Have client who is being pursued by TC office for payment. Client has just received negative decision from the Adjudicators Office, which in my view is full of holes as they have failed to apply their own guidance COP26.

Client made claim for TC in Nov 2002 and received award notice on Feb 2003 awarding both WTC/CTC based on her income for period 2001/02.The award notice advised client if her income increased by more than £2500 she had duty to notify them.

On 1O March 2003 client contacted TC helpline and advised them that her salary will rise to £18878 but unfortunately they did not act on this information and confirm this in latest decision.

On 12 March 2004 client advised TC office that her income would be £19633 and the TC office amended their decision and revised the client's award.

When the client returned her annual declaration form she advised the TC office that her salary would be £19571.

On 16 June the TC office informed the client that he WTC had stopped what at her CTC would be and also she has been overpaid several hundered pounds.

They have clearly admitted they have made a mistake in not acting on the info provided by client but she has failed to prove "it was reasonable for them to think that her payment were right".

In their decision the TC office admit they did not act the inforamtion provided by client who has clearly advised them of her income and that her payments are wrong.

For the inconvenience to our client the TC office have offered her £60 compensation???????

The client will be taking the matter to the next stage of complaint but when we look at the COP 26 guidelines the TC as well as the TAO have not applied their own guidance.( No surprise there)

Any views or opinions would be appreciated.

We have seen a few cases similar to this. As a start I would look at how many award notices the client received after March 2003 during the 2003-2004 tax year.

HMRC apply a very high standard to the reasonableness test. In these type of cases they usually look at the number of award notices after a person has reported a change. So for example if they sent a further 6 award notices during 2003-2004 all showing the old income then they would argue the client should have contacted them to say it was wrong. In essence they expect the claimant to check for their mistakes.

Sometimes HMRC use the fact that payments have not changed after reporting a change to justify their decision. How much did her income change by compared to 2001-2002? However I note in your post that you are talking about a change reported in March 2003. Tax Credits didn't start payment until April 2003, although people applied before that date. I would start looking at when the payments started in April and whether they matched the award notice, whether they were consistent or as was the case for many in 2003 sporadic.

Also were there any other circumstances specific to your client that would make it difficult for them to understand the award notice or guidance?

You could submit a complaint and/or get an MP involved.

Hope this helps. Feel free to contact me through our website if you have any further questions www.litrg.org.uk

Victoria

Thanks for your view on this matter I hadn't thought of the point you have raised about payment at the start of the Tax Credit era.

We are currently in process of assisting client with the 2nd stage complaint given that he Adjudicators office have made a decision.

Jim.

I have just got an adverse Adjudicator's decision on similar circumstances. It looks as if all the Adjudicator's Office has done is to get a report from TCO & come to a view about whether TCO has followed COP26. In my case, both TCO & Adjudicator seem to have ignored the fundamental point we raised concerning whether the claimant knew he was still being paid. As you say, if they think the "reasonable to consider payments were right" test is not satisfied they regard the overpayment as recoverable - regardless of what the claimant has done to notify TCO of the change. In my view it is reasonable for TCO to accept some responsibility for their errors - but that doesn't seem to enter into the equation at all!

You refer to a 2nd stage complaint. My understanding has been that the only avenue open after the Adjudicator is the MP & then the Ombudsman. Is this what you are doing? If not, what is the 2nd stage complaint procedure please?

It is our experience too that the Adjudicator often misses the point we are trying to make - they merely parrot what the TCO have said and agree with them.

It is also my understanding that the only avenue after Adjudicators is the Ombudsman and would be interested on hearing any different.

Hi Derek and Benup,

Thanks for your comments which I totally agree with. It comes as no surprise that the TC office and the Adjudicator have came to the same conclusion, with out actuall looking at the facts.

(Its starnge how they are ALWAYS right and the CLIENT is wrong)

Anyway enough about them.

You are both correct in you psots the 2nd stage appeal is to either the local MP or Ombudsman.

Any comments on the fact that they have offered my client £60 compensation. Have your clients also been offered monies, by the way my client has told them to stick their £60

I've had two recently where the comp. was around the £100 mark, on top of small sums which had already been paid.

Compensation between £50 - £100 is the norm for us.