BBC News - Grimsby has over a quarter of shops standing empty
UK and Netherlands to sue Iceland over lost deposits « Xfm 95.1 Newscenter | Latest News from Ghana and the World.
North Lincolnshire Council – Working smarter set to save £1.3m.
Working smarter set to save £1.3m
The agreement would mean the sharing of:
-
Housing and council tax benefits administration
-
Revenues collection (council tax and non-domestic rates)
-
Those functions that are shared across all the service e.g. systems control, development, scanning, indexing.
The service is expected to be in place by July 2012. It will be delivered in-house across the two sites, with employees remaining at their current work base, but working as one team.
Designated employees from both councils will have immediate access to any necessary data in accordance with the Data Protection Act. But each council would maintain their own records.
Telephone calls will continue to be routed through each council’s individual call centres and face to face enquiries will continue to be delivered at North East Lincolnshire council through the customer access point, and at North Lincolnshire Council through local links.
Sharing services will mean 21.4 full time equivalent posts will no longer be needed in these areas. Affected employees will be offered retraining and redeployment opportunities within the two councils.
Cllr Neil Poole, cabinet member for finance, procurement and IT services, said:
“Increasingly, we have to think of smarter ways to work and it makes sense to share these services with our neighbours.
“There are many benefits to be had by sharing services. Not least £1.3m reduction in operating costs – a saving to taxpayers. It also enables sharing of resources, skills and knowledge and will improve value for money. It enables processes to be simplified, and there’s the potential for more efficient and innovative procurement and use of IT.”
Cllr Liz Redfern, leader of North Lincolnshire Council, said:
“The partnership we are about to create between ourselves and North East Lincolnshire Council signifies a major step forward to providing a more joined-up approach to providing key services. It will not only see both councils working more efficiently, but will provide a better service to the people of North and North East Lincolnshire. No less than they deserve.”
Cllr Chris Shaw, leader of North East Lincolnshire Council and portfolio holder for finance and regeneration, said:
“Taxation and benefits are vital services of local authorities, so it is important that we run them efficiently and effectively. By working together with our partners in this way, not only do we bring about significant cash savings, we also expect the services overall to run more efficiently, which will be better for our residents.”
Something’s not quite right here.
The council recently hiked up the penalty they charge residents for late payment of council tax instalments.
This was done to raise a forecasted income of £752,000 over the next 4 years. The council are not allowed to profit from these charges and they should only cover the cost of recovery. Evidently they have done this solely to create extra revenue.
Look under “Income Generation”
http://www.nelincs.gov.uk/committees/FunctionsPage.aspx?dsid=13241&action=GetFileFromDB
If the council are axing 21 jobs in revenue and benefits services, the logical change in the penalty fee would be a reduction wouldn’t it?
The recovery costs will be reduced so the council is shafting both their staff and resident here, they are out of control.
COUNCIL CAUGHT-OUT UNLAWFULLY RAISING ADDITIONAL £752,000 FROM COUNCIL TAX PENALTIES
Council take advantage of struggling households and court system to raise a forecasted £188,000 extra each year from unlawful penalty fees.
North East Lincolnshire Council failed, or made little attempt to cover their tracks in their latest blatant disregard for legislation set out in the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations.
A recent hike takes the now ‘single’ £70 penalty fee to 23% above that of the previously combined charges. Or, when compared with 2001 levels, 65% higher.
It’s not for the sake of convenience that Summons and Liability Order penalties are now combined into one. There has been a gradual but obvious intent to increase profits by hiking up these fees, but less obvious is the cunning way the council has proportioned costs to the summons and liability order.
Increasingly more weight has been given to the summons penalty, until eventually the liability order fee – previously incurred later in the recovery process, has become consolidated into just the one fee. The obvious merits – at least for the council’s profits anyway – is that more households will be caught out by this much higher penalty, and sooner.
This is not only devious but blatantly contravenes the statutory instrument, SI 1992/613, Regulation 34(5)(b) which in summary states that on receiving a summons, the amount outstanding plus the costs reasonably incurred by the authority (summons fee only) is paid to the authority, it shall accept the amount and the liability order not be proceeded with.
The council pay fees to the court for using their facilities, this makes up a proportion of the now defunct or hidden liability order fee paid by ‘caught out residents’. Clearly, by consolidating these fees, residents are incurring court costs, for which, because of settlement prior to the court hearing they are not liable, but are forced to pay.
Again SI 1992/613, but this time Regulation 34(6) and (7)(b), which in summary state, if, on receiving a summons, the amount has not been paid, the amount outstanding plus costs reasonably incurred by the authority for obtaining the liability order shall be payable.
In essence, the council can not profit from recovery, hence “costs reasonably incurred”, but plainly this is exactly what the authority are doing by charging hidden liability order fees when in fact, residents have in many instances not had a court order made against them………
http://i1205.photobucket.com/albums/bb433/gcgent/Councilcaught-outunlawfullyraisingpenalties1.jpg
http://i1205.photobucket.com/albums/bb433/gcgent/Councilcaught-outunlawfullyraisingpenalties2.jpg
Just found this:
North Lincolnshire Council’s version
http://www.northlincs.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4781BD91-BB76-4C70-8F12-9130925E5B5E/50672/LTBsharedservices.pdf
Or the North East Lincolnshire Council’s version
http://www.nelincs.gov.uk/committees/FunctionsPage.aspx?dsid=14407&action=GetFileFromDB
“NNDR (Business rates) is currently administered under a shared service agreement between NELC and NLC, based at Hewson House, Brigg. This arrangement will be merged into the wider shared service agreement for Local Taxation and Benefits.”
“This option would proceed with the implementation of shared services in both Councils for housing and council tax benefits administration, revenues collection (Ctax and NNDR), Sundry Debts (NELC only) and those functions which are shared across all of the service e.g. systems control, development, and scanning & indexing etc.”
Does Council Tax recovery come “under revenues collection”? If so the previous post seriously needs addressing.
The Weasels at the council have taken one step too far here. All I can say is they must really be confident of their impunity to prosecution.
There are potential savings of £1.27-million for sharing services between North and North-East Lincolnshire councils over the following 4 years, mostly through reducing staff by 21.4 posts across both councils.
This is where the Weasels are insulting the intelligence of the public.
The council are not permitted to make a profit out of residents through penalties associated with Council Tax recovery. Despite this they raise penalty fees and rearranged how they are applied in order to collect a forecasted additional £752,000 for the same period.
This was listed in their budget proposals under “Income Generation”. Clearly they are acting outside of the law by doing this, but who is monitoring the council? How can aggrieved residents ensure the council don’t flout the law?
These Weasels are systematically shafting both residents and their staff. In a nut-shell they are taking measures to reduce costs of Council Tax recovery and correspondingly increasing the costs incurred by those residents receiving penalties.
Whose job is it to stop them?