I have a very tricky situation, bit of a moral dilemma really as well as a benefit issue. My client has had her tax credits stopped because the IR believe she has a partner (and father of her two children)living with her, (he has bank statements and work related post sent to the address) but she tells me he has never lived there. Having now spoken to him it turns out he is living at a different address with another lady and not declaring it. He is unwilling to give this address as it will get this other lady into trouble. However the IR will only accept an alternative address for him as evidence. If he won't provide it she will have to re-pay over £10,000. On top of this I am not sure if she knows he is living with another woman!
I've lodged an appeal against the decision to stop her award and against the decision to make her pay interest, but at the moment I'm struggling to gather evidence. Apart from telling this bloke what I think of him, does anyone have any suggestions?

Being the suspicious sod that I am Polly I think I'd look closely at this one again. From what you've said this guy is playing it cosy both sides and the only ones likely to get hurt are the two women. Assuming there are two women. Has he given you the address where he is currently staying?. If he hasn't then that could be an invention between him and your client to pull you in to help. Sorry to be so cynical but this has the smell of fishes. If he has given you the address and its the only way to get your client off the hook then I think I would make my client aware. He sounds a real selfish B******.

I'm sure that Rockford could sort this one out before the commercial break.

The burden of proof of cohabitation would be with the IR, because they are asserting a change (ie client no longer entitled). The convenience of using an old address for banking purposes etc does not mean cohabitation, and I am sure you could make a good case for this at a tribunal. However, in reality, most of these cases end well when you assume the burden of proof to show your client is living solo.

Your client is the woman you refer to, not the man. My only scruple at the appeal would be saying he is living with another woman, if that would upset your client etc.

Is your client claiming a single person council tax discount?

Steve,

I loved your use of the word 'scruple' in the singular. Sounds like a Dickensian character. Have only ever heard it used in the plural so it gave me and my colleague a chuckle (simple minds and all that).

On a serious note, we have to be aware of the client confidentiality issue which includes information given by the male client, so it wouldn't really be on to disclose details of this other woman either to the female client or to a tribunal. Let's hope the burden of proof lying with the IR will do the trick.

Could you let us know how you get on, Polly, as I have similar case awaiting a decision?

I do not think that the male person here is a client.

The client is the first woman, who came to Polly and told her she wasn't co-habiting with the man in question.

I think Polly has an obligation to tell her client what she has found out (as it is potentially to her advantage as regards the case, which is the matter she hasked for help on), and it is then for the client to tell Polly whether she wants her to run this argument or not. As the client has told Polly that the man doesn't live with her, I am not sure why it would be that she would be upset to hear about this other woman. Unless she has lied to Polly, and does in fact (think) she is living with this man. In which case, at least Polly's work would be done!

The man may have believed that he was talking to Polly in confidence. Did she tell him he was? If she did, she has a problem. If she didn't, then he made a mistake.

Even if the man doesn't give the address, the conversation he had with Polly is evidence she can submit to the tribunal. As might be the client's reaction to this news. Presumably, she might want him to stop using her house as a postal address, given the trouble he has caused and the apparant availability of an alternative address? There are always post office boxes.....

Having said this, I doubt he will be pleased to find out that she has spilled the beans. Can Polly talk to her supervisor about this?
She might need some support.

(Sorry, just realised that Steve has already addressed the "who is the client" issue).

I guess I was assuming both were clients because I recall being faced with a CSA case a few years back which raised similar issues. I initially dealt with client A, the parent with care. A few weeks later while dealing with client B I realised he was the ex-partner of client A and was revealing stuff to me that would help her out. I was advised by my manager to refer B elsewhere as there was a conflict of interest. In the meantime I had to respect the confidentiality of both.

I agree that it all hinges on in what capacity Polly spoke to the male client and whether her organisation has a confidentiality policy, so perhaps she can clarify. If the guy came in to Polly's workplace and spoke to her as a professional then I still maintain he is a client. If he didn't would it not be more appropriate to offer to be a witness to the female client and get someone else to be her rep?