BPS 2016 in Bank

Fowler VF

Member
Location
Herefordshire
Who is the letter from?
In my case RPA had contacted FC because I made a formal complaint to RPA about mishandling my 2015 BPS. As it turned out it was the local FC officer (who I knew anyway) who came out.
Suggest you start with your local FC office and have to hand as much original FC paperwork, including field numbers and the FC agreement and parcel numbers. They should be able to tell you and then write to you and confirm the status of your woodland, you have then got the evidence to send to RPA. I had to go through the exact same rigmarole when IACS went to SFP; to extract the written confirmation I asked FC if I was allowed to cut the trees down (obviously not), but this did concentrate their minds and so they wrote to tell me I couldn't because the FWPS agreement is 30 years despite the end of the FWPS payments. That was the evidence I needed.

You and I are not alone in this situation this time around as well!

My fields were FWPS, but I think WGS is pretty much the same. Again, this only works if you were receiving SFP on those fields from 2008 onwards.
 

Hesston4860s

Member
Location
Nr Lincoln
Who is the letter from?
In my case RPA had contacted FC because I made a formal complaint to RPA about mishandling my 2015 BPS. As it turned out it was the local FC officer (who I knew anyway) who came out.
Suggest you start with your local FC office and have to hand as much original FC paperwork, including field numbers and the FC agreement and parcel numbers. They should be able to tell you and then write to you and confirm the status of your woodland, you have then got the evidence to send to RPA. I had to go through the exact same rigmarole when IACS went to SFP; to extract the written confirmation I asked FC if I was allowed to cut the trees down (obviously not), but this did concentrate their minds and so they wrote to tell me I couldn't because the FWPS agreement is 30 years despite the end of the FWPS payments. That was the evidence I needed.

You and I are not alone in this situation this time around as well!

My fields were FWPS, but I think WGS is pretty much the same. Again, this only works if you were receiving SFP on those fields from 2008 onwards.

The letter I got today was from the RPA wanting written conformation the grants have ended.
I spoke with the local FC officer for my area last fri who confirmed there are no further payments and contracts have ended. He said he couldn't confirm it in writing I needed to speak to someone else and would email me and the person I need to speak to my scheme numbers which for some reason have been changed from what my paperwork has on it.
I never got that email, so rang the East Midlands office today to try again. Again the two people I spoke too confirmed my contracts have ended and I would need to speak with my local FC officer for a letter to confirm this !.
Even tho I explained I'd spoken with him they are getting him to ring me weds.

Ever feel like your just going round in circles ?.
 

Fowler VF

Member
Location
Herefordshire
Been there! I have every sympathy with you. Like I say, try asking the local FC officer if you are allowed to cut the trees down, if you sound serious enough he will probably write a strong letter telling you all about your obligations under the contract. Maybe that way you can get a letter out of him that you need for RPA!!
 

Fowler VF

Member
Location
Herefordshire
See latest 2016 BPS rules; Page 25 to 27 in particular, WGS is in there as well as FWPS. You are "still in the scheme", even though payments have ceased, because you are still covered by the 30 year contract and you cant just cut all the trees down and revert to farmland. So long as you claimed on it and got entitlements in 2008 you are eligible for BPS.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/562030/BPS_2016_scheme_rules_v2.pdf

In point of fact I would actually question as to whether RPA are right even if you were still receiving payments (I realise that you are not); they used to make a deduction for this "potential double funding" under SPS but were then over ruled by EU and had to make a lump sum re-payment a few years back.

Incidentally, if you can persuade RPA to accept your SR01 land use code, Short Rotation Coppice, then that might not be a bad move. Who knows what the future brings and establishing a land use code that is closer to crop production than forestry might be advantageous on down the line.
 

DrWazzock

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Lincolnshire
Was paid 87% of it today, but nobody can give a reason why there is 13% of it missing.

No discrepancies, inspections or non compliances.

They tell me to wait till I receive the statement in Feb before taking this up, but they can't find any reason for the shortfall.

It's a simple claim, no change in area, no complications. How can it go wrong? How could they manage to screw it up?
 

DrWazzock

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Lincolnshire
Now I receive a letter saying my payment was delayed and reduced because there was either an inspection on the ground or an aerial inspection. I have no knowledge of any such inspection, wasn't informed when it occurred nor was I informed of any findings or given a chance to appeal against the reduction. I don't even know why the reduction was made.

It's become a strange sort of country where we are fined without even knowing what it is we have done wrong.

A new low IMO.
 

jendan

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Northumberland
Now I receive a letter saying my payment was delayed and reduced because there was either an inspection on the ground or an aerial inspection. I have no knowledge of any such inspection, wasn't informed when it occurred nor was I informed of any findings or given a chance to appeal against the reduction. I don't even know why the reduction was made.

It's become a strange sort of country where we are fined without even knowing what it is we have done wrong.

A new low IMO.
At least it didnt take 4 days extra work for an on the spot cattle inspection, every animal through a crush,and a 3% deduction.
 
Last edited:
Location
Devon
Now I receive a letter saying my payment was delayed and reduced because there was either an inspection on the ground or an aerial inspection. I have no knowledge of any such inspection, wasn't informed when it occurred nor was I informed of any findings or given a chance to appeal against the reduction. I don't even know why the reduction was made.

It's become a strange sort of country where we are fined without even knowing what it is we have done wrong.

A new low IMO.

Sounds like you have had a remote inspection of some sort.

But I wouldn't be surprised if you get another letter to say that you haven't been inspected and you get paid the balance owed at some point.

Apparently the RPA have been applying a lot of penalties this year in error.

Be very unlikely that you have been fined 13% unless they found quite a few things wrong.
 

DrWazzock

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Lincolnshire
Sounds like you have had a remote inspection of some sort.

But I wouldn't be surprised if you get another letter to say that you haven't been inspected and you get paid the balance owed at some point.

Apparently the RPA have been applying a lot of penalties this year in error.

Be very unlikely that you have been fined 13% unless they found quite a few things wrong.

The frustrating part is that despite their thousands of staff and hi tech systems they are unable to tell me what it is that has caused the reduction. If I knew what the problem was, I could look into it.

I thought I'd taken reasonable care with the application, submitted it on line, so it was checked as I went along, then it was validated.

They have done satellite inspections of areas here in the past but always informed us of discrepancies which we acted upon where necessary though often they had it wrong because the satellite got the field boundary wrong because of overhanging trees along the edge of woodland etc.

At the end of the day our area has been unchanged for many years and our payment is all non SDA. They can argue the toss for as long as they like about movement in internal partitioning but the total area is always fixed and within that area it's the same payment per acre for every crop we grow.

It gets to the point where I really lose the will to enter into any more correspondence or cooperation with them. I have never come away from a phone call to their so called help line with any useful information or progress whatsoever.
 
Location
Devon
The frustrating part is that despite their thousands of staff and hi tech systems they are unable to tell me what it is that has caused the reduction. If I knew what the problem was, I could look into it.

I thought I'd taken reasonable care with the application, submitted it on line, so it was checked as I went along, then it was validated.

They have done satellite inspections of areas here in the past but always informed us of discrepancies which we acted upon where necessary though often they had it wrong because the satellite got the field boundary wrong because of overhanging trees along the edge of woodland etc.

At the end of the day our area has been unchanged for many years and our payment is all non SDA. They can argue the toss for as long as they like about movement in internal partitioning but the total area is always fixed and within that area it's the same payment per acre for every crop we grow.

It gets to the point where I really lose the will to enter into any more correspondence or cooperation with them. I have never come away from a phone call to their so called help line with any useful information or progress whatsoever.

The so called helpline isn't fit for purpose.

A remote inspection could be as simple as someone sat in an office somewhere looking at the maps you have submitted and comparing them with a satellite image.

Doesn't sound right that you have been fined 13%..

A lot of people have only been paid 85/90% when the full amount should have been paid as they have no known issues/ inspections etc etc
 

Bob

Member
Location
Co Durham
Count yourself lucky you have received 80odd percent. Nothing here except a generic letter received yesterday saying that unfortunately they have not been able to pay. but hopefully most claims will be paid by end of March. They will tell us then if we are not going to paid in March. You could not make it up absolute pratts
 

alex04w

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Co Antrim
Now I receive a letter saying my payment was delayed and reduced because there was either an inspection on the ground or an aerial inspection. I have no knowledge of any such inspection, wasn't informed when it occurred nor was I informed of any findings or given a chance to appeal against the reduction. I don't even know why the reduction was made.

It's become a strange sort of country where we are fined without even knowing what it is we have done wrong.

A new low IMO.

Take the letter received as notice of the reduction and appeal it. At least you will be within time for lodging the appeal

At least if you stick in a generic appeal, then you have protected your position whilst you try to get them to tell you what you are actually appealing against. :ROFLMAO:

The sooner that politicians take the RPA and similar agencies to task the better.

Is it not about time that the Farmers Unions challenged the situation of the Paying Agencies levying fines without first proving the case against the claimant. It is not British justice as we know it or expect it. What happened to "innocent until proven guilty".
 
The feedback from our membership suggests between a third and a half have been paid. It's a good start and hopefully we will see this rate of progress sustained as we run up to Christmas to achieve the much vaunted RPA promise of 90% paid in December. For thousands of farm businesses across the country prompt payment of this money will mean some relief for stretched bank accounts. Additionally it will mean farm supply firms and contractors will also enjoy some Christmas cheer as bills get paid.
However we remained concerned that the RPA are not clear when the remaining 10% will be paid. If the RPA cannot guarantee a payment to this identified 10% reasonably early in 2017 then bridging payments must be considered sooner rather than later. Furthermore it is clear that there are continued delays to thousands of claimants still waiting for full payment from 2015 applications. Our concern is this work is being put on hold while 2016 payments are got out. This is not acceptable. Clearly the RPA is still stretched and not fully on top of the job with IT functionality issues.




@Guy Smith
Sent
Now we are at the 18th jan and a lot of us have received these letters say we aren't to be paid in jan are you still considering asking for bridging payment to be made by the rpa ? @Guy Smith
 
Last edited:
If they have paid 91% of people and aim to pay 93% by the end of march does anyone have the numbers and ability to work out how many claims will be paid in that 3 month period? Edit, How many is 2% split over 3 months?
 

Guy Smith

Member
Location
Essex
We think the reference to the end of March date is DEFRA just ticking an EU box rather than the RPAs actual work plan.

Leaving the 2015 overspill to one side we think the vast majority of the unpaid are inspected cases which hopefully they can start to knock off fairly soon.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 80 42.3%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 66 34.9%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 15.9%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 7 3.7%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,292
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top