A Plea

I had a number of Autorecbot related discussions yesterday. The full Kafkaesque nature of these conversations would take too long to relate here. My initial conclusion – complete LSC confusion; what they are saying nationally to your representative bodies is either being disregarded locally or has not been properly communicated to them. Or alternatively the head office team are not being completely frank.
Given the inconsistency of approach between Regional Offices it may well be as a result of the former. If this is the case a straightforward 1 side of A4 statement on how contract reconciliation is to be managed would not be difficult, and would avoid the friction and waste of resource these “negotiations” create and consume. I do however have a sneaking suspicion that the lack of such clarity belies the real policy – “see what you can get away with regardless of the rules”. Consequently firms who, under General Criminal Contract Standard Terms Part C 12B 3 and CDS Monthly Payment Rules 1.1.8 (c) who should not have their SMP reduced, rather increased, have been pressured to accept a lower payment.
Whilst the confusion over the new 6-month contract does not help this should still be possible – how about this for a start:
We will not reduce standard monthly payments unless, on a current contract year or rolling 12 month basis, you are 10% overpaid.
Oh that’s what General Criminal Contract Standard Terms Part C 12B 3 already says, and it is not amended in the proposed January version.
Forward projections should allow for the 7.5% “positive balance” identified in the Monthly Payment Rules.
I don’t know if this is proposed for amendment in January, certain ROs statements imply that this is the case, however it is the clearest and most importantly the currently applicable guidance. It also actually makes sense. (It was part of marketing package used to entice signature to the original GCC to boot).
So what is the plea indicated in the title? –
Could we have a definitive statement from the LSC on this point? We know that these communications are received onboard the Deathstar, come on guys help us out.
Or am I correct above in that the real unspoken policy is to drive down payments to firms by any means available and that a fair and consistent (and lawful) approach is not therefore desirable?