childcare overpayment - help needed

nottslass_2

moniruk wrote: »

That's exactly what has baffled me. I just don't understand their reasoning for stopping the claim. Is it worth going to Citizens advice bureu ?

Personally I'd go straight to my MP - They magically seem to be able to get HMRC mattters investigated quicker than any other agency

Icequeen99

shedboy94 wrote: »

The payments would not have stopped because the money wasn't coming out of your bank - I have never come across that before.....ever. It will either be because the costs were not confirmed as genuine or the actual entitlement to claim CCC wasn't fulfilled.

In theory of course you're right. In practice day in day out I see ridiculous compliance decisions, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

I recently had a case where a claimant had deducted their pension contributions (as per guidance) only to be told by compliance that they wouldn't allow them because he hadn't declared them on his SA form. He got a letter from tax side of HMRC saying he had no need to declare them and he pointed out that such a requirement wasn't in the tax credits legislation anyway. He provided proof from his pension provider he had paid them. Compliance still refused to allow the deduction and it had to go to appeal.

That sounds very similar here that compliance are inventing a requirement that doesn't actually exist in practice. It is happening far too often with the push on error and fraud leading to a lot of very poor quality decisions that are being overturned on appeal.

IQ

moniruk

I just rang up the compliance officer again to ask him to explain his reasoning further so I can refer to it on my appeal form. He blatantly told me I was lying and told me to take it to an appeal for all he cares before hanging up the phone. Now is this the sort of people HMRC have got working for them ? I'm not sure what to think anymore.

Icequeen99

moniruk wrote: »

I just rang up the compliance officer again to ask him to explain his reasoning further so I can refer to it on my appeal form. He blatantly told me I was lying and told me to take it to an appeal for all he cares before hanging up the phone. Now is this the sort of people HMRC have got working for them ? I'm not sure what to think anymore.

I would get some advice. Citizens advice or one of the tax charities like LITRG or TAXAID might be able to help.

That is appalling behavior and regardless of any appeal I would make a complaint about the individual officer.

IQ

FBaby

What did he accuse you of lying about?

moniruk

He acused me of lying about my childcare claim and how I couldnt possibly have made these payments to my childcarer despite having receipts of payments I had made.

skibadee

We're your children only attending childcare for the hours your wife was working? also are either of the children over the age of 3yrs and entitled to the Government Grant for 3yr olds?

moniruk

Yes they were attending childcare during the time my wife was working. My children are aged 7 and 8. Before my wife started work i contacted HMRC and was told we were entitled to help with childcare. Thats the only reason we decided she should start work to get some experience as she has just qualified as a child carer.

notanewuser

moniruk wrote: »

Yes they were attending childcare during the time my wife was working. My children are aged 7 and 8. Before my wife started work i contacted HMRC and was told we were entitled to help with childcare. Thats the only reason we decided she should start work to get some experience as she has just qualified as a child carer.

This sounds odd to me too. What hours was your wife working?

Icequeen99

skibadee wrote: »

We're your children only attending childcare for the hours your wife was working? also are either of the children over the age of 3yrs and entitled to the Government Grant for 3yr olds?

We have discussed this several times on this Board before, there are no rules in tax credits that the childcare must match working hours.

As long as you meet the childcare element requirements (both working at least 16 hours as a general rule) you can put children in childcare full time and still claim the 70%.

It helps people who have unpredictable shifts etc pay for childcare otherwise it would be impossible.

The other explanation is that they didn't believe, due to cash in hand, that your wife was working 16 hours. However as the compliance officer didn't mention that I suspect it really is that they have added this ridiculous new requirement that doesn't exist in the legislation.

If they really think you have been claiming and providing fraudulent receipts (and therefore so has the childcare provider) they should be at least giving penalties and taking it further. I think this is just another example of compliance gone mad unfortunately.

IQ