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

Revenue takes on new staff to clear 64-8 backlog

by
2nd Aug 2005
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

HM Revenue & Customs has announced that it has taken on 'a large number' of extra staff in the Central Agent Authorisation Team (CAAT) following concerns about large backlogs and long delays in processing 64-8s.

'As a result the turnaround time for processing forms 64-8 has subsequently reduced to 10 days,' said HMRC. 'We expect it to reduce even more,' the Revenue added

The Revenue says that agents can reduce the turnaround time by sending their 64-8s direct to CAAT rather than to their local tax office. 'At the moment around 75% of all the forms which should go direct to CAAT are being sent by agents to local offices. These then have to be passed to CAAT for processing, which creates a delay,' says HMRC. 'We realise that agents may have been doing this as they were concerned about the reported delays at the CAAT, but this should be less of a problem now that the backlog is being cleared.'

Another way to speed up the process is to include clients' UTR reference (and NINO if appropriate) on the forms. The Revenue says that many 64-8s are being submitted without these references.

The Tax Faculty at the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales welcomed the move but said there was still some improvement needed. 'We can confirm, from discussions with HMRC, that a lot of effort is being put into clearing the backlog of unprocessed 64-8s, and that the CAAT is working towards bringing the turnaround time down to the five days which was originally envisaged. Nonetheless, we are still getting reports from members of significant delays and other problems with the new system.'

Tags:

Replies (14)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By User deleted
03rd Aug 2005 20:34

64-8's
We are still waiting for 64-8's to be registered that we sent in April & May. Have sent duplicates but still not registered. I'm sure clients think we are incompetant when we ask them to sign these duplicates.
We now ask new clients to sign two copies as a matter of course so we have a duplicate to send in when the revenue "lose" the original.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
03rd Aug 2005 21:22

VAT office authority
The VAT registration section have recently come up with the concept of requiring written authority to deal with agents.

However, forget "joined up thinking" for a bnewly joined up organisation, ie. don't look to using an update of 64-8, instead the VAT registration office send a sample letter for the taxpayer to retype and add their name, VAT number & agents details !

I've just scanned it / OCR'd it as a word document to use in the future, I'd have preferred an updated 64-8 in pdf form however.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
04th Aug 2005 05:33

64-8 cobla5......
Their massive workload is self-inflicted as the 64-8 fiasco is happening because of the HMCR (stupid) decision to refresh their 64-8 database as part of the process of moving to ‘1980s’ technology. The dozy consultants they used clearly said the best route was to bin all doubtful records and force the advisers to spend thousands of man hours renewing 64-8 forms with clients, or sending copies of the original.
They have even anally rejected 64-8 using the old style form as “it’s not right” –get back to reality please.

I myself have succeeded in a formal complaint with Londonderry Office who binned me although I had been acting since 1995. They seriously told me to excavate the 1995 files to send them a copy of the 64-8 !!

The sensible thing is to instruct staff to accept the protestations of offended 64-8 holders on trust by using discretion instead of being ‘black and white’ to comply with teeeeedious rules set by unimaginative lawyers who don’t have to deal with the consequences of their stupidity. It'i sooooo good to be part of fixing something not broken instead of getting some work done……..

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
08th Aug 2005 13:56

The simple answer always overlooked
I still wonder why tax returns include a space to record details of the acting agent yet apparantly it has no effect.

The forms continue to miss out on the opportunity of including a signatory box for the client authorise and notify of the current acting agent.

Every year presents yet another self-inflicted fiasco for all to enjoy.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
09th Aug 2005 09:08

How long do we wait before sending a duplicate?
My local office has suggested that I should get duplicate 64-8s signed for clients where I sent the originals in to Longbenton in June or July & they haven't yet been processed. Is this standard from local offices to agents - i.e. are they effectively admitting that any more than 10 days old have been lost?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Davidsm
11th Aug 2005 12:08

64-8 nightmare
The plot thickens

We are now in the situation of being informed by the revenue that they cannot trace having received the SECOND copy we submitted.
How long is this situation goinging to continue. Clients think it is us who are getting it wrong

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
02nd Aug 2005 13:04

Ten Days?
Not in my experience.

Thanks (0)
Kevin Salter
By Kevin Salter
02nd Aug 2005 13:44

Nor mine
Still waiting for 2 sent direct to Newcastle to be entered from 13th July. Tax returns sat here waiting for FBI to be enabled for them.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
02nd Aug 2005 14:49

Are there really THAT many 64-8s being issued?
Having reached the stage where I pathetically log in each day just to see whether any more of my clients have been added (5 today so feeling quite chuffed) I've been trying to detect a pattern. No luck so far, except for one surprise. Partnerships are the quickest. Which seems contrary to other users' experience.

Out of interest I tried the the Government Gateway 'electronic 64-8' process to register myself as my agent. Took minutes to be accepted plus a further three months for my name to appear as a client on HMRC site.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By carnmores
02nd Aug 2005 16:13

Glad to see that they are trying
they have taken note of our comments.


to be fair to them agents who send 64-8 s in triplicate to all over the place must be a bloody nightmare, lets all stop doing this: we should try and help them to help us!

god what has brought me to this ;-)

Thanks (0)
Morph
By kevinringer
03rd Aug 2005 10:54

What about FBI2s?
We're all aware of the problems with 64-8s (I'm still waiting for one submitted 7 July), but what about FBI2s - is anyone experiencing problems with having these dealt with? I find these are as much of a problem as 64-8s.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Robert Clubb
03rd Aug 2005 12:36

Who's in Charge of Logistics?
I can confirm that much of what is being stated by correspondents we have experienced, particularly with regard to the processing of 64-8's.

One day I will have enough time to visit Longbenton. On past performance spanning many years, this must be the Revenue's equivalent of an accident blackspot. I would just like to say I have actually been there and done that. That's what happens when you have been dealing with the Revenue for 30+ years. You are easily pleased.

My real concern is who planned this latest centralisation and do they have a calculator?

Surely, even industrious practitioners can't make up vast numbers of ficticious 64-8's and submit them. So, how can someone under estimate so badly the level of staff needed to cope with the workload.

I suggest that the decision maker has a lot in common (or may even be the same person) as he or she dealing with the planning of the new Bradford Call Centre. Only providing the resources to answer 29.2% of calls in the first month is unforgivable.

At the end of the day it's us who have to help them solve a problem that any normal person could see coming, if they only looked and planned properly.

Will the FBI system be shut down again this year in the run up to the 31 January for essential maintence?....Probably.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
03rd Aug 2005 11:07

They're having a laugh...
I would love to know how big the backlog is. How can they say in one sense they are processing them within 10 days, and another say they have employed extra staff to clear the backlog. Seems a bit contradictory to me!! I am still waiting for 3 to be processed from May, admittedly they had no UTR numbers on because they were either new start ups or someone in employment, but they all had NI numbers on them. I never had these problems before the CAA Team were created, so how can this be progress?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
02nd Aug 2005 19:41

I'm still not happy though
especially when the Revenue state "another way to speed up the process is to iclude the clients' UTR"

Have they really not twigged that many 64-8s are submitted simply because it is a new self assessment case without a UTR?

Thanks (0)