Hi Rich,
From your posting, it appears that the IR are asserting an overpayment on the basis that your client was really part of a couple for a certain period. From the facts presented by you, this decision is eminently appealable. The tribunal would have jurisdiction, because the appeal would concern entitlement (which of course is affected by the overpayment action). You would not in the primary have to think about recoverability.
The IR appears to use Soc Sec definitions of what is a couple, as they make quite clear in the TC guidance manual. See http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/manuals/ccmmanual/CCM6040.htm. I am aware that some say the IR's definition of a couple may be drawn from the underworld of tax law, but if so, why are they so clear in their own TC Manual that it is the Soc Sec definition that counts?
Assuming that it is the Soc Sec definition that holds, there is much useful case law for you to draw from, and argue as persuasive. I think these 2 adults are still married. If so, it all depends on whether they are in the same household. It would appear that the common roof was a matter of caring expediency, but was it a common household?
If you are too late for an appeal, try for an out of time appeal (reasonable prospects of success? Interests of Justice?).
I wonder if the IR would be kind enough to await the outcome of this appeal before recovering? You could always ask them nicely.
Not sure what you mean when you say that current circumstances have forced them "back together" - are they now in the same household? If yes and they decline to claim as a couple becasue they are not a couple, they should stop being in same household and claim independently, and then appeal if refused.
For all these reasons, the meeting you are due to have would appear to be premature, although it is clear from COP 26, that the IR are prepared to haggle on overpayments, so cases can be resolved quickly (and targets met?). How are you at haggling? Where do you start? ("my client is willing to offer £4.50, and not a penny more...")
Steve
|