Esc a19 refused help with review please

hwh

on the 16th december i got a p800 saying i owe tax of £604.00 for 2008/09 i phoned them the following day and was told they would review it under esc a19 the reason for the underpayment was because i was made redundant on the 26/09/08 and started claiming jobseekers allowance it seems that the dwp gave me my full tax allowance after my employer had too hmrc sent me a letter saying esc a19 does not apply in my case as they did not have any information they did not act on however i have a p45 from the employer and a p45 from dwp for that year showing the amounts that hmrc are basing the p800 calculation on i am going to ask for a review of this decision on the grounds that hmrc have had the information for more than a year and did not act on it and i thought my tax affairs were in order for that year can anyone think of anything else that would make my case stronger for esc a19 and should i send photocopies of the p45s with my letter any help with this is very much appreciated.

thanks in advance henry.

chrismac1

Keep trying at least 4 or 5 times, it looks pretty clear cut to me. Look at some of the other examples on this site - they say no, no, no, no a few times then "oh maybe you are right, hands up then!" The Chairman of the Chartered Institute of Taxation has come out very strongly against the lack of basic integrity endemic in HMRC's dealings with the public these days, which is a relatively recent development in the last 10 years or so. You will win!

Cook_County

I see no harm in asking HMRC to take this straight to the First Tier Tribunal. The Tribunal arguably cannot consider an ESC but HMRCs costs alone would be greater than the tax at stake so insist on this if you get refusal. It is free for taxpayers to go the Tribunal.

suso

chrismac1 wrote: »

Keep trying at least 4 or 5 times, it looks pretty clear cut to me. Look at some of the other examples on this site - they say no, no, no, no a few times then "oh maybe you are right, hands up then!" The Chairman of the Chartered Institute of Taxation has come out very strongly against the lack of basic integrity endemic in HMRC's dealings with the public these days, which is a relatively recent development in the last 10 years or so. You will win!

ignore chrismac, -The Chairman of the Chartered Institute of Taxation has no bearing on this whatsoever. as a body it has as much power as your local paperboy.

this is their website and details about them,
http://www.tax.org.uk/about_the_ciot


post more details of the p800 for accurate information, is this the first time you have received a p800?
if you got a p800 on the 16th december, there is no way that you would have had a letter saying ESCa19 is not applicable, HMRC does not act that fast.

Friday 16th december - P800 received,
Saturday 17th December - you phone HMRC and claim ESCA19 - it was rejected at the time, no letters are sent out, you are informed by phone, if you object, it is passed to a senior officer, who reviews it, minimum turnaround on this is 14 days, and then a letter is sent out.

To have a letter now, means that the first notification of this debt and first claim under esca19 was before the 16th december.

Also 6 months of JSA would not produce a underpayment of 650 ish pounds. there is more to this than meets the eye.

Cook_County

suso wrote: »

ignore chrismac, -The Chairman of the Chartered Institute of Taxation has no bearing on this whatsoever. as a body it has as much power as your local paperboy.

this is their website and details about them,
http://www.tax.org.uk/about_the_ciot


post more details of the p800 for accurate information, is this the first time you have received a p800?
if you got a p800 on the 16th december, there is no way that you would have had a letter saying ESCa19 is not applicable, HMRC does not act that fast.

Friday 16th december - P800 received,
Saturday 17th December - you phone HMRC and claim ESCA19 - it was rejected at the time, no letters are sent out, you are informed by phone, if you object, it is passed to a senior officer, who reviews it, minimum turnaround on this is 14 days, and then a letter is sent out.

To have a letter now, means that the first notification of this debt and first claim under esca19 was before the 16th december.

Also 6 months of JSA would not produce a underpayment of 650 ish pounds. there is more to this than meets the eye.

I am confused why my local paper delivery person would be expected to have knowledge of the UK tax regime.

UK tax legislation has more words in it than any country on the planet. CIOT members each have expertise in differing parts of this complex subject. Insulting an entire professional body is highly offensive and is not a recommended money saving technique.

I am unclear why it should take HMRC a minimum of 14 days to reply to a question and I see no reason why a competent HMRC staff person could not have written a letter that could have already arrived.

There are appeals processes that the OP could follow, he or she could also ask for help from a CIOT member if required.

chrismac1

I merely make the point that many people in this country - myself included until just a few years ago - expect HMRC to behave ethically and with some integrity in their dealings with them. In the case of Esc A19, they perhaps expect higher standards than, for example, a high street bank where most people now realise the complaints process is a sham and the bank will internally "review" complaints many times and decline them, only to find the Ombudsman or FSA immediately find the case clear-cut and proven against the bank.

Well in my view - and if you include the postings on this site and one other I post on, plus my own client base this now covers at least 25 Esc A19 cases - HMRC now follow exactly the same approach as the banks. So for hwh and others in the same position, it's important to realise that "Esc a19 declined" is the standard knee-jerk reply and as such carries no meaning whatsoever. If he or she keeps going in my view - assuming the original post was factually correct - it is a no-brainer that he or she will win on Esc a19. There may be a few more "fob offs" to get through but they will win.

One further point worth making. Until I get a response from HMRC which mentions facts or points specific to a client's case - as opposed to generic statements which could apply to every case - I always tell clients that no-one at HMRC has bothered to read their letter properly. So at the very least you should always keep going until you get a reply which deals with you specifically, at least you then know you've not just had someone say "esc a19, let's knock out the box standard fob-off reply."

BoGoF

Cook_County wrote: »

I see no harm in asking HMRC to take this straight to the First Tier Tribunal. The Tribunal arguably cannot consider an ESC but HMRCs costs alone would be greater than the tax at stake so insist on this if you get refusal. It is free for taxpayers to go the Tribunal.

That makes no sense, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction and wouldn't entertain an application so HMRC would incur no costs.

BoGoF

chrismac1 wrote: »

I merely make the point that many people in this country - myself included until just a few years ago - expect HMRC to behave ethically and with some integrity in their dealings with them. In the case of Esc A19, they perhaps expect higher standards than, for example, a high street bank where most people now realise the complaints process is a sham and the bank will internally "review" complaints many times and decline them, only to find the Ombudsman or FSA immediately find the case clear-cut and proven against the bank.

Well in my view - and if you include the postings on this site and one other I post on, plus my own client base this now covers at least 25 Esc A19 cases - HMRC now follow exactly the same approach as the banks. So for hwh and others in the same position, it's important to realise that "Esc a19 declined" is the standard knee-jerk reply and as such carries no meaning whatsoever. If he or she keeps going in my view - assuming the original post was factually correct - it is a no-brainer that he or she will win on Esc a19. There may be a few more "fob offs" to get through but they will win.

One further point worth making. Until I get a response from HMRC which mentions facts or points specific to a client's case - as opposed to generic statements which could apply to every case - I always tell clients that no-one at HMRC has bothered to read their letter properly. So at the very least you should always keep going until you get a reply which deals with you specifically, at least you then know you've not just had someone say "esc a19, let's knock out the box standard fob-off reply."

Perhaps if you stopped trotting out your little anecdotes and actually thought about what other people have said you may actually help the poster. As Suso has said there is no way the JSA alone would cause this underpayment so lets wait on the facts before giving your usual 'knee jerk' reaction.

suso

Cook_County wrote: »

I am confused why my local paper delivery person would be expected to have knowledge of the UK tax regime.

UK tax legislation has more words in it than any country on the planet. CIOT members each have expertise in differing parts of this complex subject. Insulting an entire professional body is highly offensive and is not a recommended money saving technique.

I am unclear why it should take HMRC a minimum of 14 days to reply to a question and I see no reason why a competent HMRC staff person could not have written a letter that could have already arrived.

There are appeals processes that the OP could follow, he or she could also ask for help from a CIOT member if required.

a common theme on these boards is how slow HMRC works,

The claims procedure for these cases is as follows.

joe bloggs calls up to claim under ESCA19 - this is dealt with by one of the teams in one of the two contact centres dealing with these.

If the claim is rejected there and then, then there is the option of it being reviewed by a senior officer, these are referred on, and it takes approx 14 days for these referrals to be processed, the result would then be posted to joe bloggs. Again post takes approx 10/14 days for joe bloggs to receive it.

If the original p800 was received on 16th december (a friday) and contested on the following day (saturday) , the referral to the senior officer would not be processed until Saturday 31st at the very earliest (and with the bank holidays that date is extremely optimistic.)

As to the original poster and the u/p

If they were made redudant in Sept 2008, and received JSA for the remainder of the year, there is no way that a u/p would have occurred, in fact it would be more likely that a repayment would be due if the P45 wasn't handed into the job centre.

As I said before there is more to this than has been revealed, I would say troll alert.

chrismac1

I'm basing my view on the assumption that the original poster has been open and honest, once we start questioning that on every post I don't see much point in posters coming on here. hwh has stated he has 2 2008-09 P45s which tie in to the P800 calculations, I believe that to be true until proven otherwise. So HMRC have had that information since 31 May 2009 or thereabouts. Any reasonably efficient tax regime would have processed this by 31 August 2009 or earlier, HMRC very generously permit themselves until 5 April 2011 to do so, a ridiculous amount of time especially when you consider tax agents like myself get less than 31 days - 31 days less the time the post takes to deliver mail - to appeal HMRC's often daft decisions.

Back to hwh. Under esc a19 HMRC had until 5 April 2011 and took a further 8 months. End of story.

BoGoF

chrismac1 wrote: »

I'm basing my view on the assumption that the original poster has been open and honest, once we start questioning that on every post I don't see much point in posters coming on here. hwh has stated he has 2 2008-09 P45s which tie in to the P800 calculations, I believe that to be true until proven otherwise. So HMRC have had that information since 31 May 2009 or thereabouts. Any reasonably efficient tax regime would have processed this by 31 August 2009 or earlier, HMRC very generously permit themselves until 5 April 2011 to do so, a ridiculous amount of time especially when you consider tax agents like myself get less than 31 days - 31 days less the time the post takes to deliver mail - to appeal HMRC's often daft decisions.

Back to hwh. Under esc a19 HMRC had until 5 April 2011 and took a further 8 months. End of story.

But surely a crack accountant like yourself would realise it's virtually impossible to have a £600+ underpayment due to JSA but hey don't let the facts get in the way of your crusade.

Oh and I'll think you'll find that the wording of ESCA19 re the 12 months after the end of the tax year wasn't made by HMRC so they did not "very generously permit themselves until 5 April 2011.