Home Department: Complaint to the Home Secretary against the Independent Police Complaints Commission. My appeal against the HM Revenue and Customs investigation of serious misconduct is simply being ignored (WITH UPDATE 28/10/2017)

Re: Internet cuts since 26 May 2017

From my earlier blog post's Update 28 September (11.16pm):

"And it's not just Facebook blocks, blocks on public access to our Church and State website and the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site that Declan and I are dealing with these days. We have also been dealing with Internet cuts since 26 May. See my blog post of 21 June, Internet cuts: We pay £65 per month for BT Infinity but feel we are in a race against time to stay online (WITH UPDATE 28/9/2017 RE: 163rd Internet cut since 26 May 2017)."

28 October (10.24am): 165 internet cuts since 26 May 2017.* We had to suspend work on our Church and State website on 15 June after 4 internet cuts in one night. With an all-time record breaking 7 cuts in one day by 4pm on 29 August; 14 cuts last month that included on 5 September our latest 1/2 hour removal from the internet plus the almost total shutdown of our BT TV service; no cuts since 13 October (as of 28 October at 10.24am).

1. 143rd 29 August 2017, 8.42am
2. 144th 29 August 2017, 9.54am
3. 145th 29 August 2017, 10.52am
4. 146th 29 August 2017, 11.38am
5. 147th 29 August 2017, 12.02pm
6. 148th 29 August 2017, 12.47pm
7. 149th 29 August 2017, 3.10pm
-----------------------------------------
10. 152nd 5 September 2017, 11.53am
11. 153rd 5 September 2017, 1.48pm
12. 154th 5 September 2017, 4.35pm
13. 155th 5 September 2017, 9.32pm (28 minutes+)
-----------------------------------------
23. 165th 13 October 2017, 8.50am

* 12 out of the first 18 internet cuts were within the first four days of a BT engineer's visit on 12 June. It is a matter of written record that this engineer "securely fitted a brand new master socket to another location on the same wall. He also carried out a comprehensive line test and could not find a problem with [our] line".

The War on Free Expression

From the IPCC website: "If you are appealing against the investigation into your complaint, you will have received a letter from us acknowledging that we have received it and giving an indication of the likely time it will take for us to consider your appeal."

The police complaints system extends to a small number of organisations that are not police forces, including HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). On 15 September 2017 the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) forwarded to the Professional Standards Department of HMRC my complaint of serious misconduct against HMRC staff. I not only complained to the IPCC about HMRC Pay As You Earn and Self Assessment updating my address on 11 July 2017 without my permission (and in the full knowledge of the potential detrimental effect of this on my living situation, given that my address has not changed since May 2014), but I also complained about the then subsequent closure of my Self Assessment account based upon fabricated hearsay evidence which no independent judiciary would accept. On 23 September I appealed to the IPCC against the HMRC's investigation into my complaint; however, I have yet to receive from the IPCC what their website says is a letter acknowledging that they have received my appeal and giving an indication of the likely time it will take for them to consider it. The IPCC has also completely ignored my follow-up administrative complaint of 11 October, which I copied to IPCC Chair Dame Anne Owers, who has responsibility for ensuring the Commission meets its statutory responsibilities as a public body and is accountable to the Home Secretary. This therefore is my email this morning to Home Secretary Amber Rudd titled "Independent Police Complaints Commission's current non-compliance with its statutory responsibilities":

For the attention of Dame Anne Owers DBE, Chair, Independent Police Complaints Commission (by email and recorded post)

The Rt Hon Amber Rudd MP
Home Secretary
Home Office

Address removed for email

BY EMAIL AND RECORDED POST


27 October 2017

IPCC reference: 2017/091737
HMRC reference: CETO/16936/2017

Dear Home Secretary,

On 23 September 2017 I appealed to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) against the investigation by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) into my complaint dated 12 August 2017, which the IPCC forwarded to the Professional Standards Department of HMRC. Please find attached a snapshot of the online acknowledgement I received immediately following my submission of my completed IPCC appeal form.

The IPCC website states: "If you are appealing against the investigation into your complaint, you will have received a letter from us acknowledging that we have received it and giving an indication of the likely time it will take for us to consider your appeal." I have evidently appealed to the IPCC against the investigation by HMRC into my complaint about serious misconduct by HMRC staff. However, I have yet to receive the Commission's letter acknowledging that they have received my appeal and giving an indication of the likely time it will take for the IPCC to consider the matter. I have also not received a response of any kind to my follow-up administrative complaint of 11 October 2017 cc'd to IPCC Chair Dame Anne Owers, who has responsibility for ensuring the Commission meets its statutory responsibilities as a public body and is accountable to the Home Secretary.

On 12 August 2017 I not only complained to the IPCC about HMRC Pay As You Earn (PAYE) and Self Assessment updating my address on 11 July 2017 without my permission (and in the full knowledge of the potential detrimental effect of this on my living situation, given that my address has not changed since May 2014), but I also complained about the then subsequent closure of my Self Assessment account based upon fabricated hearsay evidence which no independent judiciary would accept. HMRC Internal Governance have made the decision that "there is no criminal action by any HMRC officer or readily identifiable potential gross misconduct matter". I disagree with the findings of HMRC's investigation because I feel that they haven't made the right decision based on all the evidence.

Firstly, I have taken issue with the updating of my address by HMRC PAYE and Self Assessment on 11 July 2017 without my permission. By email of 9 July 2017, I specifically informed HMRC PAYE and Self Assessment that my address had not changed and that such an update could result in the suspension of my husband's Housing Benefit. Nonetheless, HMRC PAYE and Self Assessment updated my address against my expressed wishes and with no regard for the detrimental effect this could have had on my living situation. By letter of 19 July 2017, Newham Council Benefits Service specifically informed my husband that the suspension of his Housing Benefit would be automatic should they receive notification of a change in my circumstance from either HMRC or the Department for Work and Pensions as a result of this update.

Secondly, I have taken issue with the then subsequent closure of my Self Assessment account by HMRC PAYE and Self Assessment based upon fabricated hearsay evidence. In a letter of 24 July 2017, HMRC PAYE and Self Assessment Customer Service Manager John Fitzpatrick wrote: "We previously asked you to complete Self Assessment tax returns because you told us that you would receive self-employed income. However, your 2015-16 return only included income of £2,967 from Network for Church Monitoring and as you had told us that this was PAYE income, we have closed your Self Assessment record." I have never told HMRC that I am self-employed, which I am not. I have also never told HMRC that my income as an employee of Network for Church Monitoring is PAYE income, which it is not (as untaxed earnings to date).

HMRC explain in their final decision letter that their update on 11 July 2017 "was to confirm your address as 71 Queens Road West, Plaistow, London E13 0PE, which we had previously noted in October 2014". I do not find this explanation in any way reassuring when it comes to ensuring that my address will only be updated again by HMRC in the event that HMRC PAYE and Self Assessment receive written confirmation from me. Further, HMRC PAYE and Self Assessment have reopened my Self Assessment account and updated their records to show that I am not self-employed, but they have been unable to provide me with any written evidence to support Mr Fitzpatrick's assertions in his letter of 24 July 2017. In fact, no reference is made to this letter from Mr Fitzpatrick in the final decision letter from HMRC.

I am looking for the IPCC to uphold my complaint against HMRC as a serious misconduct matter taking into account: (i) the updating of my address on 11 July 2017 without my permission (notwithstanding the potential detrimental effect of this on my living situation), and (ii) the then subsequent closure of my Self Assessment account based upon fabricated hearsay evidence which no independent judiciary would accept. This matter has caused my husband and me a lot of distress and inconvenience. Hearsay evidence aside, HMRC are well aware that government departments share information relating to their customer's personal details. Because of this, updates made by one department to a customer's address can flow to their records held by another department and can mean a quick suspension of Housing Benefit, which could run up hundreds in arrears in the space of a few weeks.

Please could you be of assistance in respect of IPCC's letter acknowledging that they have received my appeal and giving an indication of the likely time it will take for them to consider this matter. Surely the Commission fails to comply with its statutory responsibilities by ignoring an appellant's claim of serious misconduct against an organisation to which the police complaints system extends? And this is not to mention the fact that the aforementioned administrative complaint is also being ignored. It is not inconceivable that my case against HMRC could see the inside of a courtroom in the New Year, particularly if I cannot protect my home and situation from further misconduct by HMRC staff.

Yours sincerely,

Maria Heavey
Webmaster
Network for Church Monitoring

"Let me recommend an important web site - churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out." Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

UPDATE 28 October (10.29am): Now we have no right of appeal to the IPCC! Yesterday we received an email from them. It states: "The IPCC only has remit over complaints against the HMRC when police like powers are used, e.g. raids on property etc." We fail to understand why we were only told this yesterday and not two months back. We also wonder why the IPCC came looking for my consent last month to forward my complaint to the Professional Standards Department of HMRC; see my newer blog post this morning, Why did the Independent Police Complaints Commission come looking for my consent last month to forward my complaint to the Professional Standards Department of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs? (WITH UPDATE 28/10/2017). The result is that, as things currently stand, we will use my complaint above to the Home Secretary to defend our housing association tenancy. Nothing we have written to date does a better job at establishing that we have been unable even to secure our home address with HMRC four years into the tenancy itself. I also wasn't kidding when I told the Home Secretary that it's not inconceivable that my case against HMRC could see the inside of a courtroom in the New Year, particularly if I cannot protect my home and situation from further misconduct by HMRC staff. The last time our Housing Benefit was suspended following an address update on the HMRC website, Declan was forced to take quick action with this High Court pre-action letter to the Chief Executive of Newham Council in the face of running up hundreds in arrears in the space of a few weeks:

Click to enlarge

We are well familiar with the IPCC. For example, Declan complained to the IPCC about the police investigation into the removal of our flat door in 2012. It was the IPCC's finding on that occasion that since our then landlady had subsequently signed an undertaking to the County Court promising not to harass us, there was no requirement for the Metropolitan Police to take further action.

Re: Removal of our flat door

Paragraph 23(ii) of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

23(ii) On 21 August 2012, Ms McKenzie signed an undertaking to the County Court promising not to harass the Applicant and his wife following her builder's removal of the door to their flat (see Annex 9, p. 31). The Independent Police Complaints Commission later upheld the Applicant's appeal against the police investigation of the incident "on information only", stating that "no further action is required by the force in this instance".

From My Picks:

8 May 2018: Threat to life: Updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Today we are cut off the internet for a half an hour

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty