More DMB Frustrations

Good start to Monday

Didn't find your answer?

I client subcontract company emailed a threatening DMB tax demand for the 2015 year for £8,500. This should have been covererd by a CIS set off following a request from me to HMRC in July with a copy to DMB for information asking them not to pursue payment in the meantime. The set off has not hppended.

A call to the CT section got the standard response that I will receive a call back within 3 working days. To be safe I decided to phone DMB to advise what was going on and also to find out why my July letter had not been acted on.

The gist of the conversation, as I understood it, was that my original letter would have been sent to the CT section and collection proceedings would carry on as normal. I suggested that surely they should liaise with the CT section before issuing further demands and I asked why they did not contact us if there was a problem. The response I got was "Why should we?" My suggestion that he should because he is a civil servant did not go down well. The conversation started to get a little heated and I felt that the person I was speaking to did not properly understand about CIS set offs as he referred to a CIS debt which needed to be paid. He did however say that he was fully trained in CT matters and had 5 years experience. Having tried fruitlessly to explain, I lost my cool slightly and used a vernacular phrase suggesting he did not know whet he was talking about (I immediately apologised for the use of that particular phrase - but not the meaning behind it).

I asked (very politely) how they work their debt collection system in such circumstances and he refused to give details apart from the fact that the original letter would be sent to HMRC.

Conversation again became a little aerated and it was eventually terminated with the DMB person saying that the conversation would be treated as a refusal to pay by the client company.

Why oh why are DMB so devolved from anything else that goes on within HMRC. The lack of joined up thinking is incredible and causes no end of problems.

What would you do in these circumstances? 

 

 

Replies (6)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

By SteveHa
09th Jan 2017 12:09

Because it would have been a third party acting as agents for HMRC.

The better option would have been to contact CT, accept that they have delays, and ask them to call the dogs off since it is illegal to pursue a debt that you know not, or have good reason to believe is not due.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By codling
09th Jan 2017 14:41

Thanks SteLacca,
I realise that they may be a third party but it does not excuse the lack of care and liaison as they are still acting under the HMRC banner.
As regards CT contact, I did this but of course the person who answers the phone cannot help and has to refer it on, hence the 3 day call back, so I cannot get HMRC to call the dogs of until they contact me.
The phone call to DMB was purely a belt and braces job to try and stall any future nasties.

Thanks (0)
By SteveHa
09th Jan 2017 14:50

The problem with the third party arrangement is that they are only entitled to the bare minimum information necessary to enforce the debt. They are NOT entitled to details of how the debt arose, other taxes etc. Which is why they are neither use nor ornament as a point of contact other than to make payment.

You have to go to the organ grinder, and not the monkey, I'm afraid.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By codling
09th Jan 2017 15:01

I don't disagree but It would be nice if you could find an organ grinder to go to!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By ruth.julian
09th Jan 2017 16:58

Since when was DMB hived off from HMRC?

Thanks (0)
By SteveHa
09th Jan 2017 20:54

DMB have been outsourcing collection for a while, now. Have you been asleep in the woods somewhere?

Thanks (0)