Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

HMRC outgoing calls

by
28th Sep 2009
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

Security issues with HMRC incoming calls have been raised through Working Together. Rebecca Benneyworth outlines the issues and changes made recently.

Agents have expressed concern about calls from HMRC which are unsuccessful as the agent is unable to satisfy security questions. Most agents are confused by the logic behind HMRC telephoning the agent and then seeking to confirm the identity of the agent in relation to the client, when in fact the agent has been contacted using data on the client file held by HMRC.

This was one of the early issues to be passed through the new process developed during the relaunch of Working Together, and the current edition of the WT publication describes the process and the outcome.

“The main purpose of the new process is to enable local groups to make referrals that show the real nature, impact and scope of problems. With these, the national team can make a strong case for HMRC to address significant issues.

"We are pleased to be able to report that recent referrals on the new template have already enabled progress on real issues as well as helping us improve the process further. From the recent templates received from around the country we have found that many of you are unhappy with the process we have for outbound telephone calls HMRC make to agents.

You queried why you have to answer security questions when HMRC contact you. You were frustrated when we ring you and leave a message that does not give adequate information to be able to ring you back and pass the security questions".

Martyn Warren, a steering group member who sits on the Cardiff local group, echoes a similar issue from his local agents: "Why doesn’t HMRC tell us which of my clients they want to discuss when they leave a message?"

Martyn told us how his group’s discussions concluded that the problem was sufficiently serious for it to be referred as an issue on the new template. He added: "Passing one's concerns to someone who has access to their local Working Together representative can have the problem elevated to a national level and then hopefully resolved.

"As a result of these referrals we have worked with our colleagues in customer contact and have made changes to the verification process for outbound calls. When you are called back by a contact centre, all that is now required is that when you confirm your name, or that of your firm, it matches the name on the 64-8.

"However, this system cannot apply when it is our debt management and banking (DMB) colleagues who call you. Our DMB advisers make outbound calls via an automated dialler which means that they have no prior knowledge of which number has been dialled until contact is made. So when you answer the phone the adviser needs to establish for security reasons whether you are the taxpayer or agent etc.

"We thought it would be helpful to explain to you the process our customer contact officers must follow when ringing agents.

If you are not personally available the officer will try to arrange a time when a call back will be convenient. If a call back is not possible the officer will leave their name and a telephone number to enable you to ring them back.
It is important to note that the officer will not be able to provide a reason for their call when leaving their name and number. This is due to our strict confidentiality rules that mean they can only discuss specific details with the approved agent.

If you find that you are still encountering problems with the outbound telephone questions or you are unhappy with how your call is being handled you can ask to have the call escalated. You can do this by asking to speak with the officer’s team leader.

All our calls are recorded and we are happy to review calls to resolve difficulties.”

The information provided by HMRC has clarified the issue for agents and the changes to the internal process meaning that this should no longer be a problem.
 

Tags:

Replies (19)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By User deleted
28th Sep 2009 11:10

HMRC Calling

But when HMRC calls me, how do I know it is HMRC calling me and not someone out to solicit additional information about one of my clients????

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
28th Sep 2009 12:30

HMRC - a little more work required

It seems to me that HMRC haven't quite grasped this fully.

A clear protocol should be published, one that is watertight.

This is still full of (data protection) holes.

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
28th Sep 2009 12:46

Ask for security information

I have recently taken the view that it is prudent to ask HMRC staff calling me to answer some security questions about the client so that I can be sure it is them, and not a fraudster. Surely this needs to work both ways?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
28th Sep 2009 12:57

Already tried

I have tried asking callers security questions ..... their response is they cannot answer my/our questions until my/our identity is verified!!!! I think this is called Catch 22.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By mikewhit
28th Sep 2009 13:33

Not strictly

No, you could get out of the situation by answering the security questions from HMRC.

It would be Catch-22 if by answering the question, you showed you were not trustworthy enough to speak to the caller ...

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
28th Sep 2009 13:57

limited progress

Limited progress then. However HMRC clearly dont "get it" in terms of security and why agents might not like to give out confidential information over the phone to somone calling them. 

Its a serious issue to be taken seriously.  There is no reason agents couldnt be asked to read back something only we would know - eg a practice password, and then HMRC respond with a pre-validated  'response' code so we know its really HMRC.

Bog basic security - and it works too.

If auto-dialers are the issue, then dont use them for agents. I am not sure under what circstances debt recovering should be contacting agents in any case - on the odd occasion is happens I refer them to the client directly. Its not my job to chase money for the revenue.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Simon Sweetman
28th Sep 2009 14:14

security begins at home

One would hope HMRC take this seriously, since their own security appears to have been breached by people who may have extracted information from agents - possibly by just such phone calls.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By codling
28th Sep 2009 14:40

Security

This is a different story to the one told at my local working together group. Here we were advised that no security questions should be asked when HMRC phone an agent. Following this advice, I have taken several HMRC callers to task. They always offer a call back number but that defeats the object as you then have to go through security anyway. The last time this happened I asked the caller to refer the matter to her line manager and for the line manager to write to me explaining why security questions were being asked on an outbound call, contrary to working together advice. I also asked the caller whether she had the correct address for my firm to write to and asked her to confirm this. She refused "on the grounds of security" - what rubbish!!. Needless to say no letter has been received. It is interesting that all calls with DMB are recorded - are they ever listened to by line managers to ensure that any queries have been dealt with?

On the DMB side, it seems that in many cases they somehow have the agents number as the first point of contact. Quite how this has happened I do not know. I can only assume either the wrong number has been fed into their system or else I have some clients who have decided I should be pestered rather than them!   

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
28th Sep 2009 16:17

what WT group do you belong to, codling?

It sounds as if you were given wrong info for sure - based on both my local WT discussions on the point, and central WT discussions.  (and to be honest, I cannot imagine us ever getting to the stage your local HMRC WT reps described).  You need take this up with your local WT HMRC head, not the soles who phone you and follow orders!

As so oftenever, HMRC will not fully think through the issues, or at least they will not if it involves a cost to them.  I'm sorry to say that this means I do not take calls from HMRC if it is a "cold call" that requires security steps ;  it's too one-sided.  I welcome "warm calls" from HMRC officers who are dealing with a case and know who they are calling - it is better, quicker, more effective in majority of cases.  I look forward to the day when the security system for "cold calls" is properly symmetrical, since I am sure these could be of benefit to agents as well as HMRC. (excluding credit chasing !!)

Thanks (0)
avatar
By ALISON K
28th Sep 2009 18:37

HMRC CALLING
Had this as a problem this morning. I was left a note to say that HMRC had rung and to call them back as I was unavailable. I rang them back as per their request and then they couldn't talk to me as I was not a cheque signatory?!! What do I do now? It was ascertained that because of this that would be as far as the conversation went. Also added to this as I was only the book-keeper I told them that they really needed to talk to the Accountant but they would not even take his details as there was no safeguard to tell them I was telling them the truth. In desparation with "not working together" I gave up! Ali Castle

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
29th Sep 2009 08:51

Data Protection is Key
Our practice implemented years ago a comprehensive security grilling of anyone calling the office and claiming to be from HMRC. Quite often the officer refuses to answer our questions and we politely ask them to put their request in writing having neither confrimed or denied that we ask for the client to which they refer.

Our first and foremost responsibility is to protect our client's data. The caller could be anyone!!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cverrier
29th Sep 2009 10:31

Its a Data Protection issue - no question
There is a lot of nonsense ascribed to the Data Protection Act, with all sorts of organisations using it as an excuse for not doing things that they see as inconvenient or expensive (They hope that you are as unsure of the details of the Act as they are, and so cannot challenge them - and they are usually right).

In this case, however - it's quite clear that you should NOT disclose personal information about your clients to any incoming caller whose rights to that information has not been established (and established with enough due-diligence to protect you from potential litigation).

The Act started life as an IT issue, which is why I made it my business to keep an eye on it from its early days - but the Act now covers most organised filing systems - even if there is NO computerised element - and a typical Tax Department's files would clearly qualify as a 'Relevant Filing System' under the Act.

I suspect that HMRC will only begin to address this properly if they start to encounter enough push-back from the profession to make a real impact.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By adam.arca
29th Sep 2009 11:08

Nail on head
Anonymous this morning has hit the nail on the head. That is exactly what we do.

Why bother jumping through Revenue hoops when the end product is rarely anything of real concern? Just get them to put it in writing and, there you are, audit trail instantly re-established.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
29th Sep 2009 11:28

Catch 22

As posted previously, it causes a catch 22 situation. The caller (HMRC) will not give any information until they have correct responses to security questions - we do not give out personal information until we have verified who the caller is, and HMRC won't answer security questions!!!!!!. Surely it is the caller who should be checked, not the person receiving the call?

It seems a shame that we have to go back to snail mail just because HMRC do not have a verification system that does not protect the agents, eg. we have to take a gamble that we ARE speaking to HMRC or wait for postal correspondence.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By farrcorfe
29th Sep 2009 12:37

Security checks

When I receive a call from HMRC I ask them a security check question such as 'what is my SA agent identifer number?' as anyone could impersonate a revenue officer. If they cannot -or will not- answer then I tell them to write in with their enquiry. Graham

Thanks (0)
avatar
By David160
03rd Oct 2009 16:56

When I call an HMRC corporation tax office it is always engaged!

Whenever I call an HMRC corporation tax office, the line is engaged. So much so that I have now given up trying to telephone them.

So I do not have the chance to be asked security questions.

It would be nice to get to speak to anyone at the corporation tax office, so that I can be asked security questions.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
05th Oct 2009 13:15

HMRC phone calls

We have noticed that most of these calls from HMRC are made after 5:30 and are fielded by our anwerphone.

One one occasion I was in the office and picked up the phone - the HMRC officer on the other end was totally 'thrown' to get a human response.

Is there another agenda here? Leaving quick answerphone messages = as many productivity 'points' as a more conventional office hours conversation or do all those minutes waiting on 0845 when replying provide more income to HMRC?

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
07th Oct 2009 10:47

HMRC CALLS

if a revenue bod calls me and asks me to go through security (not all do) i say i'm not going through security since they called me and i let them decide if they want to continue.....invariably they don't and that's the end of the call.....simples!!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Kay Shall
14th Oct 2009 15:33

HMRC calls to agents

We have just yet again, had a call form an HMRC contact centre trying to ID us as agents before they will tell us why they are calling. When we explained we only have to give our company name and if that agrees with the 64-8 they no longer have to do further checks, they told us there had been no changes to their internal instructions and that if we would not answer any further questions they could not deal with us. Needless to say we said Goodbye! But why have they no idea the procdure has changed?

Thanks (0)