Agenda item

To update Overview and Scrutiny on performance of the Council's Revenues and Benefits service, since it became part of ARP on 1 April 2014.

Members considered the Anglia Revenues Partnership (ARP) Update report presented by Paul Corney.

Paul Corney informed members that ARP currently have no intention of increasing the number of partners and this would only be considered in the future if there was a strong business case to support this.

He explained that whilst initially the introduction of Universal Credit (UC) had increased processing times, this has now improved significantly. He added that the introduction of UC had allowed additional resource to be allocated to the processing of Council Tax and this approach has been extremely successful. He confirmed that all partners are in a strong position and have generated significant savings since joining ARP.

Peter Catchpole agreed and informed members that ARP and the Council are currently working on a major project to improve the ‘customer journey’ and enhance the service further. He explained that the project will explore improvements to the online services available to customers and drive efficiency in this process.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows;

1.    Councillor Hay referenced 2.13 of the report and asked what discussions have taken place between the Council and Cambridgeshire County Council (CCC) in relation to their withdrawal of funding for the fraud initiative. Councillor Mrs French explained that discussions are ongoing with CCC and the Council will be continuing recovery work whilst working to produce a business case to present to CCC. She confirmed that members will be updated accordingly.

2.    Councillor Hay stated that the figures provided in relation to ‘Single Person Discount Fraud’ shown in 3.7 of the report, are confusing and asked for further clarification on this. Paul Corney explained that if ARP apply a Single Person Discount and then, through fraud work, identify that this needs removing, the charges are automatically charged from that point and they are billed for that period. He explained that ARP do not seek any future savings and only claim for that financial year. He confirmed that if a person was to apply for a future discount, these are reconsidered by the team too.

3.    Councillor Cornwell referenced 1.3 of the report and highlighted that the area covered by ARP is one of the more rural areas within this national list. He asked if ARP is in danger of growing ‘too big too quickly’ and losing their local focus. Councillor Mrs French explained that the ARP Joint Committee agrees with this view and as a result, no further partners have joined since 2015. She stated that the emphasis has been on service delivery being improved and offering partnerships in specific areas where there will be no impact on delivery, such as Enforcement, where ARP (and all the partner councils) can gain resilience.

4.    Councillor Yeulett referenced 1.9 of the report and asked if all partners benefit from the ARP Enforcement Agency Service. Jo Andrews confirmed that this service is available to all partner authorities and in addition, South Norfolk Council and Norwich City Council. She explained that any fees collected above the cost of the service, are issued back to partners. She stated that the service is extremely customer focused and as a result receives very few complaints.

5.    Councillor Yeulett asked for further information in relation the ‘significant financial savings’ referenced in 1.13 of the report. Jo Andrews explained that excess income is shared between partners based on the number of liability orders issued by the Courts. She stated that this income fluctuates year on year and if more liability orders are granted, the larger the share of surplus income. She explained that the surplus income is in the region of £800,000 and the Council’s share of this is approximately £90,000.

6.    Councillor Yeulett asked that the information provided in 2.13 of the report is quantified for members. Jo Andrews explained that in relation to further recovery, ARP continue to enforce a small amount of cases against persistent debtors for the Council however this has not been carried out as routinely due to the funding issue with CCC. She explained that this has generated approximately £5,000 for the Council in the past year. She explained that Charging Orders generate income over later years as once a charge is registered to a property, it will not be repaid until this property is sold which can take several years. 

7.    Councillor Yeulett asked for further information on the appeals to the VOA referenced in 2.12 of the report. Jo Andrews explained that Business Rate payers can appeal against their rateable value and if successful, refunds can often total a large amount of money as they are backdated. She informed members that there is a provision in the Accounts for this.

8.    Councillor Miscandlon asked the process ARP use to ‘write-off’ claims and the cost implications for doing this. Jo Andrews explained that recovery of Council Tax and NNDR follows a statutory process and every available action is taken to recover this debt. However in some instances this is not possible, for example if a debtor absconds, if a debtor is deceased or is bankrupt. She explained that ARP expects to collect 99.5% over the lifetime of the debt. Since the Council joined the partnership in 2014/15, the Council Tax debt raised was £45.5m. She confirmed that 99.28% of this debt has been collected and the recovery process is still underway. In relation to ‘write-offs’ only £165,000 has been written off since 2014/15 which is equivalent to 0.36% of the debt. The Council’s share of this ‘write-off’ is approximately 15% or £25,000.

9.    Councillor Miscandlon asked how many ‘non-partners’ are currently utilising ARP’s services and why is this not being transacted through the ARP Trading Company. Paul Corney explained that the ARP Trading Company was originally set up to trade in areas outside of the partnership group however following legal advice, much of these additional services can be offered through a partnership arrangement and therefore the ARP Trading Company is not currently in use. He confirmed that ARP currently carries out work for Norwich City Council and South Norfolk Council. Work is also undertaken on behalf of some Housing Associations as they do not have the powers ARP have to enforce using statutory powers afforded to them by the Courts.

Members thanked Jo Andrews, Paul Corney and Adrian Mills for their attendance at today’s meeting.

The Overview and Scrutiny Panel noted the Anglia Revenues Partnership (ARP) Update report.