty as charged. But some are not.

There has been disquiet for some years in legal circles at the extent of HMRC’s power. Geraint Jones, QC, a barrister who has been involved in many high-profile tax cases, notes that, as it stands, the law allows HMRC to be “judge, jury and executioner” in its own case. But there are no plans to limit that power; HMRC argues it needs the power in order “to catch the bad guys”.

HMRC will not comment on individual cases, but they insist there are sufficient checks and balances because they have to apply to a judge for a liquidation order.

“We only use ex-parte applications in the most serious cases to deal with the risk of assets derived from fraudulent activity being hidden, or company books and records being destroyed,” said an HMRC spokesman.

“We set out to the Court why we think this approach is the right one. The granting of a provisional liquidation order is then a matter for the court alone.”

To which, Mr Hone responds: “When a judge was able to test HMRC’s evidence properly he found it was all rubbish. If there had been a proper test at the ex-parte hearing the liquidation order would never have been granted in the first place.”

In his view, HMRC’s ability to liquidate companies without robust evaluation of its evidence takes on a sinister quality. He thinks himself lucky not to have been flattened by the power of HMRC; others may not be so fortunate.

NB: HMRC will deny all and anything, and Liars Team, the Lawyers team will be there to suppress all truth.

' Iceland Boss takes on the HMRC '

Chairman Malcolm Walker waged into battle with the tax authorities when they ordered him to pay £2.5 million of tax because he flew his staff to a £4 million conference with all the entertainment and trimmings.  He saw this as a company expense and therefore being deductable.  But the HMRC doggedly suggested it was 'a reward to staff' as a benefit of kind and should be taxed.  Walker who is boss of Iceland and is said to be worth £215 million disputes this and intends to challenge the HMRC.

THE HMRC £2 BILLION BLUNDER OF UNPAID TAX -- it is reported that tax officials wrongly calculated their own performance to make it look like they had recouped nearly 2 billion in unpaid tax, in other words deceive, this was revealed by MP's in a highly critical report.  They went ahead and massively overstated their achievement record in 2011 to 2012 and 2013 in annual reports.  They claimed they had exceeded their performance targets even when going before The Public Accounts Committee; up to then the 'error' as they like to call it went undetected.  Despite this deception, the HMRC intend to continue in the same way, business as usual?

' HMRC send out cheap flowers as compensation for demand of £979.000 '

As we have seen before, such is the nature of the taxman and staff who work at the Inland Revenue, their generosity know  s no bounds, except that it must be cheap enough.  Mr Coke said it was 'Insulting that a taxman thought he could compensate his wife for the trauma of being sent such a massive demand with a cheap bunch of flowers.'  Cafe Owner Florence Coke couldn't believe it when she saw a tax demand for £979,092,858.00, she had just opened the new business.  It was only later that Inland Revenue officials agreed that the amount was incorrect and should have been £17,000 for the five year period their calculation should have said.  Of course. this is far from the first time HMRC have blundered, they've apparently sent out 100 bouquets of flowers and actually don't know the cost of them......which is no surprise as they are funded by the taxpayer!

HMRC , THE GOVERNMENT AND THE EXECUTIVES -- TAX AVOIDANCE and the help -- a report says that a government-sponsored loophole is saving these millionaires and executives £700 million a year. News is that the loophole is not closed and nobody is doing anything about it.  Tax campaigners said the arrangement was brokered by HMRC and the British Venture Capital Association amounted to a government-sponsored tax avoidance on a massive scale. 

HMRC SEND PENSIONER TAX BILL OF £4-7 BILLION -- Retired pensioner Douglas Yeomans who lives in Derbyshire was absolutely shocked when he suddenly received a tax demand for £4,742,354,255 and was allowed to pay it in instalments £950 million a month.  He laughingly said in response to the demand, I can afford £255......the demand was for unpaid income tax?......HMRC have since apologised for the 'error'

'Tax Officer robs HMRC to pay gambling debts'

MARK BARBER stole 55,000 pounds out of the tax system to fund his gambling addiction it was said in Nottingham Crown Court.  It was said that he abused his position of trust in the Nottingham Office, and hit on the idea to make false payments to people living abroad, and then claim the tax back.  The discovery of what he'd done only emerged in 2004, and as a result the HMRC moved him to another office so that he could not handle or have authority to access payments.  This lasted until all the internal investigations were completed, and then the police took over when he was dismissed.  This ended his career of 27 years in the Inland Revenue.   (8/6/2006)

HMRC IN TWITTER PLAN SAID TO BE LAUGHABLE if it weren't serious.  Politicians have called the plan rather ridiculous, and Margaret Hodge of The Public Accounts Committee says the idea is 'laughable'.... no customer based service should tolerate such a poor service.  It said that people struggling with their annual tax return due at the end of the month should contact the Inland Revenue via Twitter.  All amid telephone waiting times of 10 minutes and 53 seconds to get someone to answer at the Tax Office.

The tax office will of course say that this is not representative of the HMRC, but we question that in the light of a confidential document that suggests that regional tax offices contact them before revealing wrong-doing by a member of staff, --- and that clearly indicates they want time to choose what or who can be offered up as a sacrifice - plus the evidence of your own eyes here showing cases and documented incidents and reports.  We have already seen the secrecy indulged in and we know that some investigations are suppressed and dealt with in privacy.  We are also assured by our friend who devotes his website entirely to exposing the HMRC that he has hundreds of cases, and we have at least double what we have shown here. We have only scratched the surface and further probes across the Internet will reveal more.

That is our little but not exhausted list, (at least 30 more waiting) we have more for later on these departments.

NB. Additional item --- Civil Servant avoids and dodged tax for ten years!  A 'back page' two inch column news insertion in the Finance pages offered up the report that a highly paid civil servant worked the tax system by being 'off-payroll' for a decade to avoid paying tax. It is said that MP's were reviewing the case 'behind closed doors' as around 2,000 public officials are getting anxious about being named if it goes public, and the majority are in The Ministry of Defence, plus several others in the Treasury?

'Suing the HMRC carries difficulties'

The Report says that as a result of two Data Discs being lost by the HMRC, a case for damages (even if the claimant's details are misused ) would not really succeed in an action.  The Data Protection Act requires damage and distress to be shown to have directly resulted from the breach -- so in reality, the case would only succeed for a breach of the Act '7th Principle (use of appropriate technical and Organisational measures).  Negligence on the other hand, would stand a chance in court as this could be measured by staff inaction, action, and mom-compliance that led to the loss of the discs not being secure, and who was responsible for the security of the discs.  The loss of the discs containing names, bank details etc, is to be looked at by the Information Commissioner's Office!   930/11/2007)

'THE ONES THAT GET AWAY' - What we found in many cases was that other members of staff involved could not be 'got' due to insufficient evidence despite suspicions they took part.  A lawyer said this result was commonplace ' They do not leave enough of a paper trail or computer evidence available because they are well versed in covering one's tracks, and what might be mistakenly left is not enough to take before a court or the CPS, so they are assumed and deemed as innocent, and Investigators are unable to take the matter further'    Statistics will always show a 'lower' figure of corruption at the HMRC and they rely on this to virtually con the public -- the government use these figures for their own use in denying that civil service crime is not 'worrying', when in fact this is a deceit (one of many).

In addition to the above - We found that many of these 'white collar' suspects can go and often do turn to the Internet to find lawyers who say they can represent any 'accused worker' --- their pages glorify cases they have won as a result of taking on the Department -- so there is an obvious reluctance to pursue a case or investigation against the civil service, who of course, can also represent that office worker with their own lawyers.

THE MAIL IN ITS MONEY MATTERS CONSIDERS THE NEXT ITEM IS A SCOOP AND BIGGEST EXPOSE, it isn't, we've got a much bigger one that will shock those who believe the HMRC are above board.  It involves secrecy and corrupt methods to conceal the truth.... and the so called innocent staff are involved up to their necks.

'HMRC hides 'errors' to block appeals'

Said to be 'The Great Tax Cover-up Exposed' in 2011, The Mail newspaper say they have evidence that HMRC are systematically 'concealing mistakes and vital information' for taxpayers.   It is said that an 'Internal Memo' reveals secret decision-making meetings among staff in the compliance department dealing with claims etc, -- a process HMRC uses when dealing with appeals for leniency from people facing unexpected tax bills.   The 'In-house' confidential document reveals how despite acknowledging they had made numerous mistakes! HMRC CHOSE to conceal the details and went on to demand thousands of pounds in so named unpaid income tax.   Further to that in a new development, it was discovered that the HMRC is refusing to accept official employers forms in appeal cases.  These so called P14 documents are sent to the HMRC to help calculate end-of-the-year tax bills.  Apparently, the HMRC hold the claimant responsible for their errors!  and that's official.

'Taxman faced jail in 'snooping' case'

HMRC TAXMAN TIMOTHY STEVENSON 56, was spared a jail sentence when he appeared before the Crown Court.  It was said that he accessed confidential records to snoop on tenants for almost 20 years.  He used Revenue and Customs computer systems to look at personal details of potential renters of properties during the period of 1996 to 2014.  The court described him as being an employee at the HMRC for a period of 28 years, but was finally dismissed in 2014 for what was described as 'gross misconduct'.   Prosecution described him as being 'obsessed' in his pursuit, in that he kept hand written notes copied off computer systems in a filing cabinet under his staircase at home.  The article gave Peckham as the general area this all happened in.   (25/4/2017)

 

'JUDGE GOES AGAINST THE HMRC'  In a surprise to the tax authorities, Justice Kenneth Parker gave his reasons as 'Procedural' when the HMRC took a nasty decision to declare a firm guilty of wrong-doing when this had not been decided by the court.  He said that they had not given the firm a proper chance to make a defence case against the arbitrary decision they took; he said such a decision could be disastrous to a firm and clients, and they could lose everything.    (They have in fact done this frequently and caused many firms to go bust)

'HMRC TAXMAN DESCRIBED IN COURT AS A DRUG DEALER'  ---  HMRC Valuation Officer MARK JONES was said to be a drug dealer by the two men in court.  This case from the Wales area was trying the case of murder by two brothers of a tax man.  The Bennett brothers said they had a loan refused and owed Jones a considerable amount of money in other loans.  Prosecutor Christopher Clee told the jury that Mark Jones worked in the HMRC and he was also a drug dealer, and that Bennett owed him money on the day Jones went to meet the brothers at an arranged spot.

MORE CORRUPTION AT THE HMRC -- December 2016 -The Watchdog Programme.  It was reported that all was not well at a student loan company as hundreds of pounds went missing from student accounts, and they were actually required to prove they were entitled to the money.  This case had Inland Revenue involvement.

'Golden handshake for failed HMRC Chiefs'

Two Senior Civil Servants who were responsible for the lost details of 25 million child benefit claimants, received massive payouts nicely called 'severance payments' to quit their post early.  One can see how tax officials have no qualms about screwing the public and walking away rewarded for something not funny or to be considered okay.  PAUL GRAY and STUART  CRUICKSHANK have taken £200,000 between them, and strangely enough nobody is calling this a scandal.  The HMRC thinks this is quite fair!

'HMRC TOLD TO HAND BACK £4 MILLION TO TAXPAYERS -- In a move by The Adjudicator who oversees complaints against the Tax Authorities, he upheld ninety percent of the legitimate complaints of wrongdoing by the HMRC.  £4 MILLION was returned to people they had taxed incorrectly, plus redress payments.  Between 2013 and 2014 the Adjudicator received 1,087 new complaints.  The Adjudicator responded by saying, 'I am again disappointed to see HMRC staff still overlooking the needs of some very vulnerable customers.'   So don't discount staff involvement in these dire cases, they are an integral component in the wrongdoing.

'HMRC Destroys firm and Pays out nearly £2 Million over what they call 'an error'

Here's the big one folks, and it was a case they tried to hide away from public gaze. The Press referred to it as 'bungling' but they somehow fail to see the more darker factors so blatantly obvious.  This case was manipulated all the way, very criminally too by the tax authorities who are supposed to serve the general public.  And before you think this is a one off, we will give you others.  Details it says in the report were 'hidden' in the annual report and accounts, which was casually mentioned while using 30 announcements as cover so that no one hopefully would spot it on the last day of a Parliament sitting.  It showed that a 'special payment of £1.9million was made to the 'undisclosed' firm; which they are still trying to conceal.  Have a look at the following:

Anderson v HMRC 2016 (the same time as the incident) at The Royal Courts of Justice.  Mr Alan Anderson appellant. The court in its conclusion said that HMRC are not entitled to issue a discovery assessment for the tax year 2007/8 on the basis that there was a discovery of an insufficiency of capital gains tax brought about by the appellant -- it follows that HMRC are out of time to issue such an assessment.  Mr Anderson's appeal was upheld.

The firm went bust due to the HMRC -- and a payment later will not fix things, and what do they care.  Disturbingly, there is more to this they don't want said, and that is the pay-off to the one in charge when this went down.  LIN HOMER received a £2.4 million golden handshake or pension pot when she quit the job.  It was revealed that she was in charge when there were a string of failures, and the Press nicknamed her 'Dame Disaster' she nicely walked away from the whole thing.  An HMRC spokesperson made the usual derisory comments trying to play the whole thing down as having compensation plans to deal with things that go wrong?

But don't forget here, the HMRC went to the High Court during the upheaval and obtained and were granted a provisional liquidation order against the company which sealed the fate of this firm.  As you can see, they act first, and when they get it wrong, deny all and instigate a cover-up.

In our investigations at the time our PI obtained a confidential e-mail connected with this so called 'blunder' which says staff involved were re-assured that they would not be named, and that they were covered by Crown Immunity and that anyone challenging the handling of the case could only claim damages by 'Vicarious Liability', and every effort would be made to keep this matter from the public.

'DAMAGE LIMITATION AND REDUCING PUBLICITY AT THE HMRC --  The Adjudicator is known as an impartial part of the complaints service.  When a person/complainant is unhappy with the HMRC handling of their case, they can request a 'formal review' which may lead to the office of The Adjudicator.  There is also another process known as 'mediation', this is, according to internal memos, the favoured course vigorously pursued by staff at the HMRC in order to 'quieten' and manage any damaging facts that may come to the surface.  Failing mediation, it can go onto 'recommendation'  which involves another review of the case -- in other words 'manipulation covertly activated' by the HMRC.

'HMRC INCOMPETENCE - REGULARLY DENIED OF COURSE!  --- 3 MILLION PEOPLE were estimated to have paid the wrong tax after a revealed case of CHAOS left telephone callers waiting for over an hour on the line waiting to speak to advisors -- call waiting time tripled, one in five callers had to abandon their calls due to spiralling costs, ones they were left to bear. The estimated cost to callers was £63 million in 2013/12 which steadily got to a staggering £97 million in 2015/16.  HMRC were unwilling to admit anything was wrong, and the usual arrogance followed.

'Tax credit victim left in dire straits by HMRC'

Nothing unusual here, it's typical HMRC treatment.  MP tells of how the Tax man forced an aged member in her constituency had to pawn her jewellery in order to make ends meet.  And how did this come about?  well, we have the word 'Concentrix coupled HMRC' two components, the first being a fiasco according to government sources, the other being a Rottweiler.  This lady had to sell items left by relatives and it also says another lost all her food in the freezer when the electricity was cut off.  And what of the link between CONCENTRIX and HMRC?  Well, the American based company was hired by the HMRC to root out Tax Credit Cheats?  It's a pity there's no firm rooting out Tax cheats at the HMRC, but I guess we will have to do.  And to finish this piece, it was apparent that HMRC knew things weren't going well due to the complaints they were receiving, but kept that fairly quiet, because while they were coveniently ignoring them, MP's were getting angry letters which ultimately led to the cancellation of this company's contract.

'JUDGE TELLS HMRC TO REPAY THE FINES' --  Another court case goes against the Inland Revenue when the Judge told the HMRC to repay fines imposed by the taxman with interest where they have clearly acted unreasonably.  This blew up as the HMRC fined Kathleen Loma because of their clause 'lateness to file'.  But it turned out that the HMRC did not make things clear or attempt to help in any way, so the Judge decided in her favour and said she had lost the opportunity to file online in time and avoid a penalty, and it is not for the HMRC to act in such an unconscionable manner to the public.  He ordered that the penalty of £100 should be returned along with the appropriate interest accrued.

'HMRC LOSE CASE AGAINST CHESTER ZOO' -- Chester Zoo scored a victory against the taxman in court.  The presiding Judge ruled that they could reclaim the £1.3 million VAT paid because the cash had been used on looking after the animal welfare etc (8,000 animals).  Obviously in arrogant form, the HMRC disagreed, but Judge Jonathan Cannan ruled in favour of the charity status zoo.

'FOOTBALL CLUB WINS CASE AGAINST HMRC'  -- Another win for the down trodden.  Rangers Football Club won the £50 million case brought by the HMRC.  The case involved Employee Benefit Trusts (loans and payments made to players in a 'tax efficient way'   Judge Lord Doherty dismissed an appeal launched by the HMRC after a tribunal decision went against them.  (2015)

'HMRC Destroys Couple's hairdressing Business'

Yes, we said there was more, and here we go again -- Salon owner Kristine Swindells and husband Coilin in Bognor Regis ran an upfront business.  She did the hairdressing and her husband kept the books. Both people were in their 70's, and everything was going smoothly until the taxman called, two of them actually.  The two Investigators or Compliance officers subjected them both to unreasonable questioning.  They carried out this almost like the Gestapo with the session lasting up to 4 hours.  They were demanding all details of their lives and how much they charged every customer in the appointments book.  Finally, they were both accused of dodging VAT payments by failing to report how much money their shop had made.  This accusation led to a nightmare that cost the couple thousands fighting the HMRC for a staggering 4 years.  However, after two appeals the case was suddenly stopped because tax officials 'may have made a mistake'  The HMRC said ' Based on the evidence we saw during the inspection we wrongly advised Mr Colin Swindells to register for VAT......and they found there was no VAT due!  The HMRC went off unbothered or even apologetic about their treatment and hounding the couple.  The strain and stress caused led to the closure of the business once the matter was over.

Mr Swindells commented - 'We were treated with utter contempt by the HMRC'

(It's a pity we don't get the names of these tax men, because they would end up here on this site)

PS -- see a similar case earlier subtitled 'HMRC HOUND CAFE OWNERS - The Newell's.

'TAXMAN CHASES £21 MILLION UNPAID BY THE SUPER RICH' --- This we've included because its laughable really, we all know they won't get near their money, because they have prominent lawyers just like the HMRC who can cheat and manipulate court time and play around until the taxman gets a fraction of what they want....this kind of headline is to fool the ordinary taxpayer.  The item reveals that the HMRC are locked in disputes over how much tax should be paid, and some 4,000 inquiries have been ongoing for three years.  And not surprisingly to those hounded by the taxman, the HMRC looked into just 72 cases of fraud, and only 2 cases were criminally investigated with one conviction. So there you are, they're really trying aren't they, and succeeding badly....who would have thought it?

'RICH MAN ECCLESTONE TAKES ON THE TAXMAN OVER TAX BILL  - Super rich Bernie Ecclestone takes legal action against the HMRC over their claims that he owes more than a £1 billion after it tore up a settlement agreed in 2008.  He is apparently suing them for breach of contract in view of the new actions they have taken.

TAX CREDIT SHAMBLES AS HMRC CUT DOWN ON STAFF -- It appears that £1.6 billion of tax credits have been wrongly handed out according to the National Audit Office.  It blames the move on changes as the new universal benefit arrives to supersede the tax credit system.  The Inland Revenue blame it on errors, something they know well about and use it as a way out when they get things wrong.

'HMRC FAULTY WEBSITE IS ACCUSED OF CHARGING TOO MUCH' --  A report says that the tax calculator can leave claimants out of pocket and facing fines.  Also there is the risk of taxpayers being overcharged if they file their returns online.  It is also apparent that the website cannot cope with the volume of users. 

'HMRC ORDERED TO SORT OUT FAILURES ON ITS CHILDCARE SITE' -- A report says that parents are having great difficulty in applying for the childcare credit, and this runs into thousands having difficulty online at the site.  Some 2,600 parents are still waiting to have these technical issues resolved. 

'HMRC SNOOPING ON FACEBOOK' -  This little headline appeared saying that the HMRC were offering £20,000 bribes to anyone who would give up information on their friends, colleagues and neighbours.  The only thing we think significant here, is the word 'bribes' and that is obviously something the tax man would deny, even in the face of it being an incentive for unwarranted intrusion into another person's life.

'HMRC in 31 million Injustice Case'

A court intervened when the HMRC told a sole business Scaffolder to pay them £930,000 when in reality he only owed them £11,153 in unpaid VAT.  Matthew Hodges was accused by the taxman of evading £529,536 in VAT on top of an unpaid penalty of £399.734 for non-payment.  It was heard at the Tribunal that most of this ridiculous demand came from estimates the tax man conjured up.  An Independent Accountant, Mr Hubbard said of the HMRC figures, 'It looks to be little more than a simple back-of-the-envelope calculation with no thought being given to the reality of how one person could have achieved a turnover of that level to attract that kind of bill.'

'TAX CREDIT HELL FOR ONE FAMILY'  -- Anisha Walshaw said her family were barely surviving, and lived on a poultry £3.50 a day due to the HMRC Tax Credit system blunder that happened when she least expected.  She said there was a catalogue of 'errors' by the tax man since 2003 concerning her tax credits.  However, this didn't stop the callous behaviour of the HMRC sending bills of £25,000 and £10,000 at a time.  It was said they were claiming money 'wrongly' paid to her.  Mrs Walshaw of Walton near York thinks this started with 'a change in circumstances' which was mis-recorded by the HMRC.  A local MP intervened and the HMRC have said they will look into the matter soon.

'HMRC AND FACEBOOK AND THE COSY DEAL'  -Another little bit of news that shows who gets into who's bed....apparently, Facebook paid just £4,000 in tax and the HMRC spent £27,000 of taxpayers money on adverts with them!

'HMRC's DIRTY TRICKS DEPARTMENT' -- Nick Morgan nicely shows us how they do what they do, and what happened to him when he did a tax return.  Nick Morgan is a freelance journalist who investigates and writes articles, and luckily he isn't as underhand or dirty as some of the staff at the HMRC.  They lie he says - they look at your expenses and immediately reduce it by 75 percent,  They bully and trap taxpayers -- an accountant advised this ' never attend an interview with HMRC without proper representation, they use everything you say to discredit your claim and demolish your honesty and make out the claimant is lying...when in fact they do that.  The Complaints team he says are not impartial, they are in league and part of the same investigation...always on the side of HMRC.  He says they can even find out if you've been to a lawyer etc, and have notes on what you said and see themselves as solicitors in a court looking at your witness testimony to catch you out when you don't say exactly what you wrote.  So much for data protection, these guys are way above the law and they choose which one they want to use, and frequently break it without the slightest fear of reprisal or prosecution...they've got Crown Immunity!  At the end of Nick Morgan's terrific expose of this branch of government he asked the HMRC for a comment!  They declined!

His webpage tells much more so you ought to go and see it  ---  www.tax-hell.co.uk/sunday-times/

'HMRC DON'T ABIDE BY THEIR OWN RULES' -- When it comes to demands and what it wants from you they stop at nothing to wreck your life and cause misery....but how do they react when they owe you?  do they pay you immediately?  well, get a load of this as it gives the answer to that question.  Here we see what steps they take not to co-operate or pay you as supplied by one man (thisistibi)  Sift Ltd.  He tells us of a tax return by a largish company which showed they overpaid corporation tax to the tune of £900,000.  The HMRC was contacted and chased for this over several months, often by phone, and always fobbed off.  Despite agreeing that they owed this money they didn't quite see it as a debt, and no payment was received despite staff resorting to that cliche 'its in the post'  Finally, they resorted to a new tact and said there was some technical issue on their pc which means the correct repayment amount is not being shown?

What you've got to remember here is that this agency is willing to suppress facts and compensation cases as we've already seen, and they won't answer requests for information on how many staff have been sacked or prosecuted (if any) or give out what they have paid out in damages....this is the true face of the HMRC....no accountability, no transparency...in fact no assistance whatsoever if you seek truth.

'FORMER HMRC FRAUDSTER GETS A GOOD COURT DEAL'  -- Former Inland Revenue man Neil J Foster who worked at their Peterlee office lied on his tax return to steal more than £12,000 from the taxpayer.  The investigation was instigated and led by the HMRC.  It is stated he attended a voluntary interview in 2014 where he pleaded guilty on 4 counts of fraud at Newcastle Magistrates Court.  He was given a suspended prison sentence and ordered to pay £165 in costs.  Which apparently infuriates other taxpayers who are threatened by this same government body, especially knowing its one of their own....and some suspect he's got off too lightly for certain reasons?

'HMRC and The Freedom of Information Fiasco'

Why someone should think the HMRC will be upfront amazes us here, one seriously misguided person actually wrote and asked the HMRC to explain their policy of dealing with staff who make false claims and allegations against other members of staff etc.  It becomes evident right from the start they were going to 'stonewall' him.  The letters were many during what looks to be months.  And unsurprisingly, this was the infamous heartland of dirty dealing - THE TAX CREDIT OFFICE IN PRESTON, one that is mentioned on this site several times.  His first letter (issued by Mr Renate Ackerman) pleaded - 'Please tell me how many employees have been found guilty of bullying a colleague at work etc'.  HMRC sent an attachment in their reply of 22/11/2011 in response to this Freedom of Information request.  They simply ignored a direct answer to the letter and made out that they would pass the request to some other department more qualified to deal with it.  Gradually they came onto costing meaning it would cost a great deal if he didn't narrow the terms of his request.  They then repeated another delaying letter.  And outlined the 'confidentiality of any answer saying he could not make it public'  More letters followed going back and forth going in the only way it does with the HMRC, nowhere, we know they were never going to give him the info, and we'll tell you why at the end of this piece.  See the web stuff on this if you can.  Finally after the runaround, MARY LEEDS of the HMRC and Commissioners pointed out with nothing added, see Section 12(1) Exemption.   We've already seen that some time ago, and it means they are not required to assist a person wanting to know what the HMRC hold or file.  This is the government looking after its own, no accountability here or transparency, Teresa May isn't going to tell you that the Freedom of Information Act is subjective and only applies in certain ways.

'HMRC - COMPLAINTS ABOUT ITS CONDUCT' -- The Telegraph Newspaper headlined this in a more down to Earth related tone, 'HMRC getting nastier with taxpayers who dare to complain'  Apparently in May 2013, HMRC upheld only 30 percent of the 75,568 complaints it processed between 2011/12.  This was the highest number of complaints rejected to date.  And in a seperate survey carried out, it showed that the HMRC's internal VAT review process appeared to be making decisions increasingly in the Taxman's favour.   'Who'd have thought it?

'HMRC'S MANAGEMENT OF INTERNAL FRAUD AND CORRUPTION' -- No, don't get excited here, they actually don't reveal anything.  The Official document is designed to deceive in reality and make one think they are accountable.  They issued this little gem in 2012, and it doesn't print a list of employees caught and prosecuted.  Most of the lengthy document is waffle and dealing with procedures and terms that take one away from discovering anything.  'Terms of reference'  'method'  'structures' 'leadership' 'areas for improvement' are repeated time and time again using legalise from the decidedly dodgy solicitors.  This is a nothing document and a fraud really.

' Firm accuses HMRC of bullying tactics '

A report on a small firm's tax nightmare, revealed that tax officials deliberately spent thousands of pounds of public money pursuing the small construction company SCOTIA ROOFING in Stirlingshire.  This 5 year harassment by the HMRC un-necessarily cost the small company £120,000 to defend a winding up petition launched by HMRC to save their business.   After taking over the firm after her father passed away IN 2006, Mrs Aitchison said the HMRC used bully tactics to repeatedly demand PAYE and VAT payments which were not due, and lodged the petition alleging there was a £59,000 debt.  At no stage were they prepared to negotiate or listen, they were hell bent on seeing the petition through.  'We were told later' said Mrs Aitchison, 'We couldn't got to debate, it was not in the public interest for people to claim expenses against the HMRC.'

'HMRC'S BULLYING IN FAMILY TAX CASE' -- another case supporting the above article.  This concerned a small family firm called 'ARCTIC SYSTEMS LTD' which used dividends from the business to remunerate Geoff and Diana Jones, the shareholders.  Despite a decisive victory in favour of the family firm against the HMRC in The Court of Appeal, and a refusal by that court to give leave for an appeal to the House of Lords, HMRC announced they were going to petition the UK's Highest Court to get their way.  An FSB tax spokesman said, 'HMRC's hard line attitude to a taxpayer family run business is very worrying, and so is the evident fact that HMRC has refused to respect the decision of the Court of Appeal, which delivered a decisive and authoritative ruling in favour of the taxpayer in this case.'  (2006)

' JUDGE SLAMS HMRC OVER MISCONDUCT 'Here's a third firm in the spotlight, and this was a recent case at a Tribunal Court dealing with an Appeal by the taxpayer.  GEKKO & COMPANY LTD  v HMRC.  This one contains the infamous penalties the HMRC are fond of using in a VAT case that amounted to less than £900.  The assessment was £69, plus three penalties imposed by HMRC, the first being £780, the second one £8.85, and the third penalty of £10.35, totalling = £888.20.  The company is situated in Lincolnshire (Boston).  It is stated that the decision describes a saga of HMRC  bizarre explanations, changes of opinion and those 'errors' -- the Judge was not pleased throughout the case, and in his decision concerning the quality of the HMRC's Officers' enquiry work, he cancelled the VAT claim and all of the penalties, and went on to say 'I frequently deal with taxpayers in dispute with HMRC.  The quality of work is poor, HMRC officers do not take the time to explain to taxpayers and their advisers their concerns, resulting in substantial assessments and unfair penalties.' (Aug 4/2017)

'TAX EXPERTS CHALLENGE THE HMRC' (hmrc refuse to challenge big tax dodgers) --  In 2016 the Tax Officials at HMRC were to face questioning over spurious claims that didn't add up to close scrutiny.  THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE heard from tax experts that the HMRC were underestimating the problem of Britain's tax avoidance problems by the rich in particular.  In a 2016 report The Public Accounts Committee noted 'HMRC told us that its performance in addressing tax fraud was good'  but the assessment of the tax gap shows that the level of tax fraud has remained virtually static over the last 5 years.  Which glaringly tells us they're either cooking the books or entering a world of fiction.  However, a simple deduction shows us that they are trying to hide things yet again.

' HMRC Employee in £65,000 scam is jailed '

HMRC Benefits Department Officer NICHOLA FARNINGHAM was a 'benefits adviser who dealt with Child and Working Tax Credits at the HMRC in Dundee.  Amazingly, in her own case, she failed to disclose that her own claim was incorrect and positively fraudulent, as she was taking money from the taxpayer to the amount of £65,000.  She was jailed for a period of 21 weeks and ordered to pay over £40,410 within six months at the Sheriffs Court.   (6/4/2017)  Go online to get the details if you'd like to know more.  The Record Newspaper.

'HMRC MENTIONED IN SECRET CORRUPTION REPORT OF 2003'  - This essentially - Met Police Report, reveals that the anti-corruption squad led by former assistant commissioner of police, Andy Hayman, found out that Organised Gang lords and crooks had infiltrated government departments such as the HMRC and CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE in order to manipulate investigations and their outcomes, so that corruption would survive without interference.

'THICK AS THIEVES' -- As one man recently said in an interview with a radio station,  'The HMRC tax you on income, and they tax you again at 20 percent in VAT on what you spend, why don't they just take the lot and give you an allowance?  but as the interviewer pointed out, 'They might just tax you on that too!  the Government will see that as an excellent idea, especially on the poor and less well off.'

'HMRC PROCLAIMED WORSE THAN DEBT COLLECTORS' -- Almost accurate too, as this was said by a Major Accountancy Firm in Leeds, one Russell Smith, who stepped forward to say it like it is, and this is what he had to say --  'As a tax accountant we deal with the HMRC more than most.  We have regular lines of communication with HMRC's Office, but even we cannot predict their often 'erratic behaviour'  We've had many horror stories involving them demanding payments that weren't due, and aggressively chasing tax bills that were only just filed a few days ago.  Stranger than that, we've experienced tax bills go unpaid for years without even a nod from HMRC, while others; often upstanding business owners, have been hounded by the taxman for tiny infractions and mistakes.  Sometimes infractions aren't even made, in some instances we've had the HMRC knocking on the door of a tiny business or taxpayer demanding money they've already been paid, simply because their officers failed to properly record it.  This Government body was declared worse than even private debt collectors when it came to settling bills!'

' HMRC Tax Officers swoop on Fish 'n' Chips' Shop owner at 9pm '

A Representative or Legal Advisor (remaining anonymous) had this to say on behalf of his client -- 'She had a very distressing call from her client who owned a fish and chip shop.  Her client said that two tax inspectors arrived out of the blue at 9pm despite no notice being given at all by the tax office.  They began their interrogation immediately depite the shop being still open with just half an hour to go.  The fact that she was without representation didn't cross their minds as they asked her about business banking and how much had she paid to supliers.  Even though it was embarrassing, she did answer all their questions despite having to close up for the night early and make sure the till receipts were okay.  Amazingly, all protocols issued by the HMRC were breached by the two inspectors.  They had not made any previous arrangement to visit, they were not impeded in any way either before or at present, nor were they out when this visit occured.  They just barged in at 9pm and expected the owner to jump to their orders.'  (source - the Web)

'HMRC NIGHTMARE ARRIVES IN THE POST'  -- Alison says on returning from a shopping trip, she was greeted by 7 official looking brown envelopes (all marked Inland Revenue) from the taxman which informed her that she was overpaid in relation to tax credits.  It was a total of nearly £7,000, to be paid by the 26th of May, or twelve months.  All her present tax credits were stopped and a banking giro was enclosed for her to pay the money demanded.  Alison acknowledges that they did get working tax credits at one stage when she and her husband were moving house and area, and her husband was job seeking at the time.  And she also remembers having advised them of changes and spoke to at least one advisor at the HMRC.  But being a long time ago, she threw out a lot of stuff in the move, and cannot find the paperwork for the period they've assessed her for.

'HMRC BOSS NOMINATED 'DIRTY OLD MAN' -- Sounds a bit like the sex misconduct enquiry happening now (Harvey Weinstein and all that).  The article dated December the 4th 2010  which can be located at  www.salfordstar.com/article  says 'I would like to nominate NICHOLAS ANTHONY SHAW for 'Dirty Old Man'  - it goes on to say that he is a Senior Civil Servant, HMRC BOSS Nicholas Anthony Shaw is Assistant Director of Criminal Investigations for the HMRC North West Region.

PS. If anyone knows why this appeared as it did from 2010 until now, and more about the incident that has led to this post, please contact us at www.corruptionseeker@hotmail.com  we'd like to get the full story.

'HMRC FORCE CHARITY TO PAY BACK £125,000 OF TAX'  --- A Sutton Charity along with several councillors are angered to see that the HMRC have told the local charity that they want immediate payment of £125,000 worth of tax covering the previous nine months.  In a recent HMRC ruling, organised by them of course, they have de-classified the charity 'Hope for Tomorrow' saying they were no longer exempt from paying VAT at 20 percent for billed costs, unlike the NHS owned facilities.   Locals, including councillors say that the charity is providing a much needed vital service to cancer patients.  Sutton Council in the light of this sudden move by the HMRC attack, will now lobby the government to look into this matter urgently.  'We are also calling on two MP's and the Mayor of London to support our campaign' said Ms Heron.

' Whistleblowers not welcome at HMRC '

MARGARET HODGE of THE COMMONS PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE said, 'Whistleblowers at the HMRC had been often subjected to bullying and harassment. Citing one particular case she was very familiar with, she said 'Protection for Whistleblowers was still not adequate, and OSITA MBA, a former Lawyer at HMRC who drew attention to what he claimed were 'Sweetheart deals' between the tax authorities and GOLDMAN SACHS, plunged him into something he didn't quite expect.  Margaret Hodge commended Mr Mba calling him a really brave guy, who found it was becoming impossible for him to remain with the HMRC after his disclosures, and he had to start his life again elsewhere.

NB.  One should not forget the Commissioners for the HMRC in the above case, they advise all the HMRC management in order to as they put it ' Very clearly capable of bringing HMRC into disrepute'.  They will obviously stop at nothing to whitewash all the wrongdoing by the HMRC and it looks like this lawyer wasn't the sort they wanted at the tax office.

'BARCLAY BROTHERS SUE HMRC FOR £1 BILLION'  -- Through their company 'LITTLEWOODS' the family group of business giants are suing HMRC for a tax rebate of one billion pounds, concerning 'a compounded interest rate' on VAT they overpaid between 1973 and 2004.  Looking into this firm we see that Barclay Brothers bought 'Littlewoods' in 2002, and somehow found out two years later that they were owed millions in this amazing deal, so why haven't we heard more about this, as this article is dated September 2012.  Have the tax authorities suppressed this item?

'Pensioners finally get a repayment from HMRC'

This case reminds one of the expression 'Buyer Beware' which tells you that this case concerns those pension pot and National Insurance schemes by the Tax Office which let you buy lost credits so that you get a full pension.   John and Jan Airey decided to opt for a £7,000 top up for their state pension pot on the advice of the tax people.  These are called voluntary payments to cover any shortfall.  However, they were not told about a change in the rules which rendered their £7,000 payment useless.  They contacted the HMRC and appealed to the then boss, JON THOMPSON, but this fell on deaf ears!  The couple accused the HMRC of acting like second-hand car dealers, but staff there wear body armour and ear muffs.  It was only when an organisation called 'This is Money' stepped in that the HMRC agreed to repay the old couple as a 'goodwill gesture'.  Mr Airey said 'They were penalised for an honest mistake, but nobody at the HMRC seemed bothered.  STEVE WEBB a former 'Pensions Minister' said of this case, I can quite understand that the Airey's felt like they had been scammed.' (1/9/2017)

' PENSIONERS OVERPAYING £450 MILLION TO HMRC ' -- Since 2010 the Tax Man has known that the system was too complicated and causing distress to many taxpayers.  Millions of pensioners are said to be getting ' A raw Deal'  A report said 'The Public Accounts Committee said that pensioners are poorly served by the HMRC.  They also went on to say, 'It is simply unacceptable older members of society should continue to pay the wrong amount of tax, often 'overpaying' amounts they cannot afford to lose.'

'NEIL MARTIN V THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HMRC' -- This court case of 2007 didn't get much notice at the time, so here it is.  The Court of Appeal clearly showed that an aggrieved taxpayer can sue the HMRC in that they have 'A Duty of Care' to the taxpayer.  Builder Neil Martin suffered severe disruption and loss due to the Tax Man because of a stream of 'errors' made by HMRC when it processed his CIS application in 1999.  This led to unnecessary delays, and he was let down by the Revenue Adjudicator in 2000.  After this it was onwards to the next stage - The Ombudsman whose investigation discovered 'persistent errors' (under COP1).  The Judge said ' The HMRC employee was responsible even though it was denied by HMRC, and Mr Martin's claim for damages was upheld.'

'HMRC MAKE AN-OUT-OF-COURT SETTLEMENT' -- (5/2/2015)  This is the case of Sir Fraser Morrison v HMRC at the Court of Session,  It was confirmed that an out-of-court-settlement in the region of £12 million was paid out by the Inland Revenue following a claim for damages for misrepresentation.  The full details of this can be found at  www.rpc.co.uk/perspectives/tax-take/out-of-court-settlement

'HMRC to be given power to raid taxpayers' bank accounts'

Yes folk, you're getting this hot off the press!  The words 'WITHOUT A COURT ORDER' made the Commons Treasury Committee raise concerns over what this means to the ordinary man in the street, and law!  This recent Treasury Plan (of November 2017) is to allow the Inland Revenue to sidestep normal legal protections in the law.  'It is very concerning, especially in the light of their history of 'mistakes' and 'errors' said the Committee.  It was revealed that HMRC were going to target about 17,000 people a year using these powers.  The Committee didn't pull any punches when they said 'This could be seen as 'An Abuse of Power'.   One Organisation said, If and when they get things wrong, and they do regularly.  How does one get justice and sue them under the present rules which allow them to decide the outcome of any complaint.  It is already known that the HMRC close ranks and makes attempts to cover their mistakes and wrongdoing, and some of these are costly mistakes, and they prevent the public from getting F.O.I. replies because they already know they're exempt from close scrutiny, and don't adhere to transparency or rigorous accountability.  In fact, they're a law unto themselves and they use that to beat down the taxpayer.'

'HMRC IN BLUNDER, CUT OFF TAX CREDITS TO MOTHER --  Mother of one, AnneMarie Anderson's world crashed about her when the Tax Office suspended her tax credits claim.  Even though the blunder was a mess up by that American firm CONCENTRIX who were contracted by HMRC (now fired), the Tax Office were pointing the finger of fraud at her, asking to see a year of bank statements.  Even when she complied with this they actually delayed looking into her case despite knowing she was not getting any official financial support, and she has a young child as she pointed out at the time!

'Revenue Official in 2 million pound VAT Scam'

This one is a mystery official who is not named, even though we did try to follow the trail.  The report says that 'an official' at the HMRC is under investigation for 'allegedly' authorising more than 2 million pounds of unjustified tax rebates.  The un-named civil servant is said to be involved with others?  The report concludes with 'The Police and HMRC have identified eight people who may be linked to the scam, which is believed to have gone on for two years, it further tells us that raids have subsequently taken place!      (16/2/2014)

'MAIL MYSTERY AND SABOTAGE AT HMRC'  - A taxpayer, one of many, says he is deeply worried about his situation in April 2015.  He says that he's having a problem with HMRC and mail.  Not receiving letters relating to his self-assessment.  He sent 3 letters to them all first class and registered involving important  tax paperwork.  Two were sent to their postcode BX9 1AS, 17th March/14th April/ and a later one on the 20th, and none of them showed they'd ever been received.  He asks if they are deliberately not acknowledging registered post?  Well, the answer may lie with others in a similar situation,. Others with similar experiences suggest there may well be a plot to fine the taxpayer who sends it, because they can levy a penalty of £100....and how does this work?  Well, if the officer doesn't sign for it but merely makes it go away, technically the office didn't receive it, because they well know that by taking it and signing, anything else after that date would be seen as their fault.  So by not 'receiving the mail' they render the sender in breach of a penalty, which plays into the HMRC hands.  And finally, one man informs us that the HMRC are systematically blocking up their post boxes because they don't want to deal with any paperwork from the public!

Update on the above -- This BX9 1AS is a bit of a bogus ruse invented by the HMRC, it isn't on the Royal Mail Database.  It is an 'ARTIFICIAL POSTCODE' which sent mail to Bexley in Kent.  And more alarmingly to those that sent packages etc, our research shows this address to be operating the opening of mail 'electronically' and sending things to other HMRC offices.

'HMRC Employees under Criminal Investigation'

This little item was recently uncovered, and it goes back to 19/1/2006, and it centred around a VAT Fraud Trial which collapsed at Southwark Crown Court.  It was said to be one of the costliest cases ever brought.  It was one that the HMRC didn't want known, and they initiated steps to prevent it.  However, 'Special Legislation' was approved to allow the IPCC (Police Complaints Authority) to investigate HMRC Employees, concerning the 'failed' £100 million VAT Case.  Judge Crane, presiding, was said to be highly critical of the manner and process by which unused material had been disclosed by Customs, and raised serious concerns about the evidence given by HMRC Staff, saying that some had withheld evidence from their own legal team, which showed they could not be relied upon to tell the truth.'

NB:  There was no outcome ever published on 'the staff members' and evidence points to it having been suppressed by the Commissioners and HMRC Management along with the Civil Servants Association.

'ANOTHER VICTIM OF HMRC TAX SUSPICIONS' -- There are many victims of HMRC abuse, and not all of them are published.  However, Lorelie Banks will have her space here.  She has one son, Ethan, and she's a single mother who had her tax credits stopped because they accused her of having a 'relationship' with her brother.  Things went so far that the HMRC sent her a bill for £1.400, and said she owed this.  Luckily for her, The Daily Record was interested, and it was subsequently discovered to be a 'HMRC Error', and they reinstated her payments for tax credits.  What they didn't do was, compensate her for the stress and worry caused to this Motherwell citizen. (16/10/2015)

THE HMRC 'RUNAROUND-GAME' FOR TAXPAYERS -- (HMRC FAILING TO REFUND OVERPAID INCOME TAX)  -- This report has a familiar theme now experienced by the taxpayer.  M. Boyce has pointed out that the helpline blurb issued by the Inland Revenue 'If you think you've paid too much tax, you don't need to contact us, we will automatically send you any refund due'  MISDIRECTION is the word here, and they are not to be trusted, nor are their answers to F.O.I. requests.   M.Boyce began writing to them for help! on the 15th of September 2015, and continued until the 2nd of November getting nowhere after being involved in silly games by HMRC staff.  16 letters went back and forth in this matter with HMRC stone-walling at every turn.  The matter was a simple one, but not to the HMRC of course.

HMRC'S UNREASONABLE LITIGATION CONDUCT -- This one involves the HMRC Lawyers.  Dated Sept 18/2017, This concentrates on the unusual decision to award costs in a VAT case to the 'victim' --  Misconduct of the HMRC and its Lawyers -- in the George Rowell Case.  He successfully applied for the taxpayers legal costs in an appeal against VAT assessments for £1.4 million.  This involved a County Taxi  Association representing some 200 drivers.  The Tribunal found HMRC's handling of the matter amounted to 'unreasonable conduct' and rejected HMRC's argument by their Lawyers that 'A PUBLIC BODY SHOULD BE FREE TO WALK AWAY FROM LITIGATION WITHOUT COMPENSATING THE OTHER PARTY FOR ITS COSTS'..........very arrogant, but typical HMRC.

'HMRC Tax Investigator given a jail sentence '

RICHARD BARR of the HMRC was convicted of a £500,000 scam the report said.  It was said in court that he set up two bogus companies dealing in electrical products and claimed £500,000 from the HMRC.  It revealed that Barr had been an Investigator with the HMRC, who looked into financial criminal activities. It was revealed that he used his insider information to warn two co-accomplices who also came from Birmingham.  When the tax scam was discovered, Barr told the others to destroy or hide the evidence.  The Judge said 'As a former Police and Customs Officer, you failed the public miserably.'  He was convicted at Manchester Crown Court on a charge of misconduct in public office?  and was jailed for twelve months.  It was also revealed that his two companies never existed at all. (14/9/2015)

'HMRC AND ITS DOUBLE STANDARDS' --  Double Standards? does that sound like the HMRC.....Well, Margaret Hodge at the Public Accounts Committee (19/12/2011) said so when she heard that 1.4 million people were sent 'back-dated' tax demands totalling almost £4 billion, after experiencing problems with the PAYE system.  She went onto say 'Revenue Executives have become 'Unduly Cosy' with larger firms and have tried to hide from public scrutiny details of a series of deals with companies'  HMRC failed to collect more than £25 billion in 'unresolved tax bills' from major firms.

'HMRC LOSE IN SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT' -- (March 2014).  The mighty Lawyers at the HMRC arrogantly felt confident that they could defeat the defendants, Secret Hotels 2 Ltd, on VAT treatment of Booking Agents Services.  They had been 'dining out' on previous success at the Court Of Appeal in 2012.  But this time they lost and the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Lower Court, stating that 'One aspect of economics reality is that it is the hotelier, not the Company, who owns the accommodation and its the customer, not the company. to whom it is ultimately supplied.'

'HMRC FAILINGS LED TO PAYMENT THREATS' -- This is the case of Tony Hetherington who suffered misery at the hands of the HMRC as they kept on demanding a rising assessment of what they said he owed the Inland Revenue.  Tony and his wife suffered stress and the thought of losing everything once these people at the Tax Office set about them.  However, knights in shining armour, The Financial Mail involved themselves in questioning the HMRC on how they arrived at these assessments.  The result was thus, the HMRC had clearly failed to carry out a proper investigation.  Tony had actually overpaid the taxman, and they owed him £187.  The threats ceased, and the staff at HMRC just moved onto another victim. (2012)

'HMRC Administration officer is jailed for 2 years'

(May 2013)  HMRC Civil Servant ISOMIDOLA OLAJIDE fraudulently obtained tax credits to the value of £72,000, by using a false claim as a single parent when she was not.  She worked in a London Branch of the Inland Revenue from 2003 to 2013.  The Judge said this was 'Hard nosed dishonesty over a significant period of time' when she appeared at Woolwich Crown Court, having admitted to tax fraud.  She was handed a jail sentence of two years.

'HMRC IN SECRET DEAL WITH THE FOOTBALL RICH' -- It was always suspected and known that the HMRC was engaging in 'Special Deals' for the wealthy'  said former Chairman of The Public Accounts Committee, Margaret Hodge.  'These kind of secret deals for the wealthy are totally unjustifiable, they are the kind of thing that brings the whole tax system into disrepute!'     The exact amount by which the football clubs have reduced their tax bills under the secret deal is not known -- and looking at the HMRC's track record, no one will find out because they will hide it from the taxpayers.

'BULLIED AND PRESSURISED BY THE HMRC' -- DH received  a demand from the tax man of £3,800, and they wanted it now!  The letter said 'On speaking to HMRC by phone, they agreed this was not the correct amount.  They'd also sent him communicates urging that he sell his car or anything expensive like sports gear to pay the bill.  It appears none of this was his fault, and the assessment was way over the top.  But DH had to fight them all the way...and according to some top accountants, the assessment thing is one of the biggest 'legal cons' that HMRC love to send the taxpayer.  (2013)

'HMRC HIT OUT AT DISABILITY CHARITIES'  -- Yet again in their quest to take no prisoners, Lawyer Matt Wort of Anthony Collins Solicitors spoke out against the HMRC, saying, 'The demand  of £400 million back pay taxes from disability charities was 'unlawful'.  He said, 'An internal guidance note to HMRC's compliance staff in use until March 2016, shows the department was enforcing contradictory guidance at that time'  (2017) Go to link for more on this  www.civilsociety.co.uk/hmrc-back-pay-demands

'Former HMRC advisor is jailed over share fraud'

A FORMER HMRC ADVISOR DAVID PERRIN set up a fairly massive tax avoidance scheme involving charities who suspected nothing of his dirty dealings.  Perrin and Vantis Tax Ltd became so confident that they actually claimed £70 million tax relief in connection with the shares, and these shares were discovered to be worthless it was said in court.  Perrin believed he knew the tax system so well, especially as he'd been with HMRC, that he stole millions of pounds from the taxpayers.  He was jailed for 18 months for tax fraud and exploited the rules for his own gain. (Feb 2012)

'HMRC BREACHED DUTY OF CONFIDENTIALITY'  -- What we know so far is that taxpayers are not regarded much by the people who run the Inland Revenue, and this little item from (13/12/2016) proves it.  The Supreme Court decided that the HMRC had breached its statutory duty of confidentiality, set out in Section 18(1) of the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act (2005), in disclosing confidential information relating to INGENIOUS MEDIA HOLDINGS to two journalists during an 'off the record' press briefing by the Head of HMRC.  The Court said 'It was not part of HMRC's function to pass on confidential information to the Press'

NB:  The Head of HMRC who was involved was not named, nor disciplined!

HMRC PAYOUTS TO SACKED STAFF REVEALED -- This item is not intended to show regret for HMRC as we openly seek to bring you cases and information that damages these claims of being reputable. But this one does fall into the category of character reference and show just what they will do to their own.  It seems that 'disgusting' may not be the right word for certain HMRC practices that have been going on at the Inland Revenue for a long time.  Worker Alison Doran was awarded compensation of £11,581-03 by a tribunal panel that heard that HMRC had sacked her for her disability.  Worker Sara Pryde received compensation of £11,570 for a similar complaint against HMRC, and lastly, Rebecca Smith received £9,000 for discrimination at work against HMRC.  (13/6/2017)  There are many others.

'UNIVERSITY AWARD GOES TO HMRC WHISTLEBLOWER' -- Former Solicitor to the HMRC OSITA MBA was given an award by Middlesex University for his bravery in exposing corruption and the tax deal brokered by the Head of Tax DAVE HARTNELL, who let off Goldman Sachs in a private deal so that they could benefit from not having to pay £10 million in interest. (2014)

NB: One should be quite cautious in praising this solicitor, the nice bloke image only applies to the Goldman Sachs case, he was after all engaged in making other decisions for the HMRC that might cancel out this gesture of openness.

'Man commits suicide over HMRC tax demand'

The affect they have on the taxpayer can have drastic consequences, which they play down and feel no blame for, and we have one here, and we'll tell you their response to this suicide.  On receiving a tax demand for £3,000, and being relentlessly pursued by the Inland Revenue staff, builder Simon Thompson stabbed himself in the heart in front of his bride-to-be.  These facts came out at the Inquest in Worthing, West Sussex.  Like many taxpayers, Simon got the bill at an extremely bad moment in his life after returning home from a special romantic trip with his wife to be.  His whole world turned upside down by the tax demand, devastating him completely.  A spokesman said 'one cannot lay the circumstances of this on the HMRC?'

PS We can and we do with many others that see this as the knife that drove him to the act, that letter was clearly a major factor.

It has been reported to us that, in these circumstances the tax bill is levied against the estate of the deceased.

HMRC PARTY TO THE CONCENTRIX EVIL -- Thousands of claimants for tax credit were hounded by this American firm contracted by HMRC.  Concentrix acted wilfully and at times unlawfully in the full knowledge of the HMRC who always step back and change the story with Lawyers at hand to write and invent the scripts.  People were accused of cheating on their tax credits, besides threats to have their benefits stopped a report says.  Staff at Concentrix admitted to The Independent newspaper that they were under pressure to do around 50 new tax credit investigations a day, and they don't have time to check whether the allegations were correct?

45,000 AWARDS SUSPENDED IN HMRC BLUNDER -- In 2016, HMRC chose not to worry about the problems they caused to claimants waiting for their tax credits during the renewal process.  They caused unnecessary hardship and distress, and even later they only reinstated 30,000 claims to which people had been entitled.  Public Account Committee Chairman MEG HILLER said 'The HMRC must put right the damage done, and that means fully reinstating the awards of all claimants who wrongly lost their tax credits, and ensuring they are properly compensated for any impact on their entitlement to other benefits'

NB:  WE HAVEN'T FOUND A SINGLE PERSON COMPENSATED.

'COURT RULES AGAINST HMRC OVER UNFAIR CLOSURE NOTICES' -- Ref: Manswoth v Jelley.  -Hely -Hutchinson.  The court quashed closure notices by the Inland Revenue because HMRC had not properly considered whether assessing tax that was technically due would be so unfair as to amount to 'An Abuse of Power'   HMRC had breached the principle that all taxpayers should be treated fairly and consistently because other 'Mansworth v Jolley'  loss claims had been allowed, unlawful use of statutory power to enquire into a taxpayers affairs.

HMRC Chief accused of Arrogance'

'We made no mistakes' said the boss of HMRC (2010) DAME LESLEY STRATHIE over a tax fiasco affecting millions of people.  She actually said her staff made no mistakes to which she was clearly wrong.  The Treasury Select Committee were not convinced, and blamed her for raising public anger towards the Inland Revenue.  Labour MP George Mudie, a member of the Committee accused her of arrogance - 'I thought her remarks about business and choosing customers told you all you need to know about HMRC thinking.  They seem to regret the fact that as public servants they have to serve all the public.'

'HMRC RUNNING ROUGHSHOD OF DATA LAW'  -- The Data Protection Act was supposed to be a legal guardian to millions of people and businesses in the UK, yet, the HMRC have no regard for it at all, unless?  its their data.  And that is protected with all the force they can use inside or outside of the law.  This little item comes via the solicitors, not theirs I may add.  And they believe they have been compromised by HMRC with their clients, and they risk being sued by them for releasing confidential information.  Strangely enough, the HMRC aren't big on confidentiality if you've read some of our other reports. (HMRC BREACH THE RULE OF CONFIDENTIALITY)

'HMRC ACCUSED OF HARASSING SMALL BUSINESSES'  -- Business leaders and Associations along with MP's have criticised the abuse of power frequently acted out by the tax man as they increase 'spot checks' on small companies and traders.  Mr Walker, the Chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses said ' We have approached the HMRC on this subject several times and told them they are not doing themselves any favours in launching this scheme regardless of the consequences.'  MP Priti Patel said ' The persecution of small businesses is not a welcome thing, and the attitude of HMRC to small businesses is frankly quite disgraceful.'  (2/1/2012)

'Drinks Firm considers suing the HMRC'

ESSEX DRINKS WHOLESALER MILLENIUM CASH 'N' CARRY are considering taking the Inland Revenue to court for damages to its business and reputation.  The HMRC seized around £150,000 worth of its stock in a sudden raid and impounded it.  QC for the company, Philip Coppel, said 'This has had a catastrophic effect on the business and daily trade, and its employees.  This is a prolonged and deliberate misuse of highly invasive powers.'     The HMRC declined to comment....now there's a surprise.   (6/8/2010)

'MAN IS TO SUE HMRC FOR WRONGFUL ARREST' -- Following on nicely from the above item, Richard Hillgrove, Advisor to the TV's Dragons Den team announced that he was told by a police insider to press his lawyer into a case against the HMRC, because he has a strong enough case.  He was initially arrested and charged with cheating the Inland Revenue of £100,000.   He told journalists ' they stormed into my house and acted very inappropriately...The Bristol Office!  (yes we've got some info on them)  and he was taken to Taunton Police Station for questioning.  He described it like a 'Gestapo' arrest, which other taxpayers concur in other items on this page.  (12/9/2012)

'HMRC IN 'RUBBER STAMP' OPERATION TO SEARCH'  -- This has some nasty HMRC activity so read on --- Lord Justice Gillen said ' A process to obtain warrants to search the homes of four accountants under investigation for suspected tax evasion could be seen as just a 'rubber stamping operation.'  He pressed Counsel for the HMRC on the lack of available reasons for authorising raids on the accountants.  Justice Gillen was also told that the HMRC 'misled magistrates' who granted granted the warrants at hearings where the men were not represented.  The defendant's Lawyer, Barry MacDonald QC said ' The move by the HMRC was intrusive and breached the Human Rights Act in the case of the defendants.  The early morning raids were carried out when their children were at home, and this involved officers trawling and searching through schoolbags!  He further suggested that the Inland Revenue haven't played a straight bat in this case, either in dealing with this investigation or in dealing with this application for a Judicial Review.'   (30/11/2016)

'Tax Man involved in Child Porn Cache'

HMRC TAX MAN BENEDICT CULLUM was found to have over 2,000 images of kids, some as early as 6yrs in age, in abuse situations on his computer.  He admitted to one charge of making indecent images of children when he appeared before Magistrates in Stockport, Cheshire.  Police had made a raid on his house and seized the pc and its collection of photos.  It went onto say that he resigned from his position as a Senior Officer with the HMRC after the arrest.  There were 2,714 category C images!  He was told that he could face a jail term.  (29/10/2015)

'FURY OVER HMRC BULLY-BOY TACTICS' -- Often read about, and little done is the real answer to curbing these abuses by the tax man, and why is that so?  Why is Parliament standing back?  Who are these Commissioners for HMRC and what agendas do they have?   Another 'new' report says the tax man is facing new fury as it emerged HMRC had been given sweeping powers to fine people who owe money just for knocking on their doors.  People who are behind on their taxes are being hit with stiff penalties for visits to their homes by the HMRC!  (November 28th 2017)

'JUDGE CONDEMNS HMRC SECRET DEALS'  --  In this case of the taxman's 'secret deal' which allowed fraudsters to go free --- We look at a Court case in Leeds.  A Judge has condemned a 'secret policy' by the HMRC not to prosecute fraudsters who may have cheated the taxpayer out of millions of pounds in revenue through a scheme allowing disabled people to buy cars free of VAT.  This decision by the HMRC was revealed at Leeds Crown Court when a case collapsed against nine defendants facing conspiracy charges.  The Judge was furious with how much the case had cost on investigation and prosecution, which was begun and entered into because the Police and Crown Prosecution Service were 'unaware' of the HMRC 'Secret Policy'     (23/2/2010)

'OUTRAGE OVER HMRC SECRET TAX DEAL FOR MICROSOFT' -- Corruption meets corruption here as we see the big players in what one could call 'mutual admiration' -- you scratch my back and I will?  Demands have been made for the government and HMRC to publish details of the deal it did with the Internet Giant.  Microsoft has 'avoided' up to £100 million a year in Corporation tax under a 'confidential agreement' with the Tax man.  Alex Cobham of the Tax Justice Network said' It is simply untenable for HMRC to claim taxpayer confidentiality as an excuse to keep these deals private'  The arrangement with Microsoft is known as 'An advance Pricing Agreement' (The former PM David Cameron was there in 2012 when this was agreed)  Alex went onto say 'It's difficult to fathom how HMRC could have agreed a deal that legitimised the scale of misalignment between Microsoft's real activity and its tax profits?

(We have more on Microsoft at our associated new site CORRUPT DOMAINS AND WEB HOSTS.COM on Google sites -- just go to Google listing at https://sites/google.com/site/corruptdomainsandwebhosts/

'610 H M R C staff disciplined and dismissed'

Over 610 civil servants at the HMRC have been disciplined for inappropriately accessing tax records of taxpayers since the Department was formed by the merger of Customs and Excise and The Inland Revenue three years ago says a recently accessed article -- info by a website The A Register 1st May 2008.  The details are sadly far and few between on the offences committed at the HMRC, and we certainly wish we had the 610 cases to publish here, mind you, we will still go on searching for these no matter what.  The Financial Secretary at the time, one JANE KENNEDY played down the number saying it only represented one per cent of the total workforce at HMRC.  So we will show you her figures, the official ones?   Between April 2005 to December 2005 it says that 238 members of staff were caught snooping.  In January to December 2006  it says 180 were caught.  In January to December 2007 it says a rise to 192.  So taking that this rise indicates a future upward trend we did a modern calculation on this using the known 'assessment' records the taxman does to mere mortals it goes after and the figures show this to be on a calculation of x2, and then x2 of that which taxmen do to you the taxpayer, and we arrive at 2,440  and a figure of around 5 percent each year of the fiddling, corrupt HMRC civil servants.

'HMRC APPLIES FOR THE POWER TO TAKE FINGERPRINTS'  -The Taxman showed incredible audacity in 2006 when it went to its friends, the government, seeking to gain the authority to take fingerprints of suspects -- the taxpayer.  In fact it wanted free access to 'water down' all rights in law to make it easier for them to get search warrants and even more evasive powers.  They said 'We want to avoid delays, which often happens when we face the normal channels'  -- which was a crass statement to make in the Press.

'TRIBUNAL RULES THAT HMRC CALCULATIONS UNFAIR' -- Mr and Mrs Jeffries were hotel owners who began an appeal, and appeared at the Tribunal Court to challenge the HMRC on a PPR calculation worked out by the taxman.  In the case of the above I.S. Jeffries and L.A.Jeffries versus The HMRC, it was decided that HMRC's approach was definitely wrong.  (28/3/2014)

'MAN FIGHTS FOR REFUND FROM THE HMRC'  -- Branch Manager Mr Mooney claimed he was wrongly treated by the tax man, he claimed he should be regarded as self-employed, and assessed accordingly.  THE HIGH COURT held that the tax man was wrong in the Lower Court when the Inspector of Taxes appealed the decision and achieved a win.  The High Court up held Mr Mooney's claim and the HMRC had to pay back a sum of £58,853 refund, and the court also made an order that the HMRC should pay interest on this.

'The HMRC Tax Credit Rip-off and Clawback'

Not often talked about in detail, so we've got a case here that shows you just how callous and calculating the staff are at this Government Department -- so read on.

CITIZEN D had his tax credits terminated in November by the Tax man A.CREWE in Preston, who made several disparaging remarks about D-s business, even though he knew very little about it.  CREWE was only interested in profitable businesses.  Citizen D. had been struggling to make ends meet and make a living, and realised for himself that the end was in sight for the trade he'd set up in 1998.  But A.CREWE remarked that he didn't consider citizen D. was in a trade, profession or vocation that is commercial. (Somehow, we don't think the other second-hand booksellers will take kindly to this at all)  CREWE promptly informed citizen D. that he was stopping the Tax credits immediately and re-branding the original award to the beginning of the tax year on the 6th of April 2017, of which they'd already made payments totalling £1,745. 01 which works out at £54.53 a week.  Which now means citizen D. was living on a weekly income of around £15.36, not that A.CREWE cares.  Even with the tax credit award citizen D. only earned about £69.89 a week, which is far below the minimum wage and categorised 'poor' by the Government itself.  Now A.CREWE has made citizen D. in debt to the HMRC for that £1,745.01 and intends to claw it back.  Citizen D. cannot do a back claim for JSA or Universal credit, he takes a huge loss and is now in debt due to this A.CREWE who realise he lived on only £15.36 most of the time...and being on tax credits at the time he couldn't insure himself against this move and sign on, because he's only allowed one benefit and he chose the lower to minimise his claim from the taxpayer.  No doubt the Conservative Government or May, and not forgetting the evil A,CREWE won't be in the same boat, he or she simply moves onto another tax credit claimer feeling victorious in a warped and perverted way....an utterly corrupt individual.

So beware all tax credit claimers, there are probably more cases of this, and its probably not the first time A.CREWE has been on a 'wrecking mission' for his or her paymasters.

'THE CONTINUED CORRUPTION IN THE HMRC AND DWP'  -- Individuals like Meakin and Crewe are not rare in the tax office, they are simply part of the wider fabric called 'the staff' they are indoctrinated into corruption by the policies issued by The Commissioners and politicians that hide behind the schemes to deprive the public out of everything they can, and get the law to back up this by using crafty conniving solicitors to ruthlessly harass and alter the laws meaning to represent their paymasters views.  If you've already seen and read the above item and the HMRC freedom of information fiasco, you'll not be surprised to hear that we looked at a similar thing on the DWP and they were just as evasive.  A man asked about help with fares and travel involved with seeking a job, and quite rightly pointed out that these were extra costs beyond the so-called JSA which says' JSA is the amount you need to live on' and there's no clarification that this should also include extra costs borne by the claimant, who may end up with much less to live on.  The Freedom of Information reply dodged the issue several times by saying the words they often credit the allowance to, isn't exact, and it is up to the jobseeker to see that they attend any interviews with no mention of compensation, saying that the Jobcentre has a small pot of cash that is carefully managed to help 'in some cases' -- yet another get out, in other words corruptly interpreting the law to suit what they want, and to make sure they are not caught out, and this is typical of Tax staff who in the fiasco article also confused the applicant and avoided any direct question with a planned answer to deceive and mislead the claimant, whilst at the same time covering their backs.....this is a very dark and devious corruption that these departments play in order to save money, deter claimants, and to control claimants with threats of a financial and penalty situation.

CORRUPTION MEANS 'To Wilfully deprive or Disadvantage' someone to the advantage of another/to be morally depraved....which the DWP spokesperson was doing and so were Meakin and Crewe.  Their intentions were to weed out claimants and end their claims, and in the case of the Inland Revenue, disadvantage them and drive them into debt, showing no moral compass, compassion or mercy, and to wilfully execute this as soon as possible.

'WOMAN'S ESTATE CHALLENGES HMRC AND WINS'  -- Good news here for the taxpayer, An Upper Tribunal rejected an appeal made by the HMRC when it pursued a deceased's money.  The case involved a woman who was terminally ill.  The HMRC treated a transfer deal only entered into just a matter of weeks before her death, as a 'chargeable lifetime transfer' and put in a claim for inheritance tax.  The Court ruled that and IHT advantage gained from the transfer was 'not intended to confer gratuitous benefit' and therefore HMRC's appeal was rejected.  The Deceased woman was Mrs Staveley (January 25th 2017)

NB: The above case just shows you the motivation outstrips anything else -- a means to their end, the tax man has no principles!

'HMRC SPIES -- GOVERNMENT APPROVED'  -- The Government and HMRC are but one, a nicely tight knitted band of robbers in one guise or another -- that's why they get even more power to snoop and defile the moral codes that are already fractured by society.  A report says HMRC officers monitor E-Bay, Amazon and much more as they hire data anylists in their quest to suck out the cash from taxpayers.  Auction sites, shops etc, can be forced to hand over your details.  The only Data Law that exists with the HMRC, is their own, and accessing info is strictly discouraged and denied in 99 percent of cases, and that's to protect the staff and the dirty deals they engage in.

GAGGING ORDERS IMPOSED ON EX-HMRC FIRED WORKERS' --  As we set about finding out who these dismissed workers were that were fired for misconduct etc, one of these guys contacted us through our corruptionseeker e-mails account.  Before we could get anywhere he asked us not to reveal his name for fear of reprisals from HMRC, particularly the Commissioners he said.  Reluctant as we are we did the deal so that you can now know why there isn't a huge story file, it's prevented by the HMRC and their Lawyers. He sent us a copy of his termination letter which proved interesting more by what it failed to say or disclose.  They mentioned 'reports' department heads and managers besides how the investigation into their offence was carried out before coming to the final paragraph and that's the bit that sounded more like a threat!  Obviously from their Legal Department, it said they were not allowed to disclose the contents which it pointed out was 'confidential' and they were not to discuss or communicate the contents of the letter with anyone else, repeat, copy etc, as this could result in further action against them of legal proceedings....a little bit like the Official Secrets Act, which they meant it to sound like.

So, now we know why those 0riginal 610 can't be found on the Internet, but we're going to try and find some of them.

' HMRC Tax Officer stole £160,000'

HMRC Employee RUTH KEVAN was a manager at The Tax Office in Southend, Essex, and a much praised member of staff.  But this all faded when she appeared at Basildon Crown Court facing theft charges.  She apparently conned fellow staff members to invest money into a savings club run by Kevan, which was being run like a Ponzi-style Scam.  It was said she took around £160,000 and spent it on a luxury lifestyle....apparently her husband, who also worked at the Tax Office alongside her, said he knew nothing of what she had been doing!  She was jailed for two and a half years.  (6/11/2013)

MISCALCULATIONS OF HMRC REVEALED IN LEAKED MEMO -- The Taxman found things rather awkward when it was revealed that a blunder by staff sent out thousands of tax statements that were in fact, incorrect.  The report went onto say that around five million UK workers have been discovered to have underpaid or overpaid through the PAYE system.  The leaked memo said they were 'sorry' about the incorrect calculations and that they were investigating these cases,  Stuart Philips who runs a Financial Advice Firm said 'This clearly calls into question their ability to do accurate assessments in the real time system.'   (9/10/2014)

HMRC NOT THE PLACE YOU THINK IT IS?  --- We grabbed this from a forum we happened upon, and took out some tasty bits for this page, and we're going to begin with one that certainly sounds genuine, and casts doubts on a lot of the others.

'Most reviews on this forum are like CV fillers!'

'HMRC not the best place to work due to the inexperience of all managers, especially HEO's who would not advise applicants'

'You tend to report to someone who has no knowledge of tax Law and less in people.'

'You're judged on numbers, not knowledge, compassion or understanding.'

'You'll get bored of ignoring customers!'

'Its a depressing atmosphere and repetitive work'

'Bullying managers, who are covert and divisive!'

'They care more about the pennies than the people who help run the place.  and they care more about 'stats' than the welfare of claimants.'

So there you are, we left it at that point because some of the praises looked artificial and placed on the forum deliberately.

HMRC DATA BLUNDER LEADS TO LOWER PENSIONS --- This recent report says around 4 million ordinary workers about to retire on a new flat rate pension could get the wrong amount because of inaccurate records.  It says that early information dating back to 1978 is riddled with errors and mistakes which could affect pensions.  The Treasury have been told that data being used to calculate the £155 a week pension is unreliable.  The HMRC made no comment other than the matter is of urgent concern and is being looked into.

'Bungling Tax Inspectors Overpaid themselves £22 million over the past decade'

It emerged in a Whitehall paper that tax workers were involved in many tax blunders which resulted in the HMRC Officials chasing down their colleagues to get overpayments back.  This 'untouched' article from The Mail Online, said that 245 HMRC employees were overpaid more than £1,000 last year as a result of 'errors' in the Payroll Department.  In 2015 to 2016, salary blunders added up to £1.4 million! an average of £5,000 extra for each staff member.  (Published 15th Feb 2017)

'RAIL WORKER RECEIVES TAX DEMAND FOR £14 TRILLION?' -- A man from Bristol who works on the railways was shocked to receive a tax bill from the HMRC demanding a payment of £14 trillion pounds.  Giles Hembrough opened the ominous brown envelope and was completely stunned by what he saw.  The HMRC had changed his tax code prior to this, and the bill said 'they would let him know if this amount is right?'  The tax office blamed it on a computer error saying that these bills are 'generated' by recent activity on record, but it apparently looks as if someone fell asleep on the keyboard!'

FORMER 'CONCENTRIX' WORKER SAYS HMRC WAS AT FAULT, NOT CONCENTRIX  -- At last, a rebuttle, as a recently dismissed tax worker who fell victim of the cancelled contract by HMRC, said 'It was HMRC poor systems to blame. 'After we closed off cases, it just sits there in a sort of limbo stage, waiting for HMRC to process it' she said.  'There were massive delays and we took the blame, well, it was pushed onto us.  Everything was supposed to run right, but it was at the HMRC end that it failed, but as they were paying the £75 million bill, we were used to cover their errors.'  (October 3rd 2016)

THE MASSIVE HMRC LIE -- HMRC make the false statement of 'If your payments have gone down' they will help. this is a flight of fancy and cannot be supported by this organisation.  It pretends that you the claimant, cannot meet your essential living expenses because your payments have gone down, they laughably ask you to contact them 'as we may be able to make extra payments'.  These are greatly exaggerated and mostly a lie perpetrated by HMRC staff.  Having looked at this closely, it becomes obvious that they cannot explain what essential needs are, and who qualifies for it...and that is no one.  They more or less say that once your benefit has been fixed that's all you are allowed to by law, their law, so any extra is not an entitlement and they turn most people asking this, away and point them to the DWP and other benefits they're not likely to get.  Tax credits are fixed at certain rates which are rigorously controlled, there is no room to offer extra help, all the staff know it, and dangle this bit of fiction in front of people to con them.  'may be able' isn't something that can be relied upon.  Its not enforceable or policy of the Inland Revenue, its a piece of propaganda aimed to deceive the public.

'Revelations of a CORRUPT HMRC Culture'

This next item was an actual government appraisal of HMRC and The Committees worries over their non compliance in many areas.

REPORT OF SESSION 2010 - 2012 -- THE COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

'Inland Revenue try to avoid scrutiny and consistently fail to give straight answers to any questions regarding their operations.'

Disturbing Fact: There is a provision that allows The Commissioners to authorise disclosure of confidential taxpayers details' (and this goes unchecked most of the time)

'The HMRC withhold details from Parliament which reduces transparency and makes it impossible for Parliament to hold The Commissioners to account?'

'There is the Departments failure to comply with its own processes.'

'They often take no responsibility for serious errors.'

'They make many spurious arguments in front of the tribunal'

'They can withhold repayments (refunds) which cause delay, and evidence shows that the HMRC go way beyond the Statute and what their guidelines allow!'

'Any challenge of a decision or repayment must trigger an enquiry, and this is often overlooked by HMRC officers.'

'They apply restrictive conditions designed to delay or deny a claimant -- the subjectivity is as follows -- 'unconscionable' 'unprincipled' and 'indefensible' and many more such terms (invented by their crafty Lawyers)

The Public Accounts Committee were quick to point out this -- 'We saw very little evidence of personal accountability within the Department'

There was more, but the above facts give the game away.

'NO PROTECTION FROM THE HMRC ON DATA'  --- The only secret and safe data? to be not seen by the majority of taxpayers is with the HMRC.  Even their Freedom of Information answers are evasive and corruptly arrogant.  As to Claimants and Taxpayers, their data is an 'open market' to be picked on and shared by 60 other countries.  They operate a program called 'CONNECT' which cost the taxpayer £80 million.  Its function and purpose is to find out everything about you, personal info, commercial info, and your life to a very invasive degree.  They even scour sites like Facebook, Amazon and E-bay to see if they can get you.  Anything odd or vaguely connecting to a rumour is flagged up, and an invisible investigation is prompted.  And if it leads to a wrong assumption and damages, the Lawyers for HMRC automatically place legal hurdles and stonewalling to hinder and destroy the claimants chances of compensation.

HMRC TAX CREDIT DETECTIVES POUNCE ON THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE'  - An article by Simon Read tells you how it is with the HMRC.....and their motto is -- 'You're guilty until proven innocent'   And our research here shows that to be so.  He goes on to say that tens of thousands of people have been targeted with bullying letters from HMRC.  A despicable case in point is -- One woman who received just £15 a week in tax credits was threatened, and asked to prove that she was innocent of the allegation they made.  They told her that her tax credits would be stopped within 30 days.  She had to send in bank statements, rental agreements, gas bills, and numerous other things of a confidential nature.  We did an experiment here, and got someone to ask a tax officer whether they were willing to show such items, this led to answer that said all data of HMRC staff was confidential and not available under the law?   So as we can see it, there's one law for them, and another for the public.

'HACKER SAYS HE CAN GET INTO ANY HMRC FILES'  -- and just to finish this section, we came across a statement by a hacker, and this is what he says.  'All that I need to do is find a Customs Official to compromise (and that's not difficult), and I will have access to basic tax records.   With an Official in The Revenue Commissioners, HMRC, I can acess bank account details held by offices, addresses, assets, even investment details all for the price of a 'burner phone'  I don't even need to know how to turn on the computer, and restricted databases are quite easy really!

'HMRC Suppress 'Damages' Reporting'

The current tax credit hardship processes are not well publicised, and very little information is provided about when someone might qualify under the Hardship Provisions.  The HMRC are quite well aware of this and instead of making an effort to ease stress and breakdowns caused, the Commissioners back a policy of 'Suppression' so that they can keep it out of the public arena and Media, so that they are not briefed on these awful actions and the results, and there are many cases, but not often picked up by the casual person on the street.  This obviously suits the Inland Revenue and as far as we can see they don't really care.  We tried to find some, but drew a blank, which certainly shows how effective the HMRC are in covering up a scandal.

HMRC CHIEF FORCED TO APOLOGISE FOR BLUNDER' --- Top Civil Servant and boss of HMRC, David Hartnett, kept his arrogant stance until the last moment as the pressure mounted in the Government and Public gaze.  This was the man who said 'I'm not sure I see a need to apologise over blunders that left 1.4 million people facing demands for an average of £1,428 extra tax'  on a radio 4 interview.  However, on reflection he issued one and the HMRC tried to make light of it as usual.

HMRC WRONGLY SEND OUT WRONGLY SENT PENALTY NOTICES TO 12,000 PEOPLE.  -- Busy tax officials sent out some 12,000 penalty notices for non-filing of tax returns, warning them of daily fines amounting to £10 a day.  It turned out these were incorrect and were sent out in 'error'    This 'error' followed an earlier error when the HMRC sent out around a million letters containing potentially confusing information about child tax credits!    Not bad for a department that claims it doesn't do mistakes?    (April 2012)

THE FLAWED HMRC TAX CREDIT APPEALS -- You are led to believe that you can dispute an overpayment decision because it wasn't your fault, and in many cases the client isn't aware of an impending catastrophe about to arrive by a vindictive tax officer out to screw up people's lives.  But often or not, they get a kick out of doing this -- and it's the 'Powerkick', a sense of being God and one without morals.  The .Gov site almost destroys the notion of fairplay, as it openly says that FEWER THAN 1 IN 10 TAX CREDIT DISPUTES ARE SUCCESSFUL,  and the criteria necessary is that you've got to prove they made 'a mistake'  and as we see from these arrogant civil servants, they only have 'errors' and no mistakes!

'HMRC Civil Servant gets £19,000 to find new job, and is re-employed on £50,000 a month!'

Yes, and this one refused to work for anything less?  HMRC civil servant DEEPAK SINGH who quit his tax post because he was only earning £160,000,  walked back into the HMRC just weeks after quitting to be re-employed for £600,000 a year, and this was all over his lack of promotion within the department?  Apparently, a disgusted MP wrote to The Chief Secretary to the Treasury demanding an investigation.  The scandal emerged as Chief of HMRC Dame Strathie was being quizzed by The Commons Public Accounts Committee.  (13th October 2010)

PS.  No investigation took place and HMRC 'blagged' its way out of the situation.

'HMRC MAN ON ADULTERY WEBSITE'  --- Yes, we've found it. so here's the story you may not be aware of.  The article says that civil servants used official Government websites to register profiles and explicit sexual fantasies on an Adultery website.  Some of these officials were identified as belonging to The Inland Revenue and Ministry of Justice, who used their 'secure' accounts on a website for those seeking illicit affairs, One Senior HMRC official described himself as 'a great dad' before specifying that he wanted to meet a 'curvy raven haired MILF' its translation being a sleazy Internet Acronym.  They used the Government Secure Intranet (GSI) which is intended to let civil servants send confidential and restricted information securely. All this came to light when hackers broke into the site and released details of the users.  Interestingly The Home Office gave this statement - ' The Civil Service Code outlines the values and standards of behaviour expected of all civil servants' --- which of course is shattered already and means very little, if nothing!

'Individuals Can sue the HMRC says the Court of Appeal'

To get compensation from The Inland Revenue was made easier by the Court of Appeal who said the citizen can sue the HMRC for damages in certain circumstances?   This came about because of The Neil Martin Case in 2007 (EWCA Civ 1041) when he took on the Commissioners for the HMRC.  Neil Martin was a builder who suffered at the hands of the taxman severely due to a stream of so called 'errors' made by them which resulted in heavy losses to his business.  One claim he made, weighted heavily in the HMRC favour under the Code of Practice floundered and followed by an appeal, was rejected by guess who?  The Revenue Adjudicator! in 2000.  His last step was to the Ombudsman whose own 'untainted' investigation, led to 'a striking and important letter' from the Deputy Chairman of The Inland Revenue that confirmed that these numerous errors and delays fell into the classification of 'Persistent errors' and Mr Martin's Common Law argument was agreed upon unanimously by the court.

'THE STRANGE RELATIONSHIP OF IAN BARLOW (HMRC) AND THE CANDY BROTHERS?' -- Barlow, who became the Head of HMRC came under the scrutiny and interest of PRIVATE EYE, and questions arose over whether Ian Barlow, having been the Head of an Accounting firm KVMG's tax practise of running off-shore tax avoidance schemes until 2001, and then the firm's Senior UK partner until leaving and taking up the Candy Directorship!  PRIVATE EYE said they'd seen evidence that showed Barlow acted as an Advisor to the billionaire Candy Brothers.  PRIVATE EYE put several questions to HMRC, but they said Mr Barlow was unable to answer the questions as he was 'on leave'.... probably off-shore?

HMRC IN DISPUTE WITH MANY FIRMS OVER TAX -- The taxman may be looking at their own bill (taxpayers bill) of £43 billion pounds, the cost of repaying firms who say they have been paying too much tax.  This figure was released in their latest annual accounts (Aug 2015) as the HMRC are locked in a battle of multi-million law cases with dozens of Corporations who believe they are owed refunds.  Some of these are Littlewoods the catalogue people, the Prudential, British American Tobacco etc.

'MAN PLANS TO FIGHT HMRC OVER TAX CODES' -- Keith Watkins, now 70, said he received five separate letters in one day, all from the HMRC demanding money to cover 'underpaid tax'.  He said he couldn't see or understand how these adjustments are calculated, and that goes for these tax codes, and that makes it very difficult for me to check if they're right!  Mr Watkins is worried that his latest codes may be wrong too.  'I will definitely be challenging the demand for payment, as it is not fair to land pensioners with unexpected bills of this nature!'

'The Inland Revenue Compensation Saga'

Claiming costs?  from HMRC.......From what we've gathered, it's an absolute nightmare according to a businessman who has spent hours listening to recorded messages all about how much information is available on the HMRC website, and then you get disconnected afre about three minutes or so.  And he has been waiting for tax codes because the HMRC were taking weeks to sort the matter out.  He was advised to lodge a series of complaints, quantify the cost of the financial loss he's incurred, and then make the claim based on solid agreement with them that HMRC was faulty in its service delivery.   However, before you go this far, you will be passed from pillar to post through a whole series of 'customer service' officers, departments, who have no understanding whatsoever of tax or the HMRC systems, and are chiefly skilled in fobbing you off!

'UN-NAMED HMRC MANAGER ON TAXPAYER FUNDED CREDIT CARD SPREE'  -- We happened on this because it was part of an IPCC report, and they usually tackle police situations and misconduct.  The report said they had been passed this case from the HMRC, and it concerned a Tax Staff Manager, a woman who has now been dismissed.  She was said to have spent around £10,000 using HMRC Corporate Credit Cards.  She made several withdrawals not only on one card, but others used by her team.  She apparently denied any wrongdoing initially, and the case was passed to the CPS who did not pursue any criminal charges?  (22/8/2012)

'HMRC HIT STUDENT WITH A BILL THAT WASN'T HIS RESPONSIBILITY' ---  Amidst the HMRC's attempt to crush all opposition to their self awarded powers, they began their evil by tripling the penalties for late payment and inaccuracies!  Student Jack Dyson filled in his own personal self-assessment return, but reportedly failed to submit a 'joint' return with a fellow student who he'd set up a business with.  Although Jack Dyson owed little or no tax, he received an automatic 'late-filing' penalty of £1,300, and he was not permitted to appeal against it due to a 'loophole' in other words, ' a denial of rights under the Inland Revenue Law?  (27/4/2015)

'TAXMAN'S AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR SHOWS NO HALT IN SIGHT' -- Sanctioned and condoned by the 2013/14 new regulations,  the Taxman's target has been pointed in the direction of childminders.  In their Government backed 'state of hate' the HMRC hounds are agressively cracking down on Tax Credit claimants such as the financial affairs of childminders.  They have sent out 1000's of letters demanding that they provide up-to-date accounts and other evidence that they work.  In DWP mode, both agencies have launched an attack on the people in order to lessen the benefits and drive out the claimants so that only the top people in Society have a say and control the power.  They are demanding details of what is done in the working hours, adverts placed, social media activity and names and addresses of customers.  The fact they cause fear, issue threats, bully and blackmail claimants is of no interest, and this is supposed to be a criminal act, but that isn't applicable to HMRC OR DWP, they have complete immunity granted by the State and its Lawyers.   One can actually see their game, and that is to make people afraid to claim, because they can't figure out where they stand, and the power of the HMRC is able to come down on them at the slightest mistake and wreak massive damage....this is what the HMRC and DWP doing, and it's a government backed scheme.  (20/12'2017)

'HMRC Taxman is caught in lewd act on the train'

INLAND REVENUE CIVIL SERVANT WILLIAM PATTERSON obviously thought as he did at work, that he was immune from those common laws and his Lawyer pleaded with the Court to have him spared due to his employment status at the HMRC.  The act which was rather pathetic and of course indecent, was caught on the train's CCTV.  The Inland Revenue taxman Patterson, was charged with a breach of the peace and sexual aggravation when he appeared before the SHERIFF'S COURT at Greenock.  It was said that Patterson worked at the Glasgow Inland Revenue Office.  (21/3/2015)

'SHORT-CHANGED BY HMRC STAFF' - Have you ever tried claiming back cost incurred?  Well, several of you have, especially over items like account books that you've been ordered to send in.  Quite a few people say they've lost out by up to £6 in postage fees and the tax office just ignores this.  Some say they have written several times and invoiced the Inland Revenue who don't see it as their problem, but on the other hand, if its costs they incurred they chase you all the way.  They don't actually care whether this extra finance causes you a problem and ignore the issue completely.  Staff have even told the claimant it's their duty to co-operate with a request and that the costs should be borne by the sender.  Having looked at this we find their mindset rather at odds with common decency and business sense...if someone requests a service off you and you fulfil that at a cost, that makes it a transaction which should be paid by the recipient of the item they have sent for, after all, any goods sent out on approval etc, the postage is always picked up by the one asking for that service...but not the HMRC.

'HMRC IN SHADY OFF-SHORE DEAL'  -- Not really surprising,  In 2001 ALISTAIR DARLING, Chancellor at the time, authorised a deal by selling off 600 buildings of the HMRC, in other words - State Assets.  The Inland Revenue said it had signed a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) deal with UK registered Mapeley Ltd, transferring 'ownership and management' of the entire estate.  But this was not strictly the truth.  HMRC had sold the properties to a Bermuda based 'sister company' Mapeley Steps Ltd for £220 million, while paying rent to a UK company called Mapeley Steps Contractors Ltd.  The former off-shored company with huge profits posted losses to HMRC, and therefore paid no taxes to the Treasury, which in itself is a scandal.  When asked about this transaction and what had been going on, HMRC stated that their 'misleading' Press release was simply a mistake? (24/5/2016)

'The Scandal HMRC would rather forget about'

This little item is labelled 'A CAN OF HMRC WORMS' by its author who seems very confident of his facts.  He points to a deal the HMRC used to broker called the 'CONTRACTOR SCHEME'  which went on nicely for a period of almost eleven years without fuss.  Apparently the Inland Revenue allowed these schemes to exist, to be promoted, to operate, without batting an eye!  The article mentions APN's and the official IR35 legislation.  It points at a deal that the HMRC turned a blind eye to and rarely asked questions about, so long as it remained off the radar.  For more on this, the full details and story are at https://www.dotas-scandal.org/a-can-of-worms/

'HMRC HUMILIATION OVER WHISTLEBLOWER'S E-MAIL'  -- This was an e-mail lost for 7 years.  Investigators in the Media said that an e-mail emerged 7 years after a whistleblower had offered the HMRC evidence of a tax avoidance scandal involving HSBC's Swiss Subsidiary involving British account holders in 2008.  But HMRC did nothing about it.  The Head of HMRC at the time was Lin Homer, and she told MP's that she had no knowledge of the e-mail?  (13/2/2015)

'THE TAX SCANDAL HMRC COULDN'T GET AT OR ACCESS'  --- Former Chairman of the Commons Public Accounts Committee Margaret Hodge said she didn't have much confidence in HMRC's appetite for really defending the taxpayers interests.  She said that after quoting the time HMRC came under fire for its response to tax evasion by customers of the HSBC's Swiss Bank Saga.  This time it's THE PANAMA PAPERS and the Panamanian Law Firm of MOSSACK FONSECA.  HMRC are having to seek help from investigative journalists who managed to grab 11.5 million leaked documents showing tax deals and evasion on a large scale involving British Companies and individuals. (5/4/2016)

'5 Years Jail for HMRC Employee'

CIVIL SERVANT SUSANNE GREEN worked in the 'electronic payments team' at the Inland Revenue's Essex Office.  She was hired to identify 'unallocated VAT payments' but she fraudulently paid them elsewhere.  Investigators found that she was working with others, a 'six man team' as it was described in court.  She actually entered a 'not guilty plea' when she was on trial at Southbank Crown Court, but this was rejected and she was jailed for five years  It was said that the scam involved £2.4million, one of the biggest fraud cases.  (11/12/ 2017)

'A SMACK IN THE FACE FOR CREDIT CARD USERS AS HMRC WON'T ACCEPT THEM -- Yes, it's another move by the Inland Revenue and supported by the Conservative Government.  They have banned payments on tax bills to be paid by credit cards, despite persuading all the country to use cards in shops and online for everything.  The HMRC made a statement saying ' New rules mean that we can no longer pass on what our bank charges for processing a credit card payment.  It woud be unfair to expect taxpayers to pick up this cost..... which means they have been doing all along, and as 'being unfair' how fair is it to block FOI's and information on payouts and cases they made to employees they fired?  Think about that before you get fooled into thinking they serve the country for you!   (30/12/2017)

'HMRC DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR HALF OF STAFF FRAUD IN GOVERNMENT'

Deception and swindling by staff at HM Revenue and Customs are now understood to be responsible for more than half of the recorded fraud by value committed across all government departments.  Official records in 2008 revealed that in once case, 14 members of HMRC staff were investigated for financial fraud totalling £2.3 million in March 2008.   Fraud by Customs staff had increased also, 10 members of staff were investigated over a £1.7 million fraud.  They were all found guilty of  a criminal offence and sacked.      About £3million to £6million pounds worth of recorded fraud was committed by government employees across 28 departments.    (the figures have gone up in the last ten years a survey says)

'Tax Credits Compliance Officer in £34,000 Fraud'

HMRC BENEFITS AND TAX CREDITS COMPLIANCE OFFICER LAURA SOUTHERN was described in court as 'being convicted of the very crime she was paid to investigate and deter'  The Civil Servant from Clonmore Park, Lisburn, checked fraudulent claims whilst at the same time fraudulently claiming she was a single parent for which she received tax credits to the value of £34,209  between the years of 2012 and 2017.  At Craigavon Crown Court she was given a suspended 15 month prison sentence after pleading guilty to fraud.  (14/12/2017)

'WORRIED TAX WORKER CONTACTS THIS SITE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON'  --  We shall call him John as he doesn't wish to be labelled as a whistleblower in the tax department where he works.  He said he's seen some things going on that look decidedly unlawful and been told to ignore certain activities.  He says that some of the others go along with it because they fear they might be booted out, but he feels they are only adding to the problem and not being fair to the claimants who are reliant on their tax credit awards.  'They're frightened enough without some of the staff using them as a game to get their kicks' he says and going up to management can be risky as one cannot trust that they too are involved or as he noticed, complacent about claimants anyway.  He tells us that two he knows quite well alter things on documents and lose vital info deliberately to put the claimant at risk.  He asked us what should he do?  so, we've told him to log things he sees, get copies of papers that he can which look suspicious, and we will do the rest.  So any of you in the same dilemma, go to  corruptionseeker@hotmail.com

'Tax Officer rips off the Taxpayer by £56,000'

TAX OFFICER FRANCES CYNTHIA COLE of the HMRC, ripped off the taxpayer by £56,000 in a Tax Credit Fraud.  She was sentenced at the Isleworth Crown Court to one year in jail.  Cole from West London was employed by the Inland Revenue as an Administration Officer in the Tax Credit Compliance Department.  It was said in court that she deliberately abused her position and made fraudulent claims in order to receive the tax credit payments over a long period of time.  (19/8/2013)

'THE INLAND REVENUE 'SELF-ASSESSMENT' SCAM'  -- This move by The Government and its partner in crime, the HMRC, was in fact one of the most blatant schemes to rob the public legally, and that's what they did.  They placed all the responsibility on the taxpayer not only in the filling and being warned about honesty and correctiveness , but the filing of the form too in regard to time limits.  Coming up with the idea of fines must have been the Treasury's idea along with the Revenue department, as the fines system not only allowed them to just collect extra money but perversely alter things so that they could accuse a person of other 'crimes' that rendered the taxman bigger fines.  Current info suggests that it's at least £100 a time to miss the deadline, and reports show us that 1 in 10 people around the country miss this deadline and that means millions extra for the HMRC, and that's not tax, that is pure 'greed' by a government that wants to take as much as it can and give very little back to the people.  These are 'automatic' fines, people doing their tax return on line face up to an hour on completing it, and they are warned to check this thoroughly.  The amount of paperwork needed is quite staggering, it includes P45 income, possibly a P60, and maybe a P11D.  You must declare any income from any investments and property, pension contributions, and that's just the beginning.  You must state your assets, any capital gains, and you must not leave anything out!  You could go to an accountant and this in 2017 costs around £200 for completing a 'straight-forward simple tax return'....and their costs may not be able to be claimed for, so beware on that...the Inland Revenue are not too keen on deductable income and have pulled many items once claimed for out of the bag.  This robbery is unique, in that a Parliament has made it legal.....and they have a bunch of civil servants at your cost pursuing you for every penny they can!

'HMRC IN PLOT TO SHARE PRIVATE DATA ON EVERY PERSON IN UK --- This piece seems to have its origins in Whitehall, so here it is.  It says in the report that departments such as the HMRC will be able to pass on private data of millions to private firms, town halls, quangos etc, under new powers mentioned in the Queens Speech.  Collections of bulk data will now be available to who they decide.  These measures are mentioned in the Digital Economy Bill which deals with Broadband across Britain, the ministers will put in new law allowing other bodies to share the mass of confidential public data.

'HMRC refuse to disclose cost of 5 year case'

Amazingly, the Inland Revenue pride themselves on knowing 'exactly' how much you owe them in tax, and they are keen to send you the bill as soon as possible, and these include fines.  They also insist on honesty and transparency from the taxpayer when it comes to tax returns, and they come down heavily on those who don't account for every penny they earned or received.  Yet, when questioned about a five year case against 'Rangers' they refuse to disclose that cost, and were steadfastly keeping to the reply 'It would cost too much to find out the costs in this particular case!'  This is how the fobbed off journalists seeking to know how much the taxpayer had paid....but that's accountability for you, and transparency - nil!

'TWO MILLION PEOPLE FACE TAX DEMANDS FROM HMRC'  - A report says that the Inland Revenue will be billing around two million people for £800 million for underpaying in the last financial year.  The HMRC will be chasing those who did not pay enough tax and said the average shortfall will be around £400 each.  This means that these people will be paying an extra £33 a month to catch up.  They said that they had paid out £4.32 million in overpayments in 2015 and 2016, and that they will be pursuing these.

'THE UNUSUAL CASE OF MR WILLIAMS AND HIS TAX APPEAL' -- This happened in 2011, and we were lucky to spot this, but being the hound dogs we are, here it is -  'Although Mr Williams had his appeal rejected, which surprised him....in the envelope telling him of the decision to disallow his appeal, there was an 'internal memo' enclosed, one that was not meant for him to see.  The HMRC said it was mistakenly enclosed and uttered that they were sorry that he saw it.  The internal note was from a technical advisor to the tax officer who was dealing with Mr William's case and appeal.  And this told a very different story, which said - 'Although we made errors, he should (Mr Williams, the Taxpayer) have picked up on them.  You will have to write to him and apologise for the poor quality of service he has received, but unfortunately he has to pay the charges!'

NB: So as you can see from the above, if they make any errors, you the taxpayer must pay for their mistakes, not bad eh?

'HMRC in court battle ordered to pay £500 by Tax Adjudicator'

BETH PORTER SUED THE INLAND REVENUE because she lost half of her state pension due to the negligence of the HMRC, who claimed they could not find 15 previous years of National Insurance contributions.  The Former Actress of film and TV now 72, has fought a 13 year battle with the department for Work and Pensions, claiming they are incompetent.  She said 'I've experienced rude staff, my letters being ignored and promises of phone calls that never happened, and they also lost documents or claimed them to be so'  After getting nowhere and feeling very frustrated with the affair, she lodged a formal complaint with the Tax Adjudicator, and won a £500 payout against HMRC, one of the highest awards for anyone suffering at the hands of the tax man.  Despite this, HMRC didn't budge on their decision to pay her half of her pension saying certain records were no longer available, because certain data from the 70's were deleted.  The case has now gone onto the appeal stage.    (15/5/2015)

'HMRC WRONG SAYS JUDGE IN PAYMENT'S CASE' --- The Inland Revenue, supported by PM David Cameron, hoped they could force through legislation to claw back benefit payments sent oversees by UK unemployed migrant parents getting £20 per week payments for child allowance.  But the Judge dismissed HMRC's appeal and ruled that 'even Europeans living in Britain who are jobless and claiming, can receive the £20 allowance payment for children living overseas.'  Further disclosures revealed that in another Tribunal case, Judge Edward Jacobs in the Upper Tribunal ruled it 'wrong to try to claw back child benefits from unemployed migrant parents.'    The HMRC later admitted they'd relied on outdated E.U.Law for their appeal?

'THE TAXMAN LOSES IN ANOTHER COURT CHALLENGE' -- This was the NOVASOFT CASE- versus the HMRC.  The taxpayer's appeal case was successful with the Commissioners against the HMRC.  The Tribunal decided that this was a case of 'self-employment' and being so, the   I.R.35 legislation did not apply in this case.  In reaching its verdict, the Tribunal cited the 'Hall v Lorimer' case in that it is necessary to 'paint a picture from the accumulation of detail.'  The I.R.35 relates to intermediary companies -- it is said that its intention, though complex, is to catch disguised employees falsely trading through their limited companies to reduce their tax.  But it has on occasions unfairly treated genuine self-employed people, as it did in this case.'     (15/5/2010)

'20,000 Tribunal cases against the HMRC pending'

A Report shows that the tax man is involved in 20,000 tribunal cases pending, and there could be many more as a result of a successful businessman, Sir Terry Leahy who has urged people who have had concerns and issues with the new tax legislation, should take on the HMRC legally and change the law.  Saying that a Tribunal hearing would make a good start to do this instead of letting the taxman have his way.  This has now led to the Inland Revenue admitting that they already have 20,000 tribunal cases pending and it could take up to 38 years to go through all of them, they also said it could cost them billions in tax.     (14/1/2018)

'HMRC IN PITIFUL COMPENSATION SCANDAL'  -- One hears of benefitting from someone else's downfall, and recent news of £14 being paid out to 1,271 victims of the 'Concentrix Situation' is certainly what HMRC are good at.  The recent report into the firm Concentrix has revealed that the £75 million pound contracted company hired by the Inland Revenue terminated or adjusted 108,000 cases of claimants tax credits, of which a third were overturned at appeal.  Taking advantage of the fact they had to terminate the deal, HMRC have only paid out £18,035 in compensation to 1,271 people, and what is more, there is news that because the deal was terminated before it ended, Concentrix walked away with £32 million of taxpayers money.  The findings against Concentrix reveals that 87 percent of cases went to appeal because they did real harm and caused damage to people's lives.  Both the Concentrix and Carillion episodes have shown that the bosses walked away with a decent payoff and bonus deal.  In 2016 Concentrix was accused of 'a brutal and disrespectful approach'.....and in the case of these so called HMRC 'compensation packages of £14'  they should be added to this list of brutal and disrespectful monsters that bow to the paymasters the Tory Party.      (Jan 2018)

'150 LAPTOP PC's LOST BY INLAND REVENUE STAFF' -- This report dated November 2011, says that over a five year period, civil servants at the HMRC could not account for 150 missing laptop computers.  It was said that they were all disk encrypted.  And yet again the HMRC would not comment on the matter of these taxpayer funded pc's and apparently, no disciplinary action has been taken against the staff involved, so there's no surprise there!    

'MP and Law Centre hit out at the HMRC'

The suffering of Tax Credit claimants became such an issue to The Hackney Law Centre and Meg Hillier MP and Chairman of The Public Accounts Committee, that they spoke out saying that the 'outsourcing to Concentrix' was a venture 'with appalling human consequences!'  Meg Hillier, also the MP for Hackney, added, 'We will be examining the NAO's findings closely and holding Senior Officials from HMRC and Concentrix to account on the issues highlighted when we take evidence from them in January.'                                                                                In Mid-December 2016, the HMRC had paid out compensation of around £87,000to claimants who suffered worry and distress.   (Jan 2017)

'HMRC ignore Data Law because they can!'

Not surprisingly, this report only goes to show that they abuse and misuse power regularly because they believe they are immune from any interference or court (and finding a court that has actually done them for an offence is rare).  In the years they have rectified any loopholes in their powers by requesting Parliament to 'rubber stamp' changes which have gone through Parliament unopposed, and therefore not known about in the general public.   The most recent outrage is the tax helpline recording calls without permission.  The report says that they have collected and stored some 5.1 million recordings of taxpayers through the telephone services.  The trick they are using is to require the caller to repeat the phrase 'My voice is my password' to access its tax services, and unknown to the customers they have now trapped themselves as they are unable to opt out of saying the phrase, there is no choice to decline or delete any activity they make.  The Organisation - Big Brother Watch  say that HMRC is breaching data protection laws.        No-one at the HMRC would discuss this when a request was made to clarify the position.  It is intertesting that they are not subject to any of this and immediately tell callers they cannot answer as it is protected by the data law, but you are not, especially when they can then farm your data out to any agency they wish to without needing authority.

'The non-existent Code system -- HMRC GOV.UK'

We were contacted and told that this system to access your details such as pension and tax etc was more or less a lie, the customer was left waiting for over 40 minutes for an access code sent to their e-mail account.  HMRC said it would take 'a few minutes' but no such e-mail or code arrived in their in-box.  It was however, a huge inconvenience to the customer who eventually gave up trying in case they got the threats and things saying there would be penalties?  a pastime the tax workers enjoy.

HMRC in callous mode -- A Report in Carers UK shows how staff at the Tax Office have no regard for anyone struggling to survive their rules of 2014, which says in definition to being 'self employed' and being in business 'Buying and Selling with the intention to make a profit'   This case which is not pleasant goes by the handle 'bowlingbun', she lost her husband who ran the small company.  She notified the HMRC that all she had after the funeral was 30 tons of vintage lorry spares; otherwise called assets by this lot.  Which took her over 10 years to gradually sell.  They told her it was her own choice to downsize the stuff, and that was her own affair.  They also said this did not amount to a business under their interpretation and gave her no help or tax credits, this was all she had to live on, and promptly ignored her as if she didn't exist.....however if there had been the slightest cash they could grab, they would have been all over her.....what bastards eh? (6/7/2018)

NB   this tale can be accessed on the web by going to the carers uk link.

'HMRC USE THE 'ERROR' GAME'

Yes, here we know that game all too well, it's frequently used like 'a get out of jail card' and works for this lot every time.  This report comes from the Political corridors of power and they say a Tory privileged connection was revealed by the HMRC, which of course yet again indicates data law.  Ministers said it was 'A huge error of judgement' for an HM Revenue and Customs Official to mention that Lycamobile was a major Tory Party Donor when turning down a French request for help with an inquiry into the telecoms company Phillip Hammond said.  He said the decision to decline the French request was properly made by HMRC Lawyers, but it was 'inappropriate' to mention 'completely extraneous' and 'irrelevant' Tory donations and 'The Prince Charles Trust' in the response.  This involved the subject of 'money-laundering' and an investigation into the telecoms firm.  Apparently HMRC Lawyers were unable to satisfy a UK Judge that the criteria for issuing a search warrant had been met, which in layman terms showed that these Lawyers for the HMRC didn't have enough proof, but still thought they could get away with it because they were with the Tax Authorities.

'Dark Secrets come to light on HMRC Lawyers '

It's not often that one gets a helping hand from someone in the organisation, and in the light of the above article we were rewarded when a whistleblower contacted us.  We have reluctantly agreed to call him 'M' otherwise we probably would not have got this article.  'M' says he is a caseworker who works between the departments, legal and management, who discuss possible cases of claims against the HMRC, and whenever there is a serious or difficult one looming on the horizon, they immediately meet to discuss what the claimant may have and how to 'rubbish' it basically.  He says that all paperwork on file is pulled together and civil servants involved are interviewed mainly to see if this can be altered and shown as an error by the claimant and if necessary alter some of the papers and claim copies had to be made because the originals were accidentally shredded or a glitch on the computer resulting in corrupted files.  He said he had seen them almost willing to go to any length to hinder the claimant and delay the courts and tribunals so that they could 'fix things'  Some civil servants involved in disputes were briefed and told how to answer the court, and of course remain silent while the Lawyer took over in typical 'firewall' mode.  He said they were well versed in protecting the HMRC and staying just within the law in tricky situations even though they had misled the court without anyone picking up on it.  We did ask him for some examples and possible cases that showed this, but he sounded hesitant and said he would think about it and come back to us later.

'HMRC is sued by Rupert Grint over tax claim'

Heavyweight young film star RUPERT GRINT (Harry Potter fame), went into court contesting a tax bill by the HMRC.  He was seeking 1 million pounds from the taxman after they blocked attempts to shield some of his earnings from the 50p rate of tax levied 6 years previously.  His accountants told him that tax inspectors had prevented him employing an accounting period shorter than twelve months, and their refusal to accept the data resulted in him paying an extra 1 million pounds, which he now wants refunded.                                                                                It then transpired that the HMRC civil servants wildly jumped on a rough so-called accounting document 'discovered as they claimed' during a unrelated and routine VAT inspection.  Lawyers for Mr Grint said 'The HMRC insisted on and relied on this document as 'proof' when it was just an informal draft of financial information never intended to constitute an official set of accounts'    (28/6/2016)

NB: As we see again, this is yet another case when they rewrite the evidence into what interpretation they want it to be.

'Taxman Deals come with 'dodgy' being written all over them'

It's not all that surprising to learn that HMRC have certain little secrets they want to keep that way, especially in the light that a confidential leak was exposed when reporters discovered that the taxman was 'ordered to go easy on Amazon'  --  It appears that Deputy Director Guy Westhead was recorded saying ministers had been reluctant to challenge giant online market Amazon over claims of tax avoidance.  it is said these remarks were made in a private conversation with tax campaigner, Richard Allen in 2015, the same man who lobbied HMRC for better enforcement of VAT Law.  Apparently he told Mr Westhead, 'What worries me is ministers have some kind of agenda to basically not annoy Amazon.  After certain other things that should be considered as to why one should not go after Amazon that might be beneficial, he said 'I've heard from the Treasury , and they don't want us to be too hard on Amazon.'  Yet earlier in the same year, the Treasury had been saying it would clamp down hard on Web Giants and consider new rules?  .....which now seem to be yesterdays news!  (July 2018)

'The 'Threats Brigade' aka HMRC --- 'After all, they're doing it for the State'

Both the HMRC and DWP have a distinct nasty approach of 'threatening claimants and taxpayers alike' in just about every document written and devised by Lawyers acting for them, often using words like 'Penalties' and 'Pass this on to a Debt Collection Agency' and we know such actions callously lead to cases like the 'Suicide of 19yr old Jerome Rogers' who was hounded by bailiffs employed by the courts and State.  All they could utter after his death was 'It isn't our fault' when in fact it clearly was no matter how the Lawyers spin it into a tragic accident to disclaim any liability on behalf of their clients.  Lawyers are trained in the art of deception the moment they enter Law School or University to study Law (We have several cases of trainee Lawyers caught out in this very subject).  As with the DWP and its invention of 'Sanctions' - Civil Servants empowered with this authority to use them, often do so without much care for the claimant or what harm it inflicts financially, after all, they're doing it for the State?      HMRC with their departments and Lawyers have many such options that cause disastrous harm like ruining businesses, ruining individuals and driving victims into poverty, and in some cases -- suicide.  After all, they're doing it for the State!  Amazingly, they delude themselves by claiming that they have a reputation to uphold, and falsely claim to be honest and caring, which is really outrageous!!

'HMRC Bungle leaves many paying the wrong amount'

The Report says it is a 'computer error', yes, another one of those mystery errors where 'Joe Public' gets the blame and pays the price.  This so called 'error' is said to affect pensioners and thousands of others being charged the wrong amount of tax.  Money Mail says the error is in the software, and it is calculating taxpayers bills wrongly.  The HMRC in response played down this incident and says only a small amount of people were affected as the errors are now being corrected?  (January 2018)

'HMRC gloat over Tax Snatch'

Not only do they tip off and work hand in hand with the DWP, but they have an added quality of making sure they leave some people (and that is most), without anything to live on despite the lies they pitch to the Press.  A recent article in the Newspapers points to gloating, a rather sinister and nasty way of enjoying their jobs.  Adam Lulat was involved in a case brought by the HMRC, one in which he was convicted, and the authorities put in an order that he paid the taxman a large sum of money, but his only asset was One Pound in his bank account.  Shortly after he won at a poker game, the sum of 68,930 pounds, which led to the HMRC Rottweiler's pouncing on this money by bringing him back to court,........... and the full amount 'with the court's help' was handed over to HMRC.

'Taxman 'Wholly Unreasonable' says Judge as business couple win case'

A small Southend family business in Essex defeated the HMRC at a Court Tribunal after Tax Inspectors targeted The Farthings Steak House Restaurant.  They made assertions that the fifty percent gross profits in the account books were far too low, and immediately applied 'pressure' demanding that they pay the Inland Revenue 20,000 pounds.  However, at the Tribunal Court they beat down the might of the HMRC and won a landmark judgement as the Judge awarded costs against the HMRC for the first time.  The Judge said that the HMRC acted in 'bad faith' and were 'wholly unreasonable' when they demanded the money from business owners Trevor and Vivienne Scott.

 The Special Commissioners later said that the officers from HMRC were 'heavy handed' in dealing with the small business......which yet again shows another case of HMRC Bully Tactics and abuse of power!

'Tax Credit Fiasco forces woman to pawn parent's jewellery'

MP's were not happy when they got wind of a case which involved a woman claimant who was left penniless when the taxman suddenly took away her tax credit payments, now known to have been 'mistakenly' halted.  Things got so bad for this 'un-named' woman that she had to resort to pawning her parent's jewellery so that she could pay the bills and get through the period of hell the tax authorities put her through.  It therefore came as no surprise to learn that the HMRC blamed 'Outsourcing' for the problem when interviewed by the Press.                   However, MP Sammy Wilson said 'If there's any fault to be attributed, it has to be by the people who issued the contract in the first place, and that squarely lies with the HMRC.  (18/10/2016)

'Inland Revenue staff and the waste of cash over IT System'

A report slightly hidden, reveals that the HMRC paid out 2 million pounds so that 600 members of staff could stay away while they fixed a new IT system that didn't work correctly.  It was agreed by the tax authorities that the 600 workers could have 75 percent of their salaries paid to them during the three months while the computer system was being attended to.  It tells us that these civil servants were tasked with looking for the fraudsters of tax credit claims?

'Taxation 'error' forces footballer to go bust'

A HMRC tax error forced football player Pape Souare to go bust in order to pay his debts a report has revealed.  It says he had been paying the wrong tax since the year 2015,  The football player for Crystal Palace was forced by the circumstances to enter into a voluntary insolvency arrangement over this tax error despite earning around 30,000 pounds a week at the club,                                                                                 Crystal Palace said it was entirely the fault of HMRC,  who in turn said they could not discuss specific cases!    (12/4/2018)

'HMRC Claimant Compliance Officer steals Benefit Cash'

Civil Servant NICOLA SHAW worked as an investigator in the Claimant Compliance Team Benefits Section, and most of her job involved the scrutiny of claims, forms and making sure the claimers had notified the HMRC of any change of circumstances.  But behind this facade of diligence and loyalty to the Inland Revenue, she was in fact, one of the perpetrators of a fraud within the department as she stole 50,000 pounds and made false statements in order to claim benefits too.  It was said in court that she had pretended to be a single mum for almost six years, when in fact she wasn't.  (20/2/2018)

'HMRC play the Con Game well'

It is a fact that HMRC have long taken the view that they can do what they like without the Law doing much about it.  A report tells us that The Inland Revenue knew about 'mistakes' long before they decided to tell the Public about them (this comes from The Taxpayers Alliance).   Also the fact that the Public Accounts Committee criticised them for their 'mismanagement' of the tax system over a number of years.

'The 'Law Unto Itself HMRC' and the Penalty Bungle'

This item is rather more than what the title suggests, in that the HMRC after introducing the draconian law on APN's, allowed them to remove funds from individual bank accounts before any appeal or the matter reached court.  Accountants have raised the matter as a subject of a Legal Challenge, because this is likened to jailing someone without the proper evidence, or no evidence at all, and then sentencing them without due process -- which the standard law of this country does not allow......except at the HMRC (and one gets the distinct felling that HMRC lawyers had a hand in this).  One should ask why this is so, especially in a democracy, unless as we have said before, that this Tory Government supported this and have an agenda to take freedoms and rights from the Public.  (5/7/2015)

'HMRC Civil Servant Faces Dismissal'

Although an earlier report we obviously missed, this report concerns a Female Junior Official at the HMRC at the Washington Office in the Tyne Tees area.  It appears that official data on discs went astray as it was being sent from the Washington Office to the National Audit Office in London.  The report says there was a possibility that 316,000 North East families could be exposed to identity fraud following a Child Benefits Blunder.  A Scotland Yard Police Spokesman in their Press Division, told the Evening Chronicle that they were conducting enquiries in Tyne and Wear which will take a number of days with their colleagues in Nothumbria Police.  The investigation is to centre around the 'lost discs'   Someone at HMRC said that the civil servant would be facing disciplinary proceedings!  (21/1/20O7)

NB In a online blog, it says 'HMRC CIVIL SERVANT RESIGNS'

 'HMRC accused of Voice Print Harvesting'

A new report says that the HMRC have amassed some 5.1 million 'Audio Signatures' without the consent or authority of the taxpayers, who it is said 'are locked out' of being able to decline such an action.  It is also said that they are 'storing' this audio data and analysing it for another agenda only known to the Inland Revenue.  Big Brother Watch accuses the HMRC of creating 'biometric ID' cards by this 'back door method' in order to deceive the public and provide such information to certain government departments that will be given access to it should the need arise in times of uncertainty and elections.  (25/6/2018)

'Risk of exclusion by HMRC to the aged over phone call 5 minute waiting'

This situation is not new, and in truth, the HMRC show no sign of doing any better because they simply don't care.  A new report showed that it was now taking the tax man an average of four minutes 28 seconds to answer to answer most calls and longer with others.   It is stated that this is now 30 seconds longer than previously.  The HMRC Annual Report says they didn't expect this in their long forecast and discovered that not as many use their digital services as they'd hoped for.... which in turn meant they didn't have enough staff to attend phone callers. Age UK's Caroline Abrahams suggested that the government should be forced by law to ensure that the service meets the need of the elderly and for those who haven't got pc's or use websites.   (26/8/2018)

'Is the HMRC Corrupt? the Guardian Report - and is it provable?

Corruption in the Oxford Dictionary says it is influence by using bribery or morally depraved.  Corruption or corrupt practices in the Concise Law Dictionary refers to it as - treating, undue influence, making a false declaration, disadvantaging someone wilfully or by inaction, and to gain by deceptive actions.... all of which the HMRC has done at one time or another.  A Guardian Report says that MP's are to investigate an HMRC decision to turn down a French Request for help in a criminal inquiry into a major Tory Party Donor.  Someone involved in investigations of this sort says it is the absolute duty of the HMRC to assist the Tax Authority of another country seeking information in that case (20/4/2018)...whether or not this is the case, the HMRC do lay themselves open to suspicion that they wish to prevent information, which can be seen as a sort of contempt and corrupt activity.              We now look at the HMRC's reaction or inaction of a Freedom of Information Request made by David Baker direct to the HMRC asking how many staff did they employ to investigate HMRC Corruption?  along with several other related questions, which he sent on the 27th of August 2012.   He had to write three letters over a period and none were answered?                                                                                                                                                                                                                                We also have 'DISSENT' a group who intended to reveal HMRC Corruption and Ineptitude (5/12/2011) -- this article by Michele McGagh obviously intended to be 'shocking and revealing' announced that rebel staff at the Inland Revenue had set up a group which they named Dissent within the HMRC Authority to expose the corruption and ineptitude of the Department.  She says it has 324 members who wish to speak out against the practice and double-standards that operate at the HMRC.  She said 'they have already amassed a comprehensive database of personal information on staff members, including expenses issues, benefit incidents and conflict of interest cases.'                     Sadly as far as we can tell, nothing has really been exposed or revealed by this inner sanctum group, and we'd know about it on this site, so it was either disbanded or ran into data law issues with the HMRC, which is standard practice in relation to inside investigations and staff issues such as misconduct, you the public are not entitled to know any outcome, it's all 'in-house' stuff and it's kept that way for an obvious purpose. Corruption of a Department or Corporation cannot go to jail, and no government will let that happen, that's why the HMRC have made themselves exempt in many cases relating to wrong-doing and corruption will always be denied by them no matter how strong the evidence is as it will never reach an open court, their lawyers will see to that.                                                                                                                Disadvantaging someone wilfully or by inaction is easily shown here by a case we dealt with when they demanded 'An Overpayment' which sounds okay on the surface, but not when one looks at it closely--- the claimant faced a bill of 1,745 pounds, having been paid benefit to support his low takings which sadly didn't achieve more than 30 pounds on an average week. This was over a period of six months before they dealt him the blow made by 'a civil servant's decision'.  Which turns out that he lived on just 20 to 30 pounds a week for that period as he has to return the money.  This sum is well below poverty level, but they didn't care.  In those six months he couldn't claim from the DWP or elsewhere as he was 'labelled self-employed'...so where was the support?  There wasn't any, he can't go to the DWP and make a retrospective claim because they would just deny liability.  Yet, the HMRC did and have 'disadvantaged the claimant' and merely walk away from this denying culpability.....so look at the question, and yes is the answer you should arrive at.

NB: CORRUPTION IS UNDOUBTEDLY PROVEN AGAINST THE HMRC IN  THE CASE BELOW 'HMRC WITHDRAWS MONTPELIER PROSECUTION DURING TRIAL' because they corruptly used the Police and CPS to disadvantage Edward Gittins and close him down maliciously.

'HMRC in 'Honours' Scandal'

It is well known by now that the Inland Revenue is virtually spying on anyone and everyone, most of whom they target because of their suspicious minds.  Little is known on these 'Civil Servants' only that they hide behind a 'shield' that the Tory Government provides for them, just as others have in the past.  Therefore, this new revelation that they have some sway on the selection of people to be nominated an award or mention in The Queens Honours' comes as no surprise to this site at all.  The report says they have a policy of 'advising' the Honours Board against giving honours to 'tax-avoiding celebrities' etc, and one shouldn't pay too much attention to 'celebrity' here.  This policy appears to be backed by MP Vince Cable who is fast losing fans the more distant he begins to bat from the main area.  The revelation of this article had yet again to be found via the Freedom of Information Act' otherwise it would remain in the 'Do not open' chest of the HMRC, who do as much covering-up as they can.  It says they use 'The Traffic Light' system used to identify an individual's suitability for the honour, and analyses nominees to check the risk of them being exposed over their tax affairs.  It seems strange that a money conscious body empowered by the government should be given this power to look at people who are often from the helping community besides sports and the world of TV etc, it smacks of intrusion by a spy body that is only accountable to privy commissioners within the Cabinet Office, let alone the Commons Select Committees who have been thwarted on more than one occasion when they have refused to answer questions?  (2/9/2018)

'HMRC lose case as four accused go free'

In a remarkable fraud case brought by the HMRC, the Public Gallery cheered and clapped as the four accused defendants were cleared of all charges in a 6 million pound duty case that collapsed.  The men from Woodford Green and Loughton stood in the dock of Chelmsford Crown Court as the Judge announced that they were free to go as the CPS were offering no evidence against the accused, after reviewing the case prepared by the HMRC Lawyers.  No other explanation for the collapse of the case was given or offered by Prosecutor Gareth Munday.  All the men had pleaded not guilty at an earlier hearing prior to being sent for a Crown Court Trial.  (4/11/2016)

Note, apart from the public expense of this HMRC case, we will never know what the HMRC lawyers got up to, so if anybody knows just contact us with an e-mail (confidential or not or any papers on the case)

Talking about HMRC Lawyers and tactics, look at the following case:

HMRC withdraws Montpelier prosecution during trial

Thursday, 18 September, 2014

Two tax planning accountants have been acquitted of cheating the public revenue by promoting a scheme that encouraged clients to claim tax relief on gifts of gilts to charity.

Edward Watkin Gittins and Martin Calcutt, both Directors of tax consultancy Montpelier and members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants, were charged in August 2013. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) alleged that their scheme, in which taxpayers gave of gilts to a charity with an option to a trust to buy the gilts for a nominal sum, was an abuse of gift aid tax relief. Gittins, an Isle of Man resident, was accused of designing the scheme, while he and Calcutt both implemented it between March 2004 and February 2007 to arrange donations to the Vauxhall Adult Education Trust in Liverpool – after the scheme had been officially shut down by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC). The CPS also charged Calcutt with supplying forged documents to HMRC to support claims for tax relief.

By then, relations between Montpelier and HMRC already had a long and bitter history. HMRC had begun its investigation into Montpelier in 2007. In September 2010, at the HMRC's request, police used an illegally obtained search warrant to raid Montpelier's premises in Douglas and in London, and Gittins was arrested. The police were subsequently sued for damages and forced to pay all Montpelier's legal costs, but the raid produced so much bad press that the consultancy had to make 40 staff redundant.

The prosecution of the two men came to Liverpool Crown Court this month. The HMRC originally alleged that the gifts themselves were fraudulent, but this argument was withdrawn in an earlier hearing. HMRC then claimed that the taxpayers had submitted fraudulent and inaccurate returns with Gittins' knowledge, and that tax relief of over GBP2.5 million had been claimed for a year in which it was not due. However the defence then brought evidence to show that Gittins had not helped any of the clients draft their tax returns, which were in any case accurate.

At this point, two weeks into the trial, the CPS announced it would offer no further evidence and withdrew the prosecution. Nonetheless it insisted its initial decision to prosecute had been right based on the material provided by HMRC and the defence at the time.

Gittins' legal representative Mark Spragg said HMRC never had a case, and that its actions were designed merely to close him down. Gittins is now taking advice on possible recourse.

Note:    This case printed as seen, should worry many as it shows police corruption and probable HMRC collusion in corruption in that both parties attempted to convict these two by fair or foul means.  It was only when it turned into a fiasco because of unlawful moves that the police were rightly sued.  The HMRC obviously wriggled and wondered what they could pull in 'protective measures' to themselves so they could back out when things were getting too hot and rely on Crown Immunity to cover their tracks.  The CPS had a case to answer too, but they pulled out before damage came their way, and before they too faced a writ or similar. It's interesting to see that they put the blame on HMRC for what they got up to.....its all rather convenient.  From the final paragraph we also see there may be a case of damages launched against the HMRC which should be so considering their actions in this matter.

'HMRC use their power to alter Legal Goal Posts'

As we have seen in the previous article, HMRC will stoop to anything no matter how sordid it may be, and it should be termed as an Abuse of Power.  One often wonders, particularly now, are the HMRC running this country?  Well we shall look at that in a following article, but for now let us look at a Report that says they have muscled in on the law in the 2014 Financial Bill with a new requirement 'Accelerated Payment Notices'.  Before this change, when the HMRC ordered a person to pay tax which 'it believes' had been unfairly claimed in Tax Relief, the individual could appeal the decision through a Tribunal Court, and they wouldn't have to pay the HMRC anything until the HMRC had clearly won by demonstrating this legally.  Under the new changes, the individual must pay the amount immediately 'upfront', and will only be paid when and if they win.  Which is like having to pay for an item not sent but held back by the other party until you can prove you are entitled to it, which is not only bizarre, but smacks of illegality too.                                                                                                                                          Regulators said 'This changes the presumption from innocent to proven guilty to guilty until proven innocent'    (3/7/2014)

'If you want to know about pensions who do you call?  the HMRC!

Yes, you were thinking The Department of Work and Pensions, but in this case you are wrong, the HMRC have got in there as this next article proves, a little bit unsettling isn't it?  However, you shouldn't be surprised really, they're up to all sorts nowadays, and backed up to the hilt by the present Tory Government who are trying to grab as much pension back as they can and lessen its entitlement by involving these civil servants in the scrutiny of assets and pension schemes they can debunk and lay open to penalties.  So when you check on your pension it may well be intercepted by the HMRC who have given it the once or twice over.  Financial Services say that the Pension system is quite complicated and the government have a thing called a 'Pension Reconciliation Service'   It requires the administrators of employer-based pension schemes to check the records they hold about current and former employees against information held by the HMRC to see if they match up.  The government say this is important to ensure you get the 'correct pension benefits' at retirement, and it could affect the private pension you are due to receive or currently get, and the state pension you will receive.   The Guaranteed Minimum Pension or GMP.HMRC uses this to work out how much state pension you are due.  But some of these GMP records companies held can date back decades, and there can be 'errors'.......yes that word again, so much used by the HMRC and DWP....so beware.   (August 2018)

'Contractor wins in court against the HMRC'

Another piece of good news here.....IT Contractor Ian Wells successfully won at The Court of Appeals against the HMRC, and they were ordered to pay him back 26,000 pounds in back taxes under the IR35 Legislation.  This case relied on 'interpretation' and as we know so often in HMRC situations they construe what they like on most occasions with a pinch of bending the truth.  Strangely enough, Mr Wells was involved in a 'working arrangement on the DWP's Universal Credit project in 2012 to 2013, but on this occasion we will forgive him for that and leave that issue out here.  In the Court Report it says that HMRC civil servant staff decided that his tax situation should be classified as 'an employee' with the DWP so that they could demand income tax of nearly 15,000 pounds, plus National Insurance Contributions.  In her summing up, Judge Jennifer Dean ruled that all the elements of Mr Wells contract with the DWP pointed towards him being an Independent Contractor and said that the HMRC case had failed to prove him liable for the imposed tax bill.  (17/3/2018)

'HMRC on Recovery end of unpaid debt'

Turning the tables on the Inland Revenue is rare and many wonder if the Government give HMRC undeserved immunity so that they cannot be brought into court by the mere mortal taxpayer.  This article within the pages of the gigantic Interweb brings up that question of immunity and how the HMRC use it to fend off claimant action.  The man says his client has lost patience with the HMRC who have dragged out and failed to send him a repayment that he was due.  He says he now wishes to lodge a claim in the courts to recover the payment, and can he?  He's heard through gossip etc, that they are immune from any civil court action!   Well, they're not, but they like to think so and encourage the idea with the general public.  You can launch a writ for a non-payment, but this will need several factors available to you.  Firstly you need a document from them specifically saying they will pay you on a fixed date, but check to see if they have a period of extension surrounding this on their site and have letters you sent them that they have not responded to or ignored.  They will of course make things as difficult as they can.....so one piece of good advice we found by a previous dissatisfied claimant was that you try writing to the following with your complaint: The Chairman's Office, Board of HM Revenue and Customs, 1 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0ET....it sometimes works.  (31/8/2011)

'HMRC sends Debt Collection Agency on Elderly'

The Report by Money Mail tells us that HMRC have set Debt Collectors on elderly taxpayers without a warning to correct 'blunders' on bills.  It says that pensioners and families are being threatened in letters sent out by Debt Recovery Agents for the HMRC without warning demanding immediate payment.  It further says that people are being harassed over debts that are more than ten years old, and others are wrongly being hounded after 'errors' by these civil servants led to Debt Collectors and visits.  It says that instead of 'politeness' to the taxpayer, officials at the HMRC are calling in the hounds of hell to grab money that many do not owe.  A taxpayer watchdog say they have been left feeling very vulnerable and scared, fearing bailiffs might turn up out of the blue to start taking their furniture and possessions.  Citizens Advice say that the HMRC are accounting for a large number of complaints and this is increasing at an alarming rate...due mainly to debts.  (12/7/2016)

'Fake News or HMRC Misdirection?'

'DID THE HEAD OF HMRC RESIGN OVER SECURITY BREACH?' AS CLAIMED OR WAS IT ARRANGED AS A PR STUNT?

This article goes back to November 2007, a time when 'Fake News' wasn't quoted, but as you will read here, there are things that don't add up to the resignation being true at all, in fact we found a little known contradiction hiding on the Interweb that makes this look like a stunt pulled by the HMRC to get the public to look the other way.  The Report said 'HMRC Head Resigns over Security Breach' and that PAUL GRAY quit his post at the Inland Revenue over his handling of the matter of the loss of taxpayers data.  It went onto say that 15,000 people had to be warned of potential scammers being able to access bank and other details.  The Report also led one to believe that the data disc was lost in transit by a courier working for HMRC.  Strangely, before the so-called resignation ahead of a Commons statement, BBC's Radio 4 Money Box programme announced that a CD containing the personal details of thousands of Standard Life Pension holders had gone missing?  However, the trail led to another source that categorically denounced the resignation claimed to have been announced ahead of a Commons Statement by Chancellor Alistair Darling, of whom one expects that Gray and Darling had meetings prior to the Data Scandal.  Hansard showed that the Chancellor never said that Paul Gray resigned at all! only that he accepted responsibility and had the intention to resign, which was confirmed by Gray is not the same thing as actually resigning.  Two weeks later Gray was seen in Whitehall working on a 'special project' with Sir Gus O'Donnell.  Later we had Whitehall contradicting itself, The Cabinet Office said Mr Gray remains a Senior Civil Servant.  Even more strange it was said at the resignation point 'that he left with immediate effect?'  So what was Gray doing at the Cabinet Office?  On approaching the Cabinet Office for an answer to the puzzle, it was discovered that there was no listing for Paul Gray in its Internal Phone Directory and neither did its HR Department have any record of him?  Yet in December, they let it slip that he was still on full pay and that he would collect a pension of around 1.7 million pounds. However, the story changed later to Paul Gray having 'retired' and did not resign!  Make what you will of this, as these are the facts, are we looking at a slice of deception here?                                                                                                                       Finally, we add the following to this -- HMRC CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER STUART CRUIKSHANK quit his position shortly after Mr Gray left, and STEVE LAMEY was the Chief Information Officer at the HMRC when the data incident exploded in Mr Gray's face, and some are asking why wasn't he pulled in to this considering his post?

'HMRC Civil servant in Income Tax Fraud'

TAX ADVISER AMJAD KHAN faced jail for not paying income tax for 13 years, and claiming around 24,000 pounds in Tax Credits while working at the HMRC in Bradford.  Ironically while conducting the ethical and legal obligations required from taxpayers in his advisory capacity, he had been committing fraud against the State as he told people to be lawful and warned them of the consequences of tax fraud.  The Judge sitting at Bradford Crown Court sentenced him to prison for 20 months for committing two separate frauds for a considerable time and evading income tax, and abusing his position of trust.  (16/3/2018)

'Investigation into HMRC and The Concentrix Contract'

In 2013 the HMRC said that its contract with the American firm Concentrix would save 1 billion pounds over the life of the deal struck by the government.  It was clearly going wrong months into the contract when they reduced the above forecast of 'the savings' to just 40 million.  Concentrix stopped or amended tax credit awards in around 12 percent of cases investigated, of which 32 percent of these cases were overturned on appeal following a 'mandatory reconsideration'  HMRC terminated the contract amid the fury of some MP's who were not satisfied with the results or how things were managed (2017).

'HMRC Raid on Club could be Unlawful'

The Judge in the case said 'It was arguable on several grounds the search warrant was 'OBTAINED UNLAWFULLY'   That's what he decided in the case of The Inland Revenue's raid on Newcastle United Football Club.  This sparked the question that the taxman's seizure of documents was not done correctly.  The Club had applied for permission to seek a Judicial Review of the search-and-seizure order the HMRC had obtained.  Mr Justice Supperstone said there must be a full High Court hearing on the issues.  The HMRC had suspicions that the club was involved in a tax fraud concerning agents and payments made in transfer dealings.  Lawyers for the Football club said the warrants were flawed and no proper reasons were given.  An order was made by the Judge preventing HMRC Officers from examining the seized material pending a full inquiry hearing on the matter.  (27/6/2017)

'Worker gets compensation and wins against HMRC on a challenge'

In the Case of: MOORTHY versus THE REVENUE AND CUSTOMS -- The employee received 200,000 pounds which the taxman said fell within the rule of taxation 401(1)(a) of ITEPA 2003.  But part of this award was for 'Injury to Feelings' which the HMRC claimed was taxable too under the rules as shown.  The HMRC challenged Mr Moorthy's claim by quoting rule s.406 ITEPA.  The claimant Mr Moorthy appealed against both decisions.  The Court of Appeal dismissed the first ground of Appeal, 'it was beyond reasonable doubt that the FTT and Upper Tribunal (UT) were both correct to decide that the 200,000 pounds payment to Mr Moorthy fell within that single section 401(1)(a).  It was however, perfectly reasonable of the claimant in connection with the termination of his employment to receive the damages (Injury to Feelings) in respect of actionable discrimination on the grounds of age as falling within the exemption in section 406.  Mr Moorthy won his appeal and case.  But directly after the win the HMRC and government amended the law so that no-one else could win in these circumstances!

'Woman is hounded by HMRC after ticking the wrong box'

PENSIONER and retiree Anne Funnell had her life turned upside down by the taxman when she accidentally ticked the wrong box on the self-assessment form sent to her by the HMRC.   Forms are difficult enough and for the aged, they can not only be daunting, but hard to understand.  Frail 83 year old Anne didn't realise she'd done anything wrong until she suddenly received a letter from the HMRC demanding an immediate payment of 5,541 pounds for unpaid National Insurance contributions dating back to the 70's and 80's.  From her home in Norwich, she described the letter as 'threatening' apart from a paragraph mentioning that the debt collectors could be called in plus lose the right to a State Pension.  Unfortunately, the HMRC and DWP use this sort of language frequently in order to put fear into claimants, which is plainly an abuse of their authority if not Human Rights Law.  Some observers say this is menacing and on the verge of blackmail.  The only good news here is that the HMRC realised their 'mistake' and apologised for sending the letter which they admitted was erroneous! (14/8/2017)

HOUNDING THE POOREST with Debt Collectors and agencies --- here are some figures obtained by way of an F.O.I.  The HMRC made 215,144 referrals to debt collection agencies in 2013 to 2014 to secure direct recovery of overpaid personal tax credit.

TAXMAN ADMITS THERE IS ONE LAW FOR THE RICH AND ONE FOR THE POOR -- This was a bit of a gaff caught by the Press by a senior government official, which has embarrassed the Inland Revenue and mildly dented their crumbling exterior.  This disclosure was made by Richard Las , the Deputy Director of HMRC, and it provoked an angry response from campaigners who wish to see that the tax man is being fair to everybody.  Whereas this statement suggests that some people with wealth are having special treatment afforded to them.  This has also brought back memories of recent deals struck by the HMRC which did not appear fair to the majority of taxpayers.   Shortly after the statement was made, the HMRC forcibly replied 'there have been no admissions of underhand deals, adding everyone must pay their fair share of tax regardless of wealth and status!     It's quite apparent that many don't believe this to be true, and they have a point.

'Taxpayer wins appeal over allowances against the HMRC'

Laptop Dancer Gemma Daniels who worked in the city at the Stringfellows Nightclub was asked to pay more than 8,600 extra in taxes after the HMRC decided that she could not claim for clothing and travel.  Gemma who is self-employed could not believe these things were not tax deductable, especially as the clothing was 'costume items' for performances, and her expenses of travel to the venue.  She wanted to query this officially and got nowhere with the local tax office, so she decided to go the legal route and partially won an appeal at the Tax Chamber sitting at Taylor House, London.  They ruled that her claim for clothing, dry cleaning and cosmetics were permitted under allowances, but the travel expenses were not.  They agreed that the clothing did refer to 'working outfits' which would not be suitable for wearing outside. So in the light of this, they upheld her appeal.  (11/9/2018)

'MP's worried over HMRC Tactics'

We've come across this report issued in 2007, which revealed that even a bunch of unhappy MP's could do little about the behaviour of the HMRC, or should that correctly be 'Misbehaviour' of the HMRC and its staff.  Mp's at the time accused the HMRC of making the misery of a family breakdown worse by 'relentless' pursuing of separated couples for unpaid tax.  They quoted figures of 350,000 people having to endure this 'hounding'   One Mp said 'It's ridiculous that couples are jointly liable for overpayments and the HMRC have been given the power to pursue the repayment from whichever party they choose or left on their radar, which can often be a single mother left holding the baby.'

NB:  This was at a time when GORDON BROWN was running things....so don't forget that when you research this site for information.

'Widow is harassed by taxman despite owing nothing'

This is a rather nasty tale of civil service ignorance --- Widow Joanne Allen whose Paramedic husband Dave, died two years before, says she is still getting letters demanding money from the HMRC when she actually owes nothing!   Joanne from Plymouth, says she is being hounded and harassed by the HMRC who keep sending out these letters with threats attached.  The 51 year old Theatre Sister says her husband didn't owe them a thing before he died, she says it is becoming very stressful and continues to make her feel anxious.                                                  The letters started arriving in August 2016, two months after her husband's death -- in one letter it said she would owe an extra 10 pounds a day, everyday, if the money wasn't handed over!  She wrote several times to the local tax office and felt ignored by the staff there..... But in December 2016 the HMRC suddenly found 'THERE HAD BEEN A MISTAKE'                                                                                                                   But lo and behold! this wasn't the end of it at all, it all started up again in March 2018, and the demand letters arrived yet again.  Luckily, this was quickly halted and they apologised for 'YET ANOTHER MISTAKE?'    (5/4/2018)

'HMRC Refuse to Respect a Decision of the Court'

THIS WAS THE COURT OF APPEAL NO LESS!  when The Federation of Small Businesses attacked the conduct of the HMRC in a Family Tax Case that was discussed in The House of Lords.  It concerned the decision by The Inland Revenue to ignore a refusal by The Court of Appeal to allow a Petition to The House of Lords in The 'Arctic Systems Case' as it was called.  This was a family business owned by the Joneses.  A This was a decisive ruling by The Court of Appeal in favour of the Taxpayer.  But in their arrogance, HMRC flouted the law and continued its campaign to extract money from the Joneses who used dividends from the business to remunerate themselves and the shareholders.         Bill Knox, Chairman of The Small Businesses Federation said the HMRC's behaviour in this case is shameful!  (13/6/2007)

UPDATE - Following this we're pleased to announce that the Taxman suffered a Major Defeat in this case when Law Lords dismissed the HMRC appeal and ruled in favour of the Joneses and their company.   (27/10/2009)

We included this case to show you how the HMRC conduct themselves to the point of ignoring the law, and breaking it when it suits them!

'HMRC cause alarm and distress to 90 year old pensioner'

It's quite sad to say these cases are becoming more frequent with the HMRC, and we see no sign of things getting better soon?  This is the report concerning pensioner George Taylor of Merseyside who was still trying to cope with the recent death of his wife when the taxman sent him a bill claiming that he owed them 200,000 pounds!  The reality was in fact that they owed him a 16pounds and sixty pence refund.  The demand was yet another one of these so-called 'errors' by the HMRC, which as you will have seen on this page, happen frequently and they are continually used as an excuse.  However, moving on, the worst part of this was that they almost drove the 90 year old man to suicide.  Being alone and having no one to turn to, it was left to him to contact the tax office and 'prove' that he didn't owe this massive amount of money to the Inland Revenue.  As you can imagine, it wasn't an easy battle to prove oneself innocent when it comes to the HMRC and he said the experience was quite awful.  No-one ever apologised for the error he said, they just simply blamed it on a computer error!  (6/8/2018)

'HMRC in Damages Case concerning False claims and taxman tactics'

This doesn't read well no matter how you look at it, and some of the Judges comments about the HMRC have been left out for now, so we will move on to this case -- The HMRC are being accused of a 'Vendetta' operation against a London Warehousing Company, as one of its directors suffered a mental breakdown as a result of their actions.  The seriousness of this led to an inquiry as to how much damages should the HMRC pay?  This is all the result of HMRC accusing the London businessmen of evasion in respect of taxes.  This scandal (little mentioned?) embellished HMRC's reputation for buckling in the face of powerful interests (like that of HSBC) and a perceived lenience towards rich corporate tax avoiders-- yet maintaining an aggressive policy on smaller companies and people who they think owe money.                             The Directors had fought off claims they had evaded excise duty by producing evidence to support this, and as a result, they went onto winning their 'misfeasance' trial because the HMRC had not been able to substantiate its claim that the directors had acted fraudulently.  The directors said that the proceedings caused them great suffering in 2009 at the height of HMRC's push to indict them and the Liquidators actions against Abbey, and that Rick Hone one of the directors was sanctioned under The Mental Heath Act after trying to take his own life.    HMRC said (their Legal team of course), in their usual 'we did no wrong attitude' we are carefully considering the Judge's detailed findings and will make a decision in due course as to how the HMRC should proceed!'     (Feb 13/2015)

Note,  There is much more to this case so we urge you to see out the 'ABBEY v HMRC' case online and relative stuff to it elsewhere via the Interweb.

 

Action for Misfeasance made against HMRC

The claimant alleged that the defendant’s officers had deliberately and wrongfully withheld information which ought to have been disclosed when he was prosecuted for VAT fraud. The prosecution resulted in his conviction, in October 2003, of cheating the public revenue. He was subsequently sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. In 2006, the Court of Appeal quashed the claimant’s conviction and he was released from prison. The Court of Appeal judgment (R v Sandhu (Monmohan Singh) [2006] EWCA Crim 606) records the reason for the quashing of the conviction as being the non-disclosure of information by HMRC. A retrial was ordered and was due to start in May 2007. However, shortly in advance of the retrial, further information was disclosed to the claimant, in respect of which the defendant (HMRC) decided to offer no evidence. The claimant was acquitted and subsequently commenced an action for misfeasance in public office in April 2013, almost six years after his acquittal.

ps: sadly we cannot update this case nor tell you if the victim received compensation from HMRC for the years he wrongly spent in prison.

 

THE HMRC AND THEIR SIMPLE ASSESSMENT ON PENSIONS OMIT THE 'ERROR' POSSIBILITIES

Those 'error' situations which are commonplace to both the HMRC and DWP don't really get a look in here, or considered for the moment as they claim the 'Simple Assessment' tax return system will give pensioners what they want.  According to figures put out by the HMRC on this subject they tell us that 11 million people fill out a tax return annually and pensioners account for 1.7 million of them.  The report says that the State Pension situation often complicates matters.  The State Pension is stated by the HMRC as 'a gross payment' meaning that it has not been taxed (as yet) when it has been paid to the pensioner.  The amount of income you are allowed to earn (2018) is quoted as 11,850 pounds per annum....if your income is over this (due to private pensions) and extra earnings from other sources this will attract tax deductions which are paid through the PAYE system.  However it is also said in a recent change to pensioners finding they have overpaid for several years and didn't know, that HMRC have limited the time to only 4 years to claim back overpaid tax even if you've been paying too much since 2000 or 2013 etc, your time has run out, and there's not much you can do about it.  While these changes appear to be good for the pensioner at a first glance, it isn't much help for those errors that may have occurred, they won't count.....and one account of a pensioner falling foul of this who has been paying over for years to the tune of 17,000 pounds, will have to put it down to a very costly mistake!   (Sept 2018)

'Victim of sex abuse may sue the HMRC'

This case amazingly enough concerns an HMRC worker who was dismissed by the agency for taking off too much time, read on -- After a sex abuse victim gave evidence against her attacker which involved having to give evidence in court, was actually fired from her job.  She was as it says, a cancer survivor who was targeted by rapist Jason Okwara during 2004 and 2012.  She was a 'call handler' at the Dundee Office of the HMRC.  She told reporters that at the time of the 'sacking incident' she had discussed the matter with her line manager about needing time off to go to Court.  It appears that this line manager has no recollection of this? and the agency are denying that they knew of this.  She worked over two years for the Inland Revenue.  She is now seeking legal advice about her options of redress as she feels the dismissal was unfair.  The only thing puzzling here is that despite talking to reporters, there is a 'censoring' of her name?      (27/1/2018)

'HMRC Fobs off taxpayers routinely'

In a report by the Telegraph, it revealed that the HMRC were carrying out a 'dis-service' to those who pay their salaries. They say that the HMRC typically ignores Rule ESC A19 and chases tax money it is not eligible to claim.  Even those who appeal using the Statutory Concession A19 with legitimate complaints are 'fobbed off' by staff who make out they don't know what they're referring to.                                                   The ESC A19 is thus: 3 conditions -- the first being that the HMRC failed to make 'Proper and Timely' use of the information provided to it. The second is that the taxpayer 'could reasonably have believed their tax affairs were in order' and thirdly, 'that no notification was sent to the taxpayer within 12 months of the end of the tax year in question?'     (4/11/2015)

ALAN AND CLARE HIGHAM RECEIVED A SHOCK BILL OF 10,459 POUNDS FROM THE HMRC FOR MONEY THEY DIDN'T OWE, WHICH WAS LATER DESCRIBED AS A 'BLUNDER'

'Snooping and Surveillance by the HMRC'

A Report says that the HMRC refuse to disclose how many times it had been granted warrants to intercept and read private e-mails and listen to phone calls.  The report also disclosed that 'covert' filming had been authorised without being properly accountable.  In 2011 it was given 172 authorisations for direct surveillance to be carried out.  It goes on to tell us that the Government grants them extensive powers to snoop using the 'Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and in 2011 the HMRC were authorised to view 14,381 items of communication Data 'on taxpayers' investigating tax evasion, compared with the 2010 figure of 11,513 items it looked at then.  The report also mentions that the HMRC did not respond to requests for information sought by the Public and Journalists on this matter.

NB:  There is another little known Surveillance Act that is called 'Ripa' which is similarly used by Police Forces and councils to snoop on the Public.

'HMRC Demand £5,000 Pounds from Retiree'

This section is rather longer as it entails several items of unnecessary harm and stress  to pensioners:

Adrian Davis 66, formerly with the RAF, was a victim of a taxman's demand for almost 5,000 pounds, which the HMRC claimed was unpaid taxes.  This was followed by months of blundering activity by staff at the HMRC and no fewer than six different tax offices who were involved in sending out demands for payment, and almost all were incorrect.  After some outside help, Mr Davis finally got confirmation that the HMRC admitted that Mr Davis should not have been forced to pay the money demanded at all, it should have been written off when he appealed for exemption under the ESC A19 RULE, which was either ignored or lost?

DUE TO HMRC INCORRECT CODES - Peter Patton 64, suddenly got a demand bill for 10,459 pounds in 2009.  This had come about because over a six year period the HMRC had applied the wrong codes to his income from a Final Salary Pension, and worked with a firm that provided care to the severely disabled.  He paid in fully unaware that the bill could be challenged.  In 2010 he was alerted to the ESC A19 clause.  He wrote a complaint to the HMRC, and it was rejected!  He said the Inland Revenue never drew his attention to the clause or that he'd paid out wrongly, and it was only when Consumer Champion Jessica Gorst-Williams got involved, HMRC finally owned up to its 'Mistakes and Delays'. Mr Patton said 'I tried to make them see and failed to get any joy out of it until Jessica took over and got me what they owed me.'

PETER ROBERTS was yet another to find himself getting a demand from the HMRC for 597 pounds, to be paid immediately too!  Apart from the shock of receiving the bill he said 'I was amazed to find they blamed me for the error, and penalised me for it'.  Bringing a suitable analgy to describe how he felt, he likened this to what they were doing, When a shopkeeper makes the error of 'under pricing' an item he has to swallow the cost of his mistake.  He can't run to the customer months or years later demanding the price difference, so why should the Inland Revenue be allowed to operate differently?'

IN THE CASE OF Alan and Clare Higham (previously mentioned), the shortfall was not the couple's fault, it actually came down to an error made by the Pension Provider.  HMRC refunded the overpayments that they had been forced to pay and removed the outstanding balance from their files.  They apologised for the alarm and distress that had occurred and measures they had taken, and admitted that it was their place to pursue the Pension Provider instead, but failed to do so!

'Is there another HMRC deal scandal going on here?'

It's not the first time we've heard of sweet deals being made behind closed doors, so let us look at a report that has surfaced on the giants of the Pharmaceutical Companies.  It appears that Charity Organisation Oxfam are saying that Abbott, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, and Pfizer could be holding back around 124 million pounds of tax from the British Government. It says or suggests that these companies appear to be avoiding 2-9 billion pounds a year in taxes in nine advanced economies.  So where is the Inland Revenue in this?   What have they got to say about the 124 million pounds a year that the HMRC isn't collecting.......nothing really, not a word!

'The little known puzzle of HMRC R & D Tax Credits'

This rather obscure item on the Internet by Robin Smith dated 30th of May 2011 may have some connotations one could describe as devious planning by the HMRC. It tells of how he obtained a 'Payout Cheque' from the taxman when he claimed tax credits for R & D, which he suggests is a closely guarded secret.  He also says this tax relief thing is largely under-claimed, and he points to the 'R & D Tax Rule Book' which he describes is a muddy complex confusion which businessmen fail to understand and arrive at the decision it's more hassle than it's worth.  Apparently, in 2011 the Chancellor increased R & D Tax Credits to 200% and then again to 225% in 2014, but who was getting this?

'Homelessness because of the HMRC'

It's hard to believe that this government Department can actually and deliberately disadvantage someone who has had to turn to it to get help, but they can and do frequently as this next report shows.  This is but one of many as you've seen on this site, Sarah Reeves was one of those people who needed help and had to apply for and receive tax credits in order to live a normal life, but a year after doing so, she was homeless and living anywhere she could with very little to live on.   She also had a young daughter of 22 months.  She worked as a receptionist for a firm in Wolverhampton and needed a top up to manage the mortgage to her new place with her partner, and all seemed okay at first as the HMRC granted her 170 pounds a month, which they relied upon to make ends meet.                                                                                           Suddenly one day, the nightmare arrived in April when the taxman wrote to her and announced that her tax credits were being cut just to 12 pounds a month?  This they said was to make up for overpayments worked out at 3,800 pounds!  Panic set in and she immediately appealed against this, and their response was to increase it to just 40 pounds a month.  The couple began to get behind with payments and the circle of woe began to take its toll, as her partner couldn't face anymore financial worries and left.  But this wasn't the end to the Taxman's game, the payments were stopped entirely?  and what followed was the stick that broke the camel's back.  They now demanded 18,000 pounds and said they wanted it quickly.   This tipped Sarah over the edge as she only had one asset and that was the house that she got a mortgage for.  But she felt there was no other option but to sell it....and that led to her being penniless and on the street.                                                                 Much later, when someone took the time to investigate, it was reluctantly revealed that the HMRC admitted that 'they'd made an official error'  But this was far too late for Sarah, she was a victim of a tax blunder that took away her hopes and much more!   (11/2/2007)

NB: This happened on GORDON BROWN'S watch!

'Discovery of letter reveals that the UK Taxpayer pays too much tax'

This is not how the civil servants at the Inland Revenue see it no matter what document was found, and this letter was discovered by the Chief Executive of the HMRC JON THOMPSON.  The revelation that most 'self-assessment' taxpayers seem to overstate rather than understate their tax liabilities is another 'nail in the coffin' of HMRC's plan to use 'Making Tax Digital' for individuals to reduce the tax gap.  Such is the truth of the situation, that Jon Thompson Chief Executive of the HMRC revealed the discovery of a letter to MP's that clearly pointed to tax dodging is less rife than previously thought by the HMRC.  It actually showed that UK Taxpayers err on the side of caution, inadvertently overpaying on their returns!      George Bull, tax accountant for RSM said 'Such is the truth of the situation, the taxpayer is continually being seen as devious and up to no good by the HMRC'        (6/5/2018)

HMRC APPEAL AGAINST EARLIER DECISION TO ALLOW TAX RELIEF ON NON-CASH PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS --- This is sketchy news just coming in, which says they have been allowed to challenge an earlier ruling....permission has been granted to appeal over blocked pension relief.  (August 13/2018)

NB This kind of action is typical of the HMRC when it realises something may benefit the taxpayer, it has to be stopped as far as they are concerned.

'Tax man sues the hand that feeds him'

This case that we pulled out of the recesses of the Internet rather takes the mick out of anyone who has had a bad experience with the Inland Revenue and its staff --- A Taxman for 26 years is actually suing his paymasters, something we don't hear often.  TAX COLLECTOR PETER PHILLIPS of Hove, Sussex, is asking us all to believe he's some sort of hero and champion of the people? (I think not),  He says 'I am trying to get the rules changed so everybody has the right to work until they are 65 if they want to'  Alternately, if they work longer Mr Phillips they put more tax cash into the HMRC, and you already know that.  So think about that when you're on your white stallion and wearing armour that protects you from the wrath of the pressured taxpayer when you sent out the bills.  The HMRC incidentally, are denying 'treating Mr Phillips unfairly?  (24/7/2001)

'Savers accuse HMRC of contempt'

Many savers are experiencing a betrayal of the HMRC after they found that the advice of topping up their pension isn't doing what they'd been told would or expected to happen.  Information and advice from the taxman that led some to top up the pension are finding they're due less than the full payout, and after making payments they're told they won't qualify for any extra pension at all.  This is the news Money Mail had to tell the taxpayer and imminent pensioner. 'There's a lot of supposed to' said one analyst. Money Mail's expert said that the taxman is unfairly pocketing thousands of pounds from people approaching their state pension age!     What else did you expect from HMRC?     (Oct 2017)

'Tribunal Judge Dismisses HMRC Argument'          

TOOTH v HMRC in a landmark case --- Tax Adviser Peter McMahon was asked to assist Mr Tooth in his tax matters, particularly as they involved the Inland Revenue, and especially in the light of what followed between Mr Tooth and the HMRC as it was not an enquiry into Mr Tooth's Tax Return at all and became an enquiry into matters outside of this, despite all information being included with the Return.                Not following an enquiry into the Return of 2007/8 appears to have been 'an oversight' by the HMRC, and they used a 'blanket' approach to protect their interest in all of the participant's potential tax refunds, namely issuing an enquiry into something which was outside the business of a tax return, which should have been the purpose of the enquiry.                                                                                                                                 When the HMRC finally realised what they'd got themselves into, they claimed they were entitled to raise a 'Discovery Assessment' for that tax year on the basis that a loss of tax had been brought about deliberately by Mr Tooth and his Tax Advisers!                                                    Even more alarming, things turned nastier during the enquiry as HMRC, without presenting any evidence, said that Peter McMahon (a Partner in the Tax Specialists firm Grunberg & Co) had lied and entered the information into a different box deliberately to bring about a loss of tax.  Their legal argument seemed and sounded absurd, and led to further questioning by The Upper Tier Tribunal Judges who were not impressed and expressed their thoughts on this.    Even when the HMRC lost in this attempt, they actually chose to appeal the decision of the Judges!  Peter said 'It appears in taking this case, the HMRC has attempted to overrule the Law, which is wholly unjust for the taxpayer.'    (17/5/2018)

NOTE:  This was the abridged version of events, you can access the whole thing by searching for Tooth v HMRC online.

'Echoes of the DWP Pension Robbery visits the HMRC'

One could be forgiven for thinking that they were partners of crime, and indeed they do stick together and consult each other about claimants affairs, that we already know and can prove.  Therefore it is sad to see that they too are now focusing on the Pensions and how to make things even more difficult for the taxpayer.  A recent Report tells us that the HMRC are raking in 660 million pounds from the new pension limit so that the Treasury boost their funds and control the citizen even more.  On this site we have seen at first hand the dirty tricks these civil servants get up to as tax officers....so let us look at what they are now doing.  In just ten years the Taxman is collecting a huge amount from two pension taxes which collected 7 million at the beginning and that has soared to 660 million pounds today according to official figures released.  Limits have been set on workers on what they can save tax free both annually and over their lifetimes....and the threshold before paying tax has been reduced dramatically.....in 2010 it was 255,000 pounds, in 2014 it was 40,000 pounds and now anyone earning 210,000 pounds will only have an allowance of 10,000 pounds a year tax free which is a blow to most pensioners in 2018, the only person this will please is the Chancellor and tax authorities.......and that's a slippery slope to slashing more off pensions.   (29/9/2018)

PS A leading analyst on pensions, Anthony Hilton, says that saving for pensions is inadequate among most people, they'll just have to work longer, and that will be good news for the Inland Revenue and Government who want as much money as they can from the taxpayer in work and from pensions.

'Those fake HMRC refund e-mails that HMRC ignore'

You will hear the rhetoric from the Inland Revenue will and have claimed these phising fake e-mails marked with HMRC on them which offer refunds to the victims should be ignored, but research shows they are doing precious little to combat this disturbing increasing ;crime' which has claimed victims, and why is this so?  Well, it's because these victims know what the HMRC are capable of and they fear not complying with a tax notification in case they get penalised or end up with a bailiff knocking on their doors.  They cannot distinguish between the e-mails not being genuine despite the HMRC saying they never send notifications of refunds, the HMRC send out a multitude of threats and letters that cause stress and much more, so why should the victims believe in what the HMRC say...they should be fixing this and going after the hackers and scammers, but they're not in a hurry to do that are they?

'Contractor takes HMRC to Tribunal and wins'

Susan Whittaker, consultant, took her case against the HMRC and two others, to the Central London Employment Tribunal because of a 4,200 pound unpaid holiday pay.  Her firm SJW Marketing Solutions were contracted by HMRC officials who ran the Check Employment Status for tax (CEST) tool to determine Susan Winchester's status, and the tool decided that IR35 applied.  Having done that, the taxman then forced her onto an Agency's Payroll, a decision that could not be challenged!  She said, 'I just couldn't understand why somebody could make some arbitrary decision about my tax and employment status on a brief over-simplified questionnaire that I had no input in, and seemingly have no right to challenge'  ---  The Tribunal found in her favour and awarded her a payout.     (24/9/2018)

'HMRC in seizing assets scandal'

To describe this as a scandal is not wrong no matter how their well paid lawyers think, this procedure is akin to when tyrants and Kings (and Barons) grabbed land and livestock so that they could not only own these people, but keep them in a type of servitude.  And all of these measures were in fact taxes the King or Rich Landowners thought up in order to distribute the wealth just one way, theirs!  This is 2018, and it is better known as the HMRC or Inland Revenue.  A new Report out this month tells us that there has been a significant rise in the number of 'seizures' by the taxman in relation to firms who were unable to pay, or not pay on time.  It says they have seized assets from some 2,833 businesses last year alone, and this figure has jumped by 45% from the 2016/17 figures.  Apparently, the leeches have made 69.7 million pounds by selling the business assets of companies.

 

HMRC Must Do More to Restore Public Trust, Critics Say

"People are entitled to be concerned about the tax system because it is not functioning as well as it might," tax barrister Jolyon Maugham QC of Devereux Chambers told the APPG meeting. "The worst [case] is that HMRC is failing to apply the law in an even-handed fashion. It might be inconvenient for tax professionals to have to acknowledge that fact, but there is an awful lot of evidence to support it." "We cannot know, because [we] cannot see, whether HMRC is treating big and small taxpayers alike," Maugham said. "Whether suspicions of HMRC being 'strong with the weak but weak with the strong' are founded in reality or not, we have to accept that people are entitled to hold those suspicions because there is extrinsic evidence that supports them." That people hold those suspicions is just as important, he argued. "It is not enough for us to say, 'Well, you're wrong,'" Maugham claimed. HMRC must "come out to meet these concerns," he said, but "what it does instead is hide behind the veil of taxpayer confidentiality." The U.K. Supreme Court's decision last month in the Ingenious case that off-the-record comments made by HMRC personnel to reporters breached HMRC's duty of confidentiality will cause it to "pull the shutters down still further," Maugham suggested.

AND HERE ARE SOME OF THOSE EXAMPLES OF HMRC ATTITUDES:      (As said by The Public Accounts Committee.....these are but a few!)

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has refused to reveal how much it has paid for multi-million pound contract extensions granted to Capgemini and Accenture.

PAC slams HMRC for lack of accountability and poor prosecutions of wealthy over tax avoidance

A scathing Public Accounts Committee (PAC) report has criticised HMRC for failing to be accountable on crucial problems such as tax avoidance, highlighting the growing number of tax reliefs to the lack of disclosure over the scale of tax avoidance – including a ‘woefully inadequate’ criminal prosecutions record for offshore evasion and unacceptable poor customer service at the tax authority

 

‘However, HMRC is not prepared to provide a comprehensive list of tax reliefs or to provide a definition of tax reliefs including those designed to encourage behavioural change (tax expenditures)

In 2014-15, HMRC responded to just 72.5% of calls and over the first half of 2015 this had fallen to 50%.

HMRC’s customer service continues to be unacceptable, the PAC said, citing the previous Committee’s conclusion in March 2013 that HMRC had ‘an abysmal record on customer service’, having only answered 74% of telephone calls received by its contact centres during 2011-12.

HMRC has consistently refused to set more demanding targets, however, and in 2014-15 it answered only 39% of calls within five minutes.

‘HMRC did not provide us with any indication of when or by how much its customer service would improve, beyond a vague aim to improve year on year..

 

The above attitude is by no means rare or uncommon and proof of the HMRC arrogance is not hard to find once you know where to look, but even so there are still no signs of them heeding to PAC or anyone else so long as they have the Tory Government backing them in anything they want to do.  Co-operation from them is minimal and in some cases as you have already read, progress for a more open and accountable HMRC is yet a long way off, and the next item shows you what one frustrated taxpayer was willing to pursue in order to get a response which he felt they were bound to do as a Statutory obligation:

 

24th Mar 2010 11:38

Serving a Writ of Mandamus on HMRC        (frustratedwithhmrc)

After literally months of frustration with HMRC ignoring letters, (allegedly) lost forms, official complaints about poor service, lack of any action, etc I've finally had enough.

Although nominally the problem is being handled by the Lothians Tax Office, it is impossible to actually speak to anyone there as all communications are routed to the polite, but utterly useless HMRC Contact centres.

I have now reached the stage where I can complain directly to Dave Harnett (as other channels for complaints have failed) or use legal means. The option of going to the official adjudicators’ office requires a letter of contention from HMRC which might take another 6-years at the present rate of progress.

Another option is to raise the matter with an actual HMRC Inspector, however once again I am frustrated by the contact centres who cannot give out that information. I have already spoken to my solicitor and he is prepared to serve a writ of mandamus (a legal document forcing a government official to act), but needs to have a relevant official to serve it upon.

 

[UPDATE as of 25th March 2010]    I have now been contacted by someone working for the CRM team in Glasgow who has read through the notes regarding this sorry mess and concluded that there have been serious failings to progress by HMRC and providing an apology and an opportunity to deal with the issue prior to the commencement of legal proceedings against HMRC Executive Officers.

 

Serving such a writ would be like dropping a bomb on HMRC and (while understandable) is likely to provoke a strong response from Bush House, home of HMRC Solicitors in London.

They are mostly there to prosecute HMRC cases, but also serve in a defensive capacity as well.

 

 frustratedwithhmrc

11th Jul 2013 12:20

     Many thanks to the various replies.  thus far. I understand where "Bewgint" is coming from about thinking this thing through carefully before "dropping a bomb on HMRC". It is just that the months and months of being given the run-around from these folks over something that should have been sorted a few days after the forms were posted is just unbelievable. It is ridiculous that we've got to the state where we have to serve medieval legal notices on our tax inspectors just to get them to do their jobs. However, the truth (as we all know it) is that my forms are probably sat mouldering under a pile of others on some low-level civil servants desk.

 

'HMRC fails to provide evidence in Court'

Having brought a case against Peter Jacks because they claimed he had filed a late tax return (Late Filing Penalty Imposed), they promptly lost it because they failed to provide evidence for their claim.  Judge Geraint Jones Presiding, said 'Adequate proof is a necessity, not a luxury, we do not consider that we can be, or should be, satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that a notice to file was posted by an officer of HMRC to the Appellant simply based upon the computer held note 'Return Issued Data' alongside which appears 6/4/15.  Even if the notice to file was issued on the 6th of April 2015 there is, quite literally, no evidence or even any note to the effect that it was dispatched to the Appellant at a specified address.'     The HMRC on presenting the case had already raised the penalty costs to 1200 pounds by way of their escalation process at a daily rate etc,  The Judge threw out the case brought by the HMRC.     (23/8/2017)

 

The Warwickshire Dylan

TAX ARTICLES

‘HMRC WITHHOLD EVIDENCE AT TRIBUNAL

The first and the most important thing is establishing the facts.  You cannot seek to apply the law without full knowledge of the facts – and that applies equally to clients and taxmen.

Frequently this is not an easy task and it is not unusual for important facts to be omitted.       My clients’ typical comment is that “Oh, I didn’t think that was hugely important”.  But sometimes it is more sinister.  For example, on a recent Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”) case, it came out at the meeting that HMRC had actually withheld evidence from the taxpayer and us.  Indeed, this case is in Tribunal, and had diverted into ADR to clear the ground, and this evidence was not available to the Tribunal either.

So, there is a world of difference between instances of difficulty establishing the facts going from ignorance right through to withholding of evidence. 

NB: The Author of the above piece was with the Inland Revenue so we are informed.

 

'Withholding and Concealment is it a lawful practice that HMRC has been granted?'

We look at some more examples of this practice which looks deceitful and in essence - 'attempting to pervert the course of justice!

HMRC concealing and withholding taxpayer overpayments

1) Small Ltd company client was so worried about underpaying PAYE due to the new penalties that she paid "over the top" amounts each month to ensure she didn't underpay. 2010/11 P35 goes in, confirms £18,500 overpaid, and HMRC sit on it without issuing a statement, telephoning the client or repaying it. We do the accounts ten months later in January 2012, and find there's still £18.5k overpaid. Another four weeks on, still not repaid despite being asked. If you underpay PAYE for a tax year, you receive a statement within a couple of weeks with interest added, and we're told that you're now subject to surcharges for not paying PAYE on time.

2) Another PAYE client here - lady plumber, in dire financial straits, overpays PAYE and CIS by £4,900 for 2010-11. After chasers sent since May last year, HMRC promise to pay it once and for all by 20th Jan 2012. We have tearful telephone call from client today (2nd Feb 2012) to say it hasn't arrived and she's running out of money. HMRC are contacted and say "we've got a bit of a backlog and are just doing hardship cases". This despite the fact that I said in my letter that the woman is running out of money and very upset.     Estimated repayment time?     Another four weeks.

3) A Compliance officer assessed a client for £16,000 of tax for employees where P46s were held by the client, but not submitted to HMRC, despite categorically stating in her letter that "if we supplied personal details for the staff concerned, no assessments would be made". Details were supplied, HMRC computer can't find the employees them so the officer has assessed tax, despite her promise. Two layers of independent reviews rejected our complaints with reviewing officer totalling ignoring that this officer made an offer and subsequently reneged, instead concerning themselves with the technicalities of P46 procedure instead.

HMRC ordered by the judge to think again about withholding information from Privacy International   May 13-2014

Privacy International has been attempting to get blood from a stone; otherwise known as getting information out of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. It has wanted to know if Gamma International is being investigated for potential breach of UK export controls.   Gamma International, you may recall, is the company behind the FinFisher surveillance malware. FinFisher is used by repressive regimes to spy on political activists — and it is a stain on Britain’s collective conscience that it provides the software that can lead to imprisonment and torture. More than 2 years ago, HMRC told PI that it had no power to provide information about its investigations to PI or any other third-party. PI did not accept this, and went to court to force HMRC’s hand. HMRC rapidly retraced its steps, saying instead that it chose not to disclose that information, and doesn’t need to. Whether it must or not is an important issue in itself. If an investigation is under way but HMRC decides not to prosecute, that decision can be challenged via a judicial review. And we can be pretty certain that PI would do so. But if nobody knows whether there has been an investigation, there can be no judicial review on a failure to prosecute.   HMRC’s submission did not impress. The judge didn’t buy it. “If HMRC’s submission here is that because it can argue that it is permissible always or invariably to withhold information in the tax arena that the same can be applied, mutatis mutandis, to the export control arena, then I disagree.” HMRC’s position is, of course, further undermined if not totally destroyed by its current plans to sell off our tax data in exactly the same way that the NHS is planning to sell our health data. The impression we get is that of a government agency so steeped in bureaucratic secrecy and so arrogant over its own power that it believes that it, and not the law, governs how it operates. It is wrong. “For all of the above reasons this application for judicial review succeeds. The Decision of the Defendant is quashed and it is remitted to the Defendant to be re-taken.”

 

'Barclays Bank defeats HMRC 'freeze' Order'

When Barclays Bank refused to co-operate with a 'freezing order' issued by the HMRC on a customer's account, the two institutions faced each other in a hefty court battle.....where the HMRC lost!   THE HOUSE OF LORDS found in favour of the Bank in their appeal against HMRC, agreeing that Barclays Bank had no duty of care to the HMRC when it issues a freezing order on a customer's bank account until it confirms that it will comply with that order.  In essence, HMRC were making, or forcing, Barclays into being liable for any movement of funds in the customer's account without any prior arrangement to do so.    The House of Lords had reversed the earlier Court of Appeal Judgement and held that the mere service of the injunction had not imposed a duty of care on Barclays unless there was an assumption of responsibility by Barclays to the HMRC Commissioner.         (23/1/2006)     (author Nicholas Ross Martin)

 

‘Cleaners win rights victory against HMRC over cut in working hours’

“We hope the company is genuinely committed to meaningful talks on this and other issues. And we hope HMRC and other government departments have got the message that we will not allow them to simply pass the buck when low-paid staff are being treated unfairly in their workplaces.”

Andrew Firman, employment specialist at Carter Lemon Camerons LLP, said: “This is the latest embarrassing example of a large organisation showing itself ignorant about the extent to which end users are getting a raw deal at the bottom of a complex supply chain.

“Back in May, it was the receptionist at PWC sent home from work for not wearing high heels and the Big Four accountancy firm sought to distance itself from the employment practices of its outsourced reception firm. Now HMRC are cast in an unfavourable light and it emphasises the need to both understand the significance of public perception and to keep on top of the employment practices of your suppliers.

 

We now go onto the serious matter of HMRC being contemptuous in Law, and does it flout it with ease?

 

Is HMRC in contempt of Court? Or does it believe it is above the law?

20 September 2008 By Robert

In a recent Revenue & Customs Brief, 46/08, confirming that HMRC have been granted leave to appeal to the House of Lords the decision of the Court of Appeal in the Loyalty Management (UK) Ltd case. Within that Revenue & Customs Brief HMRC make this statement: ‘ As we do not agree with the Court of Appeal’s reasoning and have appealed to the House of Lords, we will continue to proceed on the basis of our view of the law in relation to all parties, including LMUK.’ The question is whether by apparently ignoring the Court of Appeal decision HMRC could be held to be in contempt of the Court of Appeal?

This is not the first instance where HMRC appear to be ignoring the law. In the St Martins decision from the VAT & Duties Tribunal they are reported to have said that if they lost the case they would not refund the VAT to the appellant on grounds of unjust enrichment. In the very first paragraph of the decision the Tribunal says: ‘This was a somewhat extraordinary case. Although it involved only one relatively simple question, the hearing took seven days. Notwithstanding this, and the fact that we allow both Appeals, this is not the end of the matter. There remains first the possibility that the Respondents will appeal against this decision, and aside from that there remains the question of whether or not the Respondents will refund to the second Appellant the sum of £1,489,362 which the second Appellant has demanded under a Voluntary Disclosure. It was intimated at the commencement of the hearing before us that whilst this sum would almost certainly be refunded were we to dismiss the Appeals, if the Appeals were allowed the Respondents would then consider whether to refund the relevant amounts or to refuse to do so on grounds of abuse and unjust enrichment.’  To echo the Tribunal: that’s a somewhat extraordinary statement for HMRC to make. Particularly in a Tribunal hearing. I don’t know what HMRC is thinking. I know of no basis in law for the suggestion HMRC can refuse to pay the refund. The problem appears to be that HMRC is unwilling to admit that it got its timing wrong and thus missed the opportunity to prevent the appellants from gaining from the avoidance scheme that they set up. Indeed the outcome of the appeal is that because HMRC was out of time in issuing the assessment the appellants could get back more than they would have gained had the scheme been allowed to remain in place!

Contempt? Or above the law?

The answer may be both, as we've shown they frequently withhold evidence in court, and in some cases, mislead the court and pervert the course of justice.

 

'HMRC Lose yet again in another IR35 Case'

This is the fourth one so far........The Inland Revenue remain unperturbed by losses in previous IR35 cases, and as someone remarked, 'unable to accept or learn from these defeats'   So at The Appeals Court they were yet again over-ruled after alleging a violation.  Mr Daniels business MDCM Ltd was set up in 2004 (with his wife) providing management services to various construction companies.  Mr Daniels and his wife were the sole owners and workers in MDCM Ltd.  HMRC set up an investigation in 2016, and took it upon themselves to place their contracts within the scope of IR35, and in Mr Daniel's case the HMRC laid out a 'hypothetical' contract based on their investigation findings.  The Judges at the Tribunal ruled that the hypothetical contract required by the IR35 actually showed that Mr Daniels was not in an employment contract, and allowed his appeal, over-ruling the HMRC's decision.    (May 22/2018)

 

'Court Victory for Hargreaves Lansdowne does not please HMRC'

As per usual, when someone wins against the HMRC, they want revenge and do their damnedest to challenge the ruling come what may!  This is a report of exactly that, because Hargreaves Lansdowne gained a victory in the regard of tax against the HMRC.  The case report says that Hargreaves will now be going back to court because HMRC have appealed against the court's decision, as they are appealing a multi- million pound judgement on loyalty bonuses for investors.   In March, Hargreaves won on the question of 'discount tax', but HMRC have changed their rules on returning discounts, and they intend to get their hands on the cash by any means.    (16/May/2018)

 

'Secrecy rejected in disclosure of HMRC's desire to withhold document details'

12 September 2018Print This Post

Win for open justice as tax tribunal allows non-party access to HMRC pleadings

KPMG: Successful application

The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) has “inherent jurisdiction” to give non-parties access to documents, its tax chamber has ruled in allowing KPMG to see documents from another case involving HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC).

Judge Greg Sinfield, president of the chamber, said that having ruled in April this year that the Upper Tribunal had jurisdiction, it was clear that the “same requirements of open justice” applied to the FTT.

Judge Sinfield said that although the FTT rules did not “expressly allow” non-parties to inspect documents, rule 14, prohibiting disclosure of specified documents, did not suggest otherwise.

He said rule 32(1), which provided that tribunal hearings must be held in public, showed the “principle of open justice is engaged in the First-tier Tribunal as it is in other courts”.

The judge said the extent of the jurisdiction to allow non-parties access to documents was considered earlier this year by the Court of Appeal in Cape Intermediate Holdings v Dring.

In his ruling, Lord Justice Hamblen gave a list of documents to which non-parties should have access, such as witness statements, expert reports and skeleton arguments or written submissions by advocates.

The FTT heard in Hastings Insurance Services v Revenue & Customs(Procedure) [2018] UKFTT 478 (TC) that KPMG applied for copies of HMRC’s statements of case and skeleton arguments in a tax appeal.

“KPMG was not a party to the appeal nor did it represent any party,” Judge Sinfield said. “KPMG seeks the documents requested in order better to understand HMRC’s arguments in the appeal which, KPMG state, are relevant to their arguments in a different case in which they are instructed.”

Judge Sinfeld rejected an objection from HMRC on the basis of taxpayer confidentiality under section 18 of the Revenue and Customs Act 2005. The judge said this placed no restrictions on disclosure by the FTT, as opposed to HMRC.

He said non-parties should have access where they had a “legitimate interest” in the documents, which was a “broad” one and “certainly not confined to journalistic purposes”.

Judge Sinfield said it was clear from the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Cape that an “entirely private and commercial interest, such as an interest in related litigation” could qualify as a legitimate interest.

He said it seemed to him that Hastings Insurance was “really arguing that its own skeleton argument should not be disclosed because its counsel ignored it in opening and HMRC’s skeleton is irrelevant because the arguments in it were largely abandoned by their own counsel”.

He went on: “Those submissions miss the point. The skeletons were deployed by the parties at an effective public hearing and read by the tribunal.

“There is no suggestion in Hamblen LJ’s judgment in Cape or in any of the authorities that he refers to that the court’s inherent jurisdiction to allow members of the public to have access to skeleton arguments that have been deployed at a hearing and read by the court is restricted to those parts which replicate oral submissions made in open court and which survive the hearing intact.

“Counsel’s submissions often expand on or even differ from the submissions in the skeleton, which is to be welcomed as nothing would be served by counsel simply reciting the contents of a skeleton.”

Given that skeleton arguments often also contained points or arguments not developed in oral submissions because they were conceded by the other party or accepted by the tribunal without needing to be developed, not providing access to them would mean that “the member of the public would not have a full and complete understanding of the arguments deployed by that party”.

Judge Sinfield accepted the argument put by Hastings Insurance that a “deconsolidated” version of HMRC’s statement of case should be used, to avoid giving access to documents relating to a different, settled, tax appeal.

The judge also agreed that documents annexed to HMRC’s statement of case should not be disclosed. However, he refused a request by Hastings that the amount of tax assessed should be redacted, along with references to parts of HMRC’s expert witness reports.

Judge Sinfield directed that KPMG be allowed to inspect the deconsolidated version of HMRC’s statement of case, without annexures, and both parties’ skeleton arguments in the appeal without any redactions.

The Ministry of Justice is currently considering the responses to a consultation that closed last month on strengthening the rules supporting open justice

 

'Single Mother targeted by HMRC Check that went wrong'

HMRC not only targeted single mother, Debbie Balandis, but 'assumed' she had an 'undeclared' living in boyfriend called Martin McColl.  In the light of this they stopped her tax credits even though she begged them not to do this as it would leave her without money.  Debbie herself and never heard of a Martin McColl, and the tax people refused to listen.  So, without consideration, they stopped all income that was needed for Debbie and her 13 year old disabled son.  They ridiculously claimed that she was having a relationship with her newsagent, the mysterious Martin.   Their horrific gaff finally came to light when it was discovered the new 'supposed' boyfriend didn't exist at all, and it transpired that it had derived from the Post Office counter where she went to draw her benefit, which was part of a shop group R.S.McColl Stores in Castlemilk, Glasgow.      Apparently, the HMRC declined to comment on the case?       (30/9/2015)

 

'HMRC has long failed to act with objectivity and honesty'

So says 'CONTRACTOR CALCULATOR.CO.UK. who use the following headline on their webpage   '10 TIMES HMRC USED PROPOGANDA TO MISLEAD MP'S AND THE PUBLIC ON IR35 ISSUES'  They say that the Inland Revenue only want MP's and the Public to hear one side of the IR35 story.  It is certainly true that they are losing many cases in appeal over the way they interpret a person's working status for tax purposes using the IR35 to become an 'hypothetical' contract --- a supposition to make an assessment?  The organisation also accuses HMRC of making the opposition appear immoral through false accusations --- and deceiving the recipient by delivering a 'partly true' statement, along with 'Lying and Deception', telling falsehoods.  So, for more of this go to their web page.

 

'The 'Encrypted' stuff HMRC don't want read'

On our travels around the InterWeb, we obviously search out anything on HMRC and DWP as a matter of course, and some of it is easier to find than other sources.  However, on occasions we do stumble on things by pure accident, just as we did recently when we hit what could be termed as a 'dangerous' path that led us to a folder containing 'encrypted information' regarding cases in court and other departmental stuff.   We should have stayed in limbo on that first visit as our safety in such a zone was uncompromised, and we were lucky enough to grab two encrypted documents which we will be working on with the help of our techie friends.  We mistakenly went for a second visit which rang 'alarm' bells and we had to withdraw fast before it either 'bugged' us or tried to close us down.  So beware of this and tread carefully!

                                                                                          

We shall be back shortly with another set of cases that informs, challenges and scorns the integrity of the HMRC and an ongoing case that involves the HMRC retrospectively 'stealing' back awarded tax credits from a small businesses, and in the process bankrupting them, hence forcing those claimants onto JSA and jobless market?

 

Here is one of those cases told by the Lawyer who represented the man who had a small business concern, now no more!

HMRC Underpayment Case is dropped too late, causing man to abandon his business

Our client owned a car-washing business, a trade which admittedly is notorious for unsavoury practices, payment of below-minimum-wage rates for workers, and breach of working time regulations. We duly issued a Notice of Appeal earlier this year, and proceedings leading up to it continued. We were given a date in September 2018 for the hearing. Meanwhile, a lot of preparation had to be done, including documents preparation of lists of documents, and witness statements and bundles.

We remained convinced of the justice of our case, based on the lack of proof available to HMRC. Our client was adamant that he had done nothing wrong.

The burden of proof was on HMRC to establish that he had had breach the strict requirements in question. They had no solid evidence other than vague suggestions that the business was unsustainable if run legitimately.

There were no opposing witness statements and no solid evidence of what employees were actually paid and what benefits they received. We pointed this out to HMRC, but their lawyers did not accept our position. With a month left to the hearing, and after further correspondence, we suddenly received notification from a more senior reviewing HMRC lawyer, who had looked at the evidence which we had begged them to look at since November 2017. She had come to the conclusion that this was a case which indeed ought to be ‘dropped’ on the evidence. We were naturally delighted and sent a joint letter to the tribunal withdrawing our appeal. Our client was very grateful at this unexpected and amazing result. It was a pity that it did not come sooner. Our client had since abandoned his business, because of his worries about the consequences of the Notice and his ability to trade again, or register himself as a company director at all. The consequences could well have been very serious. He was literally sick with worry, and indeed was spending time living abroad, because a close member of his family was (and continues to) suffer with leukaemia.

Kuldeep S. Clair

Consultant Solicitor and Advocate

20/8/2018

NB: Strangely enough, this is the direct opposite to the Government's 'start a business' and get off the jobless figures!  Apparently they want you to run a business that the HMRC have approved, and none other.

 

'Former Inland Revenue Taxman gets 4 years jail'

The former HMRC taxman GERARD GIFFNEY used his skills in the Revenues Department to defraud the State of 112,000 pounds.  It was said in Court that he devised a plan where he asked a number of men to sign blank tax forms in relation to 'relevant contracts tax' to claim cash back.  The documents known as RCTDC forms stated that they had worked on building sites, whereas in actual fact, none of this had actually taken place.  The completed forms and bogus information entitled the men to a tax refund. Giffney filed the forms and paid the men 'a few quid' as he put it.  The men would then receive cheques from HMRC of which they were entitled to pocket 20% and Giffney then took the remainder for himself.  The Loophole in the system was known to Giffney and he was well adept to using it.  He had previously been working at the HMRC when he came under suspicion and was fired for carrying out the scam or attempting to do it.  He then went onto forming a tax advisory company.  It was said in Court that he had a previous conviction from 1995 for fraud, and in 2003 to 2005 whilst working in the HMRC he appeared in court for tax fraud.  It says he was caught and arrested on a European Arrest Warrant.  It also says that he was convicted of 11 counts of tax fraud and received a prison sentence of four years.       (28/7/2012)

 

HMRC sacks more than one hundred people this year for issues other than performance    (2010)

More than hundred people have so far been dismissed from HM Revenue & Customs this year, according to figures published in parliament.

The numbers appeared in written answers from exchequer secretary David Gauke. They revealed that 116 people have been sacked for reasons other than poor performance among 369 who have been disciplined. Performance related issues have lead to the sacking of 294 staff

Last year saw fired for 402 people for poor performance. Another 633 people were disciplined for other reasons, among them 158 who were sacked.
Gauke was replying to a question from Tory MP Priti Patel about how many HMRCworkers were sacked for errors. The department does not record ‘error’ as a reason for dismissal.

'HMRC under Investigation for Data Breach'

A subject raised earlier, as it now becomes clear that the Government aren't particularly strong on ethics or protecting the public in data, and only wish such protection for themselves.  This report of July the 5th 2018 only goes to show how they get away with things.  It is said that the Information Commissioner is to investigate the Inland Revenue for breaches of the Data Act.  They were also asked which other departments were sharing taxpayers private information data, but they declined to answer.  They were however, accused of 'railroading' taxpayers into the scheme whereby data of a personal kind is stored and used, some 5 million people is estimated at the present time, which disrespects the Public's wishes of having a choice, which they are denied by the HMRC, DWP and others.

Now onto:

A Leaked Webinar Suggests HMRC Misled NHS on IR35

by admin | Oct 15, 2018 |

The HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) understanding of the laws relating to IR35 have been criticised by tax advisors and legal experts. They have expressed concern that the tax agency has misled the public regarding off-pay rule legislation.  The criticisms follow a leaked webinar titled ‘Working through intermediaries: implementing the IR35 guidance in the NHS” delivered by MARK Frampton, HMRC’s IR35 policy advisor in September last year.

The hour-long webinar that was leaked to the Independent Health Professionals Association (IHPA) may help explain the reportedly large number of blanket assessments after the introduction of IR35. The practice has been described as inaccurate and misleading resulting in the undue financial suffering of the affected contractors.

According to Martyn Valentine who is the director of employment status specialists at The Law Place, Mr. Frampton’s comment regarding employment status is a cause of great concern. The guidance has been geared towards assessing almost all NHS locums to be inside IR35.

The guidance to NHS trusts, according to Dr. Iain Campbell who is the IHPA secretary-general, has resulted in rota gaps not being filled due to the reduction in locums in hospitals. This has worsened the winter crises and put patient care in danger.

A legal expert at IHPA, Stephen Mhiribidi, had stated that rota gaps have been increasing daily and that most of the locums have been slow to take shifts that involve a lot of travel, high accommodation costs,and subsistence. In fact, some of the trusts have faced risks due to this practice.

In the webinar, Frampton has instructed the NHS trusts that the locums would be subjected to the right of supervision, control, and direction. This might have encouraged them to ignore statements raised by contractors that control does not apply to their engagement.

According to Dr. Campbell, HMRC does not have a clear understanding of control in the healthcare sector. He says that being a doctor he knows that he is compelled to pass clinical judgements that are in the best interest of the patients and not compelled by any law. The professional codes of conduct mean that medical professionals are autonomous practitioners and are not controlled by any legislation.

NHS Trustees were advised in the webinar that a contractor who has an assistant to complete the work in order to pass the off-pay rule substitution test. The statement clearly reflects that the HMRC does not understand the case law and has potentially misled NHRC regarding IR35 rules.

 

HMRC UNDER FIRE FOR PUBLISHING MISLEADING IR35 FORUM MINUTES

HMRC has come under fire for claiming in the recently released minutes of its July IR35 forum meeting that new public sector IR35 rules have been a success. It went on to say that it “has no evidence of significant impact on attrition rates of contractors working in the public sector.” James Collings, Chairman of the Association of Independent Professionals and the Self-Employed (IPSE), swiftly criticised the minutes for not detailing a host of significant concerns raised at the forum meeting. Emphasising that the discussion, which IPSE takes part in, is designed to provide transparency on IR35 issues, he condemned the minutes for omitting frank discussions raised by stakeholders about the negative impact of IR35 on public sector contracting professionals Mr Collings revealed that he and other stakeholders had, in fact, raised serious concerns about the damage caused by the rollout of reformed IR35 rules in the public sector. None of these were recorded in the official minutes, which, he said, were published without the informed consent of forum members.  29/Sept 2017

PS: It would be interesting to know how many times the HMRC mislead inquiries and other situations they wish to damage!

 

 

'Ministers misled by HMRC'

This is a report we found from 2014 in which 'HM Revenue and Customs wrongly boasted it was generating billions of pounds in additional tax income for the Treasury' when in fact, there was little or no improvement in compliance rates.  The National Audit Office said that 'errors' in the way HMRC's performance targets were set meant that it repeatedly 'overstated' the improvements in the amount of extra tax revenues that it was bringing in.  Although the Audit Office 'accepted the 'errors' and use of 'inadvertently' being used as excuses, Margaret Hodge of The Public Accounts Committee said that these resulted in HMRC misleading Parliament, Ministers, and more importantly, the Public!

 

 

We consulted THE CODE OF PRACTICE - CIVIL SERVICE to see how 'misleading' fits into their promise to the taxpayer and Public and discovered the following:  Section 2) demands that the service acts with 'honesty, not to deceive or mislead customers, ministers of Parliament or others.   and a whole lot more (if you care to read it yourself).

It is quite clear from our own and the above examples, that HMRC have breached this many times and continue to do so when they want.

 

 

'THE 2015 SCANDAL Revealed on HMRC'

Apparently, this was said to be the turning point --- this was a piece written by Peter Tickner in his FRAUD AND CORRUPTION IN PUBLIC SERVICES article; 'Perhaps most damaging of all to the reputation of the HMRC was to discover that they signed off the contract with MAPELEY with an offshore company, which by its very nature was avoiding paying UK Tax.  That the Tax Authorities themselves should consider it acceptable for the Government to enter into such a relationship beggars belief.  It was wrong morally, politically and financially, yet the HMRC top management spent years defending the indefensible over it?  This embarrassing business led to the Treasury forbidding departments and agencies from entering into contracts with companies based wholly or in part offshore for tax-avoidance reasons.

 

We are now going to put the spotlight on complaints against HMRC:

 

HMRC 'getting nastier' with taxpayers who dare to complain!

 

The taxman is taking a tougher stance, rejecting a greater proportion of complaints about its conduct.                                                                      HM Revenue & Customs is taking a more robust stance with those raising objections about its conduct, by rejecting a far greater proportion of these complaints.

Accountants Saffrey Champness said HMRC upheld just 30pc of the 75,568 complaints it processed between 2011 and 2012, the last year for which full records are available. This is a drop of almost 10pc, on the number of complaints upheld the previous year.

This information, which was obtained under a Freedom of Information Act, shows "that HMRC is getting nastier", said Ronnie Ludwig, a partner at the accountancy firm.  2 May 2013

 

HMRC complaints shame: Just 1-in-40 unhappy taxpayers gets an impartial hearing from officials who aren’t even allowed to accept emails?

·         Just one in 40 people has their case heard by an independent adjudicator

·         Experts say people often don’t know they have the right to escalate a complaint

·         Adjudicator says some are deterred because they cannot email a complaint

·         Tens of thousands of complaints about incorrect tax bills, codes and unpaid credits are being thrown out by HM Revenue & Customs — and never investigated by an impartial judgeMoney Mail can reveal that just one in 40 people who have been fobbed off by the taxman has their case heard by an independent adjudicator. Tax experts say part of the problem is that people often don’t know they have the right to escalate their complaint to the Adjudicator’s Office, where they can get an impartial hearing.  And buried in an official report the adjudicator says that many taxpayers are being deterred because they cannot email their complaint.   In an alarming statement, it says that this is because HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), which funds the Adjudicator’s Office, refuses to cover the cost of setting up this vital service.    (August 2018)

 

MPs to probe HMRC complaints handling: 'I sent 37 letters and still no answers'

the taxman’s record in dealing with taxpayer disputes is being put under the spotlight by MPs.

The Treasury sub-committee, led by former education secretary Nicky Morgan, announced the investigation this week, inviting evidence on this and two other tax inquiries.

The inquiry will chiefly focus on disputes over tax returns, but there are many other occasions when taxpayers run into trouble and disagree with HM Revenue and Customs’ calculations of what they owe. Individual cases will not be assessed, but the inquiry will raise questions as to the fairness and proportionality of HMRC’s response to complaints.

HMRC’s corporate culture to blame for poor customer service

The recently published Adjudicator’s annual report for the year ended 31st March 2018 and reveals that elements of HMRC’s culture impacts upon the department’s initial interaction with taxpayers, their complaint handling and the action taken following feedback given to it. This is demonstrated in attitudes towards taxpayers, communication style and decision making. Surprised? No, me neither.      ( 14th August 2018 Written by Andy Vessey)

The Adjudicators role in the complaints procedure:

Where appropriate, the Office will recommend that HMRC pays financial compensation to a taxpayer in recognition of the poor level of service they have suffered, together with any relevant costs. In 2017/18 HMRC paid out £576,562 in redress for the following:

 

Reason

Amount (£)

Worry and distress

22,020

Poor complaint handling

22,599

Tax given up

454,071

Financial loss

165

Costs

77,707

 

Tax credits have, for some years, been the dominant cause of complaints and they formed 57% of complaints in 2017/18. Although the report does not provide a breakdown of other areas of complaint, PAYE errors and Extra-Statutory Concession (ESC) A19 (giving up of tax by HMRC due to their error) appear to be popular 

                                                                                           . The average time taken by the Office to resolve a complaint was 7 ½ months. Whilst this represented an improvement on the 9.7 months in 2016/17 and is within their own performance objective of 10 months, this still seems a long time for an individual to wait for resolution, particularly given that they will have already gone through HMRC’s two tier complaint process. For the year ending 31st March 2019 the Office has set itself a target of resolving complaints, on average, within 6 months.

 

Shocking – 90% of HMRC complaints to the Adjudicator upheld,   (below we have obtained results of the adjudicators investigations)

·         Shocking in a good way for the tax payer but appalling that they’ve had to fight their case all the way to the Adjudicator. And what about those who, for whatever reason, do not take their case all the way through the complaints process. How big is that figure?        Of the 2,311 Adjudicator resolved cases 844 (36.5%) were partially upheld and 1,229 (53.2%) were fully upheld – At 1 April 13 there were 2,698 cases awaiting investigation.  1,131 new cases were opened in 2013 – 2014  2,350 cases were resolved in 2013 – 2014  1,479 cases were outstanding at 31 March 2014     Complaints against HMRC are at their highest level since 2008. The tax authority handled 81,066 complaints during 2015/16 

  Data published by Citizens Advice earlier this year shows the number of people seeking advice for complaints about public services has grown over the last few years.  There has been a 51 per cent increase between 2011-12 to 2014-15.  The charity’s evidence shows people are struggling to access the public services they need and then struggling to complain when they don’t.

NB: The information above is indicative of their response to complaints, and in most cases they do their damndest to ignore them completely!

 

Another matter that infuriates the taxpayer is 'phone calls' which either comes as 'waiting for one that never comes' and the amount of time and money a person (whether it be a claimant or not) spends on the line trying to solve an issue that needs urgent attention.  We already knew that the HMRC often make things a lot worse and often make the caller a scapegoat and promptly penalise them in the process, so we are now turning to THE CITIZENS ADVICE BUREAU who often monitor the situation, and this next report is by them:

Thousands turn to Twitter to complain about HMRC phone lines

9 September 2015

Frustrated callers tweeted HMRC over 11,500 times in the last 12 months to complain about long phone line queues.

New analysis from Citizens Advice shows people complained via Twitter about spending an average of 47 minutes in total to speak to someone at HMRC.

While official figures suggest an average wait of 10 minutes, the study from Citizens Advice shows many people are waiting longer.  

One person tweeted they had tried to get through to HMRC on four occasions - waiting an hour each time.

Reasons for calling HMRC include explaining a change in circumstances that will impact on tax credits, for example losing their job or having a child, or to clarify income tax payments.  

A person’s tax credits won’t be adjusted accordingly if they can’t update HMRC about their circumstances.  This could mean they aren’t receiving all of the support available or are being overpaid which can cause debts further down the line.

A worker may not be able to file their self assessment return on time if they cannot get through on the phone, and could face a fine for missing the deadline.

Citizens Advice carried out the study, which looked at complaints made to the @HMRCgovuk Twitter account between September 2014 to August 2015, after people seeking help from the charity had reported not being able to get through to resolve matters with HMRC.  

The charity helped with 295,000 queries in the last 12 months which could require people to contact HMRC.  

Three out of four of these cases specifically relate to tax credits, the others include  income tax, National Insurance Contributions and Child Benefit.

In addition, every month 67,000 people visit the tax credit pages of the Citizens Advice website making it the third most visited section of the site.

HMRC phones lines are a 0300 numbers meaning calls are charged at the same rate as a standard landline call and could be included in some phone package’s free minutes.  However if a person is waiting 47 minutes it could cost them £4.66.

The charity is also warning that the roll-out of Universal Credit and changes to tax credits could mean waiting times will further soar as more and more people try to speak to someone about their circumstances.

Citizens Advice Chief Executive Gillian Guy said:

“People are paying the price for not getting through to HMRC.  From fines for not completing a tax return in time to under or overpayments for tax credits, people can be left out of pocket because they cannot speak to HMRC on the phone.

“Work and caring responsibilities means not everyone will be able to wait for three quarters of an hour to ask HMRC a question.  

“We have consistently raised this issue with the Government.  But evidence from across the Citizens Advice service, and our new research, shows HMRC is still failing to provide a timely service.  

“There is already a clear demand to be able to speak to HMRC.  With the roll-out of Universal Credit and big changes to tax credits just around the corner this is only going to grow.  HMRC needs to urgently address the problems many people are experiencing with phone lines.”

Citizens Advice advisers acting on behalf of clients also face long queues for the intermediary line, which organisations like Citizens Advice can use to make direct contact with HMRC staff.

Peak months for complaints via Twitter include:

·         January 2015 when income tax self assessments are due by the end of the month (1,133 tweets).

·         June and July in the run up to the 31 July deadline for tax credit renewals (1,443 for June and 1,128 for July).

1.     The average call length was calculated by looking at all Tweets for August 2015. The aggregated figures are for the total amount of time a person spent on the phone, not the average individual call eg a person phoned HMRC three times and each call took 1/2 an hour to get through was counted as 90 minutes.

2.     The average call cost was estimated by using the cost of a call if a person is on BT  fixed line, no inclusive calls tariff which is 9.58pence per minute to 0300 numbers which works out at £4.66 which also includes the 15.97 pence connection fee.  

 

'HMRC Cut Claimants benefits over Suspicions!'

So much for the 'Innocent until proven guilty' ethics that the Law used to stand for, but doesn't now.  This case involves a single mother who had her payments stopped due to civil servants at the HMRC.  They apparently decided 'that she was married to her brother' of all things which couldn't be more absurd if it weren't true.  This is just one of many cases where claimants have been 'wrongly' accused of lying about their circumstances and entitlement to tax credits and other benefits.  Lorelle Banks told reporters of her local paper that the HMRC told her to pay back 1,400 pounds of benefits because of the ridiculous 'error' -- Lorelle lives with her 5 year old son in Motherwell; as does her brother Gary Banks -- when he is on leave from the Army!  She tried to reason with the tax staff and told them about her brother, and showed them her tenancy agreement, bank statements and utility documentation, but they ignored all of this and stopped her money instantly!   (Oct 2015)

Another woman's tax credit payments were stopped because civil servants employed there said that 'her daughter didn't exist' and inferred that she was yet another lying claimant.   (Details can be found in the Liverpool Echo of 2/10/2016)

 

HMRC LOSE AT TRIBUNAL  HEARING  and Payback £10,000 Pounds    15th Aug 2017

The first tier tribunal has cancelled penalties levied on the finance director of group of companies after HMRC failed to establish that he had breached his duty as a senior accounting officer.  In the first tribunal decision concerning senior accounting officer (SAO) penalties Kreeson Thathiah, the finance chief of a group of companies owned by International Currency Exchange (ICE), successfully overturned two £5,000 penalties levied on him by HMRC.  The case hinged on whether Thathiah had taken reasonable steps to ensure his company established and maintained appropriate tax accounting arrangements, in particular relating to issues around the firm’s VAT returns between 2010 and 2014. HMRC argued that Thathiah had breached the main duty of an SAO by failing to conduct or have in place any system of, selective or ‘thematic’ testing or sampling of figures in the returns, but Judge Sarah Falk overturned the levies and criticised HMRC’s handling of the case.

 

HMRC Increased Payments to Outsourcing Firm Accused Of Wrongly Stopping People's Tax Credits    January 17, 2017,

A new report by the National Audit Office finds the UK tax authority increased payments to a contractor even as it missed more than 100 of its targets. An official National Audit Office report into a controversial outsourcing project handling tax credits has reported a litany of missed targets, backlogs, and IT failures – but found HMRC increased payments to the contractor regardless. The deal was between the UK's tax authority HMRC and US outsourcing giant Concentrix, giving the firm the power to check hundreds of thousands of tax credit cases for fraud and error.

 

High Court hears HMRC accused of 'improper motives'

By John Campbell      BBC News NI Economics & Business Editor             29 November 2016

An investigation into suspected tax evasion by four Belfast accountants’ centres on how losses made by an investment partnership were offset against tax, the High Court has heard The court heard that HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) investigators had suspicions about the men's use of a financing partnership which made loans to another firm under their control. A barrister for the men said that HMRC had failed to ask the men simple questions about FFP and instead took the "nuclear option" of applying for warrants to search their homes. He told a panel of three judges that the tax authority was legally obliged to have considered less intrusive steps in an attempt to quell any suspicions. He also that claimed ' judges who granted the search warrants were given misleading information about the extent of the four accountants' co-operation with inquiries'. Adverse inferences were wrongly drawn from their alleged failure to get back to HMRC during correspondence in 2014, the court heard. The barrister also said HMRC had been acting on improper motives.

"On the night before the warrants were executed senior (HMRC) managers were gleefully exchanging emails to the effect that this had the makings of a great story for them," he said.

 

We are now about to reveal something that 'dropped into our lap' so-to-speak on the HMRC that exposes the most awful dirty tricks they practice! (2004 - 2018)

 

'The HMRC Debt Collection Scandal'

What we're about to reveal will expose not only the HMRC, but a dubious company called ADVANTIS DEBT COLLECTION CENTRE, and it will be backed up with material and information from forums we have visited (and we have more to see yet)...the HMRC 'culpability' in this is obvious and undeniable, so we have decided as it involves the vulnerable, old, and poor that we will pass on info to BBC's Watchdog and Esther Rantzen's House Trap show on Channel 5.

We will begin with some background -- THE HMRC claw back overpayments and fines/penalties, and do arrange a 'contract' with the person if they need time to pay, though they often try to get it back immediately! and pressure that person into doing it.  However, the Strathclyde Accounts Office do enter into a Direct Debit Instruction agreement over the phone whereby that person can make monthly payments until the amount is cleared.  As this is a bank transaction this agreement is considered legally binding between both parties as it is with credit companies, with the only default factor being the payee..........We now find that it is HMRC being the defaulter....a government department!.

'They actually enter into the agreement, set up the Direct Payment scheme for a period they say, and without notification, cancel the agreement and hand on your details to a third party without any consultation......and this is usually Advantis in the main, there are others.'

'On the 5th September an agreement was made with a female civil servant acting for the HMRC in Cumbernauld, Strathclyde.  The Payments of  100 pounds a month were agreed to start on November the 1st, and conclude on the 1st february 2020, under the Direct Debit Payment plan.  The first payment was taken by the HMRC in November.  All seemed to be going well, especially as HMRC say in their blurb 'you may be able to spread your repayments over a longer period' and this is not until you ring them, which was done (the paperwork confirms this)... and this is the so called  'Payment Helpline'  they specifically say that it is only when you don't 'we may pass this on to a Debt Collection Agency'.

But there's no 'maybe' about it, they automatically when they wish (no matter if there is an agreement in force) just do it anyway, obviously to cause disruption and stress to the person for their own enjoyment!

Having paid the first instalment, without any notification from HMRC whatever, on the 26th of November, a letter arrives from ADVANTIS a Debt Collection Centre, saying that they have been instructed to act on the behalf of HMRC to recover the debt.  Which ironically says 'All discussions and payments should be made through us'....more or less warning you off, which could be perceived as a threat of some sort.  It further goes on to tell you that 'this is your opportunity to put things right'  which funnily enough I'd already done with HMRC.  Advantis then go onto the threat 'if you don't contact us or pay what you owe now, H M Revenue and Customs has instructed us to pass on your debt to debt collection agents for recovery'...............which certainly verifies and indicates the HMRC culpability in this matter beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Having at first believed that this was a scam by Advantis, similar to the online crooks, I rang HMRC only to be held waiting on the phone for over fifteen minutes, and gave up.   I had the intention of asking them to explain the situation and tell me why they had terminated the agreement  arbitrarily and why they had just ignored any decency or protocol to inform me of the situation....but I guess these civil servants aren't big on truth, decency or anything else.

Update:  on the 4th December I checked the state of my account with Lloyds to see if the HMRC had cancelled 'officially' before handing things over to Advantis, (expecting to find only one payment had been accepted as Advantis were demanding payment of the total sum minus the first 100 pounds) but found the Direct Debit Payment system still live and ongoing, HMRC had taken a further 100 as arranged, which means if I had paid the demand from Advantis, they would have taken 100 pounds they were not entitled to....which essentially is fraud, but who do I sue in this case? the HMRC who actually took the money, or agents Advantis.....or should both of them be charged with fraud, as both are 'complicit' in this matter........and what of the supposedly debt repayment plan that was not cancelled, how and why did they authorise Advantis to collect on a debt that had not been officially brought to an end in a proper and legal manner?

The bank said it looked like a phishing case by Advantis and that it should be ignored!

Update to the above  --  Advantis continued their campaign of recovering 'the debt' on four occasions -- 26/11/2018 -- 8/1/2019 -- 22/1/2019 and 5/2/2019 at which point no more demands arrived.

But this was not the end of the matter, HMRC put another firm in place (who are listed on their desired bullyboys), this firm wrote with their demand for the full sum on 16/5/2019, saying that they were instructed by HMRC to collect the 'debt' this firm is 'PASTDUE Credit Solutions and are based in Glasgow, Scotland. 

As we are now looking at a criminal charge of 'Conspiracy to Derfraud' there are now three defendants, The HMRC, Advantis and PastDue, so having investigated PastDue online we will tell you what we found (see them after the Advantis items)

 

As we have already stated, HMRC are connected with this firm ADVANTIS and this is quite clear on the Internet,  and having mentioned that we thought we'd do a little bit of digging into this firm ADVANTIS....and what we discovered in our brief visit was appalling....so here it is:

Re: Advantis and HMRC overpayment

I will sit down this weekend and check the website out.

 Re: Advantis and HMRC overpayment

You MUST report Advantis for ringing you at work, complain to the FCA. And the HMRC too
They are responsible for the powerless dogs they employ
State it almost lost your job
And you want compensation.
Did HMRC give them explicit orders to do that?

Re: Advantis and HMRC overpayment

That site is a load of twaddle
Please don't use it ……..Nor their stupid letters

(as per the Consumers Action Group)

 

27th Apr 2018    By mrme89      HARRASSMENT BY ADVANTIS (HMRC Contract Agency)

They wanted me to give them:-
1) My full name
2) Date of birth
3) A copy of my passport / driving licence

I politely declined. They harassed me for this information until I made a formal complaint.

Finally the harassment stopped.

 

lesley.barnes     27th Apr 2018     DATA PASSED TO A THIRD PARTY BY HMRC

I have had debt collection calls from them chasing for clients debts on behalf of HMRC. They are a complete nuisance and as mrme89 says they don't go away. I can only assume that HMRC have passed my number to them as the agent.

 

ADVANTIS CREDENTIALS FAIL TO IMPRESS OR SOUND BONA FIDE

I received a letter through the post for a client’s HMRC debt. Advantis refused to talk to me about it & refuses to tell the client what it related to. Their only HMRC debt was some PAYE that was roughly 75% of the chased debt. I told them to clear the debt, paying HMRC. Yet to hear anything move from Advantis 

 

Is this firm really Legal?  The question arises as does the connection with HMRC

Had a text message today from Advantis, "This is an urgent message from Advantis. We have a personal business matter to discuss with you. Please call us immediately quoting ref!!!   Strange, I am not ever aware of being in any late payment or excess debt.  No receipt of outstanding bill's or even letters that the debt is not paid in full. Or it will be passed to a debt collecting agency!  Now they are an agency that do work on behalf of HMRC, just coincidence I suppose. But how can a debt agency chase me on such an instance?  How can they have my mobile number but no home address, no letters received about the debt.

I suspect a fraud, but cannot be too fussed about ringing them back at the moment.

Did google the number and read about the harassment calls.

So I suppose the question is, how did they get my mobile phone number? Data protection and the oncoming GDPR?   I never really gave HMRC authorisation to give my details to a third party?

Still, without consent, or even the reminder letters of an outstanding debt. The details should not have be passed onto a third party, or should they.?

Monday 11th March 2013    Has anyone else had dealings with this company? To my knowledge they are a debt collection company with questionable tactics...

Holy thread resurrection, I know... But this thread cropped up just now when I googled this "Advantis" shower, having received much the same style of phone call from them this afternoon. Three years on and they're still up to the same tricks, it seems!

Two things struck me as strange: they called from a mobile number, and at no point during either conversation with Advantis did they ever mention the word "debt". I'd also had a text from them last week with the same vague line about "some personal business" which I dismissed as spam.

The 3 above comments are but the tip of the iceberg that we chose for this initial investigation into HMRC and Advantis

 

Advantis on fishing expedition ‘lie’ to get information.

Advantis called again at 8-23 am, so I answered.  They said they were ADVANTIS and looking for my daughter; they called her by her maiden name.  I said she doesn’t live here anymore, and they said she had called them from my number.  I said that was a lie as she’s now married and living abroad for the past 5 years.  I told them to remove my number or they will be reported to the authorities.     (forum material)

 

17th August 2015, 13:04:PM

Re: Advantis Credit Ltd chasing HMRC late return fees...

I have also had dealings with Advantis acting for HMRC, although in this case they were chasing an alleged tax credits overpayment. They gave up in the end and it was passed on to another DCA who also gave up and returned the account to HMRC who recently wrote to me saying if I don't pay up they'll pass it up to a DCA for collection...

 

10th September 2016, 17:47:PM

Re: Advantis Credit Ltd chasing HMRC late return fees...

Sorry if my posts have been confusing. Like you, doubt tax debt can be statute barred. What I am wondering is if Advantis need a letter from HMRC assigning them the debt? Just seems odd to get a demand for a lot of money out of the blue from a company I've never heard of and they claim they don't need to prove the debt with a letter of assignment? Why is the onus on me to prove a debt, if you see what I mean?

What I would like advice on is how to challenge the £104.54 that Advantis is charging me in interest

 

HMRC refuse to explain and send on debt demand to Advantis

Hiya. I used to get tax credits from hmrc, I think the last payment was about 2007-2008. I was overpaid, they wrote out telling me so, I wrote back with how much I could pay back a month. They refused it, I wrote to them and phoned with another suggestion, they never got back to me. 

I had a similar situation, HMRC wrote about an alleged overpayment, but were never able to show me a simple statement of account detailing WHY they said they overpaid me, or HOW they arrived to the figure quoted. I sent the query form back in Sept 2012, they replied restating the fact they overpaid me, but no calculations/figures/statements. I queried it again, they just passed it over to Advantis, who were chasing me till I submitted a complaint to HMRC (thanks to PlanB for supplying the info). I then sent a copy of my complaint to Advantis, who have put my account on hold till Xmas. :christmas3  

An acquaintance who works for HMRC advised me to always demand that they show their workings. He informed me that 9 times out of 10 they can't, and even when they can, it is often so complicated that doing so is not cost effective.

Beagle Advisor replies:

Make a formal complaint and copy your MP in on the correspondence. In order to to demonstrate their unreasonable behaviour, keep copies of all your letters and calls. Do not deal with them by email or telephone in the future - they will lie without hesitation.

 

'WHY ISN'T HMRC AND ADVANTIS IN COURT AND BEING CHARGED WITH THESE OFFENCES?

This is something that is being asked by just about every victim of ADVANTIS and HMRC, and having looked for cases against either, and especially ADVANTIS, none are showing up at the moment despite obvious cases of harassment and fraud being perpetrated in complete immunity....and that must be down to the LAWYERS for HMRC who are experienced in using the courts for their client's protection, and in case they deny this, just have a look at FEATURED LAWYERS........the expose on the Judiciary.

 

Debt sold to these horrible people Advantis by HMRC

So my reading travels on here has had me wondering. I see that HMRC debts can't be statute barred, but mine has been sold onto these horrible Advantis people, so can that be statute barred? I'm worried that by ringing the HMRC at the beginning (when I got the debt collector letter I didn't realise that I'd be paying them, I thought I could still pay the HMRC) and offering to pay it has started the clock again.

When I rang the HMRC, they told me that the debt was no longer their responsibility, it now belonged to the debt collection agency. I think Advantis put all that into their letters to guilt trip us into paying.

HMRC said on one of their previous letters that the debt would be *passed* (not sold) to a DCA who wouldn't be able to discuss the outstanding amount. I wrote to them once more asking for a breakdown and all they did was pass it on to Advantis. It is for that reason that I complained to them, I said I'd pay as long as they tell me how they came to the conclusion that I owe them that money. Advantis put the account on hold so it's obviously worked.

 

Hounded by Advantis

Colin Parkin, who lives in Nottinghamshire, received three letters from debt collection agency Advantis Credit chasing unpaid bills for energy firm Eon - but his was not the name on them. One was addressed to 'The Occupier', a practice the OFT specifically outlaws. Mr Parkin says he told Advantis that the people were not at his address. Money Mail checked the list of voters and there is no record of any of the names mentioned at Mr Parkin's address. He says: 'We have never used Eon as a supplier, and if this is the way the company goes about its business, we never would.' Eon says it can find no record of Mr Parkin contacting either them or Advantis, but acknowledged the mistake. It says that in the past it has ceased to use collection agencies caught flouting the rules.

 

rogue debt collectors

• If the debt collector continues to hound you, contact the Financial Ombudsman Service (Tel: 0845 080 1800 or 020 7964 0500). It can award you compensation for distress and inconvenience. Last year it received almost three times as many complaints about collection agencies as in the previous 12 months.

 

A company called Advantis Credit have been chasing me for months…

A company called Advantis Credit have been chasing for months on a debt which originated in Scotland (Littlewoods) they have been rude and aggressive in their handling of the situation demanding I run around trying to prove that it was not me. I have never and would never live in Scotland and have never dealt with Littlewoods. I have reported the fraud to the police although the fraud isn't against me however I have given the crime number to Advantis but now they are asking for personal information as to where I was living in 2001 which was with my parents in Essex and I do not want to give them any more of my information as I think they will use it to falsify information. Please can you let me know what to do?

 

Re: Advantis Credit Ltd chasing HMRC late return fees...

I have also had dealings with Advantis acting for HMRC, although in this case they were chasing an alleged tax credits overpayment. They gave up in the end and it was passed on to another DCA who also gave up and returned the account to HMRC who recently wrote to me saying if I don't pay up they'll pass it up to a DCA for collection...

Does anyone have any idea what makes them believe they can charge the said fees in the first place? Is there any legislation empowering them to? as I certainly haven't consented to such fees by prior agreement!?

(The above was from Legal Beagles/ Interweb forum material).......they give out this warning below in regard to this lot:

Debt collectors like Advantis Credit tend to send a variety of standard letters, initially demanding you contact them by phone to arrange payment, then writing to you threatening to visit your home.  They will then write again offering an out of court settlement, then threatening to take you to court to obtain a county court judgement or make you bankrupt.

 

 Advantis are threatening me, I’m really worried     (forum member)

Hi posted on this forum a few weeks ago about advantis have received another letter about this debt for £795.86 which they are trying to collect on behalf of CapQuest Debt Recovery Ltd at the time of my last post wasn't sure what this debt was for thinking back it could be a debt with Capitol One that I had over six years ago (although I can't be 100% sure ) all the letter states is they are collecting for CapQuest the amount a client ref number and there ref number. I ignored the last letter cause it had come out of nowhere this letter is getting a bit more threatening such as.  They are threatening legal proceedings or sending someone round to collect the debt personally to be honest I am getting a little worried and scared of there tactics as I said I'm not a 100% sure about the debt and they don't say it's Capitol One what rights do I have and what can I do if some bully turns up at my door.

Sent to Legal Beagles requesting help.

 

Advantis Credit do not pay them back, read this first

unfortunately you may have been victim to some of various collection tactics used by Advantis today. A simple fact in today’s climate, debt collectors have got a lot more aggressive and in many documented cases, clearly breached the law in bullying and pressurising the vulnerable.  Are you right now, afraid to answer the unrecognised Advantis number ringing your mobile, reply to the threatening text messages demanding you pay, or receiving ridiculous red coloured letters, saying if you don’t pay you are going to jail!  Although most collectors stay within the bounds of the law, others behave in slightly less kind ways. OK, let’s start from the beginning. By taking their business to pieces, you will see that hiding behind the mask of fear and bullying, it is in fact DCA’s are a business, 99% are not here to help you or listen to your problems. Dog died, car on fire, lost your wallet? They don’t care….Imagine a room with 100 people sitting at individual desks, with headsets on. These sales people are paid a bonus in accordance to how much they can get you to pay off the debt. A standard letter is sent to you, asking for the amount, plus charges back. Often breaching OFT guidelines and making official looking documents intended or likely to, mislead debtors as to their status, for example, documents made to resemble court claims. Phone calls – A favourite tactic – calling you about 5-10 times a day, on every number they have to contact you, mobile, home and work. Sometimes sending texts and asking you to call them back on premium rate numbers (which is illegal) imagine the above happening to you every day for the next month 

Advantisif they still have no success collecting the full amount, will use various techniques including – Contacting you at unreasonable times, ignoring legitimate wishes in respect of when and where to contact you, claiming instructions from the courts, claiming to be bailiffs. Falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when it legally cannot use a business name which implies public body status, or falsely implying or stating that failure to pay a debt is a criminal offence or that criminal proceedings will be brought if debtors to pay in full, in unreasonably large instalments, or to increase payments when they are unable to do so. All of which are illegal.   (Internet Consumer Advisor)

Where do they get the debts?…..they buy them, and in bulk . They have sales guys that target banks, institutions, mobile phone operators and buy a large collection of these debts for a % of the debt. What does this mean?….Let’s say your debt from Bank ‘A’ is an old credit card and was for £1678…….usually the DCA buys it for 10-20% of original value. However they will demand full amount, plus, their own charges on top. So they pay around £300 and try and get over £2000 off you, and over a fixed agreed time, you can begin to see why they make so much money and don’t care about personal circumstances.  These rogues are empowered by the HMRC

 

Money Mail speak out on Advantis and what they get up to  (Tony Hetherington)

G. F. writes: Out of the blue, my wife received a letter from debt collector Advantis Credit. In my absence, my son telephoned Advantis and found that the alleged debt was £228 - said to be due to British Gas. My wife does not have, and never has had, an account with British Gas. She wrote to Advantis saying this, but all she got back was a further letter telling her to set up a payment plan or face legal action. I must say the first letter your wife received from Advantis was quite sneaky. It says: 'You must call us immediately to arrange repayment of your outstanding debt.'  But it does not say who is owed money, or how much, so unless you obey orders and call Advantis you have no idea whether there has been a simple mistake or someone has been using your name to run up debts. As you now know, the explanation is that the British Gas bill is for electricity used at an address that you and your wife left in 2005. But that electricity was used by whoever lived there after you moved out.  I asked British Gas to investigate and the company tells me: 'We have apologised to Mr and Mrs F for the mistake that led to the debt letter being sent to them. This was caused by an incorrect trace carried out by a third-party collection agency.'  The debt collectors have been called off and you should hear no more about this

 

HMRC overpayment calculations for Tax credits based on net profits declarations can be and are often incorrect.

'debt collection agency harassment'

In previous years 2014-15 & 2015-16 we personally have received more than four Debt Collection Demands from other "agencies" acting on behalf of HMRC Advantis & Rossendales who are the recognised authorised agencies. How many of us have been harassed, accused, manipulated, abused, recorded, screened, provoked, intimidated, hung up on, called on a Saturday morning, perhaps late at night, gone through harrowing identification and security checks without any idea of whom you are giving personal information too?

 

Details:  Company number 05223252   ADVANTIS    started in 2004   had three resignations.   Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire.   (Contractors to the HMRC)

Active Directors etc,  STEPHEN PAUL JACKSON,   BRIAN EDWARD ROSCO,  MARK ANDREW WEBB,   these are the current people responsible.

(We shall pursue them and get their personal histories, work, home and school details and hope to come back with any incidents, misdemeanours or possible crimes committed petty or even warnings relating to these individuals, it will be out on the web somewhere)

Anyone having information on this company and directors etc, please contact   www.corruptionseeker"hotmail.com

 

Thousands chased by HMRC debt collectors due to overpaid tax credits

 

False Economy's figures show HMRC relied on 12 debt collectors to right its own mistakes on 215,144 occasions:      30/11/2014

Hundreds of thousands of people were referred to debt collectors by the HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) in a single year because their tax credits were overpaid, it has been revealed. Those targeted would usually be some of society's poorest and often completely unaware that they were in debt to the government, the group said. 

"Debt collectors rule by fear, not necessarily by going round to people's houses with a baseball bat," said Chaminda Jayanett of False Economy. "But there is the fear of being pursued through the courts by them. It is the implied fear and threat when you get constant harrassment form people saying you owe the government a lot of money that is the worry," he added.

The Independent reported that the government was pursuing more than 4.7 million cases of overpaid tax credits, amounting to total debts of £1.6bn. The paper said that debt collectors hired by HMRC phone the debtors on their mobile phones, as well texting them writing to them at home. Some of those targeted say they feel harassed and frightened. In at least 80 tax credit cases, assets have been seized directly.  An HMRC spokesman said: "The use of DCAs is an established cost effective part of our normal debt collection operations. All that these agencies do is issue letters, issue SMS text messages and make phone calls to HMRC customers. The debt collection agencies we use adhere to highest customer service standards in line with the Office of Fair Trading's code of practice and our own customer charter.

The HMRC's debt collectors:

Advantis Credit Limited

 

NB: The above spouted by HMRC is clearly untrue and they should consider looking at this material on ADVANTIS

 

BBC WATCHDOG HAS ALREADY BEEN TOLD OF ADVANTIS… ARE THEY FAILING THE PUBLIC ?

Mar 10, 2009

Twice already this year, Watchdog has exposed companies chasing people for debts they couldn't prove and wouldn't explain.*It seems we've only scratched the surface as hundreds more of you have told us about your terrible experiences with debt recovery agencies - and lots of them are hounding people for money that they might not even owe.  One of those people is Christopher Fitzpatrick, who's being pursued for £450 by a company called Advantis Credit.*The letters they've sent aren't very clear - in fact they don't even say who the original debt was with.*All they say is that the money is for gas at his old home.  Christopher, however, has definitely paid all his gas bills from that address and has even got a final bill to prove it. In fact, when he moved out, he didn't owe money - he was actually in credit.*  But even though Christopher wrote to Advantis, disputing the debt, they sent him another letter chasing the debt. This breaks Office of Fair Trading (OFT) guidelines that say when a debt's been reasonably disputed, companies shouldn't pursue it while it's being investigated.  We've checked with British Gas who has now been able to confirm that the debt relates to someone else. Chris is angry it was him who was pursued, saying: "I feel it's a scandal. I think we should shine the light on it and expose it to the people."        (From WhatConsumer)

 

PS: If Watchdog fails on our attempt at sending them a file on HMRC and ADVANTIS, we will pursue this company everywhere and anywhere, and publish it!

HMRC threatening letters & HMRC related problems                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Without a doubt the number one concern that gives directors more sleepless nights than any other subject it is the threats received from HMRC. HMRC have had their critics for the content of some its letters sent to directors and individuals often linking personal and limited company debts. By confusing the two issues they imply actions for one that can be misinterpreted for the other. For example threatening to “seize family possessions” when it is a company debt is clearly legally wrong but nevertheless it can have the effect of applying fear to an already very stressful area. So what are the typical threats, related processes and time-scales for those having HRMC tax problems? And to be absolutely clear, you should never dismiss HMRC’s threats as they have massive resources behind them to make your life very uncomfortable.

NB: The above piece was at a website that were in the tax business and affairs of company directors.

 

'HMRC are in league with debt company PastDue Debt Collectors...who confirm they are acting for HMRC

So let us have a look at what type of company the Inland Revenue like to use:

We sampled around eight complaints just to get going, there were more, but these here are all you need to know.  (gained from Internet forums)

PastDueCredit and overpaid tax credit issue

Hi, received a letter from PastDueCredit requesting I pay them an outstanding tax credit overpayment. I don't have an issue with paying anything back but I'm a bit puzzled as I've received nothing from HMRC regarding this matter. I was also under the impression they either take the overpaid balance off current/future claims. I have been over/underpaid in the past and always got letters or they subtracted/added to the next months payment. I'm a bit concerned as it's also solely in my partners name BUT not his name...it has his father's name (both first and middle but my partner has no middle name!?)

Pastdue Credit Solutions

They're corrupt!

After three years of making repayments to HMRC, this company claimed I hadn't been paying. After four years, the debt is paid in full (as of last month), and they have seen evidence of payments, but they're still claiming I owe money. They've been at this for months, and after the latest letter I got fed up and told them again that the debt is paid, and I told them straight that I'm not going to pay extra. That was in the last couple of days.

Dodgy people

Dodgy people. I made a wrong payment, They sent me the old tenant's bill and now saying you have paid for his bill and go and get your money back from him. Scammers. I will go to the court for this. I have got every proof.

Appalling Customer Service

I've decided to pay the rest of my debt online manually because I know it's a legitimate debt and I want to keep my good credit score, but the lack of customer service from this business is appalling and I hope I don't ever have to deal with them again. I've asked them not to bother calling me. 

Terrible company who use phishing…

Terrible company who use phishing tactics to get people to pay random debts. I have had to prove I didn't live at an address during the period they claim money is owed to npower three times now, when will this stop?!! it's harassment now!!!

 

Harassing bully boy tactics....

This company uses bully boy tactics to try to get you to pay. They will harass you to the point of no return and have no shame about it. They do not even care if they have the wrong person or information. They offer no help or solutions, even if they say they are working for the company they are trying to recover money.

An absolute disgrace....

 

Trying to scare me into giving them…

Trying to scare me into giving them money I don’t owe when they know it themselves.

 

Disgusting Debt Collection Agency!

I were contacted by Pastdue Credit Solutions via letter in September 2017 about a debt I owe with Vodafone. The debt said I owed a total of £1040.66, however this is incorrect as they have added on a £100.00 administration fee when they should not have done so. Debt collection agencies are not supposed to add fees and then deny all knowledge of them. If any agency were to add fees they would be required to advise myself and all of their debtors about this charge to tell us that it is valid. However they did not do that as they advised me that "we do not add fees onto any debtors debts". I have contacted them on several occasions and they either do not reply back to me or they take weeks to do so and do not actually try to resolve the matter. Absolutely appalled by them I really am as I will not be treated badly by anyone. They were even rude to me over the phone. Good customer service goes a long way in this world. It's a shame they do not know about this!

 PastDue Credit Solutions

This company in particular, never gives up chasing you for the debt. Calling mobile, sending letters, contacting your work,tracing you on social media and messaging friends/family to embarrass you into paying. So beat them at their own game. Debt collection companies have to legally adhere to a set of rules

Now we will look at this company:

 

Pastdue Credit Solutions Ltd was formed in 2005 and is now one of the fastest growing debt recovery agencies in the UK. Our two founding directors have over 60 years combined experience in the credit management and debt recovery sectors at both client and debt recovery level.

THE OWNER LISTED IS Ms CAROLINE GRANT  cgrant@pastduecredit.co.uk in case you want to let her know what you think of her company and how it responds to people who it targets.

It’s time we visited Facebook and looked into the background of Ms Grant.

 

'HMRC Undermining the Rule of Law'

A Report by the Economic Affairs Committee has concluded that the tax system is hitting out at the poor unfairly to such an extent that it is now recommending to Parliament that their powers should be the subject of an urgent review.  The House of Lords have agreed that the HMRC is too powerful under present law which is treating people unfairly.  The report says the taxman is using the power beyond what it was intended and that they are 'without effective taxpayer safeguards' which penalise people.  They also stated that 'some of these powers disproportionately affect unrepresented and lower income taxpayers'   The Report further concluded that HMRC's current approach to tackle tax avoidance is 'undermining the rule of law and access to justice' they cited high penalties designed to deter some taxpayers from actually continuing appeals against tax liabilities, as a tax on justice' and is devastating the lives of lower income individuals.    (December 2018)

PS: Its what we have been saying all along, but they refused to do anything about it, and will they now?

 

'HMRC - Their nasty involvement in The Gomm Affair'

As with 'undermining the rule of law' it seems that the HMRC write their own rule book on it to please themselves and sidestep anything that could be regarded as fair and reasonable, something the HMRC are not big on at all.  So let us look at a 1990 case of one woman who lost her house in a scam by solicitors......and the HMRC.  We say this because somewhere in this torrid action against the victim Margaret Gomm. the INLAND REVENUE pursued her in a Gloucester Court, and threatened her with jail over claims for tax, and they even sent in the bailiffs, who began chalking her furniture shortly after arrival.....hopefully they weren't Advantis Debt Collection?....and on a finishing note her two boys were taxed on unearned income......and as this wasn't quantified, one can only wonder if this was maliciously made up to hit her harder.

(This case in a more full version is in Featured Lawyers)

 

'Deputy Director of HMRC Dismissed'

SEXUAL MISCONDUCT CLAIMS against MARK NELLTHORP the Deputy Director of the Inland Revenue was made public when misconduct claims made against him by five female civil servants reported him.  The report says that five victims came forward who it is said worked in tax offices around the country.  Interestingly, two female 'assistant directors' who had been on full pay during the investigations have also been suspended for 'enabling' his alleged behaviour (turning a blind eye and damage limitation moves), while a junior civil servant has also been dismissed for the same offence.  An HMRC spokesperson said that the serious matter which led to gross misconduct resulted in the department having to take action which led to the dismissals.    (Feb 2019)   Nellthorp was dismissed.

 

'Ken Dodd gets the last laugh on the HMRC'

COMEDIAN DODDY finally pulled one last trick on the HMRC who went after him in the early days when they brought him to trial over hiding money under his bed in an attempt to get him for tax evasion.  But the judge at Liverpool Crown Court acquitted him of all charges.  So just before he died he married his long time lover and ensured that his £27.5 million went to his wife Anne without paying a penny in heritance tax to the HMRC....after waiting 30 years to get even for their attempts to take him down.   (feb 2019)

 

HMRC and Advantis/Pastdue set to be sued over 'conspiracy to defraud by false representation' case'

COLLUSION AND COMPLICITY -- Will the HMRC wriggle out of it leaving Advantis and PastDue Credit Solutions in the dock?

'HMRC -- Conspiracy to defraud -- with others'

Well, here it is --- Firstly this isn't an allegation, it is a direct accusation of fraud against 3 parties - HMRC, ADVANTIS CREDIT LTD and PASTDUE CREDIT SOLUTIONS.  It should be noted that at the core of this fraud is HMRC; the other two parties are mere pawns of this deception who have attempted to extract money whilst being 'negligent' in carrying out checks to see if their information was correct at the time they issued their fraudulent claims.  Advantis Credit and Pastdue Solutions cannot in these circumstances claim ignorance as a defence in law (without committing perjury), they should be well aware of this.   The main culprit and instigator in this affair is of course HMRC who facilitated both the other parties in their activities to obtain money by deception, as they were both agents to and contracted by the HMRC at the time.  Advantis sent 4 payment demands from the 26th of November 2018 for £1,645.01 --- Pastdue Solutions sent 3 payment demands from the 16th of May 2019 for £1,645.01, both firms made a point of saying they were appointed by HMRC on their paperwork and references.  However, what should have been known to both Debt Agencies was that HMRC had entered into a binding agreement with the 'victim' on the 5th of September 2018 to pay monthly through a direct debit bank order arranged through Lloyds Bank to clear the sum of £1,745.01 with the first payment instalment of £100 due on 01/10/2018.....with the final payment being taken on 01/02/2020 which would clear the debt and end the debt or obligation to the tax man.  At no time did HMRC write to say that the agreement was cancelled or terminated,  A check of the standing order arrangement was made at Lloyds Bank on the 4th December 2018 and it was confirmed that the direct debit order had not been changed or cancelled.  Payments continued this way to the HMRC without fault or delay, yet Advantis sent a demand for the full amount of £1,645.01 saying they were authorised to collect this amount and would take action if it were not paid.  This clearly shows that after the initial single payment of £100 on the 1st of November 2018, they breached the agreement without due notification whilst allowing the standing order to keep paying them and allowed Advantis to chase after the amount they were not entitled to.  Even on the 16th of May 2019 while payments were still being made to HMRC they allowed Pastdue Solutions to pursue the money they were not entitled to.  Therefore all three parties jointly are, and have been involved in an attempt to defraud the 'victim' knowingly, unknowingly or unwittingly without good reason or cause to do so, and ignorance of this fact isn't a defence in law.

Supporting evidence consists of 4 demands from Advantis Credit Ltd, 3 demands from Pastdue Solutions, and 10 bank statements from Lloyds, and the direct debit agreement from the HMRC (fully dated and terms).

 

'HMRC Call Centre Advisor is jailed'

AMJAD KHAN was jailed after committing benefit fraud to the value of £40,000.  The Call Centre Advisor who worked in the Bradford area and tax district, was jailed for 20 months.  It was said in court that he advised people on the PAYE system and self-assessment forms.  The report from Bradford Crown Court revealed that he had evaded paying the correct amount of tax for 12 years between 2002 and 2015, and he was also claiming tax credits to which he was not entitled to.  It was also mentioned that he ran two businesses and said they were not earning anything when in fact they were.  The Judge said it was an appalling case of lies and deceit in that he was committing fraud against the State while being a trusted officer of the Inland Revenue.    (16/3/2018)

 

'HMRC Complicit in rise of taxman con calls to defraud taxpayers'

Many groups of bloggers we found on the Internet are blaming the HMRC for the large amount of 'conmen tax thieves' pretending to be with the HMRC and producing fake Inland Revenue documents etc, in order to demand money; especially from the elderly and vulnerable.  A report says that some 60,000 calls were made to the general public by people posing as taxmen.  One main factor people pay up is down to the way that most people know that the taxman acts heavy and oppressive, therefore they can't tell the difference between the crook and taxman, they appear to be the same!  It's noticeable that the HMRC do very little for people hit by scammers 'that wear the tag of HMRC' leaving it to banks who only abide by a 'voluntary' code to be fair to victims...this wouldn't be happening if HMRC knew how to be reasonable!

 

HMRC pension errors: What happened?

PENSION payment errors by the HMRC dating back over four decades could mean that some pensioners could see a cut in their yearly income, while others receive a boost. How can you tell if you’ve been affected?  Decades worth of data errors have been uncovered by the HMRC as it undergoes a major pension data clean-up.  Tens of thousands of pensioners could undergo major changes in their finances as a result, with some losing up to 50 percent of their salary.  Others could see a significant boost to their income, with some who have not received the correct amount being given backpay and a future raise.  The errors were discovered during a data cleanup starting in 2014, the largest involving retirement benefits in UK history. Missed payments to pensioners apparently range from £50 per year to £10,000 over the course of a lifetime.  The affected accounts are both public and private sector, schemes, which hold records of millions of people.  The Government have said that they are working to correct the blunders. 

July 3 2018

 

This next little item discovered on the Internet revealed more than at first glance:

 

How many Civil Servants at the Tax Credit Ofice in Preston have been sacked for breach of contract for raising concerns with the Civil Service Commissioners in the last seven years? Andi Ali made this Freedom of Information request to HM Revenue and Customs  --- Is it not the case that under paragraph 15 of the Civil Service Code, HMRC has a duty to consider their employee's concern, and make sure that they are not penalised for raising it. para. 15).

Is it an offence under the Official Secrets Act for an Internet site, HMRCLEAKS, run by a HMRC Whistleblower, to publish internal HMRC documents on to the internet without the permission of HMRC?

The HMRC refused to answer the Freedom of Information Request?

NB: The above FOI  request shows you that 'only particular whistleblowers' are allowed to expose a government wrongdoing only if they have permission!...and the second paragraph reveals that contrary to this 'transparency' claimed by the Tories and others, there are many things in the government will be held secret no matter what, and as one can see, they've made it an offence to expose them even if its in the Public Interest by using the Official Secrets Act .(of which we know forbids any divulgence of anything)......so when they tell you that no-one is above the law you will now know that is a lie!

 

HMRC Leak Trial: Judge tells the jury they have to decide if payments to a civil servant were in the public interest

An Old Bailey judge told a jury today they had to decide if a journalist paying a civil servant for information was in the public interest or a commercially driven “corrupt relationship,” noting that: “the fact that a journalist thought a story was in the public interest is not a defence to this charge.”  His Honour Judge Rook was summing up the case at the end of the three week trial of Sun Westminster correspondent Clodagh Hartley, who is charged with conspiracy to commit misconduct in a public office after paying an HMRC press officer over £14,000 for information, including advance details of the 2010 budget.  Counsel for Hartley has told the court that her source, Jonathan Hall, was widely known amongst senior managers at the newspaper and at no point did anyone tell her: “you should stop doing that.” Emails between senior Sun staff given to the jury contained an instruction to Hartley to remove Hall’s name from the News International computer system as he was an “important source.”   The judge then directed the members of the jury that to find the reporter guilty they would have to be sure that she knew that the civil servant’s conduct was so serious as to amount to a significant “breach of the public’s trust.”  The prosecution has argued that Hall, who was in charge of media relations for HMRC’s law enforcement desk was driven merely by greed and ended up in the position of having: “two paymasters,” the taxpayer and News International.  Also on trial is the civil servant’s partner Marta Bukarewicz who had large sums of money from News International paid into her bank account before transferring them to the civil servant. 

HMRC Civil servant sentenced over Sun budget leak

A former HMRC press officer has narrowly avoided imprisonment over receiving payments from a Sun journalist for confidential information.

Sentencing Jonathan Hall at London’s Old Bailey Judge Rook said he regarded the defendants conduct as an “affront to the standing of the public office you held”, and said that in normal circumstances he would have imposed an immediate prison sentence. However given Hall’s early guilty plea and the 32 months he has spent on bail the judge decided to suspend an eight month sentence and impose 200 hours of unpaid work.  Earlier the court was told that Hall had leaked details of the 2010 budget to The Sun’s then Whitehall editor Clodagh Hartley in exchange for payment. He had also given the journalist information about treasury officials having a party and senior officials using first class rail travel. Hartley herself was acquitted of conspiracy at a trial held late last year.   (2015)

 

NEWS:  HMRC INVOLVED IN 10 DATA BREACHES IN 12 MONTHS---  2018 TO 2019  (info supplied by BBC Watchdog May 2019)

 

'Senior Inland Revenue civil servant stands by fiancé who raped heavily pregnant woman and celebrated engagement in pub just days before being jailed for nine years'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                A senior civil servant at the Inland Revenue today vowed to stand by her fiance as he was jailed for nine years for raping a heavily-pregnant woman.

Gavin Carey, 28, ignored his victim's desperate pleas that her unborn child could be hurt as he carried out the shocking attack, Newcastle Crown Court heard.

He was convicted of rape following a trial in October and the court heart how his victim desperately tried to protect her baby bump during the attack at a house.

After a jury found him unanimously guilty, Carey proposed to his partner Lisa Finn, a manager at HMRC, who told the court in a statement: 'I will stand by him with good reason.'

14 December 2018

 

Customs ex-civil servant jailed for £170K VAT fraud

A former civil servant, who had worked for the customs office in Northern Ireland, has been jailed for a £170,000 VAT fraud after an investigation by HMRC  At Dungannon crown court, Francis McGurk, a self-employed property maintenance contractor and a former employee of HM Customs and Excise (which was merged into HMRC in 2005) and the Court Service of Northern Ireland, was found to have dishonestly issued invoices using a de-registered VAT number.  Between August 2007 and January 2015 McGurk used the number to charge customers £171,149 in VAT, which he pocketed rather than passing on to HMRC.  Steve Tracey, assistant director, fraud investigation service, HMRC, said: ‘When we pay tax, we expect it to go towards paying for vital public services, not to line the pockets of unscrupulous traders. McGurk knew he was breaking the law, but thought he could get away with ripping off honest taxpayers.’  McGurk was sentenced to eight months in prison and eight months on licence.

 

'HMRC case with CPS fails and results in Record Payout'

A case that almost went under the radar emerged in a CPS report in business when it collapsed against 'a financier' who was found to be wrongly accused of masterminding a tax fraud.  The report says that record damages have been awarded.  However, secrecy seems to exist here with no trace of the sum paid out, the court, or the man?......just a news report hidden well away under business news.   (27/5/2019)

 

Taxman found with child abuse images at his Stockport home could be jailed

A former taxman has been warned he could be jailed after he was found with thousands of child abuse images – some featuring youngsters aged just six.  Benedict Simon Cullum, 51, admitted one charge of making indecent images of children at Stockport magistrates’ court.  Police had raided his home on Didsbury Road, Heaton Mersey, in April this year and seized media storage devices belonging to him.  Cullum, who after his arrest resigned from his job as a senior official with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, was found to have 2,774 category C images.  They included both pictures and moving images and the children in them ranged in age from six to 14. 

 

Taxman wants to seize debtors' homes

The taxman is seeking new powers to seize taxpayers' bank accounts and even their homes without needing to go to court.  The taxman is seeking new powers to seize taxpayers' bank accounts and even their homes without needing to go to court.  Under the proposals, HMRC would be able to raid bank or building society accounts to take money that it believes it is owed without having to make a case before a judge.  Even taxpayers' homes could be at risk if HMRC is allowed to act without authorisation by the courts.  Mike Warburton, a senior tax partner at the accountants Grant Thornton, called the proposals "a completely unwarranted extension of HMRC powers".  Mr Warburton said: "Dick Turpin was hanged for helping himself to people's money - HMRC wants it to be legal.  "The thought that the Revenue could take the roof over your head without a court order to sanction it is going over the top - if they have a case, they should be able to justify it in court."   Mr Warburton added: "HMRC wants to be judge, jury and executioner.

And they have achieved their goal to know everything and seize anything they chose to.

The taxman is to be given 'shocking' new powers to trawl bank accounts without the holders being told. ... Under existing rules, banks and other financial institutions are permitted to notify their customers if tax officials demand access to their bankstatements and other financial information.16 Jul 2018

 

Shameless HMRC grabbing thousands in charity cash                                                                                                                                                        Families are having huge chunks of their charity donations snatched by the taxman, a Money Mail investigation has found.  Parents giving money to cancer research and raising cash in memory of children who have died are among those whose donations have been cut.  And the losses could hit anyone who clubs together to back a good cause, such as supporting friends who are running the London Marathon next month. The top-up, called Gift Aid, is a refund by the taxman of the 20 per cent income tax donors have already paid - boosting your donation.  But Money Mail has discovered that the tax office routinely refuses to pay the tax refund if somebody says their donation is from more than one person.  In one case, a grieving father found the £75 Gift Aid on a £300 donation he made last Christmas to a hospice where his son had died had not been paid. The retired photographer, 61, said: 'I was shocked - how can HMRC take away money from a hospice?   (16/3/2016)

 

Government tax adviser 'quits over secretly filmed tips'

David Heaton reportedly resigns from HMRC panel after being filmed talking about tips to keep money 'out of chancellor's mitts'  He stepped down after he was recorded by BBC's Panorama programme outlining the advantages of planning tax, which he reportedly said included ways to keep the money from George Osborne's "grubby mitts".  Heaton denied doing anything wrong, but his resignation was announced on Friday, the BBC said.  Treasury minister David Gauke told the BBC: "Mr Heaton's statements are directly at odds with the government's approach to tackling tax avoidance, therefore it is right that Mr Heaton resigns from his position."

 

The taxman's to blame for our broken pension system

HMRC is faced with a computer system that has not coped with the merger of customs with revenue, that struggles even today with the tax credit system, and would have fallen over had the most recent suggestions for higher earners in pension schemes actually been adopted.  The destruction of the pensions infrastructure in the UK is due to many causes; but one of the most profound has been the perverse tax treatment of the system, including ACT, capping, registration and the astonishing length and complexity of the HMRC guides to pensions taxation, very largely under the influence and direction of senior civil servants. 

 

Misbehaviour of the HMRC Taxman has got worse

The problem has been that over the past decade (possibly since Gordon Brown became chancellor) HMRC and the Treasury have both increasingly developed a tone of behaviour which has made most practitioners deeply apprehensive of the motives of the taxman.  The irritation has been uttered frequently (most notably in Taxation, a dry journal for the tax practitioner, not normally given to rudeness) and by almost all firms of accountants who have to deal with HMRC on a day-to-day basis.  Until very recently for example it was all but impossible for the trade bodies (CBI, NAPF etc) to get regular meetings with the Treasury and there was hardly any feedback observable from ministers and officials.  There was a brief moment of transparency when Paul Gray became chairman of HMRC, but he decided to take the (unwarranted) blame for the loss of two tax discs and resigned.

 

HMRC forced to remove relief calculator from website that was flawed despite knowing it gave incorrect advice.

Pension experts slam HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) for failing to take down flawed tax relief calculator, despite knowing it was providing incorrect advice Top-rate taxpayers could have lost out on thousands of pounds of tax relief when planning their financial affairs for the coming year by using an online tool to help in one of the most complicated areas of personal taxation.  However, despite taking the calculator down late last night, it is understood that officials have been aware of the shortcomings for almost two weeks.  Former pensions minister Sir Steve Webb said: “It is totally unacceptable for an official government website to continue to operate when it contains blunders of this sort.”  “It is beyond belief that they are knowingly allowing taxpayers to get incorrect information from their website and potentially to make major financial decisions on the strength of dodgy data,” said Webb, who now works at Royal London. Charlie Musson from pension provider AJ Bell called taper relief “one of the single most complicated aspects of the pension system”. “If the HMRC website can’t get the answer right it says it all really – most high earners will have no chance of working out how much they can put in their pension.”  He said: “Mistakes like this undermine its legitimacy; the fact they knew the calculator was wrong and still left it up, opens it to accusations it was deliberately seeking to mislead investors to reduce the amount of pension tax relief it has to pay out.”

 

UK Taxman Loses 25 Million Citizen Records

Personal data on roughly 25 million individuals and 7.25 million families in the United Kingdom have been lost, Chancellor Alistair Darling of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) office announced Tuesday.  The lost data includes the names, addresses, dates of birth, national insurance numbers and bank account details of all people who receive a government child benefit. It was stored on two password-protected but unencrypted CDs and sent through an internal government post system to the National Audit Office (NAO). The package was neither recorded nor registered, and it was never received by the NAO, Darling said.  As a result of the loss, HMRC Chairman Paul Gray has resigned, Darling said.  "This is an extremely serious matter," Darling said. "HMRC has a responsibility towards the general public, who entrust it with highly sensitive personal information. It has failed to meet the high standards that should be expected of it. I recognize that millions of people across the country will be very concerned about what has happened. I deeply regret that and apologize for the anxiety that will undoubtedly be caused."

In September the HMRC lost the records of about 15,000 people, along with a laptop and other material containing personal details of HMRC customers. As a result, Darling has asked PricewaterhouseCoopers to investigate HMRC's security processes and procedures for data handling, he said.

 

Taxman fails to answer four million calls a year, as MPs warn people are not getting the help they need

HM Revenue & Customs concedes the problem is almost twice as bad as previously disclosed.  More than one in 10 callers to HMRC fails to get through to anyone, compared with just over one in 20 a year ago, prompting criticism from MPs that the service is letting down millions of self-employed people.  The true scale of the problem is even worse than HMRC is prepared to admit, as its audit ignores taxpayers who get an engaged tone when they dial the tax advice helpline.   (29/5/2018)

 

Petrol prices plunge but the taxman takes 64pc    (16/1/2019)

Car fuel prices have dropped to their lowest level in almost 18 months, according to an AA Ireland survey.  The drop is due to a global fall in the cost of crude oil as a result of greater supply.  AA said the fall was no thanks to the State which takes 64pc of the cost of a litre of petrol in taxes. It said pump prices were “excessively taxed”.  A litre of petrol is now 132.9c countrywide, the lowest price it has been since August 2017.  AA Ireland director of consumer affairs Conor Faughnan said many drivers had become resigned to what he called unrelenting price rises last year.  “However, it’s important to remember that we are not seeing any kindness from Government or an easing of taxes, but as a result of international factors which are always vulnerable to reversing in the opposite direction.”

 

'HMRC play the 'help the government' card'

After continually focusing all their energies into going after the easy targets which amounts to quite a nasty campaign, they finally come to the failing government's aid by hoping to curry favour with the taxpayers by announcing that they are now aiming at the 'big ticket' evaders to help their Tory partner in its hour of need.  Sadly, they're too late, and false promises and what they would like to do doesn't cut it anymore. They have launched over 1,007 prosecutions in 2018 they report and say nothing of the previous years....the wording they are using is not that encouraging -- 'businesses' which is rather ambiguous......so take this intention with a piece of salt, you can't trust the Inland Revenue!

 

Lorraine Kelly wins £1.2 million tax battle against the HMRC.

TV presenter Lorraine Kelly has won a £1.2 million battle with HMRC after a tax tribunal judge ruled she was not an ITV employee. Kelly, 59, was handed a bill made up of almost £900,000 in income tax and more than £300,000 in national insurance contributions in 2016.  From 2012, she was contracted to present Daybreak and her Lorraine show through the company she runs with her husband.  But HMRC argued she was effectively an employee of ITV.   Judge Jennifer Dean sided with Kelly after she launched an appeal claiming she should be treated as a “self-employed star”.  In a ruling by the first-tier tax tribunal, the judge concluded the relationship between Kelly and ITV “was a contract for services and not that of employer and employee”.  She also said Kelly can be described as a “theatrical artist”, meaning payments to an agent were allowed as a tax-deductible expense.  The judge ruled: “We did not accept that Ms Kelly simply appeared as herself – we were satisfied that Ms Kelly presents a persona of herself, she presents herself as a brand and that is the brand ITV sought when engaging her.  A HMRC spokesman said it was “disappointed” with the ruling, adding: “We will carefully consider the outcome of the tribunal before deciding whether to appeal.”   (March 2019)

 

HMRC bosses accused of being 'chronically incapable' of collecting all tax

Edward Troup, tax commissioner at HM Revenue and Customs, told the Public Accounts Committee they had no projections for how much would be collected if the revenues of major companies that have faced accusations of tax avoidance were included.  However Margaret Hodge, chairman of the Commons spending watchdog, said it does not include the millions of tax which some argue firms like Starbucks, Google and Amazon should pay in the UK.  ‘The tax gap is really the tip of the iceberg in the gap between the money that you collect and the money if everyone paid their fair share,’ the public accounts committee chairman said. Ms Hodge named Google, Facebook, Amazon and Starbucks as companies whose tax affairs had sparked public anger and doubts about whether they were paying their fair share in Britain. She said:  ‘It looks to me that you should be litigating. Why have you not chosen to litigate and test your powers?   ‘Why have you not litigated against one single internet company?’  However, Jim Harra, Director of General Business Tax, repeatedly refused to comment on individual cases.  Edward Troup, Tax Assurance Commissioner, added: ‘We make sure we collect the tax due under the law.’

Barney Jones, who worked for Google from 2002 until 2006, contacted the PAC earlier this year with claims Google has a system in place which diverts British profits through Ireland to the Bermuda tax haven and accused the company of 'cheating' the British taxpayer. 

 

'HMRC add 10% because they can to admission'

A Law to themselves perhaps, or its just the smell of money that rules everything they do.  Apparently it's a case of one rule for one and, well the HMRC doing things the way they want....or as a money advisor said 'most places you visit play by the rules, however, given that it is the government and HMRC?'   Angela Colburn was keen to sign up for Gift aid whenever it helps charitable causes, but to her amazement when she visited Michelham Priory Museum in East Sussex she saw that admission charges had 10% added 'because of HMRC rules' -- Yet when she visited the Jane Austen's House Museum and Chawton House earlier who both signed up to gift aid, she just paid the normal admission charge...which seemed rather confusing......perplexed?   don't be it's HMRC.....they expected everybody else to play by their rules.

 

'HMRC failures cause student overpayments'

"STUDENT LOAN COMPANY TOLD ME THEY COULDN'T PAY ME BACK UNTIL THEY RECEIVED CONFIRMATION FROM HMRC, AND I WAS ALSO TOLD THAT THEY DON'T REALLY COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER"  (that's what Alan Lewis found when he tried to get owed cash)

This report says there is an ongoing scandal involving graduates overpaying on their loans to a staggering £308 million pounds.  And getting back refunds is a nightmare which involves the SLC and HMRC who seem to regard the students overpaying as not that worrying, while on the other hand, people in the HMRC will set debt collection agencies on defaulters of overpayments at their earliest convenience despite setting up arrangements even.  The report says there is £28 million of overpayments on student loans 'sitting and waiting' to be claimed...and it furthermore revealed that whereas payments should automatically stop when the debt has been cleared, extra deductions were unlawfully taken from more than half a million former students.  FOI applications showed that graduates on an average paid around £600 too much each.  SLC said they are trying their best to deal with the refunds?   They added that they 'usually' receive information about a student from HMRC once a year, at the end of the tax year in April, but this is not working as it should anymore? It now appears that the HMRC and SLC have 'promised' to share data more regularly to stop borrowers from overpaying? 

In one case Simon Turner made overpayments of around £800 on his student loan due to the timing of his debt ending in the tax year, and it took 'nine months' to get his refund?    Student Alan Lewis of Shoreham in West Sussex suffered similarly and said it took dozens of phone calls and 18 months to get his overpayment back.......Just two examples of many who have had to fight both organisations.  Many of the students expressed anger that they were forced to take action to get money that was owed to them!     (31/8/2019)

 

'HMRC embark on taking couple to the cleaners, and use debt collectors'

In yet another astonishing case of this department seeing itself above the law, and getting away with it, the following report of how they treated a couple just adds to their many crimes.  Mr and Mrs F. of Gloucester paid their tax for 2016/2017 like decent taxpayers do.  Because of a £100 penalty imposed for a day late, the HMRC refunded the entire bill and penalty in November 2018, and the couple although mystified, were delighted and accepted the refund because it had all been calculated by the HMRC.  Yet, in 2019 they received a letter in May demanding the money back again (£11,000) which included that late payment fee...and a new late payment fee of £1,000.  The couple instantly appealed to ask them what was going on.....and as they waited for an explanation from the HMRC, they received a further demand notice from a debt management firm contracted by HMRC (of which we well know about).  Because it (HMRC) had reduced the penalty money, they assumed paying the settlement figure would put a halt to this nightmare.  Thinking that was over, they were shocked to get two further notices from the debt collection company asking for a huge amount regarding the penalty notices despite settling up with HMRC, who had not instructed this debt firm to cease hounding the couple.  Both people are old age pensioners, and they were extremely worried about what was going to happen next.  Someone in MONEY MAIL took up their case especially because the couple were becoming stressed and anxious. They contacted the HMRC who 'resolved the issue'....and told them that their Debt Collection Management were in flagrant breach of the rules....not that it actually made that much difference to the HMRC.   After thinking about it, the HMRC apologised and offered this - 'the couple didn't receive the high level of service they would expect from us'....which as the Money Mail Tony says 'they must be kidding. we have long ago given up expecting a high level service from HMRC'  it doesn't exist!

PS he says the government ought to take responsibility and sort out the mess HMRC get into and that Senior Heads should role......which from what we have on this page will never happen.     (11/9/2019)

 

'The role of business bashing by the HMRC'

BUSINESS BASHING is forcing a company to close, to crush all hope of getting back on its feet, and a debt of tax to these lot means that once they turn to their friends in the court, for a winding up petition, there's little that can be done.  There's no use in appealing to their good side because they completely lack that as we've shown you so many times....but if the situation is on the other foot and you embark on a mission to take them, it's very interesting to see that the court is no longer on your side and are eager to strike out or rubbish your claim in favour of it being 'an administrative error' and that you shouldn't have gone to court and appealed through the pyramid complaints system that is long and winding and designed to make sure no one is to blame and prevent you from getting justice of any sort.  The latest report says that the HMRC have filed 4,308 wind up petitions against British firms in just 12 months, which is a 6% rise on the previous year.  And it tells us that they can do this even if the company in question owe more than £750 on a 'due bill'   The order (easily granted by the court) allows the HMRC to liquidate the business and begin the process of paying off its creditors.  They claim it is a 'last resort' but we can prove this is another lie as they claim they allow companies 'time to pay'...which is usually a debit set up with your bank which takes agreed monthly payments, but we can show that even when they do this they hand the debt over to one of their rogue collection companies within weeks without notification of any kind, and you receive a demand for the full amount despite still paying off the agreed bank arrangement which you find is still running and the debt company ignore totally and insist you pay them the full amount because they are working for the HMRC and have authority to collect the money owed, which means they have colluded in taking double the amount if they can get away with it.....and in the case of a company they cause the bank to freeze the company's account which stops them from trading.           (23/12/2019)

 

'Former Tax Man in £6.9 million Fraud'

DAVID MICHAEL HUGHES was said to be the mastermind of a plan to steal £6.9 million pounds from workers pay packets.  Known as Mike Hughes at the tax office in the the late 1980's, it is sad the HMRC tax officer led a conspiracy to steal millions in taxes paid by clients and hide it away in off-shore companies.  The cash which should have gone to the Inland Revenue was diverted by Hughes.  However, before they could get him, Hughes made his escape in 2011 going to Chile before setting up his new home in Cyprus where they have no extradition treaty with the UK.  He was eventually arrested in 2018 when he was on a flight from Turkey.  He was convicted on three counts of conspiracy to cheat the Public Revenue, two counts of false accounting and one count of money laundering.    (12/10/2018)

 

'HMRC hid information on £8 billion fraud while it was going on'

The report we discovered says the Inland Revenue kept MI5 in the dark while British taxpayers money was being used to fund terrorism in the East according to police and MI5 files.  It says in its report that a network of British Asians based in London had several different areas around the country with bases mounting VAT and Benefit frauds against the Exchequer for two decades which had already netted them in the region of £8 billion pounds in total.

 

'Former taxman duped the HMRC'

PERTH TAX MAN DEREK FOSTER managed to dupe the HMRC into paying him regular rebates by exploiting the system that he well knew and could take advantage of.  It was said he took £22,000 pounds mainly to cover his gambling debts which had diminished his bank account to just £10. It was revealed in court that he carried out this refund claiming for twenty months without anyone questioning him or carrying out any checks.  The payments varied with the highest claim being around £9,000 pounds.  The court heard that he filed the false statements during 2011. 2012 and 2013.  He was ordered by the court to carry out 300 hours of unpaid work and placed under a supervision order for two years.        (25/10/2019)

 

'Conspiracy and cover up between Customs and Police'

We uncovered this story........ which involves a customs raid and Police Chief they nabbed, and an agreement forced on them by the Yard?

The whole thing started in 1967 Customs officers for the Inland Revenue had been keeping a close watch on Detective Chief Inspector Victor Kelaher's activities.......Kelaher was with the infamous Yard's Drug Squad....later to be done in a corruption investigation.  The Customs found him in a raid of the prostitute Mrs Roberts house in Holland Park and confiscated some jewellery that Kelaher had given to her; Mrs Roberts's former husband had been a diplomat for Ghana, and he'd been arrested by Kelaher for importing drugs.  Customs officers knew they could not hold Kelaher so nothing was done, only it being a little embarrassing for the Chief Inspector.  In 1971 Customs Officers surrounded the Melba House Hotel in Earls Court and arrested hotel owner Ghassan Idriss, Basil Sands (a pimp), friends of Mr and Mrs Roberts, and later when he arrived, grabbed D.C.I. Kelaher who was questioned for 5 hours and had to be released!   This resulted in tension and a power struggle between The Inland Revenue Customs and Home Office, and Scotland Yard.  Both the Customs and Home Office Officials wanted a thorough investigation into the Drug Squad and Kelaher, but this 'was blocked' by Deputy Assistant Commissioner Dick Chitty who argued that a prosecution of Kelaher would do little to improve relations between the Customs and Police, and should not be considered as a matter worth pursuing....amazingly, the deal was accepted and Kelaher was transferred to administration duties at Tintagel House in the City.   However, at Basil Sands trial, he claimed he was an informant for Kelaher.  The Old Bailey Judge Trapnell said to the court: A forthright attack has been made on the character of Chief Inspector Kelaher, but the jury must not let their opinion of the Inspector sway their verdict even if in private they believe he was in the middle of the smuggling ring....if he is to be judged, let him be judged properly by another tribunal on some other occasion?        (Kelaher was later allowed to resign)............. no-one ever referred to the deal,  it remained forgotten until now!

 

We now go onto a subject that keeps coming back:

'The HMRC and The Pensions Scandal'

This is shaping up to become one of the biggest attempts to suppress and cover up an extremely sensitive situation that will in time affect millions of taxpayers who look forward to a decent income in old age.  Time and time again we've referred to this but no-one seems to care?  Recent newspaper headlines said 'Schemes sanctioned by HMRC in the hands of scammers lose their pensions yet the taxman threatens victims with fines'....yes, the Inland Revenue are chasing them for even more cash.  Complicated these things may be, but the end result is worse....the pensioner loses out again!  Empty words by the Regulator fails to impress the losers as it should, especially as they read about former government pensions advisor of the HMRC, Steven Ward, who gave advice in 2014/15, making millions by exploiting a pensions loophole allowing him to gain financially from 5 schemes.  This all began with Tony Blair's government under rules introduced in 2006.  The FCA has said that around 5 million may fall prey to pension scammers.  It is said that these scammers registered new pension schemes with the HMRC which could be done online in minutes with minimum checks, leading to automatic registration with the Regulator!... legitimacy achieved.  The scammers targeted victims taking hefty fees from any resulting transfers and put the investment in high-risk and illiquid investments, and then more commissions were generated until the pension pots were empty!   Not surprisingly, the HMRC backtracked and later ruled that the schemes 'were now unauthorised' which means victims face tax demands for making the transfers the HMRC said was OK when it suited them.

 

'Tax man set bailiffs on pension scheme victim'

We merely pick one case here, the case of Mark Baldwin, a former printer (of 23 years) from Westcliffe-on-sea in Essex.  He lost some £60,000 in one of these 'HMRC approved' schemes after being advised to move £100,000 of pension savings into the Ark Scheme (he would have been safer if he had left it with Legal and General).  He was 'hounded' by HMRC Bailiffs (one of their trusty firms they hand out the dirty work to) demanding money and threatening to take goods.  The Ark Scheme's administrators confirmed the funds were not subject to tax in 2010 and received a lump sum of £40,000 for which he paid £5,000 in fees, and the other £60,000 was to be reinvested.  18 months later he was told it had all gone wrong, and then the HMRC demanded 55% of the lump sum because they now said it broke the tax rules even though they had 'registered the Ark scheme' put to them.  The HMRC were extremely aggressive in their attitude, and instructed bailiffs to turn up at his home and take possessions if he didn't pay up.

NB: There are many many people who have and are now suffering from pension scams while the HMRC just sit back and let it happen.  A Royal Mail Pension spokesperson (Mr Baldwin now works for them now) said, 'we have a statutory obligation to release pension funds to the HMRC registered schemes when requested by members of the workforce even if they're about to be fooled and duped by a scammer on their books, it has the seal of government approval and we cannot interfere'

 

'HMRC and IR35 will close down struggling Limited companies'

Yes, it's the HMRC up to its usual nastiness.  A report says that the self-employed and Limited Company traders are now realising their worst nightmare as tax changing rules in the IR35 will effectively ruin or close down companies that were only just surviving.  It says this piece of complicated legislation is designed to do more harm than good....it goes under the disguise of cracking down on a loophole used by self-employed people who work for a company like an employee may now be paying the same level of tax that permanent members of staff pay, but without the security and benefits.  Many self-employed workers in this position are concerned that businesses will find the new changes to off-payroll working rules too complicated and they will suffer as a result.   One freelance worker who works three days and has formed herself as a limited company (for ten years) and was getting by as it was more 'tax efficient' for her to work as a limited company feels if she ends up failing under IR35 regulations, she will have to wind up her limited company.    (8/2/2020)

 

'HMRC gains again on late returns penalty agenda'

It must seem great when you have collusion between the HMRC and Government to get more out of the tax system by making the public pay for their mistakes, but most notably, the HMRC don't...they play the immunity card.  And with their highly paid dodgy lawyers, they use the courts to cancel out and challenge any claims against HMRC by playing the 'interpretation' card and court rules.  Such is the tax system that is stacked against the taxpayer......They are, in a report out this week, congratulating themselves on having extra revenue of £95 million pounds as a result of sticking a £100 penalty on 958,000 people who missed the deadline for returning their tax forms...and it's 30% up on the previous year according to the accountancy firm of Blick Rothenberg....£25million more.  The Politician and Lawyer who thought this up must feel very proud of themselves of having come up with a way to rob the citizen and get away with it!      (8/2/2020)

 

'Former Tax Officer nicked'

He learnt everything from the job, that was MARTYN ARTHUR, now an accountant who wrote a book on how to beat the taxman, but in this case somehow failed, as he was hauled up before the courts and found guilty of a £120,000 tax fraud.  He said he knew the tax system inside out when he appeared before Cardiff Crown Court.  It was said that he continued to run a firm in his wife's name when he was made bankrupt the report says.  Mr Arthur of Porthcawl, Wales, denied tax evasion but was found guilty, and received an 18 months suspended sentence.  It was furthermore said that he moved cash between accounts during his attempt not to be found out.

 

'HMRC POLICE' and the dawn raids'

One would be forgiven for thinking the HMRC considers itself a kind of 'Superior Police' unit, independent of normal laws and constitutionally outside the parameters of common law accountability.  They indeed do act as if they are the law, and this report gives good rise to the beliefs they hold on their own importance. The Report says that they carried out a 1082 dawn raids in 2019 pursuing 'tax evasion'....they say they often target big business rather than small targets, but this is merely propaganda put out by their Press Office....they also say it's to get at suspects who are a 'flight risk' or may attempt to destroy evidence?   However, in this report there is a dead giveaway who they go after when it says 'homes' and businesses.            (10/2/2020)

 

'HMRC lose case on grabbing extra cash'

The government and HMRC lost a landmark appeal over the charging of separate business rates on supermarket ATM machines.  Valuation officers from the HMRC challenged a Court of Appeal Ruling which had already decided that supermarket cash machines should not be classified any different to other ATM's in the country, and therefore be subject to separate bills, which the taxman wanted.  Five Ruling Justices dismissed the HMRC and government appeal, and upheld the Court of Appeals decision.  Senior Judges ordered the government and HMRC to repay the money and confirm there would be no future tax demands concerning supermarket cash machines.  This ruling now paves the way for an estimated £430 million pounds to be paid in reimbursements to retailers.     (21/5/2020)

 

'The Government's Highway Robbers'

STATE ROBBERY has been here for a long time and HMRC are one of their tools for grabbing money from citizens, but up to now it had to abide by the law of the courts, but now, the Tory thieves have decided to bypass courts in their new Finance bill, and have now seized the power to enter anyone's account 'without their consent' and access financial details.  They are claiming this is to stop tax evasion and being able to ascertain the tax position of customers.  Cutting out the courts and warrants will allow these bandits to snoop and could easily be used to collect debts, and the HMRC adept in this area as we have shown allowing agencies to demand and steal money using the excuse they are working on a HMRC contract.  The UK STATE is on its way, and the Tories under Johnson will not delay its arrival, and this tax bill is just the beginning of State power and corrupt politicians using laws to get out of if you're a civil servant, and laws to suppress freedoms to be enacted as freely as they wish.        (20/9/2020)

PS: there was a time you could get a summons and take the Tax people to court....but they plugged that by inventing a tier system for what is laughingly called complaints that never reach the top and judge it themselves, which means they win or just ignore the thing entirely.

 

'When is a Tax Office not a tax office?'

Quite frankly it's to do with scammers, yet they both act the same way to customers, which is why many people fall foul of fraudsters.  Recent activity in this area with fake HMRC men have cost ordinary folk £2,350 a scam....all because many consider a telephone call from the tax office is terrifying....and the scammers seem to know how HMRC train their officers in phone manners, and have no trouble in convincing the taxpayer that they are the real deal.  EVEN SOME OF THE BEST DOUBTERS HAVE BEEN CAUGHT OUT....journalists and police alike.  They say things like 'there is a criminal court case filed against you and a warrant for your arrest has been issued' because you've failed to heed their warning and pay the outstanding bill sent.  They even pull out a sort of record on file about you and offer to put you through to a tax office representative who is handling your case.  They even suggest you may have committed fraud and quote sections of the UK Tax code. It is said that there have been 200,000 calls like this, all known to HMRC which has been going on since 2016....who say they have been hot on the heels of these scammers, but there has only been 'ONE CONVICTION' involving a website....HMRC says it is of a major concern, but are still leaving taxpayers at the mercy of these scammers, and often appearing to be like the scammers themselves!      (29/2/2020)

PS: As we always point out, if it was on the other foot and you go after them....the drawbridge comes down and access is denied!

 

'TV personality Eamonn Holmes in court battle with HMRC'

It was reported that chatman of TV Eamonn Holmes is taking the Tax Authorities to court and challenging a £250,000 bill they sent him for tax.  Even though he lost a similar case in February, Mr Holmes says he will go ahead and challenge the tax man's grading of his employment position and has filed an official court listing.     (9/10/2020)

 

'Man who killed cop is identified as a former HMRC man'

In their own tabloid style they described Louis De Zoysa as the 'HMRC KILLER' who had a government job, in that he was an employee of the Tax authorities prior to the event when he was arrested and taken to the custody suite in Croydon Police Station where on being booked in produced a gun and killed the custody sergeant.  It said that the HMRC did not respond to an interview request!       (4/10/2020)

 

'Hounded man has victory over the HMRC'

THE HMRC hounded and refused to lose as they often do, because they believe they are the law as we have exposed on several cases, in this report Bar Owner Kris Talikowski knew he was right when he refused to pay VAT on his line of 'juice drinks' he sold in Swindon at his little business -- The Core.  He told Judges that he should not have the VAT added to his fruit and veg' concoctions....and Kris had been fighting the might of HMRC for five long stressful years.  Notably, the HMRC's original case was actually thrown out in 2018, and it appealed the decision and lost its application at the London's Upper Tribunal as they too dismissed the HMRC challenge.  This final action only proved this when the Judges backed the trader's claim, and the HMRC said they were carefully considering the judgement!       (1/12/2020)

 

We now look at a scandal that we unearthed in our relentless search for cases on the HMRC:

'The Buried Scandal'

This mainly involves THE CUSTOMS:   The scandal, one that rarely gets a mention in the lurid past of HMRC; and it's easy to understand why that is so.  We go to 1996, and the deal struck with the Customs and Home Office and (drugs) gangster John Hasse, which proved to be hot stuff politically, especially with MP Peter Kilfoyle whose constituency in Liverpool had been terrorised by this drug baron.  Kilfoyle had been investigating 'the Customs bargain' (pardon) given to Haase for over eight years and challenging its validity, even so, he wasn't getting the answers that satisfied him....and the amazing thing about the deal was that it was a 'Royal Pardon' no less for Haase to get out of jail free on a 13 year prison sentence in exchange for names and places etc.  It almost seems they were willing to go this far so that they could gain access to 'those names' and prevent certain facts coming out in the public arena, so long as they had full control over everything.  In a short interview with Haase, Kilfoyle, having the power to obtain a prison visiting order, Haase told the MP he had important evidence about his 'royal pardon' that he claimed 'amounted to corruption'  ---- Later, in an astonishing recorded 2 hour statement with a legal team in situ, Haase revealed that his Pardon had been obtained by perverting the course of justice, fabricating evidence and bribery.   Armed with these revelations in full deatail, Kilfoyle demanded an official investigation and spoke with Home Secretary David Blunkett asking him to speed up things.  The matter put before The House of Commons had wide and far reaching consequences linking large sums of money and corruption.  Some MP's in the House shouted out that it was 'scandalous' especially when it was revealed that £18 million pounds had slipped through Custom's hands at the time of Haase's arrest.    Like all scandals, the government can always rely on 'public apathy' for them to go swiftly into the distant horizon, and that's what happened here!

 

'The nice little deal between the HMRC and Amazon'

The report on this situation says there is public fury over the £94 MILLION POUND DEAL that the government as struck with this tech firm that they once promised to go after because they pay too little tax, and exploit means to get around it with dodgy lawyers.  It says that £94 million pounds of taxpayer cash has been given to the giant tech firm in a new contract awarded to Amazon for digital services for the HMRC.  It also says this amount is on top of £200 million pounds of deals they have already struck with the British government?   The Union UNITE spokes-person, Sharon Graham said she could not believe that British deals and taxpayers money is going to a corporation 'steeped in  corporate irresponsibility'.....The HMRC could only comment with 'It is committed to making sure everyone pays fair tax'  which is ironical considering it breaks the law whenever it feels like it.      (16/5/2021)

 

'HMRC lose out because of ineptitude and non-diligence'

Going after small targets has always pleased the HMRC and this happens most of the time because they are not too good in getting the bigger players, such was the case in this report.  It says that the taxman is unlikely to recoup £2.5 million pounds it was owed by a failed British Music Technology Group.  The company was owned and set up by singing 'stars' Pharrell Wiliams and Grimes.  The administrator after its collapse says that the HMRC chances of being paid this money is nil.......which isn't good news for the taxpayer.   (19/9/2021)

 

NOTICE-- Irritatingly, the HMRC like to hide and prevent cases of misconduct coming to the notice of the public, So If you have a case similar to any of the above, or you have been in a secret payout that officially gags you, let us know and we will name, shame and tell the whole thing.  HMRC have no such gag on us, and their 'confidentiality' means nothing.  If you know of a worker or lawyer you believe is corrupt at the HMRC, any information on that person, past, personal or present is welcome, contact us at the following. www.corruptionseeker@hotmail.com

We investigate State and Civil Service Corruption/Malpractice, so let us know anything that will lead us to a case being revealed.

More to come soon, we have a decent folder still to process with many similar cases of HMRC corruption.  Please note that this is but a fifth of what is out there, much is withheld by the Inland Revenue's 'In-house' gagging system set up by the government to protect the HMRC and DWP.

 

THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF THE ITEMS ON  HMRC TO HELP ANOTHER WEBSITE PROVE CORRUPTION AGAINST THEM.

 

'SADLY, WE HAVE NEVER SEEN SUCH A SCALE OF CORRUPTION ANYWHERE ELSE, THE CIVIL SERVICE IS RIGHT THERE AT THE TOP OF THE LADDER, FROM THE GOVERNMENT MP'S TO COUNCILS AND THE WORKERS WHO CARRY OUT THE DIRTY WORK.  What we found was quite shocking, and unbelievably, the workers have the misguided notion that they are not corrupt, and that is far from the truth.  The top of the corruption ladder filters down to the workers who are a party to the crime, and many of them enjoy the power they get from being under the protection of the Civil Service. 

To show this, we're going to include some, not all, cases of evil that are way beyond the imagination in what is laughingly called a fair and honest society.  And this will include fabrication of documents, lies, using the law to benefit from ill-gotten gains, destroying individuals and much more, all instigated by the laws they twist to deprive others from their earnings, savings and property...and these will include council lawyers (they will also feature in 'Featured Lawyers' for good measure).

 

'DWP AND HMRC IN 5 MONTH PENSION BUNGLE'

This article involves both Government Department in cahoots with each other -- Both the HMRC and DWP have a hand in this case and tale of woe, and it yet again has a victim.  That victim is Elizabeth Harper of Aberdeenshire who had to fight a battle to get her money back after both parties left her without a pension for five months.  She even received a letter from the DWP that she would be getting her money back in March, but this didn't happen.  And to make matters worse, the HMRC told her that they wanted her to start the process again?   She said in an interview, 'It was getting very difficult to pay our bills, yet there was nothing we could do, they were just playing with our lives.  It left us very frustrated, and they had just forgotten that this is my pension they were messing around with.  I rely on that money and have a right to it, the whole thing has been handled poorly.  I speak to one person at the DWP, but find they can't or won't speak on my behalf to the HMRC or tax office, so I get left in limbo and suffer for it.'    (12/5/2016)

NB The DWP lied here because we already know in another case that the HMRC contacted the DWP with instructions on a DWP claimant.

 

HMRC AND DWP INVOLVEMENT:

'The £156 billion pound HMRC/DWP conundrum'

Looking at the period 2007/2008 when the LABOUR GOVERNMENT were congratulating themselves on being so popular with the electorate, while at the same time spending money like water (with Gordon Brown at the helm), things were escalating out of control.  In the DWP and HMRC more staff were needed to handle tax credits and benefits costing around £156 billion  pounds of which the DWP gobbled up £141 billion and the HMRC £15 billion pounds, said to be necessary to build 'a fairer society' which didn't happen, and as pointed out by finance guru David Craig, 'Giving away so much of our money (taxpayers) also costs money' ---- At the HMRC IN 2008 they had around 8,000 civil servants working on tax credits costing around £400 million, and at the DWP they had approximately 130,000 civil servants processing various benefits costing a staggering £7.73 billion....which with additional administration and other costs all works at around 30% of this government pot was being sucked up in officialdom.  But nothing was going quite to plan and the DWP had its financial accounts rejected time and time again, said to be 18 years? because of 'errors' and  a high level of fraud.  Even the Auditor General had no confidence in the DWP figures, and refused to 'sign off' their accounts.  They actually returned with their amended accounts claiming to have halved the errors and fraud...and the Auditor rejected this accusing them of 're-classifying' the figures, in other words 'fabrication' -- and as to these frauds when looking closely at what they were it was revealed that crooks had managed to break into the DWP system and stole the identities of 13,000 DWP Staff plus 30,000 railway staff and used the information to siphon off millions of pounds using the HMRC tax credits website.  It even took the Tax Office over 3 months to close the website despite knowing what was going on!  There was also 2,100 security breaches at the HMRC involving slovenly incompetence the report says when it was discovered they had sent confidential information to the wrong people?

Even today a report on the HMRC by IPPR a progressive think-tank says the UK tax system is unfair and needs reform.   Henry Parkes of the IPPR says the wealthiest in society are able to avoid tax by shifting their income source from wages so they are paid in the form of dividends which are taxed more lightly.  He says that other considerations is worsening inequality.  And another report out tells us that taxpayers are falling into serious arrears because of the taxes toll.  Around 117,000 people are more than six months behind with their bills says business advisers Moore Stephens.  (9/9/2019)

 

'NDA's -- Non Disclosure Agreements'

CONCOCTED BY LAWYERS......What are they for?  Simply, they are as a lawyer would put it, an instrument whereby you would silence a party or person by means of an incentive.   They are regularly used by government and departments like the DWP and HMRC to silence unhappy civil servants, and in public they are known as 'gagging orders' which can have threats included and many do have such a clause.  Lawyers are somewhat keen on these instruments especially in relation to evidence and other material they don't want revealed.  Most of the Legal Profession stand by these and find them useful for rich clients and powerful organisations.  They are somewhat contradictory in nature and lawyers can find themselves being hindered at times when they play the game of 'gamekeeper and poacher'...however, in general the NDA is used in order to cover up or restrict someone from exposing the truth, and recipients get a nice bonus for signing the deal, a little bit like signing the Devil's charter....what they do hinder most is the truth and that is the biggest price this society pays by allowing them to be used for financial gain and the corruption of morality....that is what a NDA represents.

'THE SILENCING CULTURE AND SUBVERSION USING NDA'S'  -- Silencing complainants who have a right to be heard is now the common target for governments and commerce/industry, and it is getting worse according to watchdog groups who are seeing an alarming trend to use such an instrument at any moment criticism or a complaint is made.  In some words it can be seen as 'isolation' or even 'blackmail' as it is used for similar purposes; keeping someone quiet whilst hanging a threat whether perceived or indicated over a person.  It has now taken a new twist, one that is diabolical and underhand, and a case revealed tells of a website forum on the social media platform FACEBOOK where people posted complaints against the giant building firm PERSIMMON found themselves being excluded, and that the settings had gone from Public to Private which meant only existing members could view the content or post items....they had in fact been 'subverted' and hijacked by Persimmon who approached Facebook and somehow got control of the forum group which had several thousand members, and began culling the membership down to less than a quarter.  The reason was quite plain, they wanted to silence the unhappy customers, and they didn't mind how they achieved it.  Persimmon said they had a right to limit the effect the group were having as it might damage their business, which might be fair comment if it were not for the piracy and devious move they made on a public site....Facebook did not comment? 

What is an NDA when it is accompanied by 'we will pay compensation so long as you do not go on social media or tell anyone?'    other than a form of veiled threat and abstract blackmail......one gets quite bored with excuses like 'improving' and 'sympathise' from these people who created the situation and don't want to own up.......

'NDA's BEING USED BY UNIVERSITIES' -- sadly, news in reveals that this sordid underhand practise of silencing someone is common practise in the 'youth sector' of learning, and that a report tells us that students are being 'gagged' over sexual assault claims etc, and it is only getting worse.  It says that there are 136 universities across the UK are using 'Non Disclosure Agreements' to prevent evidence and truth coming to the surface and cover up nasty incidents in the name of 'preserving their reputation' rather than being upfront and truthful.  It says that in the past four years universities have paid out £1.3million pounds to buy off 'situations' which works out at £250 to £40,000 each.    (13/2/2020)

...Its origins started with the police in the early days when they paid out in settlement of a case with a letter that said ' this is not an admission of liability' making out that they're doing it because they like to!.......which is absurd, no one pays out compensation unless they knew they were wrong and they feel they must atone for it somehow.....

....Lawyers have been working on this since the Internet rocked the boat in legal circles, and they are now hell bent on addressing this loss of power because the NDA which in theory enables them to take possible action is flawed if it is taken to court where the target just might make things far worse for the company or department....it's a risk they do at their peril, but subversion on the Internet is a criminal act which is in everybody's interest to stop.........secrecy and gagging should be consigned to the movies where it belongs......not in society.

 

'Public Sector Corruption must be reported;

THIS WAS AN AMAZING ANNOUNCEMENT MADE BY THE HOME SECRETARY IN 1978, when he ordered that a circular was sent out to 'All Chief Constables' in England and Wales.  It did not only refer to CIVIL SERVANTS, but the Police Service too.  In future they were to comment on matters of Public Sector Corruption in their reports, and that these arrangements should achieve 'wide publicity' (which incidentally never happened, nor was it likely to considering the lengths they would go to cover up and maintain systematic secrecy in both areas).                 Home Secretary Merlyn Rees said that the measures would ensure that no one would feel 'inhibited' from reporting any allegations of corruption in Public Life, and that inquiries into such reports would be properly co-ordinated! ....and a copy of the contents were to be sent to The National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureau.  The circular (document), required each Police Force to put an Assistant Chief Constable in charge of recording and investigating Public Sector corruption (no one of lower rank was permitted according to the stipulations).  They would be required to appoint a local fraud squad to keep an eye on inquiries and ongoing situations that came to their attention.   It said there was a Public Sector Corruption Index created, it only lasted until 1981......and details tell us  that in 1978 there were 125 cases.  There were 149 cases in 1979, and 103 cases reported in 1980, and lastly, 109 cases in 1981, and that despite this, it did very little to resolve the situation or get to grip with implementing what was actually required by the circular, and this failing led to it going away and disappearing quickly and with the least fuss possible!

 

'Government Deceit -- Living the Lie'

VIOLATOR, DECEIVER, The smiling achiever!  only Britain can play from the bottom of the pack and come out on top.  Just about every government has lied its way out of something or situation it created, went wrong, and then claimed it had no control over it because it was a global influence?  Many Prime Ministers have at least one time led this country into a scandal or just avoided one...others have had several but conveniently resigned and run.  And what has been the outcome?  well nothing really, they are immune and often put it down to the job.  Many Investigative Reporters have tried to get near to the true situation and have constantly been 'fobbed off' or prevented physically by those whose job it is to cover up mistakes and 'errors'.....and in some other countries these reporters have gone 'missing' 'abducted' and 'imprisoned without trial'....and in extreme cases 'bumped off'      As we well know, the government doesn't like prying eyes and documents getting in the wrong hands (or leaks as they say), and the UK despite the rhetoric despise 'whistleblowers' in reality, especially those in their own camp.   The British support for countries who have a bad record on human rights, repressive ruling, nasty regimes who effectively crush internal dissent, is denied frequently, and then caught out (mainly over arms sales) when politicians go and meet them on trips at State level.  This of course hides under the banner of 'diplomacy' a convenient excuse to deceive the 'peasants' as the Kings and Lords of old would put it when they robbed the villages at sword point using troops as enforcers.  We now have 'Information' lots of it, and it is fast becoming the people's weapon, and the State is increasingly becoming aware of the power change, but have a plan because it too knows that it falls into their lap too via the Web, Internet...data and CCTV currently running at just over 6 million cameras....and Britain is known to be the biggest spy in this area outdoing other countries.  Being able to manipulate data, alter it, and use it to deceive is being played out all of the time in Whitehall and the Civil Servants who carry out the worst of the State's agenda to 'regulate' or 'deny' rights to people do so by simply quoting 'data protection' and in the case of F.O.I requests are 'Exempt' (which is used to limit the scope of the inquiry).   The Court has always allowed the establishment to 'hide' behind clauses and exemptions (all roped up in secrecy and security), and has only been forced to yield and go the other way in exceptional circumstances of which there has only been a few!  'Hindrance' has also been successful as is 'delay' which civil servants and the law do routinely.  We could say more on this subject and provided figures and fancy statistics, so we shall finish with Britain's 'friends' and the foreign policy dealings with Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Indonesia to name but three, and the latter mentioned has a massive 'corruption' history at government level as mentioned in 'Related Topics'...if you care to see.......so read on.

 

So let us go down to see what we have on the DWP:

 

DWP under fire amid more corruption allegations

Posted on 2nd February 2018 by The Hylton-Potts Legal Team

A few months ago, I covered the shocking story of fraudsters within local government organisations, who had lined their pockets to the tune of more than £1 million by creating bogus claimants and taking the money for themselves.

Sentencing is still awaited in that case, but it would be reasonable for us to assume that when the fraud came to light last summer, the DWP and local authorities took the opportunity to get their house in order and take a long hard look at internal controls. After all, that is what you would expect any responsible business to do if it discovered a mature and robust system of fraud within its walls.

 

So let's get started:

We begin that with this case:

'DWP Reduce man to nothing via health decision, and take advantage of him'

on Raab says:

August 26, 2016 at 2:04 pm

What can you do when there has been such bad maladministration that the the DWP refuses to acknowledge or reply to complaints.? After 3 years of gross abuse while I had diminished responsibility from dementia it turned out the diagnosis was incorrect and I recovered. The way I was treated while easily manipulated was disgusting, I was put to forced labour. Tribunal judges ruling was ignored, my pension was stolen from me . My benefit payments were stopped without any reasons. I was left to starve, I was forced to abandon medication and encouraged to become an injecting drug user. All to entertain certain individuals. As I recovered and it was realised that I would be complaining, a war of paperwork began designed to prevent me from escalating my complaints. Then professional advocates began to write in on my behalf demanding explanations for the way my claim was handled or why no assistance was offered or why I was not identified as being vulnerable and doctors letters ignored. These are simply ignored and usually followed by another bunch of fires being being lit beneath me, to me either punish me or to give me yet another complaints process to deal with. The latest Is that I am to be prosecuted for fraud for failing to notify the DWP of a change of circumstances brought on by a decision made by the DWP. They have also ignored a tribunal judges request to provide paperwork he needed for my PIP case when the assessor lied on every question including the reason I was making the claim. My case has been adjourned 3 times now and I have been housebound for over a year since my DLA was transferred to PIP , the disability component of ESA has been cancelled because it was an interim payment while awaiting my tribunal and they have decided not to wait any longer but have still not responded to the tribunal requests for the documents.
They have contradicted themselves on several comments and made illegal decisions but will not reply to letters asking which one is correct or why decisions were made with no intention of notifying me or with no options for appeal they inform me that complaints have been escalated, 'when they have not' - in the hope I will forget. I have had 4 consolatory payments for maladministration and harassment but my treatment gets worse and they refuse to consider reparation for actual loss as a result of their abuse of position. They even mocked the CAB who said They had placed me between a rock and a hard place. They replied “yes that is correct, we have."

We have highlighted this case in particular as it shows the level of corruption employed.

The next case has similarities, involving civil servants, and one who was named.

'Civil servant wrecks ill man's life - using underhand methods'

Neville Collins  Customer Investigations Manager. HM Court of Protection.

Dear Mr Collins thank you for your email and advice.    In 2013 Mrs Justice Pauffley instructed HHJ Simon Oliver to send my case to the Court of Appeal.   Thereafter, a Government Agency placed a conviction of fraud upon me, without a hearing, and with no rights of appeal!    The conviction of fraud was later set aside with an admission that the action had been malicious.  The Civil Servant responsible has been identified, a Ms Z. CHADWICK, and her home address traced to the Bradford area.    Also in early 2013, according to a Metropolitan Police Specialist Operations Unit, a Government Lawyer had requested the Metropolitan Police to investigate me and make life difficult for me rather than investigate me; the detectives invited me to meet them for coffee in London.   They also named the Civil Servant responsible.

(A section of the Metropolitan Police has a very detailed in-depth knowledge on me, arising from my previous occupation. ) 

.It is puzzling that Mrs Justice Pauffley did not know that the Court of Appeal cannot interfere with a patient certified under Part VII Mental Health Act 1983, it has to be a nominated judge  (J Mummary, J Moorebick, LJ Arden).  That is why in September 2012 His Honour Judge Philip Waller CBE (a nominate judge) instructed that the files be sent to the Court of Protection in the instance and an appeal filed at the Court of Protection, and not at the Court of Appeal.

HHJ Simon Oliver held in 2012/13 a Part 9 authorisation, which is not a Court of Protection authorisation. 

Yours respectfully,  Leonard Lawrence

Diagnosed with moderate brain inquiry, I was made homeless and evicted on to the streets, whilst lacking mental capacity.

On the 30 August 2012 His Honour Judge Simon Oliver, Reading County Court, was entirely satisfied with what had occurred to me, and wrote that I was well represented.  I was under the jurisdiction of Government Legal Services solicitor Helen Mary CLIFT office of the Official Solicitor to the Senior Courts for England and Wales.

.There are many, many others like me in England and Wales,  including mothers and fathers whose children have been taken and are threatened with prison if they speak, like Tom Dobbie,  Carol  and Safia.  Our homes are taken, like Carol Wood and Anne Clark. Our assets are taken like Robert W, Colin B, Johnathan T,   Yvonne G, Lee G, also Scott.  The police, all too often, take no action.

.Lord Justice Sir James Munby, President of the Court of Protection, said that it was a number of Government Ministers that were keeping the Court of Protection secret, and that may be so.  However, it is a few unscrupulous  (having or showing no moral principles;  honesty or fairness) judges barristers and solicitors that that are inflicting this suffering, like solicitor Helen Mary CLIFT  office of the Official Solicitor.

This man suffered appalling treatment by the authorities, and most of it in secret for many years, and the first case shows that this is commonplace in our society.  

NB: One is often told 'its a one off', and we're publishing two for you doubters, and we have others, so isn't it time you did something?

 

'Civil Servant Spelling Mistake Ruins Family Business'

THE CULPRIT, AN 'UN-NAMED' CLERK AT COMPANY HOUSE completely ruined a family business employing 250 workers by one flick of the pen or adding an 's' on the computer text.  And yet again, he has been protected by the organisation who look after civil servants for our conniving government.  There is no report on him or her being dismissed or suffering a penalty.  And interestingly, Companies House would not comment or admit they were in the wrong again leaving that famous word 'error' to take care of everything.  However, in the High Court, the Judge ruled that the blunder was easy to avoid, and awarded the family business owner, Philip Davison-Selby a multi-million payout.  Judge Andrew Edis said the companies house had been directly responsible, and ordered the agency to pay for the damage it caused in the six year battle the owner had to incur over this matter.  The payout was published elsewhere, and it mentions £9 million!  probably all public money.  We also found out that lawyers for the agency delayed and made things awkward for as long as they could, using misdirection and procedures to achieve this for their paymasters in government.

 

'The DWP, their Lying Lawyers, and legalised Deception'

The Myth that there is one law for all is complete nonsense and invented by those in power who take themselves out of this equation, and carefully file this away for later use.  Their Lawyers remain at the heart of this lie, and help government play around with interpretation which is stacked against the 'Commoner'  otherwise known as the Crown's subjects.  Most of these Government Departmental Lawyers whether for the DWP, HMRC or other Department get around 70,000 pounds and upwards to fight off the public and see that their paymasters stay on top even when they misuse the law, for which there are no penalties, making it an ideal job with their free 'stay out of jail card' to be used when needed.  It's quite obvious when one comes up against ordinary Jobcentre staff, they lack legal knowledge and go by what is printed on the DWP official paperwork, even when it isn't quite legal.  The DWP have been in court numerous times, lost, and then changed the rules with no penalty whatsoever. The ordinary person has no such luxury, they either go to prison or are fined.  They even changed the system so that they could avoid ordinary courts like County Courts which represented the ordinary folk, and stipulated that the system of complaint should have unqualified 'decision-makers' running the gauntlet of 'barriers' leading to a tier1 tribunal, and onto an Upper Tribunal, and then appeals through two more barriers.  Deception is one of their greatest weapons along with outright corruption concerning the outcomes which are kept secret by data law...none of this applied to County Courts where a judge sat and listened to both sides and you could see justice being done.  Sadly he could only order that the claimant be recompensed etc, and had no power to jail or penalise the DWP or HMRC, they were covered by immunity and what is called 'vicarious liability', which meant people working under the pyramid of power were exempt.  The exemptions are far ranging and one can see this in the Freedom of Information system, where they issue 'redacted' pages and point out they are exempt under article this and that as set out by the Administrative Legislation Law pertaining to Government bodies.  This is all a far cry from 'a law for everyone' and shows that the law was always a two tier, two book situation, and will always remain so.  Giving a couple of examples we have the benefit itself which says 'this is what the law allows you to live on'  which for JSA is just over 73 pounds, and a DWP Lawyer probably spends that on one meal or filling up the high performance car.  In a Interview for a job it says 'a prospective employer asks where do you want to be in five years time' for them to gage how long you might stay with the company.  Claimants over 60yrs are told to lie on this as it could deter the company, the DWP like to call this 'a white lie' with good intentions, they also dissuade older claimants from revealing their age.  Sadly, this shows they can agree about lying for employment figures, but lying to them in any way will result in either benefit loss or prosecution.  And yet again, this shows you that their lies do not enter into anything and all a claimant will get is 'sorry' and they and their lawyers go onto the next one to deal with.

 

'DWP and Government plan to decimate Benefits'

THE TORIES under May and Cameron planned to lower benefits and erode them until they would no longer be seen as helping anyone, and that has been their agenda and strategy all along.   FRANK FIELD former Select Committee Chairman has found the shocking truth behind the Tories push for austerity in a document in The House of Commons Library which shows that benefits for the UK's poorest families will have shrunk by nearly a quarter after 10 years of austerity inflicted on them by The Conservative Party under Cameron and May.  It says that by 2021-- 37 billion pounds less will be spent on working age social security compared with 2010.  And amid this continuing policy, rising prices and living costs have been on the rise with the government paying no heed to it while they use Brexit to act as a smokescreen, and Brexit itself has caused price increases and there will be more to come if and when it arrives. But this won't help the Benefit Claimants because May will continue ignoring them and slashing the budget further with freezes on it according to memos leaked to us.  Disability benefits smd Employment and Support Allowance have already been reduced by 5 billion pounds (10%) so far.  Other cuts being implemented are Tax Credits by 4.6 billion pounds (and they have plans to end these ASAP).  Universal Credits are being cut by 3.6 billion pounds, Child Benefit by 3.4 billion pounds, Disability benefit by 2.8 billion pounds, ESA and Incapacity benefit by 2 billion pounds and Housing Benefit by 2.3 billion pounds.   They also have plans to remove the OAP's free travel and TV licence, plus the heating allowance when it can go through by using propaganda designed to upset the younger and middle age taxpayers so that they feel it should go by quoting 'rich pensioners'  and finally we come across their 'only suggested piece that the State Pension will be 1.7 billion higher by 2021' but that's all it is, there is no guarantee with this, so it can be scrapped whenever they like, especially if Brexit goes wrong and cost spiral...that's when they will say it not affordable...and what about the Tories themselves?  they will raise the spending budget, their salaries, and say they are doing a difficult job and we all must pull together!......I think you've heard that one before.    (Frank Field Article Sept 2018)

You might ask 'What are they doing with all of these savings?' fact 1. You're not getting any of them, and your services are still going to be cut!

HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED HOW THE GOVERNMENT CAN BACK OUT OF A PROMISE EVEN IF IT'S IN A STATUTE?

Here's why -- An Act of Parliament, particularly a Public Act, can be declaratory, when they don't make any alterations to existing law.  Parliament can rely on 'The Interpretation Act 1978' which as some say is rather confusing and rarely clears things, so much so that it is often found that statutes are not clear and the Court has to frequently interpret them?  and who will be the guide in this? yes, Government Lawyers who will revert to some obscure meaning or paragraph announcing that the Statute was not implying any guarantee and that under the Security Act it would be folly to interpret it being a promise that could be kept, or its servants held liable for any failure to deliver.

 

'Shameful DWP ignore police direction to leave 'witness' claimant alone'

If you're not shocked at the way the DWP do their business, you should be -- read on,  Apparently the DWP broke its promise to stop harassing a court witness in the run up to the trial.  Despite being clearly instructed by the police not to contact the claimant, David, until the trial was over, they continued to threaten him over his benefits, and also continued to order him to attend an assessment.  A Police spokesman said 'By continuing with their actions, they are wilfully causing our witness's health to deteriorate and this in turn could potentially compromise his ability to give evidence in the Crown Court Trial.'                                                                                                                                                               The Minister for the disabled, JUSTIN TOMLINSON MP even threatened last year to stop David's benefits if he failed to co-operate with the PIP re-assessment provided by the DWP contractor Atos.                                                                                                                                                     Quite rightly, Tomlinson was called on to resign in the Commons.                                                                                                                                 We don't know if he did, being a Tory, it seems unlikely.  They just have one agenda, pay themselves well, and make the less well-off suffer!  David has severe post-traumatic stress disorder caused by horrific sexual abuse which he suffered as a child, which later brought on several suicide attempts.  The toll and stress of the the child abuse trial in which he was a vital witness has not been easy, and even prior to this he was harassed over his claim for 'out-of-work' disability benefit employment, and received many threats of sanctions, cut of his benefits, and this Tory Government say they are the right choice for the people of this country?   Think again idiots, vote them out for good.    (22/8/2017)

 

'Jobcentre Officer in £18,000 swindle'

DWP CIVIL SERVANT JAINE MILLER, was what could be described as a trusted colleague in the Jobcentre who made sure the public jobseekers etc, got off their backs and worked for their money.....except in her case, she decided to take £18,000 of welfare cash to fund some luxuries.  In Canterbury Crown Court she was described as being a committed fan of West Ham Football Club.  She had begun claiming disability living allowance after suffering from mobility problems.  And she kept on claiming benefit, paid regardless of her employment status for five years after getting better.  A jury convicted her after seeing a film showing her to be in good heath.  It was also discovered that she had debts of £100,000.  She was sentenced to a year in prison.

 

'Jobcentre orders man with MS to attend or else!'

LOUGHBOROUGH JOBCENTRE decided to flex their muscles and exercise authority when implementing 'Compliance' in the case of an immobilised man with MS.  Civil servants at the Centre summoned him to the Job Centre to discuss his benefits and getting a job.  The man, Mr Nick Gaskin, who could only communicate by blinking had been receiving disability allowance.  A letter from the Jobcentre said ' You and your personal advisor will discuss the possibility of going into paid work, training for work, or looking for work in the future'  you have to attend your appointment.  (these are the usual threatening terms the DWP use and they all end up with 'you will lose your benefit)   The DWP after The Leicester Mercury got involved, claimed there was a misunderstanding?.......they lie quite easily.

 

'Jobseekers steered towards low paid jobs'

This Policy has been in place for years and cannot be denied by the Jobcentre or their Training Modules on Contract.  Steve B says that the DWP have tried to hide their policy behind smiles and confidence tricks but always have one thing to use, and that is their policy of moving claimants onto jobs that most people do not want, and 100% of them are low paid and insecure.  Steve says you are put into a 'trap' career-wise because promotion is almost impossible to achieve because these employers want to pay the bare minimum of pay and under if they can get away with it, and you find you're almost in a permanent situation of no pay rise, and if you don't like they tell you to look elsewhere for employment knowing that your prospects are thin and with some it's back to the Jobcentre hell again.  Steve says that the DWP and Training Centres know this and promote the situation right from the beginning; hiding it from the jobseekers.  Steve said he was once in a training situation of going back to work and was sent to do charity work for several weeks, still had to sign at the Training Centre, and did 9 am to 4pm for five days but got no job.  He found that the Manager at the Charity Shop had no responsibility to hire anyone from the centre or offer them a job, but he could use them free to bolster his staff position, which he did regularly.  He says it made him annoyed to hear DWP ministers lie and create a false impression about jobs to fool the Nation and bandy about figures that were most likely fabricated to deceive.

 

'Jobcentre Trio-plus in £1.7million Swindle'

Three Jobcentre staff got together with others to defraud the DWP and taxpayer by creating bogus claims a court was told.  ANTHONY EKAJEH, FIAYO AKINWUMIJU and OLUFEMI KEHINDE were all jailed when they appeared for trial at Croydon Crown Court.  The Officer grade Civil Servants made numerous false claims for tax credits, JSA and grants, while working at the Jobcentre it was revealed.  In court it was stated that the gang had made around 1,767 bogus claims and walked away with around £1-7 million.  It also stated in the report that several others fled before the trial.  (4/5/2012)

 

'The True Face of DWP Management'

This is a kind of 'Behind the scenes' expose as we look into the case of a DWP worker taking the DWP to a tribunal.  MR BARRY CAULCUTT produced an e-mail to support his case, and it is a shocking piece that must be exposed here too.  The evidence he submitted was an e-mail from an Operations Manager BEV LOVATT  -- 'In my mind, scrap the meeting, Let him whinge like crap and raise it in his ET (Employment Tribunal). He doesn't deserve us to be nice to him.'  this e-mail was to the Jobcentre Manager EIDDWEN BORLAND, and she agreed in a reply e-mail.  MR CAULCUTT had worked at the DWP for almost 35 years!  And the Jobcentre is - Caernarfon Jobcentre.    Incidentally, the next bit will alarm you more,  The DWP BARRISTER DAVID TINKLER revealed this, 'The private e-mails from Bev Lovatt were not meant to be seen by Mr Caulcutt' and he described this as unfortunate!   (11/1/2017)

PS: Now you know the sort of legal advice they get, and the tactics ot the DWP Lawyers who would have rather kept this a secret.

 

'DWP Guidelines a matter of disregard or follow'

Yes it's up to the civil servant; if they choose to follow DWP Guidance they can, and if they don't want to, it's not necessary.  This nice little arrangement was put forward by NICKY BOWAN (a complaints resolution manager).  She happily stated that guidance negates any process that was not fully completed in line with guidance, and 'believed that a session not mandated at the beginning could be mandated at the end' despite it being a contradiction to a session description, as in normal proceedings it is either mandated or not.  She would probably claim that a contract discussed and agreed could be breached at the end if she desired it, because she 'believes' that's the way it is.  Mandatory, and Mandated means compulsory and the DWP are fond of that, it's a pity they hold Department guidelines in a carefree attitude that points to them being meaningless.

NB: The session was already booked and the people had been mandated on the course already before they arrived...yet she says they were mandated at the end of the session making out that they were free spirits on entering the session, yet the session 'provider' had all the people booked on his 'Skills Conditionality' already?

 

'Pensioner suffers for 5 weeks after DWP stop her pension'

This is probably another case they didn't want anybody to see or hear about, but luckily it surfaced.  Showing the DWP in their true light is often difficult to do because they have a system that works very hard to cover up this sort of thing and when it does it is often handled by several people who have been instructed to minimise the fallout and publicity it might interest.  This case is yet again truly dreadful, as it concerns a widow of 76 yrs of age who recently lost her husband.  The newspapers are calling them 'Blundering Officials' but we here know more about these civil servants than they think.  Diane Geraghty found herself living on scraps for five weeks, and they were from her husband's funeral meal.  She was at the time, on 166 pounds a week pension, but this suddenly stopped without notice because 'someone' unidentified of course, marked her claim as finished because she was dead'....and without further investigation or inquiries the DWP were now no longer paying out, which is what they like.  The frail pensioner felt lonely and unable to do anything so she more or less went into hiding, and didn't even tell her relatives what had happened.  Mrs Geraghty of Lowestoft made inquiries to her bank, and that was met by no success in putting things right.  She stopped using the phone because of the bill she feared, which she knew she couldn't pay.  She was frail and very frightened as the weeks passed by, and it was only due to someone noticing her in the garden that this case was ever brought to light, and it was David Kinsella 67, who became her rescue and contacted emergency supplies from the foodbank and rang for help.  'This poor lady was in a right state, no money for food, or anything at all, in fact, she seemed all alone in the World' he said, He then set about putting things right.

  And that should have been the DWP, who have now paid her the arrears and apologised for 'the administrative error'....and in another case we will tell you more about the so-called 'error' and what the DWP will do to avoid it being 'unaccepted' as it rightly should have been.

 

'DWP Pensions Officer steals £44,000'

CIVIL SERVANT CLAIRE WILLIS a DWP worker who was with the Tyneside DWP Office in Longbenton, and was considered a trustworthy colleague by others there....but, she was carrying out a scam to deprive the elderly out of their pensions.  She 'doctored' the personal records of a chosen 6 pensioners and gained £44,000.  Newcastle Crown Court jailed her for 12 months.  Apparently, she used the office computer to find pensioners with a similar name to her own, and then altered their records.   (26/2/2013)

 

'Looking into the DWP Pensions Robbery'

This started with the Labour Government, and was continued in somewhat secrecy! with the Conservatives who are currently limiting entitlement and withdrawing as much pension they can from the taxpayer by means of 'Assessments' and 'Mandatory Interpretations' that delay and in most cases, deprive the pensioner and drive them to food banks, friends, and charities for help.  The Authority behind this, is of course, the DWP whose evil and malevolent intentions pervert natural justice to an extremely immoral depth of which they are proud to continue, and hide the real truth about pensions and what they did!    But we can expose this, and after hours of research, tell you how they did this without making it a longer than necessary story.  We have the facts, so let us begin here..... The year was 1997, and GORDON BROWN was at the Treasury (and had with him a little known group of advisors - The Hotel Group).  Among this group was GEOFFREY ROBINSON and CHARLIE WHELON, and they were not liked by other Treasury staff, which led to a state of unease, and little did they know that this was to be 'Gordon Brown's Smash and Grab scenario' to plunder the Pensions Pot of the UK's citizens and taxpayers.   He immediately began with removing the Tax Credit which Pension Funds received on dividend payments from companies in which they were invested.  Apparently, Robinson kept this highly 'sensitive' proposal tucked away until it was suddenly announced in Whitehall.  Anderson (one of Brown's cohorts) had already tested some of this previously with (Sir) PETER DAVIES, of The Prudential Insurance Group.  When the Dividend Tax Credit was stopped, they suppressed the facts from being made public for several years (until 2007).  Those at The Treasury and HMRC argued that the value of the Pensions Funds would fall drastically, and went on to predict a drop of £75 billion.  Many thought Brown's plan would hit private pension schemes and the self-employed, and it did!    The Inland Revenue told him at the time 'that abolishing Tax Credits would make a large hole in Pension Scheme Finances, and it would need and extra £3 t0 4 billion a year to meet their commitments because any future pension benefits would suffer!  And as we see today, the DWP in the hands of the conservatives are trying to slash tax credits and do away with them.  It was interesting to note the ED BALLS (Economic Secretary at the Treasury) said the abolition of the Dividend Tax Credit was a good idea in a BBC Radio 4 interview, and he proceeded to get things wrong despite his claims which were rejected by Lord Turner.                                    But nothing was going to stop this robbery of the pensions, Brown was adamant that he was right, and that there would be no adverse affect on pensions of the future.   However, 11 million taxpayers with company pensions and an additional 7 million with personal pensions were becoming seriously affected by this.    Even the Commons Public Accounts Committee issued a damning report, concluding that The Pensions Regulator and the DWP were not doing enough to safeguard scheme members.                                                                                     Amid 'misleading official literature' being sent out, it was beginning to point to the fact that the government's hard-line stance had backfired.  Pensions had collapsed for many and the subject of compensation had to be addressed despite the government trying to ignore it.  Being between a rock and a hard place, the government (anxious to use the cheapest way out) offered 'limited compensation' in the form of an F.A.S. - A Financial Assistance Scheme run by the DWP.   The Pensions Action Group were not happy, especially as it left many of its members out, and was only designed to assist a few 'hardship cases' and it was also inadequately staffed and resourced, and was far too bureaucratic, resulting in applicants who applied for funds feeling threatened and humiliated (something today's DWP rather enjoy and keep up as a policy).  ROS ALTMANN a Pensions Advisor to Number 10 made proposals which would give 'victims' a better deal, but even these funds would run out eventually, they were just a sticking plaster over a widening cut.                                                                                              The Workers and their Unions were in anger mode, and they threatened the government with Legal Action.  They said it was ignoring part of the 1980 European Union Insolvency Directive, that required member states to ensure that there are necessary measures in place to protect employees in relation to their pension rights.  The Government's efforts to appease things fell short as usual, and the Government Ombudsman's report on the state of the pensions collapse said 'This report is a damning indictment of successive governments who, again and again, gave misleading information about the safety of pensions and failed to protect the interests of long-term investors (the taxpayer), the government is once again refusing to accept responsibility.'

PS: It may be worth noting here that Brexit may remove that Directive requiring this government to protect pensions, and that may be what this government is hoping, as it will allow them more scope to destroy pensions and benefit from it themselves without legal sanctions?

 

'State Pension will fall by £1,400 short of minimum income'

This new article nicely follows the DWP PENSION ROBBERY above --  A recent (2017) report says the state pension is to be around £159-55 a week for pensioners and that is about £8,000 a year, and that is subjective to assessment, and many other factors the DWP are enforcing so that they can lower the pensions bill.....and it was them along with the Labour Government that plundered the pensions as we revealed.  The figure is £1,400 a year short of the 'minimum income' they've been 'kidding everyone' about in their misleading statements.   These figures have been revealed by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.    Another Report weeks before this said that this revised state pension leaves many elderly pensioners in poverty, and the Government are trying not to address this at all.  A staggering fact revealed that before the collapse a worker could expect an average of 60 percent of earning related pension, but that has fallen to 29 percent with this present government and they were the figures from the OBCD.  A third report announced that around a Million pensioners are relying on handouts of cash from friends and family these days to make ends meet...the report says that one in every nine senior pensioners require extra support and its not coming from the government who callously point them to charities and food banks.

NB: So heed what we tell you about the pensions, read the above articles, and never trust this government to tell you the truth.

 

'The DWP Pensions fiasco -- £7 to £230 a week'

Yes, more on that robbery subject of the taxpayers pension pot that shrinks every time the Tories look for extra money.  A report we have unearthed from 2012 revealed that around 13,000 people would receive a pension of £7 or less a week while an equivalent number would get in the region of £230 a week or more.  It says that the DWP are struggling with the problem because of its complexity?

 

'MP's Pensions are invested in Jersey off-shore trust'

Still staying on pensions, you may be interested to know where these civil servants have theirs, and more securely too.  This report informs us that MP's have around £6.6 million invested and put away in an off-shore unit trust fund in Jersey.  It also goes onto say that the Parliamentary Contributory Pension Fund as a further £6 million invested in three US companies that have been accused of tax avoidance.  The pension fund said to have a total value of  around £621 million in March 2016 had £48 million invested in 4 property funds, three based in the UK and one in Jersey.

PS.  So there you have it, this lot took care of their pension funds, and plundered yours while you were trusting them to be above board and transparent!

 

'The Pension Robbery still goes on!'

Sad to say, The Tories are still pounding at the pensions of the public, and a report out today (18/1/2018/) announces that thousands of pension savers face a tax bill shock after new curbs on their allowances.  Yes, The DWP and HMRC work hand in hand, the two main villains in this robbery on UK citizens.  The report says that under new rules brought in in 2017 the allowances will be restricted on how much they can claim and save into their pensions.  Experts have said that this new system is so confusing that many people are likely to have inadvertently over-paid, and as such will get an unpleasant shock as the deadline for filing tax returns draws near.  The first notice of drops in allowance were apparent in 2016.  Steve Webb a former pensions minister, who we will not vouch for as a good guy, said 'this tapered allowance is one of the most 'absurdly complex' pieces of personal tax legislation he has seen in years, and he goes onto say 'One of the worst things about it is the amount you can put in to a pension this year depends on your annual income, which you can't no for sure until the end of the financial year.'  But as we've seen above, the Tory MP's have their pensions nicely tied up in off-shore accounts...good eh? 

 

'The Pension System is in a crisis and the DWP ignore the risks of a meltdown'

Playing fast and loose with the pension system is something as we have already seen, and new articles which pop up every now and then are showing that the Tories have no real plans to repair the mistakes that the politicians have caused.  POOR RETURNS ON GOVERNMENT'S PENSION PLAN highlights several dangers for the workers.  The report says that workers earning the 'national living wage' could be left 'significantly worse off' in retirement as a result of the government's pensions auto-enrolment scheme, which was analysed by researchers. The President of Icas, Sir Brian Souter who commissioned the research says ' The Government must look again at the deal they offer to the lower paid. It can't be right that a policy could actually result in the poorest getting poorer'    'WORKERS 'SHAMELESSLY EXPLOITED' IN PENSIONS MIS-SELLING SCANDAL' -- The Watchdog The Work and Pensions Committee issued a report revealing that a major pensions mis-selling scandal is erupting behind the scenes which highlighted the British Steel Pension Scheme members being 'bamboozled' shamelessly by the operators.  They said that members had been 'exploited for cynical personal gain by dubious financial advisors in tandem with parasitical so-called 'introducers'   they said the workers pension scheme created perfect conditions for vultures to take advantage.  Pensions are being ripped off, not only by government, but private firm pensions being looted until they are no longer viable as in the Carillion Scandal. 'WE MUST GET TOUGHER, SAYS PENSIONS WATCHDOG' somewhat a bit late for many. 

 

'Tory Government still dodge Pension Theft'

Despite the recent Protest of pensioners gathering to vent their anger (October 2018) the Conservative Government ignore them, and they are carrying banners saying 'THE GREAT PENSION ROBBERY' which has gone on for years without anyone at the DWP doing anything about it.  There have been many players in this scandal such as OSBORNE and DUNCAN-SMITH who have deliberately gone out of their way to put up obstacles so that they don't have to address the situation.  MAY throws out sound bites which mentions a figure of millions, often told to them by an advisor in the Cabinet Office who relies on her not to let herself be questioned over these figures because they don't stand up to close scrutiny.....such is the Tory game of false pledges that have no legal basis whatsoever, and that's why politicians can throw out these wild statements with impunity......and as to the Pension question? that pot is shrinking fast and the Tories already knew their plundering had done great harm to a Nation's future long ago.

 

'Tory MP says jail Pension thieves despite culpability by government '

Lawyers always say come to court with a 'clean hand' before judging others, yet the infamous AMBER RUDD unveils new tougher sentences for those who are in charge of a pension scheme to be jailed up to 7 years if they mismanage these schemes.  Ironically another report says that the country's 'Armed Forces face £3 billion cuts to Fund Pension Deficit'.....and the Army is controlled by the British Government.  The Government have already been involved in one huge pension theft which started with Labour, and in the case of the Army it is reported that the shortfall in the pension pot is due to the Government allocating too little to cover pension contributions from employers such as The Armed Forces...which is run by the government for the security and protection of its people.  Is Amber Rudd going to jail her own MOD?

 

Let's have a look at the Pension Crisis and what the Government have been up to:

DWP ‘MISLEADING OAP’S ABOUT HOW PENSIONS ARE PAID      November 17th 2017

 

BRITAIN’S biggest pensioner organisation has accused the government of “bullying and misleading” around 1.3 million retired people over how their state pensions are paid.  More than one million collect their state pensions from the Post Office because they hold a Post Office card account (POCA).  The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has now told them that the system is changing, meaning that they must open a bank or building society account or join a credit union to receive the payments.  The National Pensioners Convention (NPC) argues that the move is premature, given that the DWP contract for the POCA lasts until 2021 and can be extended to 2024 if the government chooses to do so. NPC general secretary Jan Shortt said: “This is a really deceitful tactic by the DWP that looks like it’s trying to bully and mislead pensioners into closing down their Post Office card accounts long before they need to. “It does not say that the POCA is still operating until 2021 and neither does it give the individual the choice of retaining their POCA if they so wish. “This certainly looks like an underhand tactic, aimed at closing down the POCA before its time — and in the process, the DWP is causing distress and confusion among large numbers of older people.”

 

THE CASE:

Bradley and others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Court of Appeal) – 7 February 2008    --‘Government guilty of misleading Pensioners’

‘Maladministration’ upheld by Court.

The Court of Appeal has rejected an appeal by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions against last year’s decision of the High Court to quash his rejection of the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s finding that the government was guilty of misleading 125,000 people about the security of their pensions.  The three judges said that the Government’s maladministration had caused distress, anxiety, uncertainty and had denied workers whose occupational schemes were wound up, the right to make informed decisions.  The Parliamentary Ombudsman (the Ombudsman), Ann Abrahams, launched an enquiry in 2004 after receiving more than 200 complaints from members of pension schemes that had been wound up.  Her report (published on 15 March 2006) (the Report) found that the DWP and its predecessor, the Department of Social Security (DSS), had been guilty of maladministration.  This was one of a number of factors causing injustice to those who had lost all or part of their final salary occupational pensions on the winding-up of their schemes.  In a written statement to Parliament of 15 March 2006 and a more detailed oral statement by the Secretary of State in the House of Commons on 16 March 2006, the Government rejected all but one of the Ombudsman’s findings and recommendations. In February 2007 the High Court quashed the Secretary of State’s rejection of the Ombudsman’s finding of maladministration (consisting of the provision of misleading official information).  The Court found that it was open to the Ombudsman to consider the official information to be “sometimes inaccurate, often incomplete, largely inconsistent and therefore potentially misleading” and on the evidence, no reasonable Secretary of State could rationally disagree with that view.

The Secretary of State appealed against the first finding of maladministration in the Report, stating that the decision should be overturned on the grounds that the judge had erred:  In going on to hold that this was a case in which no reasonable Secretary of State could rationally disagree with the Ombudsman’s conclusion that the Government’s official information leaflet was inaccurate and misleading so as to amount to maladministration. 

DWP Minister James Purnell (2008)  (Malcolm Wicks  2003- 2005) followed by Stephen Timms MP cover this case period)

 

'Pension Problems and the Audit Office revelations'

Investigation into members’ experience of civil service pension administration

The NAO has published the findings from its investigation into members’ experience of civil service pension administration.

“When MyCSP took over the administration of the civil service pensions payroll in September 2014 it did not cope with the workload and a large backlog of work built up. Some people were paid late and members struggled to contact MyCSP. Some reported hardship and distress. The problems were made worse by longstanding limitations in the membership data on which I have reported over the last five years. MyCSP’s performance is now back to a steady state but the underlying data problems have still not been fixed. This should now be a priority for the Cabinet Office, MyCSP and the employers.”

Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office

·         When MyCSP ran the payroll for the first time in September 2014 14,703 pensioners who lived overseas were paid their pensions up to 7 days late and 99 were not paid at all until the next month or later. MyCSP did not fully understand Capita’s payment practices. This meant it did not issue the payments before the due date to allow for the extra time needed to make an international payment. Problems with the payment details for the 99 required MyCSP to ask for a new banking mandate.

 

Some scheme members have experienced serious problems with the way their individual cases have been processed. Our initial enquiries with employers led us to dozens of individual stories of hardship, distress and inconvenience caused by late payment of pensions, difficulty in getting in touch with MyCSP and failure to provide accurate and timely information on pension entitlement. In some cases members who were waiting for a retirement quotation or new payment did not receive their quotation or payment until after they retired

 

'Civil Servants award themselves a 35% Pension Top-Up'

PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS benefit yet again at the cost of the taxpayer says the report.  This report by an Economist Group stated that Public Sector workers, civil servants were having their pay packages topped up with pension benefits worth as much as a third of their salaries while the Private Sector was falling way behind causing a great divide from those who would retire on a good amount to those who would struggle to make it work.  PricewaterhouseCoopers said that the public sector worker would come out with a pension of around 28,000 pounds compared to the private sector worker's 11,600 pounds.  They said that almost 90% of public sector workers receive final salary pensions compared to 16% in the private sector.  Former Treasury pensions advisor ROS ALTMANN  said 'the Government have been burying its head in the sand over the cost of public sector pensions for years, Ministers have tried to pull the wool over our eyes and pretend these funds can be accrued on the cheap.  People are living much longer and you, me and our children will end up paying the bill for their retirement for sure.'

 

Pensioners paying for Government mistakes

Official figures say one in four pensioners live in poverty. The Government promised to put an end to that by 2020, but in the mean time, it's making some older people even poorer. Thanks to mistakes by the Department of Work & Pensions (DWP), a quarter of pensioners have been left either short changed or in debt.  Nancy Copper's daughter Pauline was outraged when a letter from the DWP was sent to her 94-year-old mother demanding over £2,000. The letter stated that this was because Nancy had been overpaid Pension Credit. However, it failed to specify why the overpayment had happened.  Nancy is just one of the millions of people getting pension credits, which is a means tested benefit, to top up her state pension. Nancy was upset and very concerned over the letter because she had never been in debt in her life.  Daughter Pauline spoke to the DWP but nobody could give her an answer as to why her mother had been overpaid. It did say Nancy should never have received the letter demanding the £2,000. She eventually received a second letter from the DWP in which the department apologised. It stated: "I'm writing to apologise for you receiving the letter of overpayment and can assure you this money does not have to be paid back in full."  However, although Nancy did not have to pay the amount back all at once, the DWP still planned to deduct £3.50 each week from her benefits!

Government confesses to messing up a third of all pension credits


So, though Nancy still didn't know exactly why the overpayment had happened, the DWP had already started to make deductions from Nancy's pension to pay back the money. It would be no surprise if her overpayment turned out to be the fault of the DWP. In October the Government confessed to messing up a third of all pension credits - that's £290 million worth of mistakes.  Clearly the Government isn't wasting any time getting back the money it has overpaid to people like Nancy. But, when it has made a mistake and underpaid pensioners, it's a very different story.  Gladys Haxell is a former darts champion and a mother of eight. She has dementia, so daughter Carol looks after her finances. In 2005, Gladys had a visit from The Pension Service who informed Gladys that she shouldn't have been getting pension credits at all and immediately stopped her payments. This cut her income by £63 a week. Carol phoned the DWP to query the decision but it insisted it was correct.  But two years later, Carol discovered that the DWP had actually got it wrong and that Gladys should have been getting the payments all along.

Since then, Carol has been fighting to get her mother back the money that shouldn't have been taken off her in the first place. The mistake has cost Gladys over £6,000. Carol assumed that once the Government realised it hadn't being paying Gladys enough money, it would do the decent thing and pay back the difference.  She was wrong. Carol was told that in cases of underpayment, the DWP will pay back no more than 12 months of payments, regardless of how long the underpayment has been continuing. So, despite having missed out on £6,000, the most Carol would get back would be £3,000.

Horrified by the situation


Nicky met Mervyn Kohler of Help the Aged to discuss the two cases. Mervyn was horrified by both situations and said: "We have got to treat people like that who are vulnerable with much more sensitivity. That's after all why we have a benefits system in the first place. There is no natural justice in that situation whatsoever. There ought to be a common set of rules here."   The DWP has released the following statement: "We apologise unreservedly for the distress and inconvenience caused. Clearly, mistakes were made and we have sought to rectify them as quickly as possible. We are grateful to Watchdog for bringing these cases to our attention.

And it always seems that before anything is really done, Watchdog or someone else has to rub their noses in it publicly for it to work…..otherwise the DWP will just ignore it.

 

'Pensions in real trouble as government ignores future'

A report has emphasised that attention to pensions and the funding of them is at a serious low.  Retirees are getting the worst ever returns from their pensions due to the havoc wreaked by a decade of ultra-low interest rates.  They indicate that a 65 year old who has saved £50,000 for their old age now gets a record low return of just £2,237 a year when they buy an annuity.  They say in September 2007, the same £50,000 pot would have bought a guaranteed annual income of £3,627 for life according to the Moneyfacts team.  Even Baroness Ros Altmann, a former Conservative pensions minister warns that there seems to be no end to this decline and that people will have to work longer and harder to just stand still in the hope that their pension holds out.   (11/9/2019)

THE GOVERNMENT has mentioned that in the Pensions Schemes Bill that reckless bosses who plunder pensions 'could' face up to seven years in prison......yet make no mention of their own wrongdoings in this area......which will not carry any such jail time!

 

'Frozen Pensions and a violation of rights'

Whichever way you look at it, the pensions subject will arrive at a sticky end with lies and mismanagement by all concerned with hedge funds, investments and the government framing the 'others' for the mess it is in.  But this report is certainly at the government door and what it presents isn't good news for the aged.  This concerns people abroad who have their pensions paid in the country they are staying in.  The government have arrangements in place and over the years made guarantees they do not intend to keep for a variety of reasons.  This report  says there are more than 500,000 pensioners living abroad who have had their pensions 'froze'....because they do not benefit from annual increases in the state pensions despite those 'other pensioners' in the UK, which smacks of discrimination.  Pensioners in Britain benefit from what is called 'the triple lock' system that increases the pension by around 2.5%....and unprofessionally there are differences in how they are treated depending on where they live!   The Chairman of the Canadian Alliance of British Pensioners, Ian Andexser revealed that the British Government has never been willing to enter into talks about the differences in pension rates.  One awful case cited is that of 94 year old  who had worked his entire life in the UK before moving to Canada whose state pension was £43 a week almost 30 years ago, and that's still what he is receiving today!  Callously, A DWP spokesperson said that 'it would cost taxpayers more than £3 billion over five years to change course on this issue and remedy it in the light it has been clear and settled government policy for 70 years, so we have no plans to do so.'  (9/3/2019)

 

Civil servant suspended over ‘sugar daddy’ website sting claims

The aide to Housing Minister Dominic Raab allegedly boasted of knowing ‘everything’ about him to an undercover reporter. 

 She has been suspended over allegations she met men though a “sugar daddy” website and discussed her work with an undercover reporter. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) is investigating the claims relating to a civil servant at the department.  According to the Daily Mirror the woman boasted of knowing “everything” about Mr Raab and that she knew his “every move”. The employee met twice with an undercover journalist posing as a wealthy businessman, including at a five-star hotel less than a mile from the House of Commons. At the end of each meeting she was paid £750, the paper said.  The official allegedly met with men on a controversial site used by younger women known as “sugar babies” and older, wealthy men to arrange liaisons. It is understood the woman was suspended on Wednesday afternoon pending the outcome of the investigation.        (26/4/2018)  

 

Civil servant who stole over €6k in fake welfare claims under brother's name receives suspended sentence    (31/3/2019)

A Dublin civil servant who stole over €6,500 in fake Jobseekers allowance claims under her brother's name has received a three and a half year suspended sentence. Jacqueline Walsh (33) was brought to the attention of gardaí by her brother, William Walsh, after he tried to make a Revenue claim and discovered false claims had been made under his name.  Walsh, with an address in Millbrook Lawns, Tallaght, pleaded guilty in Dublin Circuit Criminal Court yesterday to four counts of stealing money from the Department of Social Protection between October 2011 and May 2012. Eight other counts were taken into consideration.  The mother-of-four stole a total of €6736 over nine months while she was working in the Tallaght branch of the Dept of Social Protection. The court heard that Walsh had accessed details in relation to her brother's PPS number. On Wednesday, Judge Karen O'Connor said she had “not lightly imposed a wholly suspended sentence” and had very seriously considered custody. 
Detective Garda Colin Rochford told prosecution barrister, Karl Finnegan BL, that three claims were made in the name of William Walsh under three different staff member user names within the department. None of these user names belonged to Jacqueline Walsh. She suspended the sentence for three and a half years and ordered that Walsh undergo 18 months of probation service supervision and complete victim focused work.

 

DWP is now stonewalling pension complaints   December 2018

 (December 7) highlighted how the Tory Government legislation moving the pension age from 60 back to 66 is causing widespread financial distress to women born in the 1950s. This has led to thousands of complaints claiming maladministration of the pension scheme being lodged with the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). However, it seems that the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) has now closed all complaints due to the granting of a judicial review.   The letters sent by the Independent Case Examiner (ICE) to the affected women states that “since it is not within the ICE remit to consider issues which are, or have been, subject to legal proceedings we are no longer in a position to proceed with the investigation of your complaint. As a result, I am writing to inform you that your complaint with this office has been closed”. This is absurd and it seems the army of staff hired by the DWP to deal with the backlog of complaints is now no longer required. Yet again an unpopular Tory Government is continuing to spend vast amounts of public money attempting to defend its unfair policies in the law courts. Does any of this sound familiar?  All of this could have been avoided of course had the previous Conservative Government paid attention to its own Pensions Minister Baroness Altmann, who served in the government between 2015 and 2016. She accepted that the changes to women's state pensions made by the Coalition Government in 2011    (moving the age from 65 to 66) was unfair and were made without adequate notice to the women affected. She was also horrified to discover that the DWP had failed to properly inform those affected by the huge 1995 changes (moving the age from 60 to 65). Indeed, the DWP inadvertently led these women to believe their state pension age was 60. It wrote to millions of them between 2003 and 2005 about their state pension, without bothering to mention that they would not be getting it at age 60. Even in 2015, when women’s pension age had already risen to 62, some pages on the Government’s website said women would start their pension at age 60. This of course is the same organisation (DWP) that last week decided to close all of the complaints against itself for maladministration.  The bad news for the Tory Government is that these women have not gone away and it is possible that the judicial review, with Michael Mansfield QC representing them, will lead to another costly and humiliating defeat for Mrs May (if she is still there) in the law courts.

John Smith, 9 Argyle Terrace, Dunblane.

 

'How crafty can you get?'

THE PENSIONS SCANDAL JUST ROLLS ALONG --  'One million workers face 'nasty' Pension Tax Charge' -- It now appears according to a recent report that a measure intended for the super rich has now become a tool for the Government to clawback cash from around a million people hoping to have a decent to good pension.  The report says that many will receive tax bills from the HMRC  that will severely hit their intended security in pension pots due to requirements of the Lifetime Allowance scheme (LTA), a pension relief system that means those who exceed the £1.03 m lifetime limit could face a tax charge of 55% of their pension savings above this level....and as time goes by it will bite hard into the savers it wasn't intended for, as it was designed to tackle the super rich, but now works the other way, collecting more for the government, who'd have guessed?    (27/3/2019)

 

In the light of the pensions scandal, the next item is very important to both pensioners and benefits claimants;

'DWP's hidden clause 'Deliberate Deprivation of Assets' - a dangerous position for taxpayers'

We begin here by saying some of what we are about to tell you is not available by way of a FOI it is deemed 'exempt'

This little understood clause that is used not only for pensions also applies to claimants on JSA and other benefits.  In regard to pensions, they made great pretence of 'Pension Freedom' which the public inadvertently thought meant they could spend or give away gifts and cash and do a luxury holiday, buy a Porsche or Ferrari, without fear from either the HMRC or DWP.  But they were wrong, the government were not being upfront on this at all, it was yet again, another Tory scam to look nice for voters, especially old folk.  They were ready to pounce and say 'it was a deliberate deprivation of assets', and as such, your folly will mean that you can't rely or fall back on the State to help you out, benefit wise or similar, because they are ready for you!                                                                                                                                                                  They issued a little known DWP facts-sheet that said 'Your pensions pot, and withdrawals from it affect entitlement to various income-related benefits, including Housing benefit, Pension credit, and Universal credit -- under the 'Deprivation Rule' as they call it.  If you spend, transfer or give away money that you take from your pension pot, the DWP will consider whether you have deliberately deprived yourself of that money in order to secure (or increase) your entitlement to benefits.  If it is decided that you have deliberately deprived yourself, you will be treated as still having that money, and it will be taken into account as income or capital when your entitlement to benefit is worked out!                          If you lose all of your money or have given too much away, and need government support, you will only be allowed it if the government agrees with your financial decisions?    which means you having to explain what you bought or did with your cash.                                           Relative to this is the connection of this 'Legislation' is that it affects the jobseeker if that jobseeker was self employed with a business.  We learned of one who having signed on after his business was wound up, had to declare any assets, bank account to the DWP (via the jobcentre) which led to a reduction of his JSA allowance.  He had already explained that part of his account was an investment, and as such he had paid back the investor shortly after signing on.  Although he'd explained the money, they still assessed his JSA and treated his claim as if the money was still there...almost disbelieving him and using this 'Deprivation Rule' to cover what they were doing.  He had to finally fill out a statement form and get another bank statement, (his so-called 'Coach' said she didn't deal with that, but this was a deliberate fob), and even though he had followed this, they rang him and told him to get the 'investor' to confirm the amount in writing to them.                                          So, as you can see, this so called 'Deprivation Rule' gives the DWP such intrusive powers that go way beyond reasonable or Human Rights.

(We'd like to thank the Newbridge Consultancy for their help in this matter) 

 

'MP's and Peers have links with off-shore firms'

Well, having seen the above item on pensions, their off-shore interests is no surprise at this stage.  The Report says that Several Senior Conservatives, and donors, have been caught up in the PANAMA PAPERS SCANDAL - the tax haven saga.  They were reported by the International Consortium of Investigative journalists to have secure links with the Law Firm MOSSACK FONESCA, who had been keeping things quite secret until a mass of confidential documents were leaked to the outside world.  Names like, MP LORD FLIGHT, SIR TONY BALDRY have either made denials or excuses, the latter having stood down,  LORD BAMFORD a major Tory donor denied having assets in Casper Ltd which was registered in the Virgin Islands and these were mentioned in the Panama documents...but they're all innocent eh?

 

'Claimants capitulate to DWP Legalised Conditions'

AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THOSE CRAFTY CALCULATING DWP LAWYERS HERE as we reveal some material obtained by someone who sent us a document and parts thereof that was 'confidential' and we recognised the address as being the DWP Headquarters in London (Caxton House).  The material has been put into more acceptable English so one understands it better.  It tells of the meeting between the DWP and Lawyers reviewing the court claims often made in the County Courts, and how this was upsetting the system and giving too much power to the people who were seeking redress for what they termed as 'in-house problems' being made public and using the Court's time, and theirs of course. There was mention that it was irritating for them to have to send representatives from the DWP to sit around the Court waiting for the case to be heard costing the Department 'unnecessarily'.  They also mention that the Tribunals were now being overloaded!  The DWP Lawyers advised the DWP that the Public 'should be priced out of making a claim' as it will act as a discouraging factor that should minimise the amount of claimants who would go to Law against the DWP, whether they had a case or not.  Alternatively, they discussed 'a Pyramid System that slowed down the proceedings and could in all probability, dissuade any claimant by the mere fact that it was a lengthy procedure and could prove confusing to most people on benefits.  They also suggested that it should be a mandatory procedure that excluded anyone taking the court or tribunal route before having exhausted the final hurdle (so-called The Commissioners and Ombudsman route).  There was also moves by the Tory Government to thin down Legal aid, which of course was there to hit the poorest, and it was a known factor that this would help the DWP if it knew that qualifying for what legal aid there was in in the system was difficult to obtain, claimants would be held in check.

 

'Work and Pensions Minister Stephen Crabb in sexting scandal'

Former Tory leadership challenger DWP Minister STEPHEN CRABB was having it says crisis talks with his family after being caught out in a 'sexting scandal.'  The married father of two had sent sexually charged messages to another woman (unidentified) in the few days just before the referendum.  Apparently the woman became infuriated by his supposed hypocrisy in campaigning to be party leader on the platform he was a devout Christian and family values man.  Shortly after the revelations he pulled out of the contest for Tory Leadership.

 

'DWP and HMRC use outrageous Interference of the Law to limit successful appeals'

In order to reduce the winners at Tribunals against them. the DWP and HMRC set about making sure that 80 percent of claimants would be rejected, and this was in their policy, not a public policy either.  Since 2013, both Agencies of the Government have stifled appeals, and prevented such action by introducing 'MANDATORY RECONSIDERATION' as a first step to secure their aims.  This measure was a target to uphold 80 percent of their decisions already taken were successful and never went to the Tribunal.  This step was not to be passed by any claim.  Former Judge Henry Brooke said this was 'An absolutely outrageous interference with the rule of law.'  The Mandatory Reconsideration enables staff to look at a complaint/application again and have the power to overturn it if they think its incorrect.  Which means that they can select many if not a majority of Tribunal cases to be, and turn them down in order to meet the 80 percent objective, which is what they are currently doing...and these civil servants are not lawyers or members of the tribunal.   (16/5/2017)

 

'The Great Benefits Swindle 2017'

The swindle here is the DWP and HMRC, they along with their Lawyers have developed a system which enables them to pay claimants less than the 'official' benefits JSA award of £72. 40 (via the Government website .Gov) or the £73.10 quoted by a Worthing assessment centre.  A rather false figure applying to the two.  They use terms like 'This assessment is based on how much the Law says you need to live on?  The Law!  The Lawyers who signed to this are on more than a £1,000 a week.  The assessment jargon comes straight from the Tax people at the HMRC, because they include things like 'We have used the tax years ending 2015 to 2016 to assess your claim'  and this is the problem.  Some claimants fall below the number of 'qualifying' contributions (N.i.) and the JSA allowance goes down to £70 and less per week with no possibility of a top up (because they've removed other benefits and installed decision-makers, the faceless ones. who can stall you all the way to a Tribunal, which is often months down the line)...and that's where the lie comes in  as Politicians and civil servants promote the illusion that all JSA benefit claimants get the standard rate, when in fact they don't.  As we have shown, one can get £73.10 and another £70.10, so which one is the correct 'how much the law says you need to live on?  clearly not the second one as that falls short and therefore lower than what is required.  But you don't see these fat cat DWP Lawyers rushing forward to put things right, nor the DWP civil servants, no, they couldn't care less.  By taking away the former standing 'rate' whereby all jobseekers got the same money, it now varies quite a lot.  But this was the Tory Government and their 2013 Benefits Bill and that horror smiling merchant Iain Duncan-Smith, who pretends to be that 'all so fair minded person'.  They passed this Bill without arousing suspicion of their true nature to con and deprive the poorly paid and benefits claimants who are bullied by civil servants across the country.  By stealth, they have cut legal aid and removed basic rights; legal aid is now categorised with qualifying titles and money rules that have been drastically lowered to floor level, whereby someone can only afford the cheapest of lawyers or trainees to go up against seasoned barristers and solicitors paid by the taxpayer, to fight and destroy the taxpayer, and they call this justice.  While increasing their powers to de-stable their opponents, the poor, they help the rich to wield more power so that they become the decision-makers over the poor.  In 2017, the middle classes and rich have benefitted well by these Tory actions, and to such a point that they care very little about the poor, and this suits the DWP, the HMRC, and other departments who have very little accountability and transparency, and in most cases, None!

'Government reluctantly agree to falsehood statements on Jobcentre strategies it denied involving the DWP'

THIS IS A SWINDLE TOO - so read on -  After frequent denials the DWP and Government admitted that Jobcentres set targets to take away benefits from claimants.  The report says Jobcentre staff all around the country have been involved in a policy to remove people off benefits by the method of 'sanctions' one of the most evil systems set by the Tory Government.  The staff were to remove people off benefits amid pressure to meet welfare targets set by their managers the government admitted.                                                                                                   Had it not been for THE GUARDIAN NEWSPAPER, the government would have stuck to their denials the whistleblower said who revealed to them that 'vulnerable claimants were being tricked into losing welfare entitlements by Jobcentre staff.  They were given targets of three people a week to refer for sanctions (where benefits are removed for up to six months).                                                                                      Despite what the government has now admitted,  former DWP MINISTER IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH claimed it was all 'claptrap' and 'a conspiracy' during a radio interview, that such an order was made.......which of course makes IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH A LIAR and IMMORAL too.  A union boss tabled a motion that Iain Duncan-Smith apologise and own up on his return to the House, but this minister made no such move, such is his arrogance.   The Whistleblower actually worked at the Jobcentre and he produced e-mails as evidence to the Guardian Investigators in April 2016.

'DWP sends out leaflet with fictitious claimants which was fake'

The Government admitted that they made up and fabricated a leaflet intended for public consumption, which in fact was deceitful, as the claimants with their photos, and statements, were untrue.  Their views shown, of the two bogus claimants, had been written up by the DWP to fool the public into believing that the 'sanctions policy' was good and accepted by the claimants, which was of course to deceive the public and deflect their attention to reports appearing in the Press.  Their downfall was the Press who couldn't accept that these so called claimants were actually praising the sanctions system, which didn't ring true.  So they acted on this with issuing a Freedom of Information request on this welfare leaflet.  After some time the DWP revealed that the so called interviews of the two claimants were 'a fake' and that they had done this to merely illustrate the situation 'in good faith'  It was subsequently withdrawn immediately.  The DWP made no apologies despite breaching the Advertising Standards Authority whose rules state that marketing material must not mislead or be seen to have likely done so.  Iain Duncan-Smith was in charge!   No penalties were given out to the DWP by the ASA...who's bed are they sleeping in?    (19/8/2015)

 

THIS NEXT ITEM WILL SHOCK (BUT HAVE NO EFFECT ON CIVIL SERVANTS WHO WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT):  DWP and HMRC

Life is RUINED Thanks to One Woman at Jobcentre    sent by distressed claimant  LISA

i just feel devastated and have no one to talk to,,,,,, don't read if you don't want to, I feel I need to write it down!  I am a stay at home Mum. Long term partner decided to leave me pregnant and go to someone else, so that was so hard to get over initially,,,,, this was over 7 years ago now and I’ve done a fab job being a single parent so far,,, but things are going from bad to worse!, I am desperately looking for a job and am so down with it all.... There's nothing going! Once my Daughter turned 5 I was taken off income support and put onto Job Seekers Allowance.. I am forced to look for work now, but I want to work, so that doesn't bother me, but the hassle and embarrassment when I'm asked what I've done to look for work is awful. The horrible stuck up lady at the job centre told me two weeks ago, I applied for 5 jobs and looked Into and have my cv to at least 8 other places, but she said - I have NOT done enough to find a job this fortnight but didn’t say anything was going to "be done" about it... she spoke to me like something she had trodden in, didn’t once even look or listen to me at all, so i went back to my voluntary work placement heavy hearted feeling very stupid like a naughty child! I am 41 and they've literally stopped my benefits. They didn’t write to let me know, they just didn't pay me so I was on the phone two days trying to find out why I hadn't been paid!!! They said to me this morning my money has been stopped for four weeks as a "punishment" for not doing enough to find work. I was old two week sanction a fortnight ago but today I wasn't paid again!   I am distraught, ill, can't think straight, AND all this when I am currently half way through a work placement I applied for to gain myself some experience in the hope this would help me get a job!!!!! Everyone I know are disgusted with this. HOW ON EARTH CAN THEY SAY IM NIT LOOKING FOR WORK?!?! I am working 16 hours a week voluntarily to try n get some experience etc,,, i don’t receive a single penny for this and drive 24 miles a day there n back - but I am LOVING it there, its fantastic! But now i feel I cannot do the job feeling so worried and poorly al the time!

Also, am type 1 diabetic, and my little one is just turned 7 years old and they've left me without money for four weeks?!?! I WILL appeal. I have asked for reconsideration but apparently this takes weeks, I was told I must fill in a form to receive "hardship payment" of 60% of my JSA.... It's been refused cos this is a punishment! I only know this cos i rang them Friday - they STILL haven’t written to me not even once to tell me about the stop in benefits OR the hardship refusal!!!!  This is NOT A PUNISHMENT it is purely and simply cruelty, I cannot eat properly and so I'm now poorly and will end up in hospital if I don't eat properly soon. My daughter is eating toast and is also poorly and off school meaning I haven’t been into work placement for 3 days this last week! Terrified I’m gong to be in even more trouble,,, but we have both been ill, sickness bug etc! ,,, I am worried sick as I can't buy gas, electric, food or pay a single bill. What they've done is disgusting in my opinion!!!!!! To top it off, they've informed the council I'm not claiming JSA so guess what? They've stopped my rent and council tax benefit payments too,,, this is utterly distressing and I can't take much more!!!  I've applied for reconsideration, took them five mins to decide I'm not getting a single penny...It’s Going to take them up to 26 weeks to re consider this?!?! Only THEN can I appeal if they still refuse payment,,,, then if I appeal it may take 6 ,moths for this to go through!!! In the meantime what the hell do I live on? My bills are going unpaid and I haven't a penny left, yet I STILL have to pay to travel to sign on,,,,

How do I pay the rent? Pay bills? Buy food? Etc,,, , I NEED and WANT a job so much,,, I am a perfect example of a desperate single parent getting trodden on at every angle.... Who will look after Kira when I'm in hospital with Ketoacidosis from not eating enough/properly? I could die if I get this. It's happened before?!?! I almost died and went to 7 stones in weight from 10! This is a medical condition which IS life threatening!   It's so easy to judge single mums telling us "get a job" and saying things like "they've got it easy" etc etc. well it's so not easy and now I'm constantly in tears, desperate to be treated like everyone else who claimed benefits cos they have to!!!  Citizens advice can't help,,,, they said they're tightening up on people who aren't bothering to look for work,,,, but I AM LOOKING FOR WORK, I'm WANT to work!!!!!

This ONE WOMAN at the job centre has single-handedly ruined everything in my life! No money, food, Cannot pay any bills, my rent and now soon to be homeless and no car for work!!!!!!!!

PS: This isn't uncommon to find certain individuals who take a delight in showing what power they hold over others, especially at the DWP and HMRC.   One we came across is at the Chichester Jobcentre called SUSIE (we'll find out the surname) who start off all wonderful and smiling before they turn and pounce.  They often have no comprehension of what they're doing and are single-minded in doing their masters bidding to the letter and beyond.  The above case has sickened many by what we saw of the replies, and they were unlikely to be the rich middle class as they don't really care at all one way or the other.

The above case is the reason why we go after an organisation like this, and we'll keep on going after them, so if anyone has a similar case please contact us via our e-mail corruptionseeker@hotmail.com

 

AND FOR GOOD MEASURE AND SUPPORT TO THE ABOVE -- GET A LOOK AT THIS:

 

Benefit claimants take to social media to describe DWP ‘hell’ and ‘abuse’

By John Pring Disability News Service 4th May 2017

Disabled people have described how the “terrifying” and “abusive” benefit assessments delivered by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have seriously damaged their health, and how its failings will affect how they vote in next month’s general election. The discussion on the social media platform Twitter was the first major event organised by the new user-led campaign to enable disabled people to become a major political force in the UK, and help decide the election.

One contributor to the discussion, Hazel Fairs (@Hazel_Fairs), said the benefits assessment process had been “hell”, and added: “It made me suicidal. It’s like having an insulting abusive controlling ex with the power to starve and evict you.”

Payton Quinn (@PaytonQuinn) said the benefits assessment process had been “difficult and exhausting”

Jen Byrd (@jenjenbyrd) tweeted: “Assessor had a sweet, caring face on….. while writing inaccuracies and (purposeful?) misrepresentations.

Juliette Gazzard (@juliettegazzard) said her dealings with DWP “drove me to a suicide attempt, panic state I have never recovered from. Live in constant fear of contact with DWP.”

Eleanor Lisney, disability activist - “We need to vote in order to get a chance to survive the future onslaught on our human rights.”

 

PS: You will get told that they are doing this to eliminate fraud and only want the needy to get what's due, but considering we've already found out they are claiming to be understaffed, we see they cannot afford time to be human, and what's more, the are culpable in these criminal cases of distress and abuse.

See this article:

'We have no time to care say the DWP staff'

Despite there being laws in place on public bodies 'having a duty of care' the DWP tell their staff 'you have no time to care about the disabled or able-bodied jobseekers' according to an item posted on the Interweb.  That explains in cold terms what a DWP spokesman thinks of their so-called customers.  He added  'It is important we provide an effective service to manage the scale of our business'  Yes, that's how they see it, and they're as ruthless as any other such Dictator in this field.... but they don't have any money in it, all what they do and pay out is the tax payers money, which they spend at an alarming rate, looking after themselves.  One Jobcentre employee said 'This kind of attitude to claimants will continue presumably until the government finally finds a way to end benefits entirely, at which point our sick and disabled will be left with nothing!'         (20/8/2016)

 

'Decision Makers? Resolution Managers, who are they?'

According to the claimants who unfortunately have to look at some of their 'bias' and obviously tainted conclusions, we have one here:

Simon says:

October 22, 2017 at 10:37 PM

Subject: ESA Assessment

The reality is that these "assessments" are a total sham, where you have so called "trained medical professionals" deliberately lie to save the state a few extra £'s. The DWP's "decision makers" aren't much better. When the "decision maker" phoned me on September22nd last year he asked me if there had been any changes in my circumstances and health to which I informed that the 21st September the day before) I had been diagnosed with not only PTSD, but also Complex PTSD and intrusive thoughts OCD. Imagine my surprise then, upon receiving a copy of my report where the "decision maker" states "Mr (removed) informed me that there had been no change in his circumstances". I fail to understand how the "decision maker" could state that there had been no changes in my conditions when actually there had been 2 very big changes. The sad fact is that incidents like this are happening to a lot of people, and disabled people are losing their lies due to the incompetence and fraud being committed by so called "health professionals", and the blatant lies being told by the DWP's "decision makers".

 

The DWP’s ‘Work Coach’ defined

I once attended a talk by a DWP employee on Universal Credit. There was a power point presentation that looked like it had been made by someone who had never seen one before. The term “benefits assessment unit” was used where “family” would have been more appropriate. But best of all there was this gem: “Of course, your job will be obsolete because the government is making the benefits system so much simpler” Perhaps, he suggested, we could give our clients job search advice instead.  For the uninitiated, “Work Coach” is the term used by the DWP to describe the people who oversee signing on, police job-searches and refer petty misdemeanours (arriving a few minutes late, not filling in a job search record properly, applying for too few jobs) through to decision makers to consider a sanction. They were previously known as “personal advisors”. Both terms are misleading. They neither “coach” nor “advise”.  as elsewhere a very large proportion of food need is caused by the mistakes, maladministration or deliberate cruelty of the DWP. There is also a completely separate pilot scheme, in the Lalley Welcome Centre in Manchester, involving DWP “work coaches.” The project is in its early days and no information is available on its effectiveness.  The Lalley project is very much beloved by the government at the moment. The project originates in a letter from Sister Rita at Lalley to Ian Duncan Smith, suggesting that he make DWP workers available to the service. This rather audacious request was enthusiastically taken up by Mr. Duncan-Smith who not only provided the workers but also announced his intention to extend the project to Food Banks nationwide.  It will be worth watching this project very closely as it will no doubt be trotted out to justify government policy down the line.

Behind the double standard is a Victorian morality. The poor should just accept what they’re given whether that’s benefits sanctions, baked beans, or pious advice on getting a job. Meanwhile 16% of jobseekers have been sanctioned in the past year. Hardly anyone challenges a sanction but of those who do 60% see their decision overturned. It’s no wonder an experienced Welfare Rights worker can reduce hunger by 65%. Knowledge is a weapon in the class war, and the Tories want to see us disarmed.

(B. Caledonia)

 

'DWP Treat over 60's Claimant with no respect'

60 Year old David Coe actually 'died for ten minutes' due to the Jobcentre and DWP who contributed to this on finding that they had cut his disability allowance down to twenty pounds a week.  He had been told by callous staff at the centre that he was fit for work and that his benefit had been cut.  Even in the face of a court, these civil servants ignored their ruling which said 'being forced to work would result in a 'substantial risk of further deterioration to his health'   David Coe suffered the heart attack as he made his way home from the Jobcentre.  He actually appealed against the Jobcentre's decision and at a First Tier Tribunal they ruled in his favour.  Yet disregarded the system in place to see that fairness was arrived at.  This shows an absolute contempt of the Law, and Mr Coe's age and circumstances.    (January 2018)

 

 Case 2.   A Conelly

I am 61 years of age and have been disabled for many years i received a form to complete for ESA. that went missing, I sent in a second and got an appointment to attend for a medical i telephoned both dwp and the centre stating i could not leave the house and stressed to make a note that i had telephoned on several occasions stating i could not attend i was told to send in a letter from my GP. who charges £25 to do a letter my c.p.n. who is over loaded with work kindly agreed to write on my behalf i have received a letter wanting to know why i failed to attend. i have phoned dwp who blamed the medical assessment centre i telephoned the medical centre and they blamed dwp. both stated there was no notes taken of my calls despite my repeated requests to do so after a previous dispute with dwp.
all forms to dwp have to be sent by registered mail so dwp cannot deny they did not receive them. as i had no money yesterday to post back the "why did you not attend letter" my carer handed it into the local job centre and the female who was to busy chatting away to the security guard in an
empty office eventually took it off her with a look of utter distain and said il put it in the internal mail. i have been told i will have to go through this till i am 66 if i live that long, hopefully i don’t because it is quite obvious i am just a burden on the welfare state , i also don’t believe anyone who deals with these posts reads, answers or cares about us just another P.R. EXERCISE from the so called "listening caring government"

 

'Case 3 -- Another victim who died this time!'

CULPABILITY most certainly, Lawrence Bond 56, suffered an heart attack in the street after leaving KENTISH TOWN JOBCENTRE, and died on the pavement as people tried to give help.  No doubt the Jobcentre were pleased that they could close his claim!   Despite all of his medical problems, the DWP ruled him 'fit to work'....and the report says he actually appealed twice had had both appeals turned down!  (Jan 18/2017)

 

'Ignorance is bliss at the DWP'

We're often told by the DWP 'There's lots of jobs out there' and claimants are told to keep applying for almost anything, even jobs that don't suit them, because the government's attitude is 'lets get them off benefit and into work'  What they don't tell anyone is here in a report we picked up on --  Many Jobseekers have to wait almost a month for the interview process to finish which leads to frustration.  The Job Site Glassdoor did a survey of 700 adults seeking jobs through the Internet etc, were frustrated about cancelling or postponing interviews, not having enough information about a job and managers who did not respond quickly to applications.  They all said quicker decisions would help them in their job search, but this wasn't happening with most of the jobs they replied to, and that the Jobcentres said this wasn't something they could help with as it wasn't in their remit.....'We just want you to apply to as many jobs as you can, that's our part' said one officer wishing not to be known.  (Sept 2018)

 

'Threatening letters are a priority at the DWP and Jobcentres'

THE DWP didn't tell 41 year old Maggie why she was 'fit for work' and live on less money.  Her health conditions had not changed and her health support services had been cut.  No reasons were given in the letter from the DWP.  She rang them and requested a list from them explaining the reasons for the decision made.  In reply to this, they told her that they would mail her the letter without delay.  Three weeks lapsed and this explanation never arrived, despite the fact she needed it urgently so that she could challenge the decisions through the proper channels.  But strangely, the DWP was able to send other post to Maggie during those three weeks, which told her in no uncertain terms that she 'must turn up at the Jobcentre for work-related interviews or risk losing her benefits and be sanctioned.   Obviously, they have no problem in making a 'threatening letter' a priority.....and sadly, this system works well among these civil servants....as they bullishly pursue this 'Into work by fair means or foul'          (article - Nov/2017)

 

DWP CIVIL SERVICE MOST COMPLAINED ABOUT

A total of 143 Code complaints have been examined by the Commission since April 2014, eleven (7.7%) of which were investigated and four (2.7%) of which resulted in findings of Code breaches. The most complained about Department was the DWP. The Commission has examined 30 complaints by civil servants about the DWP since 2014.  The Commission’s investigative procedure is variable. It appears reluctant to make findings of whistleblower reprisal. Even in a most egregious case of whistle blowing about suspected criminality in contract handling at the MoD, the Commission only criticised the poor whistle blowing governance but refrained from a finding of reprisal. It appears that whistleblowers in the civil service may get a promise of ‘better governance jam tomorrow’ but limited recognition of personal injustice, which can have a chilling effect on culture.

By Dr Minh Alexander NHS whistleblower and former consultant psychiatrist 19 February 2019

 

'Sanctioned claimants finally get their withheld payments'

After holding out against common sense and criticism, the DWP have finally issued 73,000 extra payments to universal credit claimants who faced hardship and poverty because they were sanctioned in 2018.  These barbaric decisions were handed out by jobcentre civil servants because some of this 8% of the 938,000 universal credit cases had been deemed to have breached their claimant commitments, which left them unable to pay for necessities such as food, heating and hygiene needs (of which we have many such cases on this site).  Frank Field MP chairman of the Commons Work and Pensions Committee had made his views known on this and said it was about time.   (29/10/2019)

 

'Church Group find DWP subject shocking'

A local Church Group in West Sussex found out 'all too real' the extent of the DWP meanness and humiliation they deposited on claimants when they chose for their weekly subject 'Benefits and the People on them' which was presented in a short video for the 20 or so aged church people who were anxious to discuss and see the situation for themselves.  It featured a young man who tried to get a job in so many ways while facing criticism and threats from the staff at the Jobcentre.  It culminated in a final scene where the young man lost his reasoning and will resulting in him being made fun of as a crowd watched him pitching for attention and a job in almost begging fashion.  We here were glad to supply the group with more info on the DWP after being consulted by one of the group which enabled them to get an exact picture of what was going on with claimants and the hostile environment the Jobcentre often stooped to in order to 'force' claimants into anything whilst doing very little to really help these people get a fair deal. The group were shocked as to why a government could allow such a campaign in the form of the DWP do this kind of thing to the less well off, and individuals within the group who had heard rumours about the Jobcentre and DWP were appalled to find out that it was more than they expected.       (so if you want any info just contact corruptionseeker@hotmail.com)

 

'Duncan - Smith is not the good guy he claims'

Under his review of the DWP as Minister, he inflicted a charge on those that were stripped of benefits to fight the decision in an appeals court with an independent judge present.  This came as a report that revealed that more than half of the 874,850 jobseekers allowance claimants who had their benefits automatically stripped in the last year were for low-level problems like missing an appointment at the Jobcentre.  The proposed charge which would hit 1000's of poor people relying on benefits, aims to raise money for the government found in a leaked internal efficiency review.  The charge up to £250 to lodge an appeal at an Employment Tribunal would take it out of reach of the many JSA claimants on a sanction -- and it was suggested that Duncan-Smith well knew this, and that it was probably his idea to use this as a prevention, and a stick to beat them with.  Such is the Iain Duncan-Smith ideology.'  (21/2/2014)

NB: DUNCAN-SMITH was defeated in the court over breaching Article 6 OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT and in his arrogance launched an appeal against it and lost for a second time?     (full article further down this page)

Also see article 'Government reluctantly agree to falsehood statements on Jobcentre strategies it denied involving the DWP'  a Union Boss called Duncan-Smith a 'liar' after he was heard on a radio show interview?

Tory MP Iain Duncan Smith’s shameless lie on US TV.

 Former Tory leader and Hard-Brexiter Iain Duncan Smith was interviewed by US TV network Bloomberg yesterday, when he said all polls suggest that “the vast majority (of British people) want to get out now, even if they voted Remain” and that “majority are happy to go out without” a Brexit deal.”

People who wilfully mislead their fellow citizens by pretending that they are speaking truth, by virtue of their positions in society, should be brought to book.

By Charlie Mullins OBE

STILL UNREFORMED -- DUNCAN-SMITH SUGGESTS PENSIONS SHOULD NOT BE PAID UNTIL 75!

Yes, this man who hit out at the unemployed as now come up with another scheme to take away money from the Public, this time it's the pensioners.  the so-called 'Centre for Social Justice' think tank led by TORY IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH says that the state pension age should rise to 70 by 2028 and 75 by 2035. (which isn't definite) because he claims that thousands of people aged 50 to 64 are 'economically inactive' and help older people 'access the benefits of work' by providing support and training opportunities.  Something familiar here? and it's Smith up to his old tricks of reducing opportunities and making people pay into the system until they drop....whilst contributing to a pension they are never going to receive!         (19/8/2019)

 

'DWP in 'Dirty Tricks' row over abusive comments'

The components here are a warning about IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH DWP MINISTER and a pc used for abuse next door to the DWP Headquarters!  The Dirty Tricks Mob are out and about in the halls of Government, and everything points to a pseudonym being used by someone in the Tory Party within the DWP.  In this instance a row broke out over abusive comments made to, and about a disabled MP.  It arrived in the form of an anonymous comment attacking a former Labour MP who happens to be disabled.  It was posted on the DNS website in response to an interview with Dame Anne Begg, who lost her seat in the 2015 General Election.                                                                                                          Dame Begg was heavily critical of the Conservatives, especially the DWP Minister IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH.  She feared that the disabled would bear the brunt of a new wave of benefit cuts to The Social Welfare Budget, and with a Tory manifesto pledging to cut it further with another £12 billion of 'savings.  Dame Begg was a former chairperson on THe Commons Work and Pensions Select Committee, whose reports held the DWP and Iain Duncan-Smith to account over the Coalition's Welfare Reforms.   She tweeted a link to the Guardian News on Iain Duncan-Smith being re-appointed as Work and Pensions Secretary who would be in charge of making sure that plans to cut £12 billion from the benefits bill would go through under his authority.  She added the comment 'Be Afraid, Be very Afraid'    It was found by the help of a techie, that the abuser used a laptop computer to send the message from the area of the Methodist Central Hall, which is right next door to the DWP Headquarters in Tothill street, London.   (22/5/2015)                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

'Former DWP Ministers could face a police investigation?'

This directly goes to MP's IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH and CHRIS GRAYLING MP and Minister who both ran the DWP.  Both MP's are to be looked at by the police after a complaint was lodged against both politicians.  This comes from the Police in Scotland who are assessing whether to launch a criminal investigation into their handling of the nicknamed 'Disability fit-to-work Tests'    Activist John Mc Ardle lodged a complaint with the police in March against both ex-DWP Ministers, he accuses them both of ignoring a coroner's concerns about the safety of the tests, which are used to determine whether a disabled person receives benefits.  He also produced a list of suicides brought on by their actions and policies.    (May 7th 2016)

NB: Sadly, both of these politicians have not been charged or taken to task, and the police dropped this on the orders of?

More on Minister Grayling below

'DWP Minister Grayling introduces court charges to claimants seeking justice'

CHRIS GRAYLING dealt a cruel blow to all benefit claimants in 2013 as he introduced fees to be charged for employment tribunals which means justice will be denied to very poorest who will not be able to afford the fees and hence, the state will win (as he knew they would).  Luckily the Courts did not agree with this move by the Conservative Minister, and the fees were ruled as unlawful, which resulted in them having to repay people who had been charged.

Grayling admits misleading parliament as JR reforms defeated again

10 December 2014   the government has lost another two votes in the House of Lords on judicial review reform – as it emerged that lord chancellor Chris Grayling has admitted misleading the House of Commons during a debate last week. Crossbencher Lord Pannick persuaded enough Conservative and Liberal Democrat peers to rebel against the government last night on the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill. Pannick’s proposed amendments introduced judicial discretion over what financial information applicants should disclose and whether to grant permission in certain cases. All three were backed by peers and will return to the House of Commons for further consideration, probably after Christmas. But during yesterday’s debate it emerged that Grayling had given wrong information during the course of discussions on 1 December in the Commons.

'Minister Grayling accused of avoiding rail fury by taking a convenient trip'

TORY TRANSPORT MINISTER CHRIS GRAYLING seems to learn this term of avoidance well, and just as the rail fares went up he was nowhere to be seen.  Many see this as cowardly, but the government said he was on a trip to Qatar....to do what?                                                                 The Transport Secretary's visit to Qatar  and Turkey conveniently got him out of the way of angry train commuters who on that very day faced huge rises in their travel costs.  But this isn't the first convenient disappearance, commuters in the strike ridden south have had their travel disrupted for almost two years without any meaningful intervention from Chris Grayling, he merely comments on how awful it is and then no more, he's more or less allowed this strike to carry on regardless.  And as we can see from the above article he was a DWP minister who did nothing for the claimants but make things harder for them, much in the same way he's treated rail passengers on Southern Rail.

'Grayling is accused of Misleading the Public'

In a report on the state of the Railway, The NAO accused the Transport Secretary of misleading the public when he gave reasons for the cancelled rail upgrade.  They said his explanation was not the true reason when he said they would not be proceeding with three major rail-electrifying projects following an investigation into the cancellation.    The National Audit Office said the reason was entirely financial!

'Grayling uses the word 'help' as he targets 500,000 for work at the DWP'

100.000's was the initial quote as CHRIS GRAYLING MP was the Minister in charge of the DWP.  He says he ought to have had this job years ago.  'I shall break down Britain's Incapacity Benefit Culture for the next three years' he said during an interview.  And in true Iain Duncan-Smith fashion, he said  'There are hundreds of thousands of people young and old who have been claiming benefit for a decade and a half' presumably written out for him by the usual DWP money men before he did the interview and yet another statement saying this ' We shall be re-assessing 1.6 million people over the next three years.'

'Grayling undermines the law and legal aid'

Several leading British barristers have warned that reforms of the legal aid system by Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary would seriously undermine the rule of law.  (29/5/2013)

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, 90 QCs have condemned the government’s proposals restricting the judicial review process as “unjust”. They suggested that “conscientious and dedicated” public law firms faced the risk of going out of business.

'Grayling was accused of not listening to the electorate'

A recent report criticised The Transport Minister yet again by the public in the North of England for disappointing them and showing no interest in their frustration caused by the Tory Government.  They have repeatedly brought to his attention the lack of investment in the Northern rail network, and accused him of having 'a tin ear' to constituents during transport questions in the House of Commons.  He claims he is 'actively working to improve things' 

PS. It's a pity all this energy was never put into solving the Southern Rail strikes with has lasted well over 19 months, especially as he's the Transport Minister?

Grayling defends giving Brexit ferry contract to company with no ships

Chris Grayling has defended his decision to award a £13.8m contract to charter extra ferries to a “start-up” company that has no ships, as part of no-deal Brexit preparations. The local Conservative councillor Paul Messenger was the first to raise concern in public about awarding such a lucrative contract to a firm with no prior experience. “It has no ships and no trading history so how can due diligence be done?” he told the BBC.  He said the company had not moved “a single truck in their entire history … I don’t understand the logic of that”

One hell of an operator eh?  a thorough Tory!...................In February 2019, the plan is abandoned even though they were paid!

'Calls for Grayling to stand down' ministers in the House are becoming alarmed with the fiascos following Chris Grayling MP, and the recent Ferry incident and his handling of a £13.8 million contract he awarded to Seaborne Freight to provide ferry services, is now cancelled, and it is very public that this firm had no ships, no experience in the sector, and it was ditched by its backer, Arklow Shipping an Irish company.  Mr Grayling claimed no money had been spent from the public purse during the process, but a report from the National Audit Office contradicts that claim by revealing it had cost £800,000 in consultancy fees...and Grayling calls this nothing?

'MP Chris Grayling wishes to limit the Freedom of Information'

It became quite apparent that Minister Chris Grayling is not a defender of 'people power' and like a lot of Tory Ministers, believes that the Freedom of Information Act should have curbs that prevent requests from people and mainly journalists from using information as a research tool.  He lashed out at journalists saying that they were 'misusing' the act for stories.  He also 'laughingly' came up with this bit of nonsense - 'that it was useful for those who want to understand why and how government is taking decisions'..... and if one reads many of the cases on this site, one can see how 'open and transparent' they are not!

NB: Luckily, a following report said that the government had retreated on F.O.I. curbs, and they will not be changing things for Mr Grayling.

'Grayling still trashing taxpayers money'

It's incredible that this Tory Minister smiles and walks away unscathed by the bills he lands in the taxpayers domain.  Whilst the Tories are ruthlessly squeezing the poor, unemployed and low earners, CHRIS GRAYLING MP is cited as being responsible for a £33 million bill to the taxpayer as a result of a settlement in a court case launched by EURO TUNNEL.  Apart from that he was also involved in two other fiascos that failed and cost the taxpayer: £500 million was lost in his reformed probation services when he was Justice Minister, which was scrapped because it didn't work and The National Audit Office confirmed it.  He also brought a move in the prisons to 'restrict books to prisoners'  But despite this Theresa May 'has complete confidence' in him, and mate Matt Hancock is covering him with amazing glory and back up!

'Grayling costs taxpayers £467 million over Probation Policy'

It has just now been revealed that Grayling in his guise of 'Justice Minister'  has left the British Public with a massive bill of £467 million over his failed probation system for the supervision of thousands of criminals in a worse position than before he took measures to improve it.  It was designed to reduce re-offending....but it never worked out and the Public Accounts Committee's report has made public what is now a huge financial loss to the taxpayer.  (3/5/2019)

 

'House of Commons and the secrecy over assault case'

You should not be fooled by the 'Government Press Office' and their statements of 'openness and thorough investigations' these are mostly sound bites and insincere propaganda' thought up to pacify onlookers.  The report we feature here says that the matter was 'brushed under the carpet' by officials at the House of Commons in a bid to protect MP's.  Lisa Whittaker a former Committee Assistant says she was assaulted by an MP and then stalked by him.  She approached the body who are supposed to look into misconduct and found that they had little interest in the bullying and harassment, and having reported it found that nothing was done.  She started working for the European Scrutiny Committee in 1993 and over the years she was expected to tolerate 'low level harassment' as part of the job.   (October 2018)

 

Fury over taxpayer gold card cover-up: Ministers blame head of the Civil Service.

Ministers are locked in an extraordinary power battle with Britain’s most senior civil servant over the scandal of taxpayer-funded credit cards. Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell is being blamed by key members of the Government for blocking moves to reveal the true extent of spending on the cards, which are given to officials to pay for their ‘expenses’. Ministers fear a cloak of secrecy is being used to conceal widespread abuse of the £1 billion of public money spent on the cards every year. Some officials have already been caught using them for personal items such as hamburgers or supermarket shopping trips – but the real number of culprits is suspected to be far higher. About 140,000 Government Procurement Cards (GPC) are in circulation, and any bills lower than £1,000 a month are not routinely audited. Now, amid growing public anger over the revelations, Whitehall finance mandarins have issued secret advice warning Ministers against publishing information that exposes exactly how much has been spent using the cards since their introduction in 1997. The advice says the Cabinet Office opposes the release of backdated information, including the identity of cardholders, as it would be a ‘poor use of resources’. The row coincides with the release today of bank statements revealing how officials at the Commons racked up a £1.5 million bill on taxpayer-funded credit cards over the past three years. The list of nearly 4,000 purchases, released under Freedom of Information rules, includes £3,700 on The Claridges hotel in New Delhi and almost £200 on French lessons. ‘We are convinced there has been an abuse of this perk on the scale of the MPs’ expenses scandal, but the Cabinet Office has resisted at every turn. And it has been made clear to us that Sir Gus is not on our side.’ 

 

'Expenses Scandal still rides on in 2018'

Once assured by the government that it would be cleared up, a new report suggests that all that happened to it was 'the carpet treatment' and a good Tory Brush!   Apparently, The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner is to be 'urged' to identify those under investigation....but in the light of 'a review of the Commons Complaints Procedures' brought in by The Conservatives, new rules introduced this summer says that MP's accused of expenses fraud or bullying, 'can no longer be identified'    Therefore it is not surprising that campaigners for transparency are calling this 'a Cover Up'.....and it was noticed that a website which held a list of names under investigation just vanished from public view on the day they changed the rules!      (18/10/2018)

PS: It comes as no surprise to find the Tories hiding facts from the Public.......they once claimed to be 'Clear' and 'Accountable'   this says it all!

'CLAIMS EVEN HIGHER BY MP's TEN YEARS ON FROM THE SCANDAL'

A New Report says that MP's expenses claims are climbing despite the scandal, it was £116 million in 2017-2018 compared with £95.6 million in 2008- 2009 which is an increase of 21%, and these figures were released from the Parliamentary Standards Authority.   (2019)

 

'Political Candidate not charged over ballot rigging'

A storm erupted in Political circles when it was revealed that the Met Police had not charged the candidate for Mayor, LUTFUR RAHMAN who was booted out of office for rigging the ballot to become the Mayor of Tower Hamlets.  To their surprise, even The Election Court had found him guilty of 'fixing' the ballot to become the Mayor.  It was pointed out by the Election Court and the London Assembly's Police and Crime Committee that there was widespread concern that despite the obvious no charges had been brought by the Met Police who were required to investigate allegations of electoral fraud and malpractice.     (see full report in Featured Cops')         (11/3/2017)

PS: It was pointed out that this was a criminal offence, so how is it the Law changes in regard to politics and who can be charged?

 

'The scandal of the Assembly Candidate and Welsh Secretary of State'

THIS IS YET ANOTHER CONSERVATIVE SCANDAL, one they are anxious to kick into the long grass, as Tory Faithfull's try to make light of this and make out there's been nothing really wrong.  This is the scandal of ALUN CAIRNS who has now resigned as the Secretary of State following the revelation of a trial that was 'scuppered' by a man he backed for a position in the Welsh Assembly....a ROSS ENGLAND who got his seat on the assembly despite wrecking a trial, and was then suspended after news broke on what he had been up to and his honesty questioned.  Moving back to Mr Cairns, we now hear that proof exists that he 'lied' over what he knew about the row involving England and consistently denied it......until he resigned today, the 6th of November 2019.  In some ways Mr Cairns is escaping the questions that he should be answering, and no doubt his conservative friends in Cabinet and elsewhere will applaud this.  BBC Wales sent an e-mail to Mr Cairns about the court events before Mr England was actually chosen as a candidate?.....and what lies behind all this, basically, the rape victim suffered a terrible blow when the 'honourable' Mr England got up in the witness box and made changes to his statement even though he had discussions with the lawyers.... very damaging statements.....the Trial Judge Stephen Hopkins QC was so annoyed that he told Mr England --' You have managed single-handedly, and I have no doubt it was deliberate on your part, to sabotage this trial'  --- and concluded by telling him to get out of his court.    (5/11/2019 and 6/11/2019)

 

'Conservative Official convicted of Expenses Fraud'

CONSERVATIVE PARTY OFFICIAL MARIAN LITTLE was convicted of falsifying election expenses for the campaign at South Thanet in 2015 when they were trying to prevent UKIP from winning the seat.  She appeared at Southwark Crown Court with Tory MP Craig Mackinlay who was 'acquitted' even though he featured heavily in the campaign with other Tory big guns in Thanet.  It says that Little worked with the Tories since 1974 and became quite a player in the Conservative Campaigns.  The Report said that 60,000 pounds in staffing expenses including hotels and advertising went undeclared.  The Trial Judge handed her a suspended jail sentence of 9 months and said it should have been an instant prison sentence, but as she cared for her husband who has cancer he allowed the suspended term.  He also told the Jury that ' the law was simply abandoned as the Conservatives set out to fend off Mr Farage and UKIP'      (2018)

PS: She couldn't have carried out this fraud on her own, there had to be others, but they will not be caught or revealed!

 

'DWP at the root of many new depression cases, and mental anguish'

Having carried out our own survey by trawling through hundreds of blogs and forums involved with complaints and cases against cruelty inflicted by the system that fraudulently claims to help, we saw a familiar pattern of abuse and civil service 'You do this or?' attitude from those who claim they are obligated to follow the Government rules, and claim they have no room to make a decision without the authority of a line manager of another department.  We have cases on this site of suicide, and not all of them by any means.  We contacted a doctor who admitted that some of his most recent patients were suffering moderate to acute depression due to signing on at a Jobcentre where they feel intimidated and bossed around like children.  The latter being quite common, and again, we have many such selected cases on this site of this happening.  The DWP dismiss this out of hand and pretend it is nothing to do with them, which is a typical Tory response to the activities they back which is intended to demoralise the less well off.  One should always remember that they are the party of the rich, and they pander to the rich and very rich almost exclusively.  They were taken to task several times over the 'Sanctions' but they are still there in the DWP policy and they are being used to frighten, harass, and de-humanise a claimant who either 'fights back'  'questions their authority' or 'does not co-operate fully'    On one case of a DWP compliance operator, she can be heard saying' Well, if you come into the office for the interview, we can talk about re-instating your benefits'  no promise or guarantees.  She says 'talk' and talk is cheap as we all know.  Even if that interview leads to the reinstatement of benefits, that will not happen straight away, we found out that it could take up to two weeks, and that claimant will be paying a high price both mentally and health wise in being 'accepted by this officer'  who in fact has breached this person's human rights.  We asked the GP if he passes on this alarming situation to the Government,  firstly he said they never ask, and then said he wasn't obliged to communicate privileged information on his patients according to confidentiality and Data Protection Laws.  Having looked at this factor, we now understand why the DWP and Government are getting away with what they are inflicting, and until the Medical Profession stop ignoring this and launch their own official investigation, the Tory Government and Civil Service will get away with abuses last seen in the war.

 

'Cease and Desist Order against the DWP'

We came across this amazing 'recorded telephone call between a sanctioned claimant and DWP Compliance Officer, which rather answers some of the above facts.  We summarise this only as one really must seek this conversation out and listen to it.  'Claimant Mr Harper hands in a letter of complaint accusing the DWP of harassment against the named DWP Ofiicer MARIE CLARK in Halifax.  The incident is dated on the Internet as 11th September 2014 (still relevant now).  Mr Harper a claimant, did not allow Ms Clark to enter his house, at which stage he said his son was affected by her presence, because some of the conversation was done on the doorstep.  As a subsequence, she immediately instructed the Jobcentre boss, MARCUS, to stop his benefits.  Mr Harper then said he'd already issued a 'Cease and Desist' order at the time he made a complaint to the Jobcentre Manager Marcus at the Crossfield House, Halifax.  She said she was prepared to book him in for the meeting on Tuesday the next day when they could 'talk' about things.  Mr Harper said he didn't wish to have her at the meeting, and said he'd still not been told why his benefits had been stopped or sanctioned and wanted to know before being interviewed.  Ms Clark said another colleague would be selected, but at the moment they didn't have an available date, and that colleague would ring him to fix it.  Mr Harper levelled several allegations against her, which sound a bit muddled, but it was an intriguing conversation, and of course when you consider it, he's still left without any safety or benefits until they, the DWP decide to lift those sanctions...and as we've seen this could be weeks and it could severely affect the emotional stability of a claimant...and one wonders how they're getting away with such a thing in  2017/2018.

 

'DWP issued with notification by claimants'

In 2013 Claimant and Jobseeker Declan Heavey found it necessary to challenge the Secretary of State IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH after being ignored by the Bansbury Jobcentre who refused to give him reasons why his benefit payments had stopped without any prior warning.  Mr Heavey sent a pre-action letter involving the request for a Judicial Review.  He gave the Jobcentre 14 days to reply before going ahead on the legal side of things.  He also made a MF47 statement.  He says he only learned of the non-payment of his jobseekers allowance when he visited his Building Society.  Further to this they'd lost their dwelling due to other reasons, and he was looking to engage a solicitor to engage the services of Broadway Homelessness and Support, to help him acquire a safe address.  Upsetting as this is, it's clear that the DWP acted without compassion or due process to him and his wife, who informed them of their plight, and what they clearly did was let them down, and it's possible they breached their care of duty in this matter.   (18/6/2015)

 

'The DWP need to look at themselves, says former Care Worker'

Paige says:

October 22, 2017 at 03:56 PM

Subject: ESA Assessment

Well where do I start????? I originally was a care worker myself until my life took a unprecedented turn of events, and CCH actually made me homeless for having mental health problems even regardless of me never being a threat to anyone, having no criminal convictions or antisocial activity in my life before. I'm a well educated person who feels like I've been made ill and also made to think my perceptions are wrong in making that person out to be the problem itself when all these problems are caused by society and the system itself. I find these 'assessments' are completely false and it's actually making everyone worse. Not once have I come across anybody who says they had a good simple experience in taking a medical assessment. On my first ESA hearing I was booked into Marshall House at Preston who clearly weren't aware of their own opening and closing times when they booked my appointment as it was booked on a Sunday. I couldn't contact anybody and only realised at the last minute it was a Sunday not a Monday as I suffer with manic depression and social anxiety so I'm very forgetful although I didn't use to be. I started suffering from migraines and was told by my GP at the time I had depression when I was 15 a few years after losing my mother and it's been hard ever since. I also have been diagnosed with asthma since and this has also affected my life as I can't do sport anymore so I'm not as active as I used to be and so this has had a negative impact on my life too. I can only assume the asthma came from the hard and stressful life I've had to go through also. Back to the story of benefit hardship, I contacted DWP on the Monday and was told to write in a piece of paper my reason for not attending and so I wrote it was because the assessment centre was closed on the date I'd been booked in for and sent it that day. Later that week I received my p45 and they had ended my claim and said my reason wasn't good enough. A (removed) made this decision so in all facts show this was corrupt from the beginning and completely unnecessary. Myself, dog and cat were living off one food parcel a well for up to 14 weeks and this was the first time in my life I'd been forced to live like this all because of a decision someone 😡 made who didn't even know me. They affected my lifestyle and got away with it. This process is completely flawed and seems to me whatever people do, whether your in a job or on benefits or homeless you get harassed anyway. I've had more trouble on benefits than anything else in my life and honestly if I could go back to work I'd go now. That's all I did since high school and even while attending college I've always worked for others til the system chucked me to the bottom with the rest and now I'm classed as a liability. It's changed my view either way through experience. You c ant win either way. Judgement needs to end and people really need to start analysing this situation carefully because people are dying because of this. It's systematic abuse and leads straight to murder. We need to stop being ignorant. People need help now more than ever. Just to finalise I won the case but that's only because again as I've seen in a lot of other people's comments, third party organisations were involved as with me Mind and before that -Help The Homeless. God bless these organisations and all like them such as Shelter and Save The Children and all they do because they are the only organisations and networks of people that you can depend on to really help you when in dire need and don't know where to turn. Thank you for leaving no-one behind :) I'd like to mention also that the other side who made the decision didn't turn up at court (obviously), and in total the case lasted 5 minutes and the judge also said himself that in all his years as a judge for the past 14 years, this was the first case he'd ever seen where a citizen had been told to attend a medical assessment on a Sunday so my foot was already in the door. Still it all should never have happened and so forth for this main reason and others these 'assessments' should not go ahead in future for the sake of people's wellbeing unless you want even more illnesses with people so then they are stuck on these benefits for life and more deaths, suicides and abuse. The 'trained medical professionals' also need to learn how to smile too. Your supposed to be supporting people of all ages and types with mental and physical health issues, not mass murderers and psychopaths with no emotions for gods sake. I've heard of lots of people leaving their assessments early or afterwards crying their eyes out or having panic attacks. That's a good start to ruining anybody's progress they've already made with having, learning about and controlling the illness in the first place. They have enough on their mind to deal with everybody else's mis-preconceptions and judgements. That's other people's problems, they need to deal with that themselves.

 

'Scottish Minister Alex Neil's fury at DWP Bullying'

ALEX NEIL, Scotland's SOCIAL JUSTICE MINISTER came out against the DWP over the Case of STUART CHESTER who has Downs Syndrome and cannot do anything for himself.  It was revealed that the local jobcentre and DWP were trying to get him on a work programme, and that it was reaching the bullying stage.  Stuart's mother, Deborah, said, 'The Tory Government doesn't care that their system is killing people after their own figures revealed how 90 people a month are dying after being declared fit for work by assessments.'  Statistics obtained from a memo said that between December 2011 and February 2014, 2,380 people died after their claim for employment and support allowance ended because of a work capability assessment found they were fit for work.   Minister Alex Neil is calling on the people of Scotland to join him in his fight to have welfare powers devolved in order to put a stop to vulnerable people being victimised and families put on the breadline because of sanctions.    (30/9/2015)

 

'Jobcentre Worker fraudulently claims £27,000'

DWP JOBCENTRE WORKER DENISE KELLY decided that she would claim disability allowance, and made a claim that netted her £27,000 in payments.  She said she had trouble walking and suffered severe discomfort and had problems sleeping properly at home.  But colleagues at the centre saw her walking around the offices in high heels on many occasions when doing her job there.  She appeared before Liverpool Crown Court where it was said she banked the payments over a five year period after making a bogus claim in 2009.  She apparently refused to accept she acted dishonestly and only pleaded guilty to fraudulently claiming Disability Living Allowance.  The Judge remarked that being in a Jobcentre she knew all too well what she was up to.   She was given a six month prison sentence which was suspended for two years.  (7/9/2015)

 

'Channel 4 Despatches show exposes the DWP Assessors'

CIVIL SERVANTS of the Government and DWP who assess disabled claimants, were caught out by the investigative 'Despatches' programme on TV's Channel 4 who captured staff insulting disabled claimants.  The stark truth was revealed much to the annoyance of the DWP and Iain Duncan-Smith who later resigned from the Cabinet and his Minister's post.  As the nation watched one assessor said they were earning up to £20,000 a month by rushing through dozens of appointments.  Liz Sayce OBE top executive of Disability Rights UK was shocked to see and hear the rude and disparaging remarks made by the assessors who should be treating disabled claimants with respect.  She also witnessed how the PIP system was being abused by the assessors.  These harassments were being carried out by CAPITA, the firm contracted by the DWp who are desperate to reduce the massive £12 billion annual disability benefits bill, and thousands of current claimants have had their applications rejected.  The PIP assessment is a 35 page questionnaire document.  The TV programme witnessed breaches of the Data Protection Act by one assessor who was taking photos of the claimants details on the VU screen.  Capita were loathe to accept responsibility and said it would be looking into the matter, and they would take the appropriate action necessary.  (this video footage etc, can be seen on the internet if you just put the subtitle in the search box of Google.   April 2016)

PS:  Some eminent physicians watching even questioned the methods and qualifications of the medical staff carrying out the health checks.

 

'DWP's Contractor for assessments ATOS in payout for Maladministration'

The DWP who took on ATOS under contract as their benefit assessors, learned that the County Court in Huddersfield had awarded claimant, Vanessa Haley, 5,000 pounds over 'A Dishonest PIP Assessment'   She told the Court that the Assessor had tried to 'impede' her entitlement to the enhanced rate of the daily living component of PIP, by 'falsifying' her assessment report.  She said the Assessor 'constantly and repeatedly ignored her answers and evidence' in his report and misrepresented what he saw during the face-to-face assessment interview.  The Court upheld her claim of 'maladministration' against ATOS.       ATOS commented, 'We must reserve our position'  The DWP declined to make any comment on the case.    (21/12/2017)

 

'Insider tells it like it is'   (Assessment Interviews)

November 08, 2017 at 12:05 AM

Subject: ESA Assessment

I would like to make a few points. I am a telephone agent who answers the phone for the ESA benefit enquiry line.

customer rang and wanted to add to his mandatory reconsideration he had done via telephone a few days earlier so I sent the information to the Benefit Centre but they rejected it despite the fact it included information about how the customer was having suicidal thoughts.

customers are always saying the DWP decision makers written report doesn't reflect what happened in the assessment room and I think I know why. The healthcare professional (HCP) decides if the person meets the threshold for WRAG, Support Group or not entitled to ESA so the DWP decision maker appears to frame their decision around what the HCP has put in their report.

customers have been quizzed about their thoughts around self harm, suicide...even though this is very distressing for them it has still happened.

we hear time and time again of people with very serious conditions being forced to either make a new claim (sometimes these aren't accepted despite a new condition or a worsening condition being evidenced...I saw one where the decision maker didn't even ask for the evidence of the new/worse conditions, the DM just threw it out straight away).

The system to get customers in to the WCA is flawed, letters/forms are always going missing for various reasons. Some vulnerable people are bullied to let people use their properties for drugs etc...they remove the mail and therefore the customer loses their ESA for failing to attend a WCA. We need a far better system in place.

The decision making process needs to be a lot fairer and not weighted in the DWP's favour.    (George Miller 2017)

 

'They lied about me over and over again'      (the DWP Assessments)

This person who wished to remain anonymous said they suffered anxiety attacks, and this happened at the assessment (and pushed the stress level way up).  The Assessor was stone-faced and looked at the computer screen most of the time I was there.  Instead of questions about my mental health, she ignored this in favour of my physical well being and any problems I might have that could be relevant.  I had listed several concerns on the form but these were passed by and she did not ask any follow-up questions at all.  The result of the assessment led to me being moved down from the Support Group to The Work Related Activity Group.  So I rang the DWP, and a lady there read out the judgement, and I found they had lied about me over and over again.  It said I had no serious problems or that I feared to leave the house.....and I scored zero points! which has now forced me to ask for a mandatory reconsideration with the help of my doctor.   (10/11/2017) and this was on the forum board.

The Forum closed on the 10th of November 2017, and it had 2,827 responses from people going through distress or being badly treated!

 

Watchdog orders DWP to publish secret reports on Atos and Capita PIP failings

By Roisin Norris – Fri, 07 September 2018

The information commissioner has ordered the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to release documents that are likely to expose the widespread failings of two of its disability benefit assessment contractors.  DWP has been attempting to prevent the documents being released since receiving a Freedom of Information Act request from campaigner John Slater in December 2016  He said the documents – if and when they are eventually released – will reveal the truth about what DWP knows about Atos and Capita.  The reports include detailed “management information”, including the number of complaints made against assessors, what proportion of assessments led to claimants meeting the PIP criteria, and the average length of time taken for face-to-face assessments.  Slater, who works in programme and project management when he is not campaigning on issues around freedom of information, had asked DWP to provide copies of these reports for every month of 2016.  DWP has continued to try to block Slater’s request, initially claiming that it did not hold the information he had requested, before arguing that releasing the monthly reports would prejudice the “commercial interests” of Atos and Capita.  It later told the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) that releasing the information “will give rise to items being taken out of context… [and] will be misinterpreted in ways that could lead to reputational damage to both the Department and the PIP Providers”, and would “prejudice the efficient conduct of public affairs” by DWP.  “If the DWP cannot find a way to block or dodge this request (and they will try very hard to do this) this disclosure could reveal the full extent of the calamity that the PIP contract has visited on disabled people.

 

Court orders Atos to pay disabled woman £5,000 over dishonest PIP assessment  (Working for the DWP)

DECEMBER 21, 2017

A court has ruled that a disabled woman should be awarded £5,000 compensation by the government contractor Atos, after a dishonest report by one of its assessors led to her being awarded the wrong level of benefits. Vanessa Haley, from Huddersfield, told the county court in her written evidence that the assessor had tried to “impede her entitlement” to the enhanced rate of the daily living component of personal independence payment (PIP) by “falsifying” her assessment report. The assessment report also led to her being denied any PIP mobility support.   

She was awarded the compensation after the court upheld her claim of maladministration against Atos and her allegation that it was responsible for causing her health conditions to worsen.  The news of her court victory came as the minister for disabled people gave evidence to the Commons work and pensions committee yesterday (Wednesday), as part of its inquiry into the PIP and employment and support allowance assessment processes (see separate story).  Disability News Service has been investigating claims of dishonesty at the heart of the PIP assessment system for more than a year, and has heard from nearly 300 disabled people who have made such allegations.  Haley was previously on the lower rate of care and mobility for disability living allowance (DLA), but the impact of her multiple health conditions had worsened since her last DLA award in 2013.

The Atos assessor, a paramedic, visited the former teacher and film-maker at her home in January 2016 as part of her reassessment for PIP, which is gradually replacing working-age DLA.  But she told the court that he “consistently and repeatedly ignored” her answers and evidence in his report, and misrepresented what he saw during the face-to-face assessment.  One example she gave was that he described her as looking “well kempt and casually dressed”, when she had not washed her hair in 10 days and was wearing pyjamas and a dressing gown. He also said he had seen her “move her body around the sofa herself and raise her legs on and off the floor herself”, and claimed that she was able to “lay back and put her head against the sofa”. But she said she was seated when he came into the room and her legs were already up, and she only lifted them with her hands to put them on a cushion.

She said: “I tried to move myself but couldn’t as I don’t have the upper body strength. “My mum offered to lift me but she’s 73 and that’s not fair to her, so I sat in a great deal of pain for the rest of the assessment.  “I didn’t lay back either as my sofa doesn’t allow that, it’s a straight back.”  The assessor said that because of her movements on the sofa and because she said she could drive an automatic car – which he said “suggests adequate power and movement in her limbs and joints” – she was “able to move for more than 200 meters (sic) safely and reliably”. The assessor also claimed that she had been “able to recall all of her medical details and history without prompting or referring to written notes”, when she had actually had to pass a written list of her conditions to her mother to read out for her. The county court awarded Haley £5,000 when Atos failed to offer a defence to her claim for damages. She said she was “angry” that she and other disabled people were being “dismissed and lied about”, because “through no fault of our own we have found ourselves in unfortunate and reduced circumstances.  “We are constantly being lied about, repressed and vilified. Many disabled people have become even further isolated by this system and have lost much, if not all of their care.”

The DWP had nothing to say about this event though they were the paymasters, Atos claimed they hadn’t received the correct papers before the case went to court!

 

'INVALUABLE INFORMATION FOR 'PIP' CLAIMANTS'

THIS MAY BE USEFUL TO ANYONE WHO THE DWP HAVE TAKEN AWAY AN EXISTING TRIBUNAL AWARD...

*correct info - fight for yourself if they try to reduce your pip or take it away. They don't want you to know this.. confront them with this info and ask for reasons why it's been reduced if it is. They can't just do it now without giving you information to fight It. The field of dodgy assessments is levelling a bit.* thank you to all admin for clarifying this is correct and giving us the information. 

Pip/dwp

In decision CPIP/1623/2016, the Upper Tribunal has given two important new protections to people who have their PIP awards reviewed and then stopped by the DWP.

The decision will hopefully bring to an end a shocking abuse of the system by DWP.

FIRST NEW PROTECTION
Many people on PIP are told by DWP that they must have another face-to-face assessment before their existing PIP award has finished. Sometimes this happens up to a year before the finish date of their existing award. Up until now, DWP have treated this second face-to-face assessment as giving them complete freedom to change or end an award based purely on the opinions of the latest assessor.

The DWP and the assessor does not look at why the original award was made in the first place or say what has changed since the first award. The Upper Tribunal has now said that this is illegal. The UT accepted that Regulation 26 (of the Decisions and Appeals Regulations 2013) allows the DWP to supersede or change an existing award of PIP based on the medical evidence from an assessor. But the UT said that the DWP could only do this after considering all the relevant evidence including the previous award and why it was made. The UT was clear that the DWP cannot legally change or remove a PIP award on a snapshot assessment which doesn’t look back at the previous award as well. The Upper Tribunal then went further and said that the DWP must also give an adequate explanation of why an existing award has been reduced or stopped referring back to the previous award.

SECOND NEW PROTECTION 
In Regulation 11 of the PIP Regulations 2013, DWP gave themselves the power ‘at any time and for any reason’ to review all PIP awards, including those granted by Tribunals and to ‘determine’ or decide whether the award should continue. This power has been used by DWP to arbitrarily change and stop PIP awards, usually by requiring a new face-to-face assessment but sometimes just on their own say so. The Upper Tribunal has now said that DWP does not have this power. The UT accepts that the DWP has the power to determine or decide that in theory an award should reduce or stop, but they say that actually stopping the award has to be done under other legal powers set out in the separate Supersession and Appeal Regulations.

What that means is that DWP have to follow the same procedure as they do for reviews after a new assessment (First New Protection, above).

They have to consider all the relevant evidence including the previous award and why it was made, and also give an adequate explanation of why an existing award has been reduced or stopped referring back to the previous award. WHAT THIS MEANS FOR YOU What this means for you is that, when your PIP award is reviewed or changed for any reason, the DWP must look back at why they made the award in the first place and look at the evidence they used to make that award, including perhaps a more favourable assessment report or Tribunal decision.

If they do decide to reduce or remove your award, then they must say why they have done this given the evidence that you used to be entitled to an award. And of course you can appeal any decision if the DWP does not do any of this.

 

'Pensioner Wins against The DWP'

80 years old Eileen Knight fought hard against the 'cruelty' of the DWP when they cut her badly disabled son's benefit allowance.  She had dedicated her life to looking after him; Trevor was severely disabled and unable to read or write.  From their Wigan home, Eileen described the ruthlessness of the DWP as she challenged them over this following an Assessment for PIP.  The DWP following the report from the assessor ruled that Trevor didn't have any care or mobility needs, and as a result they removed his entitlement to benefit.  Unable to accept this, Eileen took the DWP to the Tribunal Court and fought in person to have her son's benefit reinstated.    The Tribunal found in Trevor's favour and ordered that his benefits be restored as well as 3,500 pounds in back payments.  The DWP said they had no comment! 

 

Why the DWP doesn't mind losing appeals

https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/3702-13-december-2017-update?utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Benefits and Work&utm_content=V1+December+13+2017+newsletter

Cost of Mandatory Reconsideration and Appeal to the DWP - £140

'Which explains why Sir Ernest Ryder, senior president of tribunals, recently told a gathering of barristers that most of the decisions that the DWP tries to defend at tribunals are so bad that they have no case at all and cannot hope to win.'

Confused?

'Because first the DWP refuse benefits to hundreds of thousands of people who are actually entitled to them.

Then they make all those who challenge the decision go through a dispiriting and generally hopeless reconsideration process, which costs the DWP very little

The DWP know from experience that the vast majority of claimants will be physically or emotionally unable to pursue their case all the way to a tribunal and will give up as soon as they realise that their mandatory reconsideration has been unsuccessful.

Others will drop out during the appeal process itself.

A small number will make it all the way to the appeal hearing and, in the majority of cases, leave the DWP unable to defend a clearly unjust decision.'

 

A Senior Judge Has Suggested Charging the Government for Every "No-Brainer" Benefits Case It Loses In Court

Sir Ernest Ryder, senior president of tribunals, said the quality of evidence provided by the Department for Work and Pensions is so poor it would be “wholly inadmissible” in any other court.  Britain’s most senior tribunal judge says most of the benefits cases that reach court are based on bad decisions where the Department for Work and Pensions has no case at all.  Sir Ernest Ryder, senior president of tribunals, also said the quality of evidence provided by the DWP is so poor it would be “wholly inadmissible” in any other court.  Ryder said his judges found that 60% of cases were “no-brainers” where there was nothing in the law or facts that would make the DWP win.  In an extraordinary outburst against what he said was the incompetence of the department, he said he and his fellow judges were so incensed by the volume of cases where there was “no justiciable defence to the appeal” that they were considering sending them back – or charging the DWP for the cases it loses. He said: “It's an inappropriate use of judicial resources, it's an inappropriate experience for the users, and the cost is simply not right.”  The percentage of cases lost by the DWP on appeal has been growing rapidly. In 2007, 44% of cases heard in the Social Security and Child Support tribunal went against the DWP. Ryder said the figures have now risen to a “staggering” 61%.  He said this was because in most instances the DWP simply had no case at all. “Just as an experiment in Leeds, my judges used their lunch hour to take the wall of paper files and go through them to see what the percentage of no-brainers might be,” Ryder said. “That is, [ones where] there could be no argument in law or on facts that the appellant wouldn't win. It was spot-on 60%.”  “In case management I could send back those cases to the DWP and say, 'You might as well remake them, because there is no argument that a tribunal could hear. There's no justiciable defence to the appeal.' Why don't I? That's the argument we're thinking about long and hard, because the appellant doesn't lose anything.”  He said claimants were needlessly put through “the stress of that day when actually at the end of the day (though they can't know it) they're bound to win”. Commenting on the poor quality of the DWP’s evidence, he said that after sitting in on one tribunal for a day, not one of the cases he saw had an assessment that was dated, named, or signed.  Ryder said the court typically did not “even know what the professional qualification or registration number was of the author”. He said this meant “in expert evidence terms in any other organisation you and I know of, it would be wholly inadmissible.  “And yet we are expected to take those documents, some of which are amended and we only know they're amended by the computer line at the bottom but we don't know by whom or in what circumstances, we're expected to take that and rely upon it as our primary evidence before the court starts to ask questions and come to determination.  “In any event case research shows that unrepresented appellants are nearly always at a disadvantage. If more could be done to improve the quality of decision-making at DWP level, a great deal of expense and stress and needless delay could be avoided.”

 

The DWP is spying on disabled people and causing a ‘human rights emergency’

According to a new report, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is causing a “human rights emergency” through its surveillance and sanctioning of sick and disabled people.  The report from Big Brother Watch, The State of Surveillance in 2018, sets out a chilling picture of the UK’s surveillance society. Amongst other issues, it covers the right to protest, the surveillance of investigative journalists, and how public service workers are being used to enforce the government’s “hostile environment” for immigrants.  But the section on the DWP shows how extreme surveillance has become and the impact this surveillance, combined with sanctioning and deterrence is having on sick and disabled claimants.  Called “Monitoring, Suspicion and Welfare”, the section on the DWP is written by Dr Jay Watts. Watts is a consultant clinical psychologist and psychotherapist with over 20 years experience of working in mental health.   In 2017, a survey found that the number of suicide attempts by unemployed disabled people had more than doubled since the government introduced its Work Capability Assessments. Other data released in 2017 also showed a 50% rise in mental health problems amongst unemployed people. The UK Council for Psychotherapy blamed benefit cuts and sanctions.

 

'Working mothers DWP challenge win in court'

FOUR WOMEN CHALLENGED THE DWP IN THE HIGH COURT OVER UNIVERSAL CREDIT, AND WON.  The DWP said nothing as the ruling against them was read out by two Appeal Judges, LORD JUSTICE SINGH and MR JUSTICE LEWIS concluded that the Secretary of State 'had wrongly interpreted' the relevant regulations (see article The DWP,  their Lying Lawyers and legalised deception). The four working single mothers said they were struggling financially because of how the Universal Credit system works.  They said it varied their monthly payments enormously and that they were often out of pocket because of it.  The Judges decided that the action against the Secretary of State was proven.  In court it was showed that some of the women were having to rely on food banks to, and that they felt 'forced' to do this because of this unfair system.  Lawyers for Danielle Johnson, Claire Woods, Erin Barrett and Katie Stewart said the issue could affect tens of thousands of claimants either in the situation or nearing it. (2019)

 

'Victims of DWP unlawful discrimination get Payout'

In a High Court Ruling, two disabled claimants were awarded payouts of more than 11,000 pounds because the DWP unlawfully cut their benefits.  The two men had their benefits cut when civil servants at the DWP moved them over from the disabled status to one of Universal Credits -- and as a result, they both lost around 178 pounds a month.  In Court, the DWP agreed to refund the two men's lost benefits, 2,108 pounds for one, and 3,277 pounds for the other.  One claimant in Hartlepool will also receive 2,650 pounds for anxiety and distress caused by the DWP, and a Cambridge Graduate will also receive 3,240 pounds for anxiety and distress in his case concerning this landmark ruling against the Government.  Both men in the case decided to remain anonymous; the Lawyers for the men said 'Both of our clients suffered significant hardship because of the sudden reduction of their benefit when they were transferred to Universal Credit. We hope The Secretary of State will now without delay, compensate others in the same position and that she will reconsider her decision to pusue an appeal against the original finding of discrimination'    (July 2018)

Sadly they haven't and Esther McVey feels she has to wield the Tory Axe and destroy more people for her Mistress of 'Clear' Theresa May.

 

'DWP loses Legal Battle after 5 years of legal challenges attempting to cut benefit for 7yr old boy'

This case centres around a 7 year old badly disabled boy and Vaccine Injury Payments, which the Government went to great lengths to limit because of the cost.  THE COURT OF APPEAL ruled against the department in this Test Case, because the DWP had appealed against a Court's previous order to pay the boy benefit, who is now 14. was awarded 120,000 pounds in compensation at the time.  Three Judges at the Appeal Court dismissed all three grounds of the Government's appeal and told the DWP it now has to take into consideration and account, the impact that disability has on a person's entire life, and not just the impact it has on the individual at the time of their claim is made under the scheme.   (Which means they will have to pay the boy regular benefit if they don't respond or ignore the ruling, they've done it before!)     (9/2'2017)

 

Michael Philo says:  DWP APPLIED TO OVERTURN CLAIMANT’S RIGHT FOR FAIR TRIAL & be present at tribunal

October 27, 2017 at 12:00 PM

Subject: PIP Assessment

To whom it may concern,
I suffer from quite severe mental health challenges and was in receipt of DLA. At the beginning of this year, 2017, I was forced to apply for PIP. I sought assistance to fill out the PIP application form as I didn’t want to fill it out incorrectly and I have trouble trying to explain myself. I was on High Career, Low Mobility brackets for DLA, which has been the same assessment I received for each tie my DLA was reviewed. 
When I receive my PiP Assessment from DWP I was put on the lowest level of PIP that can be awarded. I challenged this by asking for a Mandatory Reconsideration which I submitted an 11 page personal letter detailing how my mental health affects my daily life. I also went through the decision points highlighted on my initial assessment from DWP explaining how their conclusions were inaccurate about how my life has been dramatically altered as a result of my mental health. 
When I received the assessment after the reconsideration and reading through their conclusions, it was very obvious to me that they had completely ignored my letter and not taken any of it into consideration. 
As a result of that, I appealed the FWP’s assessment and have been forced to become part of the UK Judicial system, which in its pelf has caused me a great deal of anxiety. I’ve been to court before and it was not a very nice experience, so my anxiety, which I already suffer from, has increased exponentially. 
When I received the initial paperwork from the courts, I was confused about how it was written, so I called the support line for the court and asked some questions when I lodged my initial paperwork for an appeal I asked for the opportunity to present my case in person, but the DWP initially over ruled this and requested that my case be reviewed independently without the chance for me to speak. If I hadn’t of telephoned when I did, my case would have been assessed without my knowledge, because of the DWP”s actions. The Court Clerk was very surprised when I told them I’d asked for an oral hearing.
That was back in June 2017 and the last paperwork I received from the court advised me that my request for an oral hearing had been granted, but as yet no date for that hearing has been set. Since then I’ve called the court several times to see if I’ve been given a date yet as I’m constantly worried that I’ll miss a letter or never receive the paperwork to tell me that I’ve been given a date. We’re now in November and I’ve still not been given a date. 
All the time this is going on, it’s worrying me more and more which is affecting my other challenges and making them worse. 
I feel that the DWP have done everything they can to make my life more complicated, more stressful, given me greater anxiety which in turn affects my depression, which in turn affects my social isolation, which in turn affects my personal care of myself and that’s not going into half of what affect this has had on my mental health. 

NB Every citizen has a right to be heard and present their case under Common Law, the DWP have no right to request that it be heard in private and without advice.

 

'Claimants abandon 'helpline calls' because of Benefits Answering Machine'

A Report says there was well over a million calls to the 'Benefits Hotline' which claimants abandoned because people found themselves on an 'answer machine' for five minutes or longer waiting to discuss their claim with an advisor.  It says only 12 percent of the calls were actually answered by an operator and advisor.  Which as Labour MP Jim McMahon says, 'the sheer number of abandoned calls means that claimants are giving up on trying to get through to the helpline and not getting the support they needed as a result.'  Figures revealed at 'Parliamentary Questions' were that 1.3 million calls were abandoned between September 2016 and October 2017. 

 

Lawyer wins review of DWP delays

The Department for Work and Pensions has promised to review how it handles possible benefits overpayments into estates following a complaint by a solicitor. Terry Moore, a partner at Hull firm Burstalls and chair of the Hull Probate Practitioners group, told the Gazettethat he hoped the review would benefit most estates in England and Wales. The review was promised after Moore complained to the DWP when an investigation into his 89-year-old client’s estate caused ‘great delay’  Moore said that while such an investigation should take roughly three months, this enquiry took almost a year, with the DWP’s lawyers posing questions that were impossible to answer.  According to Moore, the DWP asked for bank statements from 2003, despite the fact that most banks do not keep records for more than six years.  He said the department caused ‘great delay and distress’ to the executors and beneficiaries of the estate as the administration of the assets and liabilities could not be completed until the outcome of the enquiries was known  He added: ‘The department’s repeated inappropriate, impractical and misinformed enquiry set off a merry-go-round of correspondence without any practical value.’ 

Following an intervention by Moore’s MP, the DWP apologised for the delay and said that it would review processes, including how far back it requires bank statements, and implement any improvements as soon as possible.

 

In another case concerning a judicial review the Judges upheld a complaint of unreasonable delays by the DWP

 

'Ms C and Anor, R v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions'

The claimants maintained that the processing was unlawful as it 1) breached the duty on part of the DWP to act within a reasonable time, 2) breached the Article 6 rights of the individual applicants  - breached Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).  The claimants contended their experience affected many other claimants too.  Both cases submitted by the claimants against the DWP accusing them of unreasonable delays were upheld by the Court in the Judicial Review.

 

'Victimisation by Jobcentre - one man's story'

In fact, there are many stories and accounts like this --- Brighton Jobcentre came in for heavy criticism when claimant Peter Styles accused them of victimising him and making it harder for him to find work.  This happened after he was told to 'sign on every day' and he was sanctioned and had his benefits withheld.  Shortly after, he lodged an official complaint against the Jobcentre and the DWP.  Further to this he took to the Internet and started a blog which attracted thousands of hits, which came to the attention of The Guardian newspaper.  Mr Styles revealed that the jobcentre victimised him even though he had made 67 job searches in two weeks.  He was told that 'he would be forced to attend the jobcentre and sign on every day'  One civil rights observer said this was' a massive intrusion into Mr Styles personal freedom, and it also breached the Human Rights Act.'   (Nov 2014)   But the Tory Government ignore this, and have plans to scrap as much of it as they can. 

 

Experiencing the reality of rogue staff supported by others in the DWP Job Centre

I have started my appeal against JSP staff by using a few examples of cruelty 
and intimidation. 
Former jobcentre adviser Angela Neville has written a play to expose the harsh reality of the benefits sanctions regime
She once sanctioned someone for being 10 minutes late, because the bus didn't arrive on time. She hated doing it but she "had to".

On the 5/11/2018 I had an appointment with Claire to update my CV at 11:30hrs. I arrived with a friend 10mins early. I was told by Claire she will see me as soon as possible. I then sat down near her desk she came over to me sitting down and said the computers were down and will see me when they are back up running. I was talking to my friend we both found it peculiar that she was operating her pc till noon when I finally started the appointment. (Half an hour late)
Claire offended me all the way through the interview by calling me Caroline she forced me to set up a gmail account I was under great mental stress at the time and had to hand her my phone so she could set up the account I gave my details as carolyn.maccann38……..she entered my details and still could not fathom that my name is Carolyn. Clearly this woman DWP staff member should not hold a position as a CV advisor especially when I noticed on my CV error punctuation straight away in a sentence ( , I ) 
There was also no apology from Claire about keeping me making me wait half an hour for an appointment. This morning I nearly had a break down while walking up to the Job Centre I took a short cut up the alley where I live the Salvation Hostel and nearly stood on a drug user’s needle.

 

'Jobseeker's benefit cut because of attending dad's funeral'

Provided by Scrapbook, an online political blog, revealed that a man in Manchester signing on at the Jobcentre for his jobseekers allowance had his benefits stopped because he could not sign in on that day, were both events clashed.  Ironically and rather spitefully of the jobcentre staff, they had already received notice in advance from the claimant.  He informed them that his father's funeral was on the same day he signed on, and would have miss it.  But on his return to the Jobcentre to sign on, he found that he had been sanctioned by them.  Ministers called for these penalties to be 'proportionate' but no-one was listening? not the DWP anyway.

 

'Ashton Jobcentre stonewalls claimant'

This case reveals the tactics, lies, and attempts by Jobcentre civil servants to hinder and obstruct claimants for reasons they only know.  The The report says 'The unidentified claimant had been claiming ESA, but his medical records were said to be not received by staff, and they virtually accused him of lying.  He had the equivalent of a Mackenzie Friend'. an advisor present, but they in turn were more or less told not to interfere, and at one stage barred from entering the jobcentre.  The Jobcentre told the claimant he should now claim JSA, but the advisor told them he was too ill to qualify as he would not satisfy the conditions.  They then said he should wait for his appeal on the ESA benefit situation yet he had no money coming in.  The man asked if they could refer him for food parcels, but the jobcentre staff lied, as they turned to him and said they didn't do referrals for this.  The whole interview was negative and obstructive said the advisor.

 

'DWP officer diverts £1,400 into her own account'

BARBARA JOHNSTONE civil servant, worked in the Stockton Benefits Centre, where she handled the benefits and payments.  She appeared before Teeside Magistrates Court on charges of fraudulently obtaining the money from the benefits of nine claimants.  It was said that she made a full admission about her offence.  Sentencing was apparently adjourned to another date.  (December 2017)

 

'DWP run scam to get cash not owed'

It now appears that the DWP have shown how dishonest they can be in full public view (or should that be well out of the way?).  Newspaper biggy The Telegraph, revealed that they have been asking households to repay loans claimants never took out, and had no proof it ever issued the loan in the first place.  This as all to do with the 'Crisis Loans' system they put into place to help struggling families who were unable to meet the essentials and other bills.  The report says that Telegraph Reporters talked to two families who were being unfairly targeted by the DWP and confirmed they had no loan agreement whatsoever.  The Telegraph say they have seen evidence of more such examples of this practice of demanding repayment of a 'ghost loan'.    (31/5/2018)

 

'DWP Play the Discrimination Game'

A report has exposed a particularly nasty side of the DWP, and something the Tory Government were supposed to have legislated against.  Yet, behind the scenes and the civil servants offices within those offices in Preston, Bristol, Newcastle, London etc, the DWP have instructed its 'Disability Benefit Assessors' to discriminate against people with mental health conditions compared to those with just physical problems.  It is suggested that this measure is so that they can reduce benefits by what is known as the component method, which if it is torn apart, can leave the claimant on the basic allowance -- which suits the DWP, Treasury, and MP's.  Charity MIND said this 'labelling' is an injustice and is very unfair to claimants just managing on what they get, losing some of their money is the last thing they want and in many cases they cannot get a loan or top up to make good the loss.  (14/3/2017)

 

'Corrupt' civil servant jailed for universal credit fraud

13 February 2019

A civil servant who paid herself more than £40,000 in universal credit has been jailed for a year.  Lauren Wainwright, 32, used claimants' national insurance numbers to make fraudulent payments into her own bank accounts, Preston Crown Court heard. Her scam began four months after she started her £18,000-a-year job at the Department for Work and Pensions.  Wainwright, from Thornton Cleveleys in Lancashire, was described by the judge as "thoroughly dishonest and corrupt".  Sentencing the mother of one, Judge Graham Knowles QC called her crimes a "serious and persistent abuse of her position".  Wainwright, who pleaded guilty to fraud, set up new bank accounts to spread the fraudulent payments, the court heard.  The caseworker, of Alder Lane, was caught out when a suspicious payment in July 2017 sparked an internal investigation, revealing she had made 54 separate payments totalling £41,466.50 using the national insurance numbers of 12 universal credit claimants.  After her arrest at work, she told police: "All the other trainees laughed about how easy it was, and I was the idiot that tried it."  

 

'Civil Servant in Passport Office jailed over kiddie porn pics'

More than a 1000 photos were found in Civil Servant James Close computer when the Durham Police raided his home.  It was revealed in court that Close had stolen 30 photos of girls between the age of 6 and 16yrs from the print room at Durham Passport Office.  It was said that apart from the 1000 indecent images of children, Close admitted to theft and the making and having the images and possessing extreme porn images.  Close lived at his elderly parents home in Shildon, County Durham.  He was received a twelve month suspended jail sentence at the city's Crown Court.           (11/1/2020)

 

'DWP stop man's benefit on assumption?'

DWP JOBCENTRE STAFF without any safety checks decided to stop a claimant's benefit because they assumed he was in jail?  It may seem unbelievable but the DWP stopped single Dad Lee Carroll's Universal Credit payment of 751 pounds because they thought he was languishing in a Birmingham jail.  The Liverpool hotel worker said he was made to feel like a criminal when he found out what had happened as staff where of the opinion he had been put in prison.  The DWP said it was 'an administrative error'        (8/1/2019)

 

Man deemed ‘fit-for-work’ wins DWP appeal seven months after his death


Wednesday 13 Feb 2019

 

The family of a grandfather who died fighting a ‘cruel and lengthy’ benefits battle, won his case – seven months after his death.  Jeff Hayward died of a heart attack in June last year after spending the last 18 months of his life battling a government decision that he was fit to work.  Despite working all his life and providing a letter from his GP, Mr Hayward was refused Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).  His family said the stress of his appeal and financial woes that stemmed from it contributed to his untimely death at the age of 53.  The government ruling has now been overturned, but the family, from Clitheroe, Lancashire, say it’s ‘too little too late’.  Mr Hayward was forced to stop working as a Silentnight beds warehouseman in 2016 because of a bacterial skin condition called cellulitis.  He applied for benefits for the first time in his life but was refused ESA after a Department for Work and Pensions assessment.  ‘When the DWP refused him benefits, even though his GP said he was unfit to work, he felt worthless.  ‘He was someone who really needed help and they wouldn’t give it to him.  The family appealed the DWP’s initial ruling but their plea was rejected again. The DWP maintain the ‘correct process’ was followed, even after their decision was overturned.  Last month, a tribunal hearing panel found the DWP decision should be reversed.

 

 

'The abuse of power leads to claimant's death'

 

THE DWP ALWAYS DENY CULPABILITY KNOWING THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT, they have one foot in the Court and Legal Profession.

 

David's story

David was found dead in his flat in July 2013, he was 59 and died alone and penniless. David was very vulnerable yet had his £71.70 JSA allowance stopped for a month, penalised by the job centre for missing two meetings. He tried his best but was vulnerable, he had worked for over 30 years and CVs were found just feet from his body. 

The sanction left him unable to buy food, his electric key had ran out and he could not chill his insulin (temps at that time 30c +).

David was a quiet, private and proud man who never asked or wanted much; he never complained or told me or his friends he had been sanctioned. He was not a scrounger or skiver, he was simply unwell and vulnerable and needed the caring support rather than being sanctioned without a lifeline.

He tried his best but was vulnerable, he had worked for over 30 years, including serving as a soldier in Northern Ireland

My name is Gill Thompson. I am the sister of David Clapson who died on the 20th July 2013 and I believe his death was a result of benefit sanctions.

 

 

'Whistleblowers in the DWP remain quiet and fearful of colleagues'

At a time when we're being told that whistleblowers are welcome in the workplace, this report shows that this is unlikely to be so, especially with civil servants in the DWP, HMRC and other Government Departments who often have a system of 'gagging' in operation.  This is a report of 2015, and one can see that its results are disappointing to say the least.  On looking into The Civil Service an 'Open letter' online by the former Cabinet Secretary and Head of The Civil Service, SIR JEREMY HEYWOOD, certainly reveals that he was quite aware that for every 'whistleblower' who speaks out, there must be others who, for various reasons, have remained silent.  He says they may have faced awful intimidation, ostracism, or even that they may have been 'contractually gagged' by departments in the DWP. He also went on to say that he realised that others may be fearful of dismissal or other sanctions, and may be totally unaware of what protections they have.  Some he said, 'May see evidence of abuses, and prefer to turn a blind eye because they don't know how to report it or who to trust in such circumstances which sadly prevents an investigation.'  

What he says here comes as no surprise to us, and sadly there are signs that whistleblowers are 'thin on the ground' and 'rarely visible!

 

THERE ARE SOME SCANDALS THAT A WHISTLEBLOWER MAY NOT BE ALLOWED TO DISCLOSE?

'The 3 Billion Euro Fraud'

This was one of those frauds one rarely heard of due to interference from governments and lawyers, and they are rarely taken seriously because of misinformation and deceit by the people in power who have every opportunity to suppress action by individuals or groups alike. These are typically where no one has been arrested or made accountable and resistance is high to any inquiry or investigation on the grounds of 'National Security' which is often misused in this area, but sadly common.  Before we go on, it should be noted that in Europe they know about the expenses fraud and some merely look at it as funny, whilst corruption busters say they are doing their best to handle it....but fail in most cases as we now see.  One man who uncovered the 'Euro Fraud' lost almost everything because he exposed those who engineered it, and the lawyers who defended the practice that had the power to subvert justice.  He was 'whistleblower' Robert McCoy who suffered a sustained harassment campaign, thuggery, and threats against his family.  The European politicians (M.E.P's) feared nothing because even the investigators in the European Committee Building had gone through 15 years trying to unravel the fraud despite fighting hard to get close to those who were actively engaged in it.  In fact, orders from high ordered a 'tone down of the investigation' -- What Robert McCoy uncovered was just a drop in the ocean, and even now no-one knows how far the fraud scandal goes or where it leads due to interference and a desire by the EU to have it go away.  One man involved was a President Alber Bore who was approached (COR), but he was answering to nobody?  (19/2/2019)

This is Political Corruption practised by EU members.....and nobody has been held accountable for the £3 billion fraud.

NB The source was Channel 4 News.......and perhaps the full story if it exists, can be located via the TV investigators online.

 

'Watchdog in the Spotlight - are they selective when it comes to whistleblowers?'

There is always a major question and question to be asked when it comes to the activities of a Watchdog, and that is - 'do they treat everyone the same and investigate regardless who has power?  -- this report certainly highlights this conundrum,  'Watchdog faces whistleblower test'  This concerns whistleblower John Banarjee, a Trader, who was sacked for speaking out against the Bank RBC because he dared question the lender.  He actually won against the bank at a tribunal and the comments against the bank by the judge were forthright in that he said they had fired him 'for making a Public Interest Disclosure' -- which in turn has made the whistleblower provision at RBC come into doubt which broke strict rules set by The Financial Conduct Authority which states that workers cannot be victimised for raising concerns, yet senior staff at RBC were willing to break this rule and went ahead and sacked him despite their claim to be transparent.  It is said that this incident now will put pressure on the watchdog -the FCA, to take action against those who were responsible.  Regulators are being called to take tough action against the RBC.......so this remains to be seen?  (2018)

 

'Can one trust a Watchdog to have the claimant's rights upheld?  - not always!'

One is continually being misled by the Government in this area, and the only one who suffers as a result of it is the end user, the plaintiff or claimant.  These Watchdog's or Ombudsmen bodies often fail and sometimes act against the claimant, and we can show you this here:

THE FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY staffed with Civil Servants, are sometimes under the investigation process, which is far from what they are expected to do.  

In one case 'THE VINCENT TCHENGUIZ AFFAIR' the Financial Conduct Authority had to hand over 6 million pounds in compensation over a 'botched' investigation when they 'wrongly arrested' him.

THE FCA WAS FINED in relation to A DATA BREACH for sending out 'confidential documents' to an unauthorised person from an investigation, which is classified as a criminal offence?  The Fraud Busters' as they're known were fined by The Information Commissioner's Office, and received a £180,000 pound fine.

THE FCA STAFF TAKE 25,887 SICK DAYS OFF --- The Financial Conduct Authority, a Government watchdog meant to look after the Public interests and purse, took 25,887 days off sick in 2018 reflecting the highest figures yet.  They were also the worst figures in six years.  The report says 60% higher than the national average!     (27/3/2019)

They were also sued for 'Harassment' by an IFA member, John Calland, the FCA tried to 'Gag' the case and have his claim struck-out so that it never went to Court.  Luckily they failed, and the Judge disagreed with their plea, and ordered that the case should go ahead.

THE SFO -- The Serious Fraud Office was also investigated for corruption when secret e-mails within the organisation revealed 'handshakes and goodwill payments worth a million pounds, were being paid to THREE CIVIL SERVANTS, and that this was a 'cover-up'

THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE spent £6 million on a case against Tesco and failed to get any solid prosecutions against three directors, Chris Bush, John Scouler and Carl Rogberg.  The Judge said that their case was too weak!

THE FCA HAVE BEEN TOLD TO CLEAN UP THEIR ACT!.....according to an internal memo which was sent by the City Watchdog's Chief of Operations officer Georgina Philippou who said she was appalled  about the incidents of misbehaviour in the department.  She says she has reports of 'overflowing bins, stealing plants and charging cables from desks, and reports of verbal abuse at the FCA's new £60 million Base in Stratford.  Civil servant workers have been leaving their offices in a shameful state, and that the toilet staff have reported that there has been defecating on the floor of the cubicles and urinating on the floor in the men's toilets and leaving alcohol bottles in sanitary bins.  (13/11/2019)

THE FCA REPORT SURGE IN FINES ON COMPANIES ON THE UP.....The Financial Watchdog has issued a new report that shows fines have risen dramatically and are up six-fold in the past year. In 2019 they issued fines totalling £391.8 million to firms and organisations who have breached regulations and acted improperly.......and in 2018 it was just £60 million?........(corruption is growing eh?)

FCA FINED £2,000 BY PENSIONS REGULATOR......Yet again this department meant to investigate rogues and crooks in business have become the outlaws.....they have been named and shamed by the Pensions Regulator for not providing details on what regular training it's pension trustees received.  The Regulator had asked them time and time again to provide data, but finally had to 'name and shame' the Watchdog who should know better.     (29/1/2020)

 

'Regulator won't compensate for loophole in their system of customer security failure'

THIS IS THE FCA AGAIN! and what it spells out is 'don't trust an FCA REGISTER' because you could end up out of pocket and nothing in the way of compensation from this government watchdog.  This is the case of Myra and the Austrian company of HELMUT KOB, which was apparently cloned.....but it wasn't flagged up when Myra went to the FCA site and checked to see if it was safe....just as she and others are supposed to.  She invested £7,000 and a further £6,000 later.  She felt totally safe in knowing that this watchdog was showing the company and like others saw it as a recommendation.  She was therefore horrified when she heard nothing from the company and discovered that there was a new listing on the FCA site warning of it being a scam, and that the firm had been hijacked.  Myra wasn't the only one to find this and others came forward to reveal that the FCA had done this sort of thing before and let people down.  Myra took the steps to complain to the Commissioner (Ombudsman) and they ruled in Myra's favour saying that the FCA were partly at fault as they were late in changing things on the register, and facilitated the hackers, and recommended they compensate her for a loss because she could not control or even plan for such an incident because she trusted what the register showed at the time she invested.  However, the FCA say they disagree with the Ombudsman and are unwilling to compensate.  It also turns out that there was a warning 12 years earlier from Austria warning the FCA about this....but nothing was done.

 

'The Financial Ombudsman failed us – now we want our cases reviewed'

Telegraph Money readers are calling for the Financial Ombudsman Service to review their cases, after an undercover journalist appeared to show staff at the dispute resolution service failing to understand the financial services they were investigating.  The Dispatches documentary recorded an employee admitting that they rushed through cases to meet targets, and ruled in favour of the banks because it was easier than persuading businesses to pay out.  Two Telegraph readers, Donald Kelly, a retired professor, and Barrie Cooper, both fell victim to similar solicitor scams.  The FOS ruled against them both, after they complained that the banks involved should have stopped the fraudsters stealing tens of thousands of pounds.

'The ombudsman delivered two contradictory views in 12 months'

Telegraph Money reported in 2016 how Prof Kelly and his wife Patricia, who lost £47,508 to a fake solicitor when buying a home, felt hopeful when the ombudsman said it felt Lloyds Bank – the fraudster’s bank – should repay the stolen sum plus interest in its provisional decision. But more than a year later the ombudsman changed its mind. The case was passed to a new person and the FOS ordered Lloyds to offer only £500 compensation. The ombudsman offered an additional £700 because of its poor handling of the case. At the time Prof Kelly branded the ombudsman “crassly incompetent”. Remarking on the documentary, Prof Kelly said: “Nothing surprised me. From my experience the FOS is dysfunctional and clearly lacks proper training for individual staff whose background is often inadequate for dealing with complex forensic matters.”     THIS CASE INVOLVED LLOYDS BANK

CASE 2 …. Fraud victim Mr Cooper had already asked for his case to be reviewed in October as he felt significant parts of his complaint were overlooked. Since the Dispatches programme, he has written to the ombudsman again. But the FOS says its decisions are final. Mr Cooper, 82, was tricked into paying more than £50,000 into the account of a criminal posing as his solicitor in February 2016. He argued that TSB, the fraudster’s bank, enabled the crime by allowing the criminal, who was not the account holder, to move large sums out of the account without question. When he uncovered the ruse Mr Cooper alerted his own bank, First Direct, which contacted TSB. TSB blocked the account after calling the criminal, who failed to pass its verification process on the phone.  But by this time £46,738 of Mr Cooper’s funds had been transferred to other people.  Mr Cooper said he feels TSB failed to “act properly” with regard to this and the ombudsman is “toothless” for not acknowledging it.  “TSB should never have allowed the funds to be moved out of the account by someone who wasn’t the account holder,” he said.  The bank said it had no reason to question the significant payments in and out of their criminal customer’s account in the report and did not see why it should refund Mr Cooper. The adjudicator and ombudsman agreed. Mr Cooper eventually received £7,283 back, although he said this payment was never explained.  The FOS refused to comment on Mr Cooper’s experience.

Case 3 For more than a year, the bank insisted Charlotte Higman had been aware of the transaction and refused to refund her. The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) backed RBS after the initial complaint.  But earlier this month, RBS apologised and issued Charlotte a full refund, after Watchdog Live's investigation. Charlotte, from Totnes in Devon, believes that RBS repeatedly failed to pick up on evidence, including warnings raised in its own security processes in a recording of the fraudulent phone call obtained by Watchdog Live, a woman can be heard incorrectly answering a security question relating to Charlotte's occupation.  Despite this, a transaction of £4,318 is approved by the bank and it is only after the caller requests a second transaction, and is unable to answer additional security questions, that a warning is raised on Charlotte's account.  The bank's own records show that the phone call, in January 2017, was marked as a "potential account takeover" and the caller failed the bank's voice recognition checks. Despite this, the initial transaction was not reversed. After reporting the call to the police, Charlotte discovered her phone line was diverted on the day of the call, explaining why the bank believed they were speaking to her at her home address. "I just feel really angry that someone's been able to do it that easily," Charlotte told the Watchdog.  

After being contacted by Watchdog Live, an RBS spokesperson said: "We would like to apologise to Mrs Higman that the service provided fell short of the high standards we expect. "On review of Mrs Higman's case, and in light of new information provided to us, we have refunded Mrs Higman in full for her loss."

 (Charlotte Roberts)

 As one can see in the above case, the Ombudsman got it wrong, but you can't find an apology from him in this last case!

 

 

'Who investigates the investigators?'

Well no-one really, it's not high on the agenda, it's an area they'd rather not talk about or even consider as one can see from the above trail of deceit and zero accomplishment.  The authorities would have you believe that the investigators are above reproach, and even when the smell of it occurs its 'all a mistake, error or misunderstanding'.....but we've been on the case of 'investigators' for quite a while, and the so-called fraud busters have 'black sheep' among their flock both in the Public and Private sectors of society who are good at covering up their tracks and to others around them, look squeaky clean.  We've got many such cases through the ten megabyte collection within this site's pages.  The DWP for example are in here and FCA......Police too.....such as Elite Corruption Squads being investigated for corruption at the Met.  They appear to be the good guys, but its not what they are, this is just the mask they wear.  Getting most of these individuals is really hard because the State makes it very difficult to launch a case against them, and they actively try to prevent disclosure of such with the aid of the courts by exemption orders and held in camera situations......the investigators are fond of saying how good they are....but being put to the test is more difficult, especially if you went on a mission to look into their backgrounds, even on line, they immediately take action to say that you can't use anything discovered.......and we've had that.   Government systems in place for complaints is another sham, as they close down any inquiry that demands a real answer and satisfactory end.......investigators only investigate when they know they're covered by immunity.

 

 

'Trusted Watchdog for Nurses spends £250,000 on Cover-Up'

THE NURSING AND MIDWIFERY COUNCIL, a regulatory body for nurses found themselves exposed when it was discovered that they had spent around £250,000 to cover-up how much information it held on a grieving father it had been monitoring for almost a decade.  They had not reckoned on the power of the Internet and that man, James Titcombe said about his fight for an investigation into the death of his nine day old son, Joshua, who died from an infection.  The NMC reported the information it found about his speaking engagements and social media use.  When he challenged the NMC and requested what information they held on him under The Data Protection Act, the NMC's Chief Exec' JACKIE SMITH , authorised a team of Lawyers to work on how much information the Regulator could block from documents it was forced to make available.  When Mr Titcombe received the requested information, it was heavily redacted (lines blacked out) and most of what was there had incomplete sentences.  After looking at this he made an official Freedom of Information request and the NMC said 'I am sorry you do not feel we have been transparent in the way we handled your data subject access request.  We engaged THE LAW FIRM FIELDFISHER to help us deal with your request, and the estimated cost of their work is £239,871.85 including VAT.

 

'DWP Fraud Investigator is dismissed'

A SENIOR BENEFITS FRAUD INVESTIGATOR -- NATALIE GREEN lost her claim for unfair dismissal by her bosses when she took them to an Employment Tribunal somehow believing she could win.  It soon emerged as evidence and statements were read out that Green was a racist in the eyes of her colleagues who said they had to tolerate her behaviour. The main evidence against her arrived as it was stated that she used racist language in connection with an Asian Police Officer who she had come in contact with in her position at the East Midlands Serious and Organised Crime Unit who she worked alongside with for the DWP investigating benefit fraud.  It said that Green of Leicester used awful language frequently (even though she denied it in court). The Tribunal ruled against Natalie Green and found her job termination correct in the circumstances.    (18/1/2020)

 

'Investigators on the fiddle'

In case anyone in the security fraudbusters tries to play this down we cite this case:  SIX MEMBERS OF A FRAUD TASK FORCE.....this was the debt recovery organisation who used taxpayers money to buy food and drink for their parties.  The report revealed that disciplinary charges had been brought against six 'un-named' civil servants who were in the fraud investigation team of the Benefits Agency.  One of the team was under investigation over claims that a consultancy contract worth thousands of pounds was given to her brother without being put out to tender among other such things as expenses, meals and overtime?   (this happened on Peter Lilley's watch) .....and true to form an outcome never came to light and the story was buried!

 

YES THERE'S MORE:     DWP FRAUD INVESTIGATOR COMMITS FRAUD --- ELIZABETH LEWIS was given a suspended sentence when she was found guilty of Money-laundering from 2007 to 2010.....she was busy pushing £30,000 into her own account whilst 'disguising expenditure and income' figures and fiddling the Gift Aid system.

INVESTIGATOR DAVID ARCHER, THE COUNCIL HEAD OF CRIME PREVENTION, was jailed for three years at Chelmsford Crown Court after he siphoned off an amazing sum of £230,000 in an elaborate fraud scam.

BENEFITS FRAUD INVESTIGATOR IAN HARRISON was caught cheating on benefits.  The Former Cop turned benefits investigator for the DWP appeared before Blackpool Magistrates Court after it was discovered that he was caught obtaining disability benefits fraudulently.  The court gave him a 9 week suspended jail sentence.

 

 

'Faith in ombudsman wanes by the day'

It's becoming more apparent that the Ombudsman service is not fit for purpose in many cases as we have already seen in the above reports, and the fact that there are some 25 different ombudsmen around the country with varying degrees of power from nil to maybe is a worrying concern to people who get scammed or receive a poor service.  The Regulation Industry only have 'three' ombudsmen who have real legal power, the rest just try to get by.  And one word that is commonly used by most of them, and this includes lawyers too who should know better? is 'SHOULD' which carries no legal weight whatsoever.  One hears that 'this should happen' 'you should get your money back' 'you should be compensated'....all of which mean nothing....it's very similar to the commonly used 'HOPE' which again is a dreamy word that implies something but ultimately leads to nothing!  One also hears the phrase 'not signed up to it' which means the Ombudsman has no real power if the firm or service that is complained about is not signed up to a code of practice, there is little they can do.  These 'opt out' firms are usually not held to account at all!    The case of Natasha who complained to the Energy Ombudsman about her provider shows you yet another flaw in this system....he ruled in her favour and three months later the company were still not paying her... which begs the question 'What is the point of an Ombudsman?  especially if their enforcement power is nil.  Another worrying point was the fact that one person had to wait 10 weeks for an answer, and there was even another who waited a year!  

 

PS: The Parliamentary Select Committee said that the situation was 'in a mess' when asked on a TV watchdog programme!

 

 

'DWP misleads The Select Committee'

'Quite often really as we can testify to,........  The subject of sanctions is rarely addressed truthfully, and the DWP made a claim to the Work and Pensions Select Committee that these sanctions were 'applied as a last resort'.  M.Boyce in a blog dated 14th May 2015, says that this directly contradicts the information to the Public.....and we here can confirm that to be the case as we know one official representing the DWP was willing to enforce a sanction, threatening to use it (abuse it) in a first interview with a claimant without good reason.  The whole of this document should be seen by M.Bryce, and those interested should go to -- mmm.whatdotheyknow.com/request/dwp_misleading_the_work_and_pensions_committee

 

'Smell of 'Cover-Up' at DWP annoys the MP's'  (only some MP's)

Work and Pensions Minister ESTHER McVEY is being called to answer questions by MP's of both sides of the House who require a full explanation from the DWP in relation to WCA deaths cover-up.  Two opposition MP's are writing to McVey while a third MP is demanding a full investigation into the matter and the ensuing possible cover-up over documents linking the 'Fitness for Work' test with the deaths of benefit claimants.   Jonathan Bartley of the Green Party said the failure to be clear about (remember Ms May and how many times she said 'clear') what happened with the documents, had all the Hallmarks of a deliberate cover-up, which needs investigating thoroughly.  The Report says there has been a 'reluctance' to co-operate and 'refusals' that cause alarm to those who see accountability being ignored. (19/7/2018)

 

'Misleading Tory stunt backfires on them'

A report shows that the Conservative Party in regard to a Twitter fact-check landed the Tories with a red face, in that while trying to put the Labour Party down, they inadvertently shot themselves in the foot.  It was probably a 'wheeze' by the Tory MP's with their Public School leanings.  They apparently attempted to re-brand their twitter press account for the TV clash with their leader Boris and Jeremy Corbin to suggest it was providing impartial scrutiny of the leader's electioneering promises.  But they soon found themselves accused of misleading voters and using 'underhand tactics' when they wanted to make out the Labour Party were peddlers of lies and distortion.   (21/11/2019)

 

'The Sweet smell of Corruption'

THE GOVERNMENT tend to treat cases of corruption within its 'bubble' as a 'hiccup' or very large apple in order to minimize its effect so that they can kid the Public into thinking it rarely happens, when in fact, it is to the contrary.  This works on two levels for them, they keep the Public at arms length promising a thorough inquiry (which takes months, years or just fades), and secondly avoid reforms and reconsideration or more rigorous implementation of existing standards or conduct; this has happened in the Police for years, and they have successfully got away with it.     Pretending there is no problem doesn't make it go away, and this has helped it to thrive well beyond government and into the Public arena where getting away with it is a goal to be achieved. There is hardly anyone in society or public that hasn't turned a 'blind eye' or responded to a deal that doesn't look right or too good to be true......and as one member of the Public once proudly said, 'Everybody does it, what's the problem?'                                                                                                                                                                                                             Expanding government, Public Sector expenditure, legislation and regulations still provides the potential for corruption and misconduct, while low risks of detection and punishment, plus the lack of official enthusiasm for reform, and the steady decline of both informal and informal means of investigation and accountability still offers the opportunity, and there are many who will take that risk for gain or power!                       In the Corridors of Power both government and Legal, corruption is not seen as entirely bad, especially if they believe the end result is justified or interpreted in another way.  They find it hard to believe they have committed any 'wrongdoing' and resort to such words as 'error'  'oversight' ... 'mistake' or even 'collateral damage' and often resort to threatening the accuser with legal action in order to silence and suppress (like Jimmy Savile for example)......something akin to the subtle NDA's arranged by solicitors behind closed doors.                           Corruption is hard to prove because it takes on so many guises both in government and commerce, with either 'a few players' taking part or 'an organised team and system' that take part and organise a 'firewall' to lessen any chances of capture or detection.  Corruption will survive because of its very nature, and its lure will be too sweet for many to ignore!

NB: It only takes one man to turn away from the truth.......and the rest will follow!

 

THIS NEXT SECTION LOOKS AT THE WAY THE DWP BREAK THE LAW WILFULLY AND BREAK PROMISES AT WILL:      (The Tories)

and it happens time and time again....

DWP breaks law over secret reports on universal credit deaths

 

23rd August 2018

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is refusing to release evidence that would show how many secret reports it has compiled into the deaths of claimants of its new universal credit, in a fresh breach of freedom of information laws. DWP compiles an internal process review every time a “suicide is associated with DWP activity”, as well as in some other cases involving the deaths of disabled or “vulnerable” benefit claimants. The last batch of reviews released by DWP were published in heavily redacted form two years ago.  Further investigations reveals that they are breaking the law in many other areas of Benefit policies, and wilfully ignoring the fact.  Disability News Service DNS will be lodging a complaint with the information commissioner about DWP’s failure to release the internal process reviews.

 

Sadly for those who suffer as a result, the DWP will ignore all requests as they’ve previously done.

 

 

DWP QUITE PREPARED TO BREAK THE HUMAN RIGHTS LAW.

THEY WERE ALSO WILLING TO INTRODUCE LAWS TO PREVENT ANY PAYMENTS      which shows they actively tried to circumvent Internationally agreed Conventions and law.

 

The Tory government is planning to refund almost £2million in benefit sanctions to 4,000 jobseekers after breaching their human rights. The saga began in 2013, when graduate Cait Reilly won a Court of Appeal victory over her unpaid work placement in Poundland.  Judges found the government had not described its back-to-work schemes in enough detail when establishing them in 2011. So an emergency law was passed in 2013 to make the schemes legal - and stop Tory ministers having to refund £130million to those who'd had their benefits sanctioned. A court found this group of jobseekers had lost their right to a fair hearing under Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

DWP set to refund 4,000 jobseekers almost £2million in benefit sanctions after breaching their human rights

It’s time their lawyers appeared before the SRA and SDT for contravening ‘Qualified Privilege’ and had it revoked so that corrupt lawyers could face jail time for circumventing laws that they choose to ignore.

 

DWP breaks promise again to stop harassing abuse survivor over benefit claim

Disability News Service February 1st 2018

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has again broken its promise to stop harassing a traumatised benefit claimant while he waits to give vital evidence in a child abuse trial. Disability News Service (DNS) has been reporting on the continuing harassment of David* by DWP since 2016, when former minister for disabled people Justin Tomlinson faced calls to resign after threatening to stop his benefits if he failed to co-operate with an ATOS assessment. David is a key witness in the trial and has been told by police not to discuss his case with anyone, or to allow DWP or Atos access to his medical records, because court proceedings are live and the case is sub-judice. He has severe post-traumatic stress disorder, caused by the horrific sexual abuse he suffered as a child, and which has led to several suicide attempts. The toll of the criminal investigation on his mental health has also been harrowing, resulting in a series of self-harm episodes. Last year, DWP broke its promise not to harass David, after Atos asked him to attend a face-to-face personal independence payment (PIP) assessment. Atos made it clear that DWP had failed to include any note asking it not to contact David on the file it received about his PIP claim. Now David has been contacted again, with DWP sending him a text message last week warning him that he would be sent a PIP2 How Your Disability Affects You form, which he would need to complete and return. David said that DWP’s behaviour “completely dehumanises me, violates my privacy and strips away any remaining dignity”   A spokesperson for the DWP contacted David, she refused to apologise for the latest harassment or confirm that the text message was sent mistakenly.

NB: It's hard to believe that we have a government like this who behave like villains and act like them too, with no integrity whatsoever!

 

'Barrister pursues Treasury Cover-Up'

Barrister Keith Gordon has lodged a complaint against Her Majesty's Treasury with The Parliamentary Ombudsman.  The basis of his complaint is that the former Economic Secretary to the Treasury misled Parliament when she told it that 'trade associations and the accountancy and legal professions' had requested that the rule in Sharky v Wernher be legislated for.  In fact, this was untrue, no request had ever been made by any organisation trade or otherwise, and the professional bodies were actually against the measures.   Mr Gordon pieced together the facts using the Freedom of Information Act, however, the Treasury ignored his first request.   Eventually, and out of time, the Treasury made the disclosure, but it then failed to include it in its list of published disclosures.  A change in the reporting criteria the appears to have been made, whether by coincidence or not, this ensured that Mr Gordon's request would not be featured.   His first letter of complaint to the Treasury in February 2009 was ignored, and it was not until Mr Gordon contacted the Ombudsman that a response was received in February 2010.  The Treasury is still unable to explain if the EST made a genuine mistake or whether she was in fact briefed to tell Parliament what she did?     (24/3/2014)

 

'Scots Lawyer sues the DWP'

There are many people online who are rooting for this solicitor to 'hammer' the DWP, so we thought you'd like to know more on this.  The little gem of an article was discovered in a 'web fishing expedition' so read on --  The Lawyer in question is a Mr Daniel Donaldson from Glasgow who claims benefits for a medical incapacity which affects his daily living.   The report goes on to say that in 2013 the DWP awarded him PIP but after an assessment in 2016, they stopped his benefits.  Mr Donaldson appealed to a Tribunal and on winning, they reinstated his benefit in October 2017.  But he declined this as it was unacceptable, partly because he feels the DWP 'discriminated' against him on account of the medical condition.  The Lawyer told the local Press that he's suing the DWP for 4,000 pounds for disability discrimination.  Another 275 pounds in bank charges incurred due to the stop of his benefit, and a further 700 pounds in lost Passport benefits.  He has also named the Scottish Government in his claim, because powers over welfare payments were devolved under the Scotland Act 2016.     (30/4/2018)

 

'The Rights that the DWP take away from you'

The Government and the DWP are not upfront about the subject of a claimant's rights, and they never have been.  Lawyers for the DWP have deviously eroded as many rights as they can, often without testing their credibility in a Court of Law; mainly because of the system they have helped to build which is loaded against the claimant with 'unlawful' and 'not legally trained' decision makers, who also feature in the so-called second stage 'reconsideration' process, which brings in another decision maker before you may approach a Tribunal Court -- 'First Tier' which in fact is almost equal to a 'discovery hearing' rather than the final outcome in the Upper Tier tribunal.  It used to be The County Court, a one-stop, one application, to see the DWP and their Lawyers in Court.  The DWP took this away in order to build a 'delay' mechanism that only they can operate, and although your action may cite them, they in fact oversee the complaint from day one as it is 'in-house' and they can if they choose, stall it for as many reasons they're likely to give you -- saying its confidential and data-protected.  All the claimant can do is reject their so-called findings or decision, and its back on the treadmill again for another long drawn out complicated situation being decided by the people who have an incentive to make your attempts fail!

As for fairness? don't look to the DWP for it!.......they don't know the meaning of it.

 

'DWP warns Charity Contractors not to ruin their 'Public Image'?

What image I hear you say!  However, in an unusual and stupid attempt, the DWP have told Charities delivering the DWP's 400 million pound Welfare-to-Work Programme that 'They are not allowed to criticise the government' according to official documents quoted.   They have stipulated and instructed contractors 'to pay the utmost regard to the standing and reputation' of the DWP and ensure that they do nothing that damages it, or harms the confidence of the Public!       Sadly for them, they're a bit late on that, we here feel that this is all a loser as the reputation they claim is in tatters, and if you're not sure then read this entire page and back them.        (22/4/2018)

 

'DWP don't listen and don't care'

Liam 

After being on Benefits for some time because it was necessary, I'm now 30 and because of my mental health situation, the dwp has cut all my Benefits and my state of mind has never been so bad.  I'm not in a good place at all and have felt like ending my life because I can no longer afford to have my little girl who is 6; and I had her with me for 3 days a week I can't afford to even eat.  I have bills that need to paid and I’m also getting in debt.  I’m left feeling  like I'm totally useless as I have tried in the past to work but never works out and depending on Benefits is my only way to get some sort of income, I wish I didn't need it so I didn't have to feel this way again but there is no other way. I believe kicking people who must rely on these Benefits is the dwp committing a crime. I don't care who agrees or doesn’t, and if you’re telling me they didn't realise people would consider committing suicide because of this it’s an obvious fact that it would happen in some cases and it has by what you read in the newspaper.

 

'DWP Pays out £26,000 pounds to 'singled out' worker'

We now go into the HMRC for this case and a worker sues them..... In yet another case of amazing stupidity, the DWP turned on one of their own.  BARRIE CAULCUTT revealed that he was treated 'mercilessly' by the Benefits Office in Caernarfon, Wales.  In Court he told them of how his life and health was ruined by the bosses at the Office who called him a 'whinger' who didn't deserve to be treated nicely or otherwise.  The father of two, a disabled benefits worker, won compensation of 26,000 pounds from the DWP.  It was heard in Court that things began when he was moved from the 'backroom' finance office to work on the 'frontline' facing claimants who were angry because their benefits had been sanctioned.   The Tribunal found that the DWP had 'discriminated' against him by failing to make reasonable adjustments for his disability, and their decision was unanimous!       (9/4/2018)

 

'Government study says Benefit Sanctions Don't Work'

Not exactly mind-blowing, but late in acknowledging even the possibility that claimants have said this over and over.  The Study published in September 2018, found no evidence that these draconian sanctions actually work.  This was quoted in their paper 'Universal Credit; in -work Progression Randomised Controlled Trial' on the Government's website on the 12th of September 2018.  Apparently, this study has been on the go for three years.  It also said that the sanctions 'damaged' the claimant's relationship with the work coach.  In addition it also said that the sanctioning of claimants 'did not help motivate participants to progress in work'........strangely, there was no ministerial announcement of this?

 

'Data breaking DWP manager in DWP Payout'

Yet another in-house case --- A former DWP worker, Aftab Marchant who worked in the DWP's Stockport Office near Manchester, won substantial damages from the Government Department.  He launched the case because there was no other solution to his plight, after a 'superior' official (manager), shared 'Highly confidential Private Medical Information' with his fellow colleagues.  He was shocked to find out in a moment of trust, the manager had sent e-mails to another ten people making his health situation very public in the office.  Mr Marchant was claiming 50,000 pounds in damages for the breach of data.