Home Responsibilities Protection (HRP)

GETTING_MAD

My wife having attained state pension age over three years ago is now attempting to claim her pension for the first time. She had paid full National Insurance Contributions without any gaps for over 12 years, until the birth of our only child.At that time Family Allowance (as Child Benefit was then known), we were advised, was not claimable for an only child. It only now transpires that we could have claimed this benefit for the 16 years that my wife spent in being a home-maker during his upbringing. Since this time she has not been employed from choice. We have never claimed any benefits of any kind. We were initially told by the Pensions Service that despite not having claimed the allowance that she would be entitled to receive the pension credits for HRP protection and that such credits would be added to the contributions previously made.
She was advised to fill in a claim form which was done and 4 weeks later she received a reply saying that because she did not Claim child benefit then she was NOT entitled to HRP Pension Credits. It seems grossly unfair that by not making a claim for the money (saving the taxpayer thousands over 16 years) that she should now be penalised by having the tax credits disallowed.
We have been advised by the decision maker at HMRC that there is little point in contesting their decision or putting in an Appeal as it is bound to fail.
Has anybody else had a similar experience, and what was the outcome ? Any advice would be helpful.

zagfles

Might be an idea to consult one of the tax charities like TaxAid or the LITRG, or see the CAB.

Who advised you you couldn't claim child ben/family allowance? Do you have any proof (eg in writing?).

As your wife reached pension age before April 2010 the rules are a bit different - she wouldn't get credits for HRP but instead it'd reduce the number of years she needs. But think she'd still get a lot more with HRP than without.

rogerblack

GETTING_MAD wrote: »

Has anybody else had a similar experience, and what was the outcome ? Any advice would be helpful.

Unfortunately, it seems likely that any appeal at this late date is likely to fail.
If there is absolutely rock-solid cast iron evidence of what she was told at the time, there may be an argument for compensation to be paid.
Needless to say, this will be at best tricky, as the reasonable starting point for a figure is the whole of the child benefit unpaid plus any future shortfall due to lack of NI conts.

GETTING_MAD

My thanks to both Rogerblack and Zagfles for the useful information. I think that we are on a loser too. but you don't know till you try ! The real problem is that you get conflicting answers from different staff members at the HMRC DWP department.

Horseunderwater

GETTING_MAD wrote: »

My thanks to both Rogerblack and Zagfles for the useful information. I think that we are on a loser too. but you don't know till you try ! The real problem is that you get conflicting answers from different staff members at the HMRC DWP department.

Hi getting mad

I assume that your OH is now 60 and therefore the old rules of 40 years contributions probably apply - so she would have 28 years worth if she went back to work after her 16 years at home with your only child? If she did not go back to work then I assume she is only entitled to 12? I can see why you are really mad about this. I would be too.
I'm not too sure if you can do anything about it as such. But it does prove one thing about DWP they were just as bad then as they are now about misinformation given out. I hope that you can find some help.

MissMoneypenny

At one time, there was no Child Benefit for the first child, but I think that changed many years ago. It also seems your wife would need 39 years for a full state pension under the old scheme and that has to be full tax year - April to April. So only 28 years at best towards her 39 years required (if there is any way she can claim back her HR and she worked full tax years) so not a full pension anyway.

It might be better if you ask the experts on the Pensions board about any reclaiming or buying back years.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=19

She may be better off claiming 60% state pension on the back of your NI contributions. Are you of retirement age too? The pensions board will be able to advise you.

Be_Happy

As mentioned above, Family Allowance was not payable for the first child, several years ago (I'm not sure, but it may be as late as the 1970s that it became available for the first child), so your wife may have been correctly advised at the time. Perhaps someone else knows the exact date.

Secondly HRP only became available from 1978, so only years after this will count.

You'll have to consider your exact dates to know if either of these things affect your calculations.

margaretclare

From memory, Family Allowance (later Child Benefit) was originally only paid to the second and subsequent child - this was an initiative earlier in the 20th century to encourage people to have more children to replace losses in the world wars. I know this, because it was the one political change my mother ever hoped to see, to change it to the first and subsequent children, not just the second onwards. AFAIK the change to payment for all children from the 1st onwards came in the mid-1960s. Not sure which year. Late 60s maybe?

From April 1978 any woman who was still paying, or had been paying, full NI contributions (i.e. hadn't made the 'small stamp' reduced contribution option) and was not working and in receipt of Child Benefit, was credited with the NI contributions she would have paid if still at work.

HTH

MissMoneypenny

Be_Happy wrote: »

As mentioned above, Family Allowance was not payable for the first child, several years ago (I'm not sure, but it may be as late as the 1970s that it became available for the first child), so your wife may have been correctly advised at the time. Perhaps someone else knows the exact date.

You're right. 1977 according to wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_benefit#United_Kingdom

The system was first implemented in August 1946 as "family allowances" under the Family Allowances Act 1945, at a rate of 5s (= £0.25) per week per child in a family, except for the eldest. This was raised from September 1952, by the Family Allowances and National Insurance Act 1952, to 8s (= £0.40), and from October 1956, by the Family Allowances Act and National Insurance Act 1956, to 8s for the second child with 10s (= £0.50) for the third and subsequent children. By 1955, some 5,000,000 allowances were being paid, to about 3,250,000 families.[4]


It was modified in 1977, with the payments being termed "child benefit" and given for the eldest child as well as the younger ones; by 1979 it was worth £4 per child per week. In 1991, the system was further altered, with a higher payment now given for the first child than for their younger siblings.

lijaloo

Child benefit was introduced in 1977 and all children were included. Previously family allowance was payable for the second and subsequent children. OP when was your child born? If before 1977 it is possible that you didn't claim child benefit when it was introduced or were given incorrect information.

MissMoneypenny

GETTING_MAD wrote: »

.At that time Family Allowance (as Child Benefit was then known), we were advised, was not claimable for an only child.

From what you have said about Family Allowance, it seems your child was born before 1977 when (according to wiki) there was no money for the first child. The wiki link shows that when it became child benefit in 1977, the first child could then be claimed for.

Happy has said that HR could only be claimed from 1978. So it seems it's just from 1978 until your child was 16 that your wife has lost towards her state pension (plus all the child benefit payments you could have claimed).

Your wife may be better off claiming 60% state pension on your contributions.
http://www.pensionsadvisoryservice.org.uk/women-and-pensions/basic-state-pension