§ 14. Sir D. Walker-Smithasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the practice of the Inland Revenue of sending, only one month after receipt of initial demand, a final demand, containing a threat of distraint or proceedings in court, causes embarrassment and apprehension to persons who, due to absence, illness or other reason, have not been able to comply with the initial demand; and if he will review the situation.
§ Mr. Patrick JenkinIt must be very much the exception where neither the taxpayer nor someone acting on his behalf is able to contact the collector before a final demand is sent. If my hon. Friend has a particular case in mind, I should be happy to look into it.
§ Sir D. Walker-SmithHaving regard to the possibility that in many cases this final demand is in fact the first notification actually received, not only because of illness or absence but possibly due to failures in postal delivery, will not my hon. Friend turn his undoubted ingenuity to trying to devise a form of words less peremptory and minatory?
§ Mr. JenkinI take the point made by my right hon. and learned Friend. The wording of the final notice has certainly been subject to several complaints. We are considering whether it can be modified without weakening its impact on that inevitable fraternity who always delay paying their tax until the bailiffs are at the door.