Agenda item - Quarter 2 Write Off of Debts Report

Agenda item

Quarter 2 Write Off of Debts Report

Minutes:

The Head of Customer Access and Financial Support presented the Quarterly Monitoring of Write Offs report for the period 1st July to 30th September 2014.  During the presentation of this report the following points were highlighted for Members’ consideration:

 

·         The total amount of debt that had been written off during the quarter was £46,935.

·         As requested, comparative data had been provided for the previous year. 

·         The level of debt that had been written off had decreased since the previous year. 

·         There had been a review of all of the Council’s debts and this had resulted in the identification of a number of cases where Officers had concluded there was no possibility of writing off the debt.  The outcomes of this review had impacted on the figures recorded for the previous year.

·         The Council was collecting debts dating back to 1999/2000.  The level of debts owed from previous years continued to fall.

·         Colour copies of the graphs included in the report were provided and Officers explained that these graphs had been updated to illustrate both the total write off of debts for 2013/14 and the position for 2014/15 at the time of writing.

·         The Council would pursue all options to support people struggling to repay their debts, but would start to pursue repayment of the debt more actively if the individual experienced a change in circumstances.

 

Following delivery of the report Members discussed a number of matters in further detail:

 

·         Officers explained that incentives could not be offered for the payment of Council Tax or business rates.  However, incentives were offered by some Councils to pay off other debts, such as sundry debts, by direct debit.

·         The deadline for invoices for debts. The deadline tended to be 30 days, though this varied depending on the type of payment involved.

·         The possibility of including debtors personal details in the report.  Officers explained that under data protection rules they were unable provide this information for Council Tax and it would only be possible to supply the information in a redacted form for business rates, which would be time consuming to provide.

·         The potential to predict the level of write offs in advance.  Officers advised that it was not possible to make predictions on a quarterly basis, though the Council had made relatively accurate predictions in previous years about bad debt provision for the year ahead.

·         The circumstances that might encourage individuals in debt to approach the Council for support. 

·         The increasing focus of the local authority on the needs of the individual as a whole, rather than as customers of separate Council services.

·         The repeated attempts adopted by the Council to obtain payment of debts.  The arrangements for payment of debts from previous years and how the funds returned to the Council were reflected in Council budgets.

·         The reasons why the report focused on debts dating back to 1998/1999.  Officers clarified that the Council’s computer systems had changed at this stage and the data could be obtained from this period for inclusion in the reports.

·         The value of outstanding debts that had not been paid for over 30 days or more and how this compared to previous years. 

·         The use of debt collection agencies. Members were advised that debt collection agencies were involved in collecting outstanding debts when no other action could be taken by the Council and would only be paid a fee in cases where they were able to recover a debt.

·         The circumstances where “statute barred” applied.  Members were advised that this referred to debts which the Council was not legally permitted to collect. 

·         The frequency with which the Council reviewed payment plans for bad debtors.

·         The amount of debt due to liquidation that had been written off and the extent to which this debt was owed by multiple parties in relatively small sums. 

·         The increase in the number of invoices that had been dispatched for Lifeline.  Officers confirmed that Bromsgrove District council had not had to cover the costs of lifeline services delivered to residents living outside the  District.

·         The extent to which particular individuals and businesses were more frequently in debt to the Council.

 

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

Supporting documents: