Agenda item - Key Decision - Review of the Corporate Debt Recovery Policy

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the changes to the Corporate Debt Recovery Policy be agreed and adopted;

(2) Council Debt Recovery Services update their individual debt policies to reflect the principles of the Corporate Debt Recovery Policy by 1 April 2014.

Reason for Decision: The Corporate Debt Policy was implemented in 2009. Issues were raised by Councillors at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the need for debt recovery services to recognise vulnerability within the collection processes. These concerns prompted an extensive review of the Corporate Debt Policy.

The review was carried out by working with both an internal officer group representing all Council Services and an external multi-agency sub group that included representation from the Citizens’ Advice Bureau (CAB), Harrow Association of Disabled People (HAD), Age UK Harrow, Harrow Mencap and Newlyns and Chandlers Bailiffs and Council Debt Recovery Services.

The policy had also been shaped through feedback from a public consultation carried out from 30 September 2013 to 24 November 2013. To allow all Council Debt Recovery Services to update their policies to reflect the principles of the Corporate policy.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected: As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted: None.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance introduced the report, which set out the proposed changes to the Corporate Debt Recovery Policy that had been shaped through partnership working with a multi-agency Debt Recovery Sub- Group, including feedback received from public consultation.

The Portfolio Holder outlined the origins of the report to when he had served on the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the need to address the needs of the vulnerable members of the society. He added that the proposals met the administration’s priorities and commended the report to Cabinet.

An officer provided clarification in relation to the calculation of the ‘Benefits Overpayments’ figure position. He reported that the figure represented the amount of Housing Benefit overpayments at any one time. These occurred because claimants informed the Council of their change in circumstances after a period of time, such as a pay rise, thereby resulting in an overpayment in benefits. The overpayment should not be seen as reckless administration and Members should note that the overpayment was legally recoverable by the Council.

A non-voting non-Executive Member asked how the report fitted in with the Council’s Corporate Priorities agreed by full Council. He questioned how a decision could be made if the report did not accord with these priorities.

The Monitoring Officer confirmed that notwithstanding the Corporate Priorities, the administration could make a decision based on its own priorities.

The same non-voting non-Executive Member was of the view that the Council’s role was being undermined, as set out in the Budget and Policy Framework rules.

The Portfolio Holder for Communications, Performance and Resources challenged the non-voting non-Executive Member to exercise the Call-in process, which was the relevant body for such process. However, he would be surprised if such a step were taken as the proposals would ease the burden of corporate debt on the most vulnerable. The non-voting non-Executive Member stated that he was not talking about Calling-in the decision but wanted to understand how the proposals fitted in with the Corporate Priorities.

The Leader of the Council considered the proposals to be fair for the people of Harrow and therefore fitted into the administration’s priorities.