ANNUAL REPORT
2007-2008
2007-2008
CONTENTS .. Quick Links
Chair's Report
Progress during another challenging year ..
Manager's Report
It's good news and bad news again ..
General Advice
The car loan insurance policy that didn't pay up ..
Debt Worker
Another Tax Credit error causes stress ..
Employment Advice
A fight for due wages, holiday pay and redundancy payment ..
Money Advice to Prevent Homelessness
A big debt problem and the risk of losing the family home ..
Town Hall Sessions
A landlord's failure to comply with Tenancy Deposit Scheme ..
Eastfield Centre Sessions
State Pension under threat when HMRC claims retired person is still working ..
Are you getting It?
Welfare Benefits
Treasurer's Report
Enquiry Statistics
Personnel
I have pleasure in introducing this report on the performance of Scarborough and District Citizens Advice Bureau in the 2007/08 year.
As I look back I am aware just how challenging it has been for all the staff, trustees and volunteers, but how much progress we have made despite apparently bleak prospects at the start of the year.
The environment in which voluntary organisations operate becomes more and more difficult. Our funding comes in three main categories all of which are changing and under pressure. The basic funding which underpins the general advice service comes from our local authorities. We are grateful for their continued support but their grants are nowhere near enough to meet the demand from our clients.
To supplement this we seek contracts and bid for project funding but these streams too are under pressure. The year has been overshadowed by the new payment and contract conditions being implemented by the Legal Services Commission which potentially threaten the future of our excellent welfare benefits team. Partly in response to this we have been working with other North Yorkshire CAB's to establish Advice North Yorkshire. We believe this consortium will have more capacity to take advantage of government initiatives and contracts than individual bureaux standing or more likely falling alone.
On the project front, whilst the year saw the start of Triple Chance work in the Esk Valley funded by the Big Lottery, we also had to face the end of the Lottery funding for the telephone advice service run from Filey. We were forced to wind up that project losing valuable and long serving staff.
The Trustee Board had to grasp a few nettles as we examined just what services we could afford to provide in the light of ever diminishing and stretched income. I would like to thank all the staff for their help with and constructive approach to the process of fundamental review. In January we were facing cuts in service and reductions in paid staff hours.
But then, quite out to the blue, we were made aware of a trust fund set up in the will of a local woman, to be used to benefit the people of Scarborough. Our bid to that fund was successful and we are now able to plan to restore telephone advice and extend our services over the next three years. This sound platform from which to move forward, and the partnership working being developed across the county offer grounds for cautious optimism. We shall always need local support and fundraising and there is still much work to be done to secure the future, but, for now, we are able to develop and improve the services which local people continue to need.
Pat Chandler RETURN TO TOP This year we’re back to the old story of the good news and the bad news.
On the plus side we have been able properly to evaluate the effect that our new Financial Inclusion Fund Worker has had on bureau services now we’ve had the post for a year.
Frances left in November, Vicki held the fort until the end of January and she and Ed now share the job. Despite the upheavals we have never missed a target, for which they are to be congratulated. All of their work and Henry’s has been in addition to that carried out by the volunteer advisers, who have still dealt with debts of £5,616,539 between them, more than in 2006/07. Part of the aim of the Financial Inclusion Fund was to increase provision of face-to-face debt advice and it’s certainly done that in Scarborough.
Funding for Money Advice to prevent Homelessness (Henry) from North Yorkshire County Council finished on 30th November 2007 but further cash has been forthcoming to keep the post unchanged until 31st March 2008 while new partnership arrangements can be set up.
We’ve known we should be providing advice in Eastfield for people who can’t get through to Scarborough for a long time. Finally, on 1st June 2007 we started a new general advice service at the Eastfield Link Centre on Wednesdays. This has been paid for by the Eastfield Neighbourhood Partnership. To complement this they also fund Henry to go there for a day every other week and Ed does the same.
Thanks to a grant from the Big Lottery Reaching Communities Fund our new Triple Chance Project started on 1st July 2007 with targeted recruitment of trainee advisers from the Esk Valley. The project will, over time, create three new paid posts delivering advice in the Esk Valley, Eastfield and Filey until June 2012.
On the downside we were unable to obtain sufficient funding to continue operations at our telephone Call Centre in Filey when the Big Lottery grant ended. Reluctantly we closed the Filey premises and the line was discontinued while we refitted the Scarborough premises with a call room to enable telephone advice to continue.
And up again! .. the line went live again for three days a week on 31st March 2008 and we are now able to plan to expand the service back to five days a week.
Throughout, the bulk of the service has continued, thanks to the commitment of our volunteers; our receptionists who make our clients feel welcome, our advisers who deliver the actual advice and our admin staff who give IT and clerical support. Without them we might as well give up and go home. Thanks.
Here are some stories that illustrate the kind of work we do ..
Jill Mandy RETURN TO TOP Susan bought a car from a garage. She took out a loan of £8804. £6170 was for the cost of the car and the rest was to pay off the finance on her previous vehicle.
The garage also sold her an insurance policy which, they said, would cover the amount required to pay off the loan if the car was ever written off and the pay-out from her main motor insurance policy was insufficient to do so. She wasn’t given a copy of the policy but felt confident that whatever happened she would not end up with a debt.
Her car was stolen and written off. Her main insurer paid out £6,000 leaving £2085 needed to clear the loan, so she claimed on the insurance policy.
On 18th April 2006 she received a letter saying that the policy only covered the amount she paid on the car, not the amount used to clear the previous finance. As her main insurer had paid out £6,000 they would pay nothing at all.
Susan wasn’t happy. She went back to the garage and told them that they had misled her about what the insurance would cover when they sold it to her.
The garage weren’t happy either. They too had thought that the policy was designed to clear the outstanding balance on the loan and wanted to clarify the position before selling any more policies.
By the time Susan came to us on 4th March 2007 the garage’s solicitor had been trying to obtain a copy of the terms and conditions of the policy in order to examine it for ten months without success. The solicitor had written at least seven letters and made at least three phone calls. The outstanding balance on the loan had been passed to a collection agency and Susan was making payments of £100 per month to them to clear it.
We explained to her that she herself had more power than the garage’s solicitor because she was the insured person. She could make a formal complaint to the insurance company, which should make them sit up and take notice, and take the matter on to the Financial Ombudsman Service if not satisfied with their response.
But we also needed to see the terms and conditions of the policy first.
4th March 2007 - we wrote to the address on the letter refusing her claim asking for a copy of the policy and of their complaints procedure.
No response.
8th April 2007 - we prepared a formal complaint against their failure to supply the policy, which she signed and posted off.
11th April 2007 - we received a letter saying we needed to contact the main insurer for the policy. The letter refusing her claim had been sent by a third party claims administrator.
15th April 2007 - we rang the main insurance company. They said we needed to write for a copy of the terms and conditions. We did.
29th April 2007 - we got a letter form the main insurance company! It contained an excerpt from the sales document when the client bought the car and a compliments slip. No policy document.
We wrote again saying what we needed.
No response.
21st May 2007 - we are in the middle of preparing another complaint about the refusal to supply the policy details when we hear from the garage’s solicitor that the claim has been paid in full and all the money Susan has paid to the debt collection company will be refunded to her.
Can it have been a coincidence that the insurance company decided to pay out shortly after they knew we were involved? We think not.
Susan got what she wanted and we’re pleased for her but it’s frustrating as well from our point of view. Did the insurer pay out because they didn’t want the Financial Ombudsman looking too closely at their terms and conditions and making a ruling? What’s happening with other people who make claims on their policies? We don’t know.
Jill Mandy
RETURN TO TOP Mrs R came to the CAB for assistance with a Tax Credit overpayment from the tax year 2004/2005.
Mrs R said that she had received notice that she would need to begin repayments towards a Tax Credit overpayment of £5,000. Mrs R said that she did not understand how this had happened as she had always kept the Tax Credits office informed of any changes in her income or personal circumstances. She said she could not have received too much money as she had been in receipt of Statutory Maternity Pay, which is a very low income rate.
We discussed and agreed that Mrs R could not afford to repay this money as her and her partner’s income was low and they had a mortgage to service. Repayments of the Tax Credit debt would make keeping up with contractual payments impossible. Mrs R was in great distress and heavily pregnant. She explained that she had needed medical attention due to the stress this situation had caused and the effect it was having on her and her unborn baby.
The first step in dealing with overpayment of benefits was to clarify how the overpayment had occurred and if it was actually recoverable. We contacted the Tax Credits helpline to enquire how this overpayment had come about as she had always declared all changes. We clarified Mrs R’s income for the period in question. The Tax Credit officer dealing with the call explained that Mrs R’s information had been scanned into the system incorrectly and that the £5,000 income had gone through as £500,000. The officer explained that they would rectify this problem as soon as possible. He said that Mrs R should not worry any further as the overpayment was incorrect. With the correct income figure there was not an overpayment at all. Mrs R left very happily.
Shortly after this appointment Mrs R got back in touch with CAB. She was receiving demands for repayment for the overpayment again and had contacted the Tax Credit helpline herself several times to be told that there was no error that could be seen and that nothing had been added to her claim to give information which might help or explain the previous findings. Yet again we contacted Tax Credits and talked with several different Tax Credit officers before any light was shed on the situation. Repeatedly we were informed that the debt stood and would need to be repaid. The only option was to make a complaint and take the matter further until it reached Tier 2 of their internal system as they had greater powers.
During this time Mrs R was repeatedly admitted to hospital due to the effect the stress was having on her baby. Letters were received from Mrs R’s GP and Midwife to support her position which we forwarded to Tax Credits to hasten their actions in resolving the issues raised.
After several complaints were sent in writing highlighting the areas of error made by Tax Credits the case was finally fully reviewed by Tier 2 which concluded that the overpayment had been the fault of an error made by Tax Credits and that the matter should have been resolved after the first point of contact. The overpayment has now been cancelled and £100 paid in compensation to Mrs R. (This is the maximum amount which can be awarded.)
The whole case took several months to resolve and a great deal of time and resources.
Mrs R said that she could not have achieved this result and received the compensation if CAB had not become involved, as she herself had been told repeatedly by H M Revenue and Customs that the money was owed and would need to be repaid. This was evidently not the case. Mrs R could have potentially lost her home and accrued large levels of debt as a result of an oversight and poor administration and communication.
Mrs R had her baby with no further complications and both are doing well.
Vicki Smith
RETURN TO TOP The following case study shows some of the work necessary to uphold employment rights in the Scarborough area.
CAB Drop-in.
A young hairdresser worked at a beauty parlour for nearly 4 years when a new owner took over. Payment of wages then became a problem in terms of both the amount paid and when the wages were paid. After 3 months the young person was owed 2 months wages and came to us for advice. The Client was advised on how to write a grievance letter (what to put into it and to send it recorded delivery) and an appointment was made to see an employment adviser at CAB.
Client's CAB Appointment
She had not sent the grievance letter because she had been made redundant in the meantime. The client was advised on how much pay, holiday pay and redundancy pay she was entitled to. A grievance letter was drafted for the client to send recorded delivery to the employer to try and settle the matter without making an application to an Employment Tribunal. An appointment was made to see the client in 28 days.
Client's next CAB Appointment
She had not received a reply to the grievance letter but had received a telephone call that she would receive the money owed when the business was sold.
An application was made to the Employment Tribunal straight away.
This case took THREE meetings and EIGHT telephone calls with the client. There were a further NINE telephone calls with ACAS as well as correspondence and an application to the Employment Tribunal before the case was brought to a successful conclusion.
Paul Bateson
RETURN TO TOP We have a couple with two dependant children who, due to family health issues, are reliant on benefits as their sole source of income and, because of limited funds had incurred a number of debts both priority and non priority.
They had repeatedly tried since May 2005 to resolve the issue and made payments to their creditors with limited success, and the worry and stress of being constantly hounded by telephone calls and letters were making their health problems worse.
These were debts to their Landlord, the Local Authority (for Council Tax Arrears), Yorkshire Water and six non-priority creditors including their bank and “door to door” collectors; their overall health was deteriorating as a result, and they sought advice from the CAB.
Despite making efforts to pay their creditors by making individual offers and setting up individual payment arrangements they had repeatedly failed to maintain the payments. They were also issued a Notice Seeking Possession by their landlord for rent arrears and faced the real risk of losing the family home.
We made an arrangement for the clients to pay their landlord by Standing Order, and to pay the Local Authority by payment card.
After discussing the option of being able to use a “free” Not-for-Profit Debt Management Plan to make a single monthly payment which they would then be distributed equitably between their creditors it was agreed to set up a Paylink Account (a subsidiary of PayPlan) for the clients to be able to make a single monthly payment using the PayPoint Card system.
When we set up the Paylink arrangement the clients owed their landlord £732, the Local Authority £787 in Council Tax arrears and the various non priority creditors a total of £4,161.
Both their rent and Council Tax arrears have now been cleared and their non priority debts are down to £3,636.
But more importantly from the clients point of view their health has improved dramatically because they no longer receive letters or telephone calls from creditors demanding more money than they can afford and their home and liberty are no longer threatened (provided the make the single monthly payment through Paylink).
While the clients will never be able to live a lavish lifestyle they are able at last to plan for the future, and budget and provide for their children without the constant worry about opening the door of their home or answering the telephone in case it is a bailiff coming to demand money or their possessions.
Henry Rowlands
RETURN TO TOP Doing the sessions at the Town Hall I deal with a lot of other issues as well as benefits, Council Tax debts, bailiffs etc., and with the help of the SBC staff these are nearly all resolved, so it’s nice to report on something different for a change.
In April 2007, new legislation was brought in to protect Private Tenants bonds. This is called the Tenancy Deposit Scheme
This meant that landlords who took a bond from a tenant as a deposit after April 07 had to protect it in one of the 3 Schemes. The landlord had then to inform the tenant that the bond was protected and what scheme it was in.
However a lot of landlords are not complying with this.
Mrs W had paid a £500 bond and then was given a section 21 notice to quit the property. If served correctly the tenant has no defence against a Section 21 notice and will eventually have to leave the property, although the landlord would still need a court order if the tenant didn’t leave.
On checking the Tenancy Agreement I found there was no mention of the bond and when I queried it with the client she said the landlord had it and no it wasn’t protected.
On checking the legislation I found that if a landlord failed to comply with the Tenancy Deposit Scheme, then they could not get possession of the Property using a Section 21 notice. Not only that, the tenant could make a claim to the County Court that the Landlord failed to protect her bond and if client proved her case (which client could) then the court would order an award to the tenant of 3 times the bond i.e. £1500 plus the original bond to be returned.
Mrs W was very happy to say the least and would discuss the issues with her partner. The information she had received put her in a very strong position regardless of what she decided to do.
Ken Nikolic
RETURN TO TOP Mrs Y came to our outreach centre in Eastfield for advice about her State Retirement Pension.
She said she had given up work 14 years ago at the same time as her husband who is 15 years older than her. They had been living on Guarantee Pension Credit. She had reached 60 in December and put in a claim for her Retirement Pension.
Mrs Y said this is when the problems started. She had been told that she would start receiving £90.70 per week on 19th December BUT H M Revenue and Customs told her that they had records of her working for 2 firms she had never heard of AFTER she had actually retired. She had contacted her local tax office, but they had seemed reluctant to believe her, and she had still not received her pension. She had also received a letter from the Pension Service stating that she was entitled to a Retirement Pension of £100.29 starting from 19th December.
I contacted the Inland Revenue and explained that my client had never worked for these companies and she had not yet received her pension. They agreed to review their records and said they would inform client of the outcome.
I then contacted the Pension Service and explained my client’s situation again. They checked their information and told me that my client would receive a backdated payment and then a weekly pension of £100.29 from 9th January.
I advised Mrs Y that when she had all her income details we would do a full benefit check for her.
11th January
I advised my client to write to them with the information they were requesting and to return if there were any further developments.
25th January
2nd February
I contacted the Pension Service and was put through to a specialist adviser. Having checked my client’s records she found a number of errors and said that there needed to be a full investigation. She assured me that this was an official error on their part so they would not suspend my clients pension or pursue her if there was any overpayment.
It was agreed with Mrs Y that we fax through her consent form so they could deal with this matter through us in future
She asked about Attendance Allowance for her husband. He had been turned down for this 2 years before. I contacted the department of Work and Pensions, requested an application form and advised her we would make her an appointment to see a welfare benefit adviser to help complete this.
She continues to receive £100.29 per week Retirement Pension, part of which is based on someone else’s National insurance contributions, and we’re waiting to see what happens next……
Maurice Le Cuirot
RETURN TO TOP Mr A, 61 was passing by, had heard about our Benefit Take Up, so dropped in not hoping for any useful information.
He explained he moved to Scarborough about 9 months ago after a relationship breakdown. He had some savings and obtained rented accommodation. He found part time work that gave him enough income to get by on.
But he'd lost his job 2 months earlier and was using his savings to pay everything, hoping he would get further employment, but he hadn’t been successful.
He said he was now down to his last few hundred pounds and desperate. He wanted to know what he could do until he was 65 and get his Retirement Pension.
After doing the necessary checks on capital, assets, income etc., I informed him he was entitled to claim Pension Credit of £119.05 pw plus help with his rent and Council Tax through claiming Housing and Council Tax Benefit from Scarborough Borough Council.
I told him that as his rent was only £70 a week he would more or less get full help with this as he would be in receipt of Guaranteed Pension Credit. His Council Tax of £14.19 would also be paid in full.
Mr A actually said he was flabbergasted. He had never claimed benefits in his life and these benefits would be a lifeline. I also advised him that he could possibly get his benefit backdated to the period he lost his job, providing he could supply evidence to show that his circumstances were the same then as now. He said he could and left to make the necessary claims for these benefits. The total sum of benefits the client was missing out on was £201.24 a week.
Ken Nikolic
RETURN TO TOP "Zebedee" (aged 69) came to the bureau when Scarborough Borough Council stopped his Housing Benefit for alleged non-commerciality. He explained he had no idea why as his wife ad looked after all finances and she had died in January.
Potted History: When "Zebedee" and his wife "Ermintrude" moved into the house it was owned by his son "Brian". Brian sold the house to "Florence" who then became the new landlord. During this process Florence met Zebedee’s other son "Dylan". They clicked and married. After an unhappy six months the couple separated and as part of the separation agreement Dylan bought the house and became Zebedee’s landlord.
Nitty Gritty: On 1 February 2007 Scarborough Borough Council received the information that Zebedee’s landlord had changed to be his son Dylan. Zebedee and Dylan were interviewed on 7 March: Zebedee said that Florence was still landlord and Dylan said he was not the landlord. Zebedee subsequently produced a tenancy agreement dated 5 January 2007 and a rent book showing Florence as landlord.
SBC then obtained a statement from Florence saying that the house had been transferred to Zebedee as part of the separation agreement and the last rent she received was on 23 February 2006. She was shown the tenancy agreement and rent book produced by Zebedee and said the signatures were not hers.
Zebedee’s Housing Benefit was suspended from 26 February 2007 and superseded on 27 September. Zebedee was notified of a recoverable overpayment.
Dylan claimed that he only learned that the house was his at the above interview at which he was also advised to get a new tenancy agreement and to start collecting rent, after which Zebedee should make a new claim for Housing Benefit. They did all this and the new claim was rejected as being non-commercial.
At this point Zebedee came to the bureau for help.
At the bureau: Zebedee was very confused and seemed to have no idea why his benefit had been stopped. I agreed to help but couldn’t do much until the SBC submission arrived. This showed clearly that a fraud had occurred. I did not suspect Zebedee as he was not competent to forge documents and signatures. But I suspected that Dylan probably was and somebody had certainly committed fraud. As a result I refused to represent at the tribunal hearing.
At the tribunal: The Chairman spotted that there were two decisions; the decision to recover the overpayment and the decision that the latest claim was non-commercial. As a result Scarborough Borough Council was persuaded to allow a late appeal against the overpayment. The Chairman directed that the two decisions should be heard separately and Scarborough Borough Council should prepare a new submission to cover the overpayment decision. He also directed that the possibility of a tenancy by Estoppel should be considered and recommended that Zebedee seek representation from the CAB (estoppel – in this context is when you are paying rent to someone you truly believe is your landlord, but isn’t really).
Back at the bureau: Zebedee and Dylan were interviewed together and questioned about the forgeries. Dylan seemed very genuine. He had gone to pieces at the time of his separation from Florence to such an extent that he became a danger to others at work (colleagues refused to work with him) and he neglected all correspondence and paperwork. This is why he was unaware of exactly when Zebedee’s house became his. But there had to be a villain. So maybe Florence was lying. Dylan said he no longer had any contact with her but knew that she would not have anything to do with the tribunal and would not talk to me. He didn’t know how to contact her but thought that his sister Diana might still be in touch with her.
On the trail: Diana lives in Bridlington and works full time so she would not come to the bureau but agreed to talk to me in the evening. Two long conversations revealed new possibilities. First she did not know how to contact Florence but she did not believe that Florence would say the tenancy agreement was forged if she had signed it, which makes sense as she would have nothing to gain, so another dead end? Both Zebedee and Dylan had told me that Zebedee’s wife Ermintrude had handled all their financial affairs and Dylan had hinted that unexpected debts were discovered after she died. So I asked Diana about the debts; there were several in Ermintrude’s name but one was in Diana’s maiden name and one in Zebedee’s name; neither was aware of this. I then asked about the dodgy agreement and if she knew the witness Mrs McHenry (who was next on my list to contact). Diana knew Mrs McHenry because she was Brian’s girlfriend (the other son – keep up!) and she also knew that Florence was not present when she (Mrs McHenry) “witnessed” the signatures. So poor dead Ermintrude became the prime suspect; oh dear!
I delicately raised this possibility with Dylan, he admitted that it was possible but would not admit the possibility at the tribunal. He also mentioned that his mother had been in debt to a credit card company some months before her death and he had paid the debt. I did not talk to Zebedee about this as he was still in a state of grief for his wife.
The Tribunals: There was never any chance of winning the first tribunal regarding the overpayment as it was clear that Housing Benefit had been paid but no one had received any rent. The only reason for going ahead with it was to bring out the fact that neither Zebedee nor Dylan were responsible for the fraud and lead the tribunal to realise that dead Ermintrude was the culprit (without quite saying so). This worked fine. We lost but the chairman got the message. I thought with Zebedee and Dylan off the fraud hook we had a good chance of proving that the tenancy between them was commercial. The tribunal was to be heard by the same chairman as the first one but he was called away at the last minute so we had someone new to the case, which I think was a factor in losing this appeal: which was a shame.
Follow-up: I have asked for the full statement of reasons for the decision on commerciality and hope to be able to find an error of law which will allow us to appeal to the commissioners. So watch this space!
Pete Rothery
RETURN TO TOP During the year ending 31.03.08 £2,486 was raised by the Publicity and Fundraising Group and the bureau was featured in the local newspaper on several occasions.
We would like to thank the following for their kind donations.
Thank you also to the members of the group for their time and effort.
This year we started a new accounting system (QuickBooks). The system was introduced as the previous package (Quicken) was not being supported in the UK.
QuickBooks was implemented at the suggestion of Citizens Advice as they would like all bureaux eventually to adopt this system. They assisted us setting up the full cost recovery model. We have a large number of projects and QuickBooks accurately records income and expenditure on each project. Thanks to Sharon Noble for her extra work and diligence setting the system up.
The healthy state of our finances at present is testament to the careful monitoring and strict control of the management and directors. Continued adherence to these aims and ideals will ensure a healthy financial future.
Dave Hawley
RETURN TO TOP RETURN TO TOP
RETURN TO TOP
Webmaster: Lionel Beck
Checking entitlements leads to a pleasant surprise ..
A Magic Roundabout of family confusion and deceit ..
Kind donations and new accounting software ..
At-a-glance picture of the types of enquiry and where they are received ..
Management committee, paid staff, volunteer advisers, trainees, administrators & receptionists ..
Chair's Report
Chair
Manager's Report
Manager
General Advice
Funders: Scarborough Borough Council
North Yorkshire County Council
Enquiries: 11,360
Total debt handled: £5,616,539Debt Worker
Funder: BERR Financial Inclusion Fund
Enquiries: 1515
Total debt handled: £3,222,168Employment Advice
Funders: Scarborough Borough Council
North Yorkshire County Council
Enquiries: 369
Settlements: £37,400
Money Advice to Prevent Homelessness
Funders: North Yorkshire County Council
Scarborough Borough Council
Accent Housing
Chevin Housing
Home Housing
Sanctuary Housing
Yorkshire Coast Homes
Eastfield Neighbourhood Partnership
Enquiries: 1,788
Total debt handled: £1,190,806 Town Hall
Funder: Scarborough Borough Council Housing Benefit
Enquiries: 1,307Eastfield
Funder: Eastfield Neighbourhood Partnership
Enquiries: 283
She returned to see me bringing in a letter from HM Revenue and Customs. They wanted confirmation in writing of her National Insurance Number and any previous addresses. She was concerned that they still did not believe her as the Pension Service had contacted her the previous week asking about company pensions.
She returned again and said her pension was now being paid but her husbands had been stopped. I contacted the Pension Service. They said this had been adjusted and he would receive £119.70 from 30th January, which would include £23.13 Savings Credit.
She brought in letters from the Pension Service & HM Revenue and Customs stating that someone had been using her National Insurance number in error and she was probably being paid too much pension. She was concerned that if she was being paid the wrong pension legal action would be taken against her.
Extra Money - Could you get it?
(Welfare benefit take-up)Funder: Scarborough Borough Council Housing Benefit
Enquiries: 646
Extra Income Identified: £668,218 p.a.
Lump Sums: £21,986Welfare Benefits
Funders: Legal Services Commission
North Yorkshire County Council
Enquiries: 2,341
Benefits obtained: £1,366,907
A Magic Family Affair: 23 contacts over 8 monthsTreasurer's Report
Enquiries and Service Outlets Statistics
Total Enquiries: 19,240
Debts 7271
Benefits 5842
Misc 2089
Employment 1724
Housing 958
Legal 702
Relationships 654
Service Outlets
Scarborough General 7195
Whitby General 2001
Filey Call Centre 2162
Money Advice Project 1788
Welfare Benefits 2341
Town Hall 1307
Are You Getting It? 646
Financial Inclusion Fund 1515
Personnel
Management Committee
Pat Chandler
Ken Dale
Dave Hawley
Andrew Backhouse
Dawn Birkett
Dorothy Clegg
Lisa Nortcliff
Ian Poole
Martin Smith
Brian Watson
Jean Rhind
Miriam Alcock
Jo Drydale
Alan Stewart
Sue Butcher
John Fawcett
Catherine Webster
Chair
Vice Chair
Treasurer
Ordinary Member
Law Society
Ordinary Member
Coastal and Moors Voluntary Action
Ordinary Member
NYCC
Scarborough Borough Council
Citizens Advice Bureau
Staff Rep
Staff Rep
Staff Rep
Minute Secretary
Resigned 19th September 2007
Resigned 19th September 2007
Paid Staff
Ed Barker
Rachel Boyes
Frances Butt-Philip
Jean Crossan
Chris Gadd
Adam Holden
Maurice Le Cuirot
Jill Mandy
Julie Maskill
Ken Nikolic
Sharon Noble
Sarah Peaker
Becca Robinson
Henry Rowlands
Victoria Smith
Phillipa Valentine
Julie Wardle
Denise Whetton
Financial Inclusion Fund Worker
Welfare Benefits Worker
Financial Inclusion Fund Worker
Advice Session Supervisor
Welfare Benefit Take-up Worker
Welfare Benefits Worker
Session Supervisor (Call Centre)
Bureau Manager
Welfare Benefits Administrator
Deputy Manager
Office Manager
Welfare Benefits Worker
Welfare Benefits Worker
Money Advice Worker
Financial Inclusion Fund Worker/Administrator
Guidance Tutor
Cleaner
Call Centre Manager
Volunteer Advisers
Miriam Alcock
Paul Bateson
Tony Bellwood
Heather Bogg
Jean Crossan
Greta Griffin
Ally Harrison
Tracy Jarratt
Pen Jenkinson
Maurice Le Cuirot
Mary Mynot
Valerie Nicol
Maggie Ratcliffe
Angela Richings
Peter Rothery
Paul Seddon
Vicki Smith
Carole Spink
Alan Stewart
Susan Thompson
John Truscott
Josie Williams
Trainee Volunteer Advisers
Dave Baker
Christine Brumfitt
Maggie Burchall
Pat Church
Kay Edwards
Chris Gadd
Lucia Goodman
Jenna Holliday
Helga Immison
Shirley Keyworth
Chris Lightfoot
Sue McAdam
Gwyneth McDermott
Lorraine Merrian
Keith Mollison
Mary Murphy
John Raine
Rose Rylands
Harry Stevens
Christine Swaine
Agata Szymanska
Gwynneth Townson
Peter Turner
Christine Ward
Sarah Waterson
Carol Watts
Volunteer Guidance Tutors
Maggie Ratcliffe
Carol Spink
Volunteer Administration
Vicki Allen
Adrian Andrews
Lionel Beck
Ian Clark
Jo Drydale
Jamie Myers
Anne Phillips
Barry Soper
Volunteer Receptionists
Christine Baxendale
Steve Drydale
Kathy Hardy
Gillian Marsden
Lesley Michalak
Arliene Monsey
Anne Moore
Pauline Moss
Jamie Myers
Chris Parsons
Christine Raper
Lynne Reed
Sylvia Smith
Wendy Wilson