Council Tax Collection Rates

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by garinda

I'd want evidence they did sell it for seven thousand

I don't think that would be a problem, it's who they sold it too I'd be checking. Not unknown for them to arrange to sell to family or friends and 'sort' it out later

[garinda]

Originally Posted by lancsdave

I don't think that would be a problem, it's who they sold it too I'd be checking. Not unknown for them to arrange to sell to family or friends and 'sort' it out later

That's the sorty of dodgy dealing I was referring to.

Although they wouldn't necessarily know prices would go through the roof, property prices very rarely fall, in the long term.

I'd name them.

No harm in that.

If that's what they actually did, they can't sue.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by gynn

No, business rates are separate.

Since you're ever so helpful, coming up with figures, and the quoted collection rate only relates to residential property, what's the equivalent collection rate on business properties in Hyndburn?

Surely it must also have been collated?

It would be interesting to compare the collection rates of both.

[gynn]

Originally Posted by garinda

what's the equivalent collection rate on business properties in Hyndburn?

Do you really want to know? Might put you off your cornflakes.

Okay, here we go.

Lancaster 99.1 Preston 98.4 Burnley 98.4 Blackburn with Darwen 98.1 Ribble Valley 97.8 South Ribble 97.8 West Lancashire 97.8 Wyre 97.8 Rossendale 97.7 Fylde 97.5 Chorley 97.4 Pendle 97.2 Blackpool 95.0 Hyndburn 93.1 Lancashire Average 97.4

I'm afraid it makes sorry reading. Hyndburn performs nearly 2% worse than any other Lancashire district. In cash terms that is around 390,000 pounds below average.

The only consolation () is that Hyndburn passes the cost of that appalling performance on to the government, and doesnt suffer any cash losses in the money it gets back.

[gynn]

Correction. It is 390,000 pounds below the next worst performing authority. It is over 800,000 pounds worse than the Lancashire average.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by gynn

Correction. It is 390,000 pounds below the next worst performing authority. It is over 800,000 pounds worse than the Lancashire average.

Thank you, and yes it does make depressing reading.

I'd hardly label this as 'excellent'.

What were we saying about saving pennies and pounds?

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by garinda

Thank you, and yes it does make depressing reading.

I'd hardly label this as 'excellent'.

What were we saying about saving pennies and pounds?

Don't worry G our Ken will have the rate up to 106% by next august

[cashman]

Originally Posted by jaysay

Don't worry G our Ken will have the rate up to 106% by next august

thing is,any improvement is goin the right way, or do yeh think its fine as is?

[Bernard Dawson]

Originally Posted by gynn

Do you really want to know? Might put you off your cornflakes.

Okay, here we go.

Lancaster 99.1 Preston 98.4 Burnley 98.4 Blackburn with Darwen 98.1 Ribble Valley 97.8 South Ribble 97.8 West Lancashire 97.8 Wyre 97.8 Rossendale 97.7 Fylde 97.5 Chorley 97.4 Pendle 97.2 Blackpool 95.0 Hyndburn 93.1 Lancashire Average 97.4

I'm afraid it makes sorry reading. Hyndburn performs nearly 2% worse than any other Lancashire district. In cash terms that is around 390,000 pounds below average.

The only consolation () is that Hyndburn passes the cost of that appalling performance on to the government, and doesnt suffer any cash losses in the money it gets back.

I hadn't realised we were performing that badly. There's no reason really why we should be performing worse than our neighbouring authorities is there.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Bernard Dawson

I hadn't realised we were performing that badly. There's no reason really why we should be performing worse than our neighbouring authorities is there.

Doesn't make good reading, does it?

Shouts out poor performance to me, in regard to collecting revenue owed, rather than 'excellent'.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by cashman

thing is,any improvement is goin the right way, or do yeh think its fine as is?

No I don't but as I said it will be sorted out by next August,

[Bernard Dawson]

Originally Posted by garinda

Doesn't make good reading, does it?

Shouts out poor performance to me, in regard to collecting revenue owed, rather than 'excellent'.

It doesn't.It's something I'm sure Peter's not happy with either. We should at least be on a par I would I've thought with are East Lanc's neighbours.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by gynn

The only consolation () is that Hyndburn passes the cost of that appalling performance on to the government, and doesnt suffer any cash losses in the money it gets back.

Originally Posted by gynn

Correction. It is 390,000 pounds below the next worst performing authority. It is over 800,000 pounds worse than the Lancashire average.

So any money not collected by Hyndburn is paid by the Government?
What about money not collected from homes?
If a house is empty and owned by a landlord and eligible to pay council tax, is it classed as commercial or residential?

It cant be that hard to take a business to court for non payment.

[gynn]

Originally Posted by Neil

So any money not collected by Hyndburn is paid by the Government?
What about money not collected from homes?
If a house is empty and owned by a landlord and eligible to pay council tax, is it classed as commercial or residential?

It cant be that hard to take a business to court for non payment.

The Government picks up the tab for money not collected by Hyndburn, but they will start squealing at a non collection rate of 7%! No houses are classed for business rate purposes.

By the way, if you want to look further, you can download the Excel file (Table 5) from the government's own web site:-

Collection rates for council tax and national non-domestic rates in England 2009-10 - Corporate - Department for Communities and Local Government

[Less]

Originally Posted by Less

Yes, so do our's I know someone paid twice in one month to keep in front, got the nasty letters because somehow extra payment doesn't seem to show up.

Well, I can happily inform you that the person involved in this little escapade was none other than, myself.

It had even got to the stage where a 'Council Tax-Notice Of Liability Order had been taken out against me with threats to send in the Bailiffs if I didn't fill in a 'Request For Relevant Information'.

Well, I didn't fill it in instead I emailed the Council and asked for a record of my payments so that I could check them against my bank statements.
A very polite but I imagine extremely harrassed lady replied Giving me the details required and also informing me that on checking these details, I was in fact up to date with my payments and that The summons and liability costs have been removed.
She did go on to say that the reason for this error was that my pay by date was the 14th of the month and some of the payments have been received after this date.

If, I was to be really bothered I think looking through my payment records I would find that in actual fact I was probably several weeks in front when making my donations to the buttie bar, but the system employed down there doesn't seem able to work that out.

However, I won't hassle the girl just on a minor technicality, instead I will thank her for her prompt action, and ask that the overpaid person in charge will try as hard and has the manners to check the figures they have before issuing their next summons to some other poor soul.