| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
ReynardTheFox
Rank; Hector Tax Inspector
12 Posts |
 Posted - 01/12/2008 : 00:53:18
|
Hi everyone!
I am disputing an overpayment from 2003/4. I have already done a SAR and initial RRR.
Mr SAR contained our initial TC600 claim from, completed on 3.3.03. This contained our joint income details from 2001/2
Our first award statement was dated 17.9.03, but the award was based on estimated income for 2003/4. This is where my memory is hazy, and is my first question: where did the estimated income figures come from? They're not in the TC600, nor is there any sign of them in all the SAR documents. Was there a separate form? Should this have been included in my SAR documents?
The award statement only mentioned my wife's (estimated) income (which was part time). This is the cause of our overpayment. I am trying to find out what caused this. I doubt that we would have accidentally declared my income as zero (!). How should I go about finding out?
I wish I'd been more on the ball at the time... but, well, it's a long story!
Many thanks!
ReynardTheFox
|
|
|
Ali M-W
Da Tech(y ones)
3296 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2008 : 08:15:44
|
Hi ReynardTheFox
I'm not great at the casework side of things - for that you'll need Paula, Splashin, Miss Froy, Samthe or someone similar - but if you are talking aboout a zero income - I DO know a bit about that! I was a victim of HMRC's random salary zeroing at least three or four times that I know of...
Splashin told me a while ago that the zeroing is caused by the Advisor thinking they've entered the right salary but actually clicking back to an earlier page so the details aren't saved (or something very similar). So you are quite right that "I doubt that we would have accidentally declared my income as zero (!)." The fact is, that you didn't. It has been a very common HMRC error.
HMRC will firstly insist - as they did me - that you should have checked your award notices to make sure they hadn't wiped your salary out and set it at zero. We have to be auditors of their work now, even when we give them the right details! But with some persistence it is possible to get them to back down. Even with the new COP26 they will still try to evade their responsibility to record details correctly and act promptly on information you have given, by claiming you didn't check your award notices. But since they never told us to at the time, you could argue that they failed to give you the right information, ie. that everthing they did wrong would fall to you to correct. So whichever way you look at it, you have an argument.
In my case, something strange happened. They based my award on a zero salary yet quoted my real one, hence there was no way I could have known anything was wrong. So that bit got written off after a long, hard fight (thanks, LITRG!). But the next thing they did was to quote me exactly the same level of award but sneak the zero onto the award notice! So I took a quickish look and thought all was okay since the award was the same. They then had me by the 'short and curlies' as there was a zero on that form that they thought I should have spotted!
I had to fight tooth and nail to win that one, but win I did. And so will you if you stick to your guns. Perhaps the same has happened to you, though probably not - but whatever they come back at you with, you must persevere and find the cracks in their argument.
I recommend that any letters you send, 'cc' them to your MP, Tax Credit Casualties, and any other organisation you are involved with (CAB, LITRG, etc.). HMRC hate adverse publicity. Sometimes just the threat of press coverage of your case will send them runnning, too. People bold enough to go to the Nationals will also win.
Trinity: No one has ever done anything like this.
Neo: That's why it's going to work.
|
 |
|
|
ReynardTheFox
Rank; Hector Tax Inspector
12 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2008 : 09:40:06
|
Thanks so much for the quick reply!
All this happened at a really, really hectic time in our lives so piecing together what happened is a real PITA.
I can find no evidence of a any TC form that we would have used to declare estimated income for 2003/4.
Therefore I can only assume that this would have been done by ringing the helpline.
At the time, our first child had just been born, so it's likely we estimated my wife's income as being lower than 2001/2, when she was still working full time.
Our first award statement mentioned only my wife's income. No mention of me at all, other than as a claimant - despite the fact that on the TC600 I had declared myself as working fulltime and declared my income for 2001/2.
So unless my wife fraudulently declared me as earning zero income, presumably the award SHOULD have been calculate on my wife's estimated earnings for 2003/4, plus my actual earnings for 2001/2. Yes?
Meanwhile, it seems we rang to query, generating another award statement, this time containing an estimated income for me as well.
The wording of the overpayment was vague and obtuse... it was not made at all clear that this would effectively nullify all claims for the next 5 years, AND still leave us in debt, nor was any method offered to repay the incorrectly paid lumps sums, and so on and so on.
My SAR data lacks any evidence of any phone calls in 2003, which we MUST have made in order to inform them of estimate income, right? So it looks like my next step is to go back and demand missing personal data?
There is a broken link in the "Library" section about old TC forms... don't suppose anyone has a TC600 from 2003??? I'd like to see what it says about estimated incomes... |
|
|
|
missfroy2
Rank; Captain Gordon
236 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2008 : 12:26:20
|
There was an issue in 2003-2004 where if you changed the income of one partner, you had to go in to the other partner's details and re-type their income even if it didn't change. If this wasn't done then it meant the system either zeroed or left off the 2nd person's income.
If I remember correctly back in 2003-2004, if you estimated only one person's income then it would would list both as estimated 2003-2004 incomes even though it might have actually stated your 2001-2002 income.
Some things you should consider:
1. Was your overpayment caused solely because your income was missed off or did some of it also arise because your estimates (on teh 2nd award notice) turned out to be too low?
2. Did your payments increase substantially? If so did you question them?
3. Did you report the error?
If this is your first dispute then it will be under the new CO6 guidance rules which are based on a series of responsibilities. If you didn't report the error, then you would fail on your side of the responsibilities which would make the write off more difficult in my opinion.
However, if you had 'exceptional circumstances' which impacted on your ability to check the award notice that might help.
If your dispute is looked at under the old 'reasonableness test' I think you may find it difficult to argue. Essentially HMRC will argue that (a) the error is visible on the award notice and (b) your payments would have gone up substantially and possibly (c) you didn't report any of this.
Again, you mention it was a difficult time for you so that might help (obviously depending on the circumstances).
Generally in these sorts of disputes it isn't enough that HMRC make the error, even if you gave them the right information during the phone call. The emphasis is placed back on the claimant to check award notices, payments etc....So you need to try and remember whether any other contact was made.
Sorry if this reply sounds negative, the point of it is really to help you see how HMRC might respond to you and therefore allow you to write a better dispute.
Good luck.
MF2 |
|
|
|
ReynardTheFox
Rank; Hector Tax Inspector
12 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2008 : 20:48:15
|
Thanks MF2
Yes, this is my first claim, and I've already had a reply to my first RRR which mentions the COP26 gubbins.
To answer your questions:
1) the overpayment was caused solely by missing my income off. As it happens, both our estimated incomes were on the low side, but this did not affect the size of the award when it was finalised in 2004.
2) this was our first award. the overpayment took the form of a lump sum, paid shortly after we received the first award statement in sept 2003. once we received the 2nd statement (after we queried), all payments stopped
The RRR response letter states "I have found that the overpayment arose because of an increase in your joint annual income"
This is not correct - dunno whether I'll be able to prove it, but it sounds like it arose due HMRC error.
Question is: even if I can show it - will it make any difference?? Is there any likelihood of them writing off any outstanding balance, rather than the whole overpayment? We've already paid back a large amount, part of my reason for pursuing it now is that we're now no longer eligible for tax credits, so can't pay back from any future awards. |
|
|
|
ReynardTheFox
Rank; Hector Tax Inspector
12 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2008 : 20:53:39
|
| ... something else I've read (somewhere on here... forget where) is that HMRC have been instructed to be "more lenient" in overpayment disputes from 2003/4 and 04/05 - is this right? Instructed by whom? Is this any help to me? |
|
|
|
missfroy2
Rank; Captain Gordon
236 Posts |
Posted - 02/12/2008 : 09:20:54
|
What are the two incomes estimated on the award notice as compared to your incomes used to finalise your 2003-2004 award? (you should have an award notice that says 'we have finalised your tax credit claim for 2003-2004).
If you give the figures from each award notice starting with the first you received and ending with the finalised notice we should be able to see whether HMRC's explanation is any way correct.
Sometimes however, people use the wording 'the overpayment occurred because of a rise in your joint income' to mean that it occurred between the award notice that showed nil/missed an income and the next one that was calculated correctly. That could be what they mean.
So you queried straight after you received the lump sum. If that is the case - you should dispute again stating that under their cop 26 it should be written off because you told them the award was incorrect within 30 days of the award notice with the error being issued.
MF2 |
|
|
|
Ali M-W
Da Tech(y ones)
3296 Posts |
|
|
ReynardTheFox
Rank; Hector Tax Inspector
12 Posts |
Posted - 05/01/2009 : 21:18:17
|
Quite unexpectedly, I received a letter from HMRC today:
"I have decided that the whole amount of the overpayment arose because we did not meet all of our responsibilities as set out in our Code of Practice 26. You do not have to repay this overpayment and I have updated our records with this decision"
Wow... I expected a bit more fight than this! However, we have been repaying this "debt" from our Tax Credits for about 5 years. Does this mean we can recoup the money they recovered?
To be honest, I would have expected HMRC to explicitly write off £X of the overpayment, where £X is the amount left outstanding - but they haven't done that - they've said we don't have to repay any of it.
Where do we stand here? What's our next move (if any) ?
Thanks,
RTF |
|
|
|
ReynardTheFox
Rank; Hector Tax Inspector
12 Posts |
Posted - 07/01/2009 : 14:25:38
|
| No reply necessary... this one is moving to the "success" forum! :) |
|
|
|
Sarah
Rank; Captain Gordon
247 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2009 : 12:12:43
|
Well done, ReynardTheFox! But I do think you need a reply - write to HMRC enclosing a copy of their letter (keep the original in a very safe place) and set out how much of the overpayment has been repaid through reduced payments and awards and ask when you will be receiving the repaid amount back. You have paid something you shouldn't have repaid so therefore HMRC owe you the money. Good luck.
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Questions about overpayment from 2003/4
