Default Surcharge – Settled of Consent – No expenses due to or by either party.

EDINBURGH TRIBUNAL CENTRE

	SUZANNE GREENAWAY	Appellant

	- and -

	THE COMMISSIONERS OF CUSTOMS AND EXCISE	       Respondents

			Tribunal:	 (Chairman):  Mrs G Pritchard, BL., MBA., WS

Sitting in Edinburgh on Thursday 25 March 2004.

for the Appellant		Mr James Greenaway

for the Respondents	Mr Archie McCue

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2004.

DECISION

This is an appeal against a Default Surcharge in respect of the quarter 02/03 having a due date of payment of 31/03/03 in which a Default Surcharge of 10% was applied amounting to £799.17.  Mr J Greenaway appeared on behalf of his daughter Suzanne.  Mr A McCue appeared for the Commissioners.  The written evidence consisted of a bundle of documents produced by the Commissioners numbers 1-31.  Where any reference is made to any page in the said bundle it will be treated as repeated here.

Mr James Greenaway intimated at the outset of the Tribunal that he wished also to appeal against the quarter 11/02 as that has really been the source of all the difficulty.  At the time when he ought to have appealed the Default Surcharge he had been unable to do so due to pressure of business and his daughter’s ill health.  He explained in great detail the difficulties which had arisen with the Electronic Point of Sales Equipment (EPOS).  Technically it was supposed to feed information back from the sales established by using the Switch and Visa cards through the EPOS system so that stock was re-ordered etc.  However there had been many snags with the system “hanging up” the telephone connection and with transactions requiring to be re-recorded.  His daughter had been unwell.  He had been attending to her accounts and to the equipment as she could not cope.  His own qualifications are as an engineer.  The shop which his daughter runs sells pyjamas and underwear and was extremely busy over the period up to Christmas and into January with gift purchases, and returns.  

The 11/02 VAT return was due on 31/12/02.  He had started to prepare the accounts just after Christmas and had discovered that difficulty with the EPOS system whilst preparing the return.  He had had to make a great deal of amendment to the stock check system and indeed the EPOS system had had to be changed as had the computer system to which it was linked.  The difficulties had persisted beyond the December deadline.  They are now dealt with entirely separately, on different equipment. 

Before making the decision as to whether to admit the appeal relating to the 11/02 quarter to probation the Commissioners officer who had conducted a long cross-examination of Mr Greenaway with regard to the problems on a daily basis, a weekly basis, and a quarterly basis accepted that there had been genuine difficulty.

In cross-examination Mr Greenaway asked to be permitted to produce the bank statements which showed that his payments had indeed left his bank albeit on very narrow time margins but prior to the due date of payment, for both the 11/02 and 02/03 quarters.

In the circumstances it was accepted that the appeal relating to the quarter 11/02 should be admitted to probation and allowed.  In all the circumstances Mr Greenaway did not continue to pursue his claim in relation to the 02/03 quarter.  The appeal relating to the 02/03 quarter was refused.

The matter was settled on that basis.  No expenses are found due to or by either party.

MRS G PRITCHARD, BL., MBA., QC

CHAIRMAN

RELEASE:  30 MARCH 2004

EDN/03/89