Does anyone have / know where we can get hold of the new IR guidance on severe hardship overpayment write off's?

I have been told that one has recently been produced, and so decisions on hardship grounds are now being made.

more recent, or in addition to, the cop26 code of practice?

(@ http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/leaflets/cop26.pdf)

More recent and in addition too....

Could not access your link (acrobate not feelign very acrobatic), but its not the Cop 26 stuff.

This has been given to TCO staff and they are using it to actually process hardship applications - only got it in November / Decemeber as far as I can make out. I understand that no hardship requests were actioned prior to this guidance being issued.

It seems to be quite different from the advertised scheme, hence my interest.

For example, I have been told that it is not being used to write off overpayments, just to further stagger re-payments. Other little proviso's, about when it will and won't be used, have also appeared, which do not match up to the expectations raised in the Cop 26.

IS this something that you could obtain using the Freedom of Information Act? All you need to do is write to IR requesting the relevant information and, if it exists, you should be sent relevant details within 20 days.

I have asked for this and it has not been provided. Can anyone else ask too?

Any idea which department I should bombard with requests? Its just so demoralising, getting so few responses to any enquiries / requests made.

Hi Emma,

I am interested in the implication that hardship is not really intended as a write off criteria. I have 3 points to support this idea.

1) Look at COP 26. Notice that hardship is only tagged on to the "may not" recover ground, and does not appear in the relatively stronger "will not" or "would not" recover sections.

2) Again, COP 26. Look at the third para on page 3 of COP 26. it says..."contact us if:

the reduced payments cause you or your family hardship, or

you think a possible overpayment should not be recovered

This is a bit confusing because this part of COP 26 is discussing in year overpayments, which are not challengeable in terms of recoverability. Possibly the IR are envisaging correcting factual erors, but in any case hardship and recoverability are separated.

3) The TC846 overpayment appeal form does not refer to hardship.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I put it to you that hardship was never intended to be aground for challenging recoverability!

If this is so, and you are right about it's possible role simply to stagger repayment, then it's probably only worth bothering with if clients want to pay over longer periods, or wants Additional Payments (where hardship pops up again in COP 26).

What do you think?

Steve

You are dealing with the Inland Revenue who have a long history of not writing off money due to them, but in some cases not collecting it, just for the moment.

You can review the recently published Tax Credits Manual at http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/manuals/ntcmanual/

.......but "hardship" does not appear in the glossary.

COP26 is still the best you have.

Hi John,

Many thanks for the link, although my old printer does not than you.

Steve

Actually, looking at our CD-Rom, 'hardship' appears twice in the TCM.

Both in income types being disregarded, EMAs and hardship funds for students.

I think I have discovered the answer.

Hardship does not formally exist.

See the evidence before you.

Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer in how many cases of tax credit overpayments the Inland Revenue has decided in accordance with page 9 of the Code of Practice 26, "What happens if we have paid you too much tax credit?' not to collect (a) all and (b) part of the overpayment to avoid causing hardship in (i) 2003–04 and (ii) 2004–05. <215780>



23 Feb 2005 : Column 643W


Dawn Primarolo : None. However, there are a number of measures to protect against hardship being caused by the recovery of an overpayment.

Hi everyone, and thanks for all your replies.

If the guidance notes (when i eventually get them) state that recovery will not be written off on hardship grounds, I want to see if we can take any action against the revenue for misleading us in the first place. Which i think it has: as steve pionted out they said they "may not" recover on hardship grounds. That does not mean the same thing as "will not" recover. And John's posting covers similar ground: what DP says does not correspond to the information provided in the Cop 26.

I understand that it will be difficult, but think its worth exploring (am thinking of legitimate expectation, but there might be alternatives). If its not a runner, then so be it.