I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling 
information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm

600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to 
take firm action over this.


-- 
Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!

On 1 May, 11:41, Edward Cowling London UK
 wrote:
> I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling
> information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm
>
> 600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to
> take firm action over this.
>
> --
> Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!

Vote for whoever you want!!

What does disciplined mean?

Told off or sacked are very different.

On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
 wrote:

>On 1 May, 11:41, Edward Cowling London UK
> wrote:
>> I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling
>> information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm
>>
>> 600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to
>> take firm action over this.
>>
>> --
>> Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!
>
>Vote for whoever you want!!
>
>What does disciplined mean?
>
>Told off or sacked are very different.

Learn to read....

"Each case is treated on its merits but in many cases the disciplinary
penalty for breach in dismissal"

I suspect much of this was from people looking up stars and
footballers.

--
Alan "Ferrit" Ferris

 ()'.'.'()
 ( (T) )
 ( ) . ( )
 (")_(")

On 1 May, 18:17, Alan Ferris  wrote:
> On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>
>
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >On 1 May, 11:41, Edward Cowling London UK
> > wrote:
> >> I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling
> >> information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.
>
> >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm
>
> >> 600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to
> >> take firm action over this.
>
> >> --
> >> Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!
>
> >Vote for whoever you want!!
>
> >What does disciplined mean?
>
> >Told off or sacked are very different.
>
> Learn to read....
>
That comment reflects your maturity.

> "Each case is treated on its merits but in many cases the disciplinary
> penalty for breach in dismissal"
>
"many cases" can mean practically anything. They are deliberately
vague to bamboozle people like you.

Alan Ferris wrote:
> On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>  wrote:
> 
>> On 1 May, 11:41, Edward Cowling London UK
>>  wrote:
>>> I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling
>>> information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm
>>>
>>> 600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to
>>> take firm action over this.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!
>> Vote for whoever you want!!
>>
>> What does disciplined mean?
>>
>> Told off or sacked are very different.
> 
> Learn to read....
> 
> "Each case is treated on its merits but in many cases the disciplinary
> penalty for breach in dismissal"
> 
> I suspect much of this was from people looking up stars and
> footballers.
> 
> --
> Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
> 


Before you two get into another slanging match, it is true that most of 
this is for accessing data. There is a huge temptation for people to 
access their hero's records but the department treats this as a very 
serious offence.

Edward has made a big assumption that is not supported from the article, 
there is no alegation that the data is being sold. Fir instance, there 
was one fired from my building because she wanted to send a get well 
card for a colleague, did not have the private address so looked him up. 
This was immediately flagged by the security checks and this was 
punished with immediate dismissal.

taken on its merits, no, ensuring that every member of staff is aware of 
how seriously the department takes the right to privacy, Yes.

Simon

On 1 May, 21:21, Simon  wrote:
> Alan Ferris wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
> >  wrote:
>
> >> On 1 May, 11:41, Edward Cowling London UK
> >>  wrote:
> >>> I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling
> >>> information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.> >>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm
>
> >>> 600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to
> >>> take firm action over this.
>
> >>> --
> >>> Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!
> >> Vote for whoever you want!!
>
> >> What does disciplined mean?
>
> >> Told off or sacked are very different.
>
> > Learn to read....
>
> > "Each case is treated on its merits but in many cases the disciplinary
> > penalty for breach in dismissal"
>
> > I suspect much of this was from people looking up stars and
> > footballers.
>
> > --
> > Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
>
> Before you two get into another slanging match, it is true that most of
> this is for accessing data. There is a huge temptation for people to
> access their hero's records but the department treats this as a very
> serious offence.
>
> Edward has made a big assumption that is not supported from the article,
> there is no alegation that the data is being sold. Fir instance, there
> was one fired from my building because she wanted to send a get well
> card for a colleague, did not have the private address so looked him up.
> This was immediately flagged by the security checks and this was
> punished with immediate dismissal.
>
> taken on its merits, no, ensuring that every member of staff is aware of
> how seriously the department takes the right to privacy, Yes.
>
> Simon

Simon

It would appear that YOU are the one making a big assumption. Edward
said that he felt HMRC staff had been selling information but he did
not say that the report confirmed his view. It would appear that
Edward thinks that the report confirms that staff are accessing
records without good cause. I would have thought it would be easy to
uncover staff accessing a celebrity's records without due cause but
more difficult to spot them accessing records for debt collectors.

You give one example, but if HMRC were being open then they would have
said how many staff had been sacked rather than simply disciplined. It
is my view that they say "disciplined" to give the impression of being
tough when the reality is anything but that.

Ferrit is simply a troll, always looking for trouble and never trying
to say anything useful. At least you should be grateful he doesn't
discuss transvestism and child sex on this newsgroup like he does on
other newsgroups!

In message 
, 
PeterSaxton  writes
>not say that the report confirmed his view. It would appear that
>Edward thinks that the report confirms that staff are accessing
>records without good cause. I would have thought it would be easy to
>uncover staff accessing a celebrity's records without due cause but
>more difficult to spot them accessing records for debt collectors.
>

I have had several incidents that made me suspicious about how various 
companies obtain information. On one occasion about two years ago, which 
I did post here at the time. A debt collection company phoned me to try 
to get contact info for an ex employee. When I asked how he knew the 
person had worked for us he quite openly said it was from the P60/P35 
information we'd submitted a couple of months before.

So yes I am very suspicious about the security of private information 
the HMRC hold and I think with 600 staff being disciplined it would be 
fair to say it seems to leak like a sieve :-)

Do I think the information gets sold to debt collectors ? Well that does 
seem a fairly good assumption.

-- 
Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!

On Fri, 2 May 2008 00:13:57 +0100, Edward Cowling London UK
 wrote:

>
>I have had several incidents that made me suspicious about how various 
>companies obtain information. On one occasion about two years ago, which 
>I did post here at the time. A debt collection company phoned me to try 
>to get contact info for an ex employee. When I asked how he knew the 
>person had worked for us he quite openly said it was from the P60/P35 
>information we'd submitted a couple of months before.

So?  He probably had used his P60 as proof of income, people often do
and these documents get photocopied at the time and passed along when
debt recovery is instigated.  Just as those copies of bills and photo
ID are copied, kept and passed along.

--
Alan "Ferrit" Ferris

 ()'.'.'()
 ( (T) )
 ( ) . ( )
 (")_(")

On 2 May, 17:43, Alan Ferris  wrote:
> On Fri, 2 May 2008 00:13:57 퍝, Edward Cowling London UK
>
>  wrote:
>
> >I have had several incidents that made me suspicious about how various
> >companies obtain information. On one occasion about two years ago, which
> >I did post here at the time. A debt collection company phoned me to try
> >to get contact info for an ex employee. When I asked how he knew the
> >person had worked for us he quite openly said it was from the P60/P35
> >information we'd submitted a couple of months before.
>
> So?  He probably had used his P60 as proof of income, people often do
> and these documents get photocopied at the time and passed along when
> debt recovery is instigated.  Just as those copies of bills and photo
> ID are copied, kept and passed along.
>
He had used a P60 to provide proof of income a couple of months ago
and already debt collectors were on his trail?

Sounds like fantasy to me.

Edward Cowling London UK wrote:
> In message 
> , 
> PeterSaxton  writes
>> not say that the report confirmed his view. It would appear that
>> Edward thinks that the report confirms that staff are accessing
>> records without good cause. I would have thought it would be easy to
>> uncover staff accessing a celebrity's records without due cause but
>> more difficult to spot them accessing records for debt collectors.
>>
> 
> I have had several incidents that made me suspicious about how various 
> companies obtain information. On one occasion about two years ago, which 
> I did post here at the time. A debt collection company phoned me to try 
> to get contact info for an ex employee. When I asked how he knew the 
> person had worked for us he quite openly said it was from the P60/P35 
> information we'd submitted a couple of months before.
> 
> So yes I am very suspicious about the security of private information 
> the HMRC hold and I think with 600 staff being disciplined it would be 
> fair to say it seems to leak like a sieve :-)
> 
> Do I think the information gets sold to debt collectors ? Well that does 
> seem a fairly good assumption.
> 

I do not doubt that there such instances when this info gets paid for, 
thats human nature, there is always a part of any community that is 
chasing the easy buck.

On the other hand, these debt collection agencies often pone one tax 
office claiming to be from another office, one that would not have 
access to the info. There is a procedure that is supposed to be followed 
  but I suspect that many dont, and a few need a kick up the how you 
call it to remind them.

I believe you when you say that the debt collector was that braisen, but 
did you not think that HMRC would be interested in them. We would be 
just as interested in this behaviour as we would staff supplying the info.

PeterSaxton wrote:
> On 1 May, 21:21, Simon  wrote:
>> Alan Ferris wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>>>  wrote:
>>>> On 1 May, 11:41, Edward Cowling London UK
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling
>>>>> information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.
>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm
>>>>> 600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to
>>>>> take firm action over this.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!
>>>> Vote for whoever you want!!
>>>> What does disciplined mean?
>>>> Told off or sacked are very different.
>>> Learn to read....
>>> "Each case is treated on its merits but in many cases the disciplinary
>>> penalty for breach in dismissal"
>>> I suspect much of this was from people looking up stars and
>>> footballers.
>>> --
>>> Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
>> Before you two get into another slanging match, it is true that most of
>> this is for accessing data. There is a huge temptation for people to
>> access their hero's records but the department treats this as a very
>> serious offence.
>>
>> Edward has made a big assumption that is not supported from the article,
>> there is no alegation that the data is being sold. Fir instance, there
>> was one fired from my building because she wanted to send a get well
>> card for a colleague, did not have the private address so looked him up.
>> This was immediately flagged by the security checks and this was
>> punished with immediate dismissal.
>>
>> taken on its merits, no, ensuring that every member of staff is aware of
>> how seriously the department takes the right to privacy, Yes.
>>
>> Simon
> 
> Simon
> 
> It would appear that YOU are the one making a big assumption. Edward
> said that he felt HMRC staff had been selling information but he did
> not say that the report confirmed his view. It would appear that
> Edward thinks that the report confirms that staff are accessing
> records without good cause. I would have thought it would be easy to
> uncover staff accessing a celebrity's records without due cause but
> more difficult to spot them accessing records for debt collectors.
> 
> You give one example, but if HMRC were being open then they would have
> said how many staff had been sacked rather than simply disciplined. It
> is my view that they say "disciplined" to give the impression of being
> tough when the reality is anything but that.

"disciplined" means instant dismissal, escorted from the building with 
loss of pension, for looking up a colleague to get their private address 
is not being tough?

On Fri, 2 May 2008 10:46:54 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
 wrote:

>On 2 May, 17:43, Alan Ferris  wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 May 2008 00:13:57 +0100, Edward Cowling London UK
>>
>>  wrote:
>>
>> >I have had several incidents that made me suspicious about how various
>> >companies obtain information. On one occasion about two years ago, which
>> >I did post here at the time. A debt collection company phoned me to try
>> >to get contact info for an ex employee. When I asked how he knew the
>> >person had worked for us he quite openly said it was from the P60/P35
>> >information we'd submitted a couple of months before.
>>
>> So?  He probably had used his P60 as proof of income, people often do
>> and these documents get photocopied at the time and passed along when
>> debt recovery is instigated.  Just as those copies of bills and photo
>> ID are copied, kept and passed along.
>>
>He had used a P60 to provide proof of income a couple of months ago
>and already debt collectors were on his trail?
>
>Sounds like fantasy to me.

Everything does, but then you struggle with reality.
The fantasy is in the fact the guy did not know if it was a P35 or a
P60 but did know Edward had submitted it only months before......


--
Alan "Ferrit" Ferris

 ()'.'.'()
 ( (T) )
 ( ) . ( )
 (")_(")

On 2 May, 21:55, Simon  wrote:
> PeterSaxton wrote:
> > On 1 May, 21:21, Simon  wrote:
> >> Alan Ferris wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
> >>>  wrote:
> >>>> On 1 May, 11:41, Edward Cowling London UK
> >>>>  wrote:
> >>>>> I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling
> >>>>> information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.
> >>>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm
> >>>>> 600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to
> >>>>> take firm action over this.
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!
> >>>> Vote for whoever you want!!
> >>>> What does disciplined mean?
> >>>> Told off or sacked are very different.
> >>> Learn to read....
> >>> "Each case is treated on its merits but in many cases the disciplinary> >>> penalty for breach in dismissal"
> >>> I suspect much of this was from people looking up stars and
> >>> footballers.
> >>> --
> >>> Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
> >> Before you two get into another slanging match, it is true that most of> >> this is for accessing data. There is a huge temptation for people to
> >> access their hero's records but the department treats this as a very
> >> serious offence.
>
> >> Edward has made a big assumption that is not supported from the article> >> there is no alegation that the data is being sold. Fir instance, there
> >> was one fired from my building because she wanted to send a get well
> >> card for a colleague, did not have the private address so looked him up> >> This was immediately flagged by the security checks and this was
> >> punished with immediate dismissal.
>
> >> taken on its merits, no, ensuring that every member of staff is aware of
> >> how seriously the department takes the right to privacy, Yes.
>
> >> Simon
>
> > Simon
>
> > It would appear that YOU are the one making a big assumption. Edward
> > said that he felt HMRC staff had been selling information but he did
> > not say that the report confirmed his view. It would appear that
> > Edward thinks that the report confirms that staff are accessing
> > records without good cause. I would have thought it would be easy to
> > uncover staff accessing a celebrity's records without due cause but
> > more difficult to spot them accessing records for debt collectors.
>
> > You give one example, but if HMRC were being open then they would have
> > said how many staff had been sacked rather than simply disciplined. It
> > is my view that they say "disciplined" to give the impression of being
> > tough when the reality is anything but that.
>
> "disciplined" means instant dismissal, escorted from the building with
> loss of pension, for looking up a colleague to get their private address
> is not being tough?-

I'm talking about all the other instances. Are you telling me that in
all those cases "disciplined" meant sacked?

Surely, you understood my point or are you just trying to avoid
reality again?

On 2 May, 23:02, Alan Ferris  wrote:
> On Fri, 2 May 2008 10:46:54 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>
>
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >On 2 May, 17:43, Alan Ferris  wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2 May 2008 00:13:57 퍝, Edward Cowling London UK
>
> >>  wrote:
>
> >> >I have had several incidents that made me suspicious about how various> >> >companies obtain information. On one occasion about two years ago, which
> >> >I did post here at the time. A debt collection company phoned me to try
> >> >to get contact info for an ex employee. When I asked how he knew the
> >> >person had worked for us he quite openly said it was from the P60/P35
> >> >information we'd submitted a couple of months before.
>
> >> So?  He probably had used his P60 as proof of income, people often do> >> and these documents get photocopied at the time and passed along when
> >> debt recovery is instigated.  Just as those copies of bills and photo> >> ID are copied, kept and passed along.
>
> >He had used a P60 to provide proof of income a couple of months ago
> >and already debt collectors were on his trail?
>
> >Sounds like fantasy to me.
>
> Everything does, but then you struggle with reality.
> The fantasy is in the fact the guy did not know if it was a P35 or a
> P60 but did know Edward had submitted it only months before......
>
> --
> Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
>
"When I asked how he knew the
person had worked for us he quite openly said it was from the P60/P35
information we'd submitted a couple of months before."

You make yourself even more foolish. P35s and P14s (not P60s actually)
are usually submitted at the same time and quite often done online so
the information would be shown on a screen and most likely not the
documents themselves.

I would suggest you stick to transvestites and child sex, you
obviously have more knowledge about that than tax administration.

PeterSaxton wrote:
> On 2 May, 21:55, Simon  wrote:
>> PeterSaxton wrote:
>>> On 1 May, 21:21, Simon  wrote:
>>>> Alan Ferris wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> On 1 May, 11:41, Edward Cowling London UK
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>> I'd always been fairly certain HMRC staff were giving, or rather selling
>>>>>>> information to debt chasers etc. Now the BBC has this on it's website.
>>>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7376586.stm
>>>>>>> 600 staff being disciplined is staggering. The government really need to
>>>>>>> take firm action over this.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Edward Cowling   Vote for Ken - Give him a third term !!
>>>>>> Vote for whoever you want!!
>>>>>> What does disciplined mean?
>>>>>> Told off or sacked are very different.
>>>>> Learn to read....
>>>>> "Each case is treated on its merits but in many cases the disciplinary
>>>>> penalty for breach in dismissal"
>>>>> I suspect much of this was from people looking up stars and
>>>>> footballers.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
>>>> Before you two get into another slanging match, it is true that most of
>>>> this is for accessing data. There is a huge temptation for people to
>>>> access their hero's records but the department treats this as a very
>>>> serious offence.
>>>> Edward has made a big assumption that is not supported from the article,
>>>> there is no alegation that the data is being sold. Fir instance, there
>>>> was one fired from my building because she wanted to send a get well
>>>> card for a colleague, did not have the private address so looked him up.
>>>> This was immediately flagged by the security checks and this was
>>>> punished with immediate dismissal.
>>>> taken on its merits, no, ensuring that every member of staff is aware of
>>>> how seriously the department takes the right to privacy, Yes.
>>>> Simon
>>> Simon
>>> It would appear that YOU are the one making a big assumption. Edward
>>> said that he felt HMRC staff had been selling information but he did
>>> not say that the report confirmed his view. It would appear that
>>> Edward thinks that the report confirms that staff are accessing
>>> records without good cause. I would have thought it would be easy to
>>> uncover staff accessing a celebrity's records without due cause but
>>> more difficult to spot them accessing records for debt collectors.
>>> You give one example, but if HMRC were being open then they would have
>>> said how many staff had been sacked rather than simply disciplined. It
>>> is my view that they say "disciplined" to give the impression of being
>>> tough when the reality is anything but that.
>> "disciplined" means instant dismissal, escorted from the building with
>> loss of pension, for looking up a colleague to get their private address
>> is not being tough?-
> 
> I'm talking about all the other instances. Are you telling me that in
> all those cases "disciplined" meant sacked?
> 
> Surely, you understood my point or are you just trying to avoid
> reality again?
> 

The current reality is HMRC need to shed 25000 staff over 4 years. They 
have saved 12500 so far but they dont have so many volunteers togo and 
the govenment, who is insisting on th staff reductions, wont fund 
redundancy, they look for opportunities to get it on the cheap.

This way, not only do they save the lumps sums, they also save on future 
payments.

On Fri, 2 May 2008 21:59:38 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
 wrote:

>I'm talking about all the other instances. Are you telling me that in
>all those cases "disciplined" meant sacked?

"Breaches of this policy are taken seriously and will result in the
commencement of disciplinary proceedings," she said. "Each case is
treated on its merits but, in many cases, the disciplinary penalty for
breach is dismissal. 
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2215702/staff-sacked-hmrc-reading



--
Alan "Ferrit" Ferris

 ()'.'.'()
 ( (T) )
 ( ) . ( )
 (")_(")

On 4 May, 11:40, Alan Ferris  wrote:
> On Fri, 2 May 2008 21:59:38 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>
>  wrote:
> >I'm talking about all the other instances. Are you telling me that in
> >all those cases "disciplined" meant sacked?
>
> "Breaches of this policy are taken seriously and will result in the
> commencement of disciplinary proceedings," she said. "Each case is
> treated on its merits but, in many cases, the disciplinary penalty for
> breach is dismissal.http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2215702/staff-sacked-hmrc-reading
>
But they still won't say how many WERE dismissed!