64-8s

64-8s

Didn't find your answer?

I just wondered if waiting at least 8 weeks for a 64-8 authority form to be processed, (and still waiting!) is typical, or whether an 8 week delay is normal these days. I'd like to know at what stage I should complain, and to whom?
paul goodman

Replies (7)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By ACDWebb
02nd Jun 2006 14:51

A couple of interesting comments re FBI & 64-8's in

Working Together 25

Self Assessment Online Filing for Agents - an Update
Filing Only Status
From April 2006, agents using 3rd party software to create and file Self Assessment and company tax returns online for their clients have been able to do so without 64-8
authorisation (known as file-only). The client no longer needs to be on your Gateway Client list in order for you to file returns on their behalf. However, a full 64-8 authority will be required before an agent can discuss client details with HMRC Offices or view liabilities and payments and statements online.

We plan to introduce this facility for agents using our own Online Tax Return software at a later date.

Agent Authorisations and Form 64-8
CAAT does not currently handle
• 64-8s for individuals who are newly in SA (but not selfemployed)
• 64-8s for new partnerships
• 64-8s for new trusts
• 64-8s for companies (Corporation Tax cases)
• 64-8s for claims cases dealt with in our laims Offices
• 64-8s for expatriate or complex personal return cases
• 64-8s and CWF1s accompanied by CIS Registration Card
applications
These forms/authorisations should be sent to the appropriate Area office, Expatriate or Complex Personal Return Team.

So now we know

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
30th May 2006 06:34

Further to my earlier post in this thread ...
... have just introduced another procedure:

Prepare (and get client to sign) two (or more) identical forms 64-8 at the outset (explaining to client that the first one (or few) will not get processed by HMRC). Then submit them at 14 day intervals. Eventually one will get through and it saves the time of approaching client for further signatures on separate occasions.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
08th May 2006 13:51

Fast at hurting a taxpayer, slow at helping.
A client had alleged Class 2 NIC arrears. Dispute them - detailed letter issued to Longbenton. CCJ is quickly issued ignoring the letter disputing the arrears. The Court office dealing with this challenge to the CCJ infer that Longbenton are "laid back" (don't care for customer service / don't have any concern for incorrect CCJs?).

One rule for them - be as slow and anti-customer service as they want, but expect taxpayers and advisors to be more prompt and put up with rubbish service.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
06th May 2006 11:09

Procedure
Every 64-8 that we submit now contains a covering letter providing notice of intent to pursue costs in the event of unreasonable delays in compliance.

After 30 days if the records remain unavailable online the correspondence is copied to local office requesting agreement that failure constitutes neglect on the part of their colleagues at Longbenton.

This is a fairly new procedure that we have put in place and it is early days yet to determine what proportion of our costs will be recovered.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
05th May 2006 14:52

E-Business Helpdesk
Phone the helpdesk on 0845 6055999. It may be that the 64-8 has been processed but you just cant access the details on the IR portal - in which case some friendly chap will manually put the details on for you and sort it out.

We've had a few like this - thinking the 64-8s hadnt been processed but in fact they had. Districts confirmed this. But in some cases its not being linked to the Portal.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
08th May 2006 12:46

64-8 Problem
We had a similar problem but we were informed that the client had to be allocated on the Gateway site. The problem with this is that if you have a lot of clients to be allocated to "users" each client has to be processed individually, and the site gives you the UTR not the name of the client.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
05th May 2006 15:17

Had the same problem...
...can't understand why they can't just link every 64-8 entry to the portal as a matter of course.

Thanks (0)