Matthew Saunders
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Hi Trevor,
Penrith City Council offers general direct debits by quarterly or annual payments and are done on the due date. We offer weekly, fortnightly or monthly payment options for overdue accounts only and these are processed once a week on Fridays. We do not offer general weekly or fortnightly payments by direct debit due to the work needed to recalculate amounts each financial year. We encourage customers to setup their own weekly or fortnightly payments using BPay.
In all cases we only do from savings/cheque accounts (not from credit card).
Kind regards,
Matthew.
Hi Layla,
Penrith City Council provides an additional rebate equivalent to the Stormwater charge, which for us is $25 (standard residential) or $12.50 (strata). Our rural properties don’t get the stormwater charge so they don’t get an additional rebate.
We basically raise it as a charge and then rebate it so that it can be shown on the rates notice that they are getting an additional discount. Initially we exempted pensioners from the charge so it wasn’t appearing on the rates notice, so they weren’t being informed of the additional rebate they were effectively receiving.
No additional rebate is given.
Kind regards,
Matthew.
Hi Richard,
Submissions have already closed for the inquiry. I am not sure that further submissions will be called before the hearing as no details other than the hearing date have been released. The submissions, including submissions from some NSW councils and the NSWRP are available on the NSW Parliament website.
Kind regards,
Matthew.Penrith City Council includes a map showing the boundary of our business sub-categories in our Operational Plan, with a note on the plan that says any properties categorised as business within the boundary is to be sub-categorized accordingly. Other than that we don’t provide other maps, and I must admit that I never new about this part of the legislation before you raised it.
Kind regards,
Matthew.
Hi Lisa,
Penrith Council uses Secure Pay for our online payments. They were acquired by Australia Post a few years ago, but still seem to be a stand alone company, and we have used them for about 10 years. They can charge a surcharge if you wish and can brand the payments page. If you go to our website and click on “pay my bill” it will take you to our payment page. They send us a payment file each night which we update each day, similar to our BPay payments.
Kind regards,
Matthew.
Hi David,
Penrith Council allows a temporary deferment of the rates increase only(above the previous year’s rates)for up to two years with any interest raised to be waived. Presently we set the eligibility level at 25% rates increase or more and it is only for the first year of rates under the new valuation. We have only had 1 owner that I can recall apply for hardship assistance under this policy. The Hardship Policy wording says:
“Under Section 601 of the Act Council is able to provide relief to ratepayers when their rates have increased due to a land revaluation. Council will allow the ratepayer to apply to defer payment of the increase for a period of up to two years. Additionally, any interest that accrues as a result of a deferment is waived. Both the land value and rates must have increased by a minimum percentage which will be set by Council resolution upon adoption of the Rates and Charges. Residential applications will only be eligible for the owner’s principle place of residence. Business proprietors are required to provide details of the financial hardship caused to the business.”
Kind regards,
Matthew.Hi Lee,
This is an unusual situation that I have never considered would occur in the current market. In our area if a property could be developed or subdivided, it would be bought by a developer and developed to its full potential (ie more than one dwelling), and thereby losing the postponement. It is unusual that some-one would buy a property that is obviously able to be developed and build only another single dwelling and still be entitled to a postponement.
I am assuming from what you say that the original parcel of land was made up of two or more lots and that the new consolidated property is the same parcel of land.
Whilst the granting of a postponement of rates requires that a dwelling be situated on the land, the wording for the ending of the concession is slightly different and says that the entitlement ceases where the use of the land ceases to be used or occupied as a site for a single dwelling house. Even though for a brief period the land was not used or occupied by a single dwelling house, it may be considered that it is still used as a site for a single dwelling house, whilst the new house is to be/is being built. I looked up an Oxford Dictionary definition of site which says “a place where something is, was, or will be built, or where something happened, is happening, or will happen” . With the lack of definition of “site” in The Act, a dictionary definition may be used in a Court, which lends a property to be considered to be a site of a single dwelling, particularly in this case where a DA was lodged to re-build another single house.
In this case I would continue the postponement of rates as the entitlement hasn’t ceased.
This would be my interpretation, but I would be interested in other opinions as well.
Kind regards,
Matthew.
In response to Carlas’ query about Penrith Council’s refund fee, we don’t have a rates policy that says when it is to be used. It is in our fees and charges simply as a “Refund of Overpayment” under Financial Services with a charge of $36, and is listed as a direct cost recovery charge.
Penrith City Council has a $36.00 fee payable for refunds of overpayments. We don’t always charge the fee, but may invoke it for serial offenders who purposefully overpay their rates and then expect us to refund their credit at the drop a hat, like it is a savings account.
We also use it to deter small balance refunds.
It has come to my attention when speaking to James that some councils may not receive the same results from Centrelink when doing the verifications. Our results show the payment type and grant date, but Cessnock Council said they do not get this with theirs.
If you look under the payment details on your search results, there should two results fields being be a payment type and Payment grant date. If you don’t get these results and you want this information you can contact Centrelink and ask to have these fields added to your search results.
Matthew.
Hi James,
The old form and the new form don’t ask for the pension type as a person is entitled to a rebate if they hold a Pensioner Concession Card irrespective of what type of payment eg Single parent, age, disability etc. If you need to know what type of payment they are on, the Centrelink verification search shows this information under the “payment type” and you can therefore get the information from there and record it if required.
The consent forms stipulate that “payment type” will be provided to councils so there are no barriers to recording the information as long as the information is stored and used for the purpose it is provided, being to determine their eligibility for a rebate.
Kind regards,
Matthew.
Hi Ken,
I agree. The wording for the paper and online application should clarify more clearly that they are (1) signing to give consent and (2) to verify that the information is true and correct. The consent is kind of hidden in the third paragraph.
The verbal application is even worse as it asks for them to consent by saying yes/no, but after that they are read a paragraph that says by answering the questions they declare that the information provided is true and correct (after they have already answered the questions – perhaps the owners should be informed of that BEFORE they answer the questions?).
I notices a few other omissions/anomalies as well:
1) No field for assessment number
2) Date of occupation field(s) a bit confusing. “The last financial year” – Do non-financial people know what a financial year is? Also, If they only have to enter a date of occupation in the current financial year, how are Councils that back-date rebates going to determine previous financial year rebates without a field for their date of occupation before the current financial year.
3) No mention of MRCA applicants in eligibility list.I am also not happy that I will now have do more work and research for my pensioner presentation at the conference (LOL).
Kind regards,
Matthew.
Hi all,
By my reading of the regulations there are two ways an MRCA recipient can be entitled to a rebate, and either way their eligibility can’t be confirmed doing a Centrelink or DVA online check as these will always come back as “Not entitled”:
REGULATION 134 (b1) persons who have received a lump sum mentioned in section 234 (1) (b) of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 of the Commonwealth or are receiving a weekly amount mentioned in that paragraph, and do not have income and assets that would prevent them from being granted a pensioner concession card (assuming they were eligible for such a card),
MY INTERPRETATION: For these, I think we should refer the applicant to the DVA to get a letter to say that they have received a lump sum or weekly payment AND that they meet the assets and income test required for other eligible pensioners under the Veteran Entitlements Act 1986 (Cmwlth),assuming that they are not actually entitled as they are paid under a different Act to other pensioners (as Trevor pointed out as well). If a letter is provided from DVA, it would be OK to grant the rebate but ongoing future verification would be difficult if not impossible, without getting the owner to get a yearly letter confirming their eligibility (maybe keep them on and do every 3 to 5 years?).
REGULATION 134(d) persons who receive, or who at some point in their life have been eligible for, a Special Rate Disability Pension under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 of the Commonwealth.
MY INTERPRETATION: These ones are a bit easier to confirm as they only need to have been entitled at some stage in their life to receive a disability payment under the MRC Act and they are then eligible and continually eligible for life. For these we will need a letter from DVA confirming this.
Unfortunately in either case, their eligibility will always come back in regular batch verifications with Centrelink/DVA as not being entitled, so you will be forever overriding these as being eligible.
I agree with Trevor that there are only a small number of them so it is easy to monitor. We only have one MRCA rebate at the moment.
Kind regards,
MatthewHi Michael,
Penrith Council has a minimum rate structure and we have one main strata complex where we use aggregation of strata lots. It is a retirement village where the carspaces are separate lots in the strata plan. For that complex the owners can choose whether they want or need a carspace. If a person wants to sell their unit and they own a carspace, they can either sell it to a new owner if the new owner wants it, or offer it to another owner that may want a carspace. This means we are always moving around unit entitlements for the units to aggregate the units with their carspaces, depending on which unit is associated to which carspace.
We are now getting numerous multi-storey apartment development where the trend is to have some storage spaces and carspaces as separate lots in the strata scheme, so I am predicting that this will become a new headache for us. These apartments are popping up near the railway where parking is tight, so we have no way of knowing if the carspaces are being used by the owner in conjunction with their unit or separately leased out by the owner.
The Revenue Raising Manual says that if a ratepayer approaches the council and asks for aggregation, it would be difficult for the council not to apply this provision. I take this as meaning if they ask for it they get it.
The Act says for two or more parcels of land so you can aggregate a unit/carspace and storage space if you choose (but not two habitable units).
I can’t see where it says they have to be in the same strata plan, but I think they should be adjacent to the habitable dwelling. For example an owner in a strata complex might buy a car-space in the next door strata complex.
Kind regards,
Matthew.
Penrith City Council charges the general business rate for golf courses. No donation is given either.
also, we do exempt them from the Stormwater Levy where they are situated in rural areas (as required) but for the golf courses that are in urban zones, we only charge them a stormwater levy for the area covered by the clubhouse and carpark only.
Matthew.
-
AuthorPosts
