[David Grima]

Hi all,
Just wondering who submitted their data file + GM letter on time BUT still received an email from Revenue NSW asking for one or both of these?
Dave

[Emma Murphy]

Yep – we did. Requesting both

[Jo-louise Brown]

Yes I did also. I called and was told they had my file but it was on a list that had errors and they would work their way through them. They would fix it or email it back if I needed to fix.

Haven’t got anything back yet.

[Andrea Dolan]

Hi David,
I got an email Friday afternoon stating they hadn’t received the CEO letter. But I submitted it the same time as the file, and I’ve received the file back stating there were errors. I’m going to email them this morning and if I get any info worth providing, I’ll update you.
Andrea

[Edwin Athaide]

Our GM letter mysteriously disappeared though it showed as uploaded so had to resubmit. just a not if your Data has been verified as correct by their analytics team your file is moved to your Councils history folder.

[Carmel Waters]

Yes we did too. I called them said they had received both but were correcting the file.

[Michelle Smith]

I did – they emailed requesting the GM Letter.

I responded and said that I uploaded them both at the same time and they came back to me and said they had located my files.

[Lyndal McCann]

Hi Dave – yes we received request for letter only and have already submitted all. Awaiting advise as to if there were any issues.

[Tracey Walker]

Hi All,

When we met last week with Revenue NSW and Treasury, the working group was advised that any files that did not validate Revenue NSW would try and resolve first otherwise the council would be contacted to correct the file.

For those that Council’s that had not submitted data or letter Revenue NSW was starting to follow up, unless you had an extension granted.

Both the data file and letter for Sutherland was loaded on the same day. However, they followed me up for the CEO letter, which I could see in tracking within the MFT was loaded successfully. I did reload the letter and responded to their email with a screenshot of the tracking.

[David Grima]

Hi all,
Interesting update.
So my file was apparently not in the correct format so it has been corrected TWICE.
The files in my opinion were in the correct format as per appendix A of the guidelines issued November 2024.
The changes made to my file were:
– in fix 1, the results in the Pensioner Flag column were changed to YES or NO results when the guidelines state should be Y or N; in fix 2, the results reverted to Y or N;
– in fix 1, the results in the Specified Use column have been changed to Y or N answers from the previous BTR, CHP etc results required by the guidelines; in fix 2, the results have remained as Y or N answers.
On closer inspection, Revenue NSW have managed to transpose results so that whatever result was in the Pensioner Flag column now also appears in the Specified Use column (meaning that if a property is marked as being entitled to a pension rebate, then the file also shows that the same property as having a Y result in the Specified Use column.
Before I lodge an enquiry with Revenue NSW has anyone else noticed this?
Dave

[David Grima]

Hi all,
A little update.
I emailed Revenue NSW and magically 4 hours later a file called Fix 4 appears with the original data reinstated in the Specified Use column (i.e. codes as per the guidelines – BTR, CHP etc).
No email confirming the error has been received to date.
Makes me wonder if I didn’t point out the error, what would have happened?
Sorry for being the sceptic amongst us BUT this wreaks of 2017 all over again.
Dave

[Author]

Posts