Issue - meetings

Report FSD21036

The report provided information regarding the performance of the Revenues Services provided by Liberata for the period 1 December 2020 to 31 March 2021.  A letter from Amanda Inwood-Field, Liberata’s London Regional Contract Director, provided an update on each of the individual service and was attached to the report at Appendix 1 with statistical data relating to the Revenues Service attached at Appendix 2.

In opening the discussion, the Chairman asked how Bromley’s performance compared with other London Boroughs in terms of Council Tax and Business Rates.  In response Members noted that for Business Rates the average decline across London was 8.4% whilst Bromley’s was 6.4% as such Bromley was below average.  In relation to Council Tax Bromley performed comparatively well.  Noting the poorer performance in respect of business rates, a Member suggested that it may be helpful for the Committee to have sight of the improvement plan for the service.  The Chairman also suggested that future reports include a commentary of comparative performance and the action being taken to drive continuous improvement.

As the information concerning the number of accounts removed from the single person discount as a result of fraud was not available at the meeting it was agreed that this information would be provided following the meeting.  It was also agreed that information concerning the number of properties vacant for 2 years and those vacant for 5 years would also be provided following the meeting.

In response to a question, the Director of Finance explained that more would be known about the risk surrounding the collection of Business Rates and to a lesser extent Council Tax once the virtual court started.  However, it was clear that a lot would depend on the economy and economic recovery.  Members noted that it had been a difficult year with a number of cancelled direct debits however, the Director of Finance confirmed that risks had been factored into the financial forecast.

Turning to the Empty Properties Premium, the Chairman noted that there were currently a number of uncertainties in relation to the performance of the economy and it would be unwise to take action which may prejudice homeowners who were trying to sell their property.  Members noted that there were a number of complex reasons why properties were left empty (such as probate) and it was important to highlight that there was currently a premium being charged for empty properties, the Committee were considering the issue of increasing this premium in certain circumstances.  The Committee requested that it be provided with any information that was available concerning why and where homes were left vacant.

RESOLVED: That

1.The report be noted;

2.  Future reports include a commentary of comparative performance and the action being taken to drive continuous improvement; and

3. The Portfolio Holder be recommended to approve the deferral of the decision to increase the Empty Homes Premium to 2022/23.