Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Tracyb82
    • By Tracyb82 9th Feb 18, 2:19 PM
    • 3Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Tracyb82
    Ex employer using NI number
    • #1
    • 9th Feb 18, 2:19 PM
    Ex employer using NI number 9th Feb 18 at 2:19 PM
    Hello,
    Posting on my sisters behalf. She has recently found out that her ex employer continued to use her details after she left work a year ago. She repeatedly asked for her p45 and it wasn't given and as a result was on an emergency tax code in her new job. A bill arrived from HMRC and she has been told they have amended her tax code for her to pay this bill.
    She sent them a letter stating she hasn't worked there and where she did work since.
    They said there's nothing they can do. Basically her word against her former employer.
    Any advice? She has made an appointment with citizens advice in the meantime.
Page 1
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 9th Feb 18, 2:39 PM
    • 4,552 Posts
    • 7,619 Thanks
    sangie595
    • #2
    • 9th Feb 18, 2:39 PM
    • #2
    • 9th Feb 18, 2:39 PM
    A bill for what? If she was PAYE then the employer could only have recorded her as having tax deducted from her wages. So there wouldn't be any bill. What possible benefit could the employer have had, since, if they failed to pay PAYE tax, it would be them that owed the tax money and not her.
    • gettingtheresometime
    • By gettingtheresometime 9th Feb 18, 2:56 PM
    • 3,522 Posts
    • 8,730 Thanks
    gettingtheresometime
    • #3
    • 9th Feb 18, 2:56 PM
    • #3
    • 9th Feb 18, 2:56 PM
    Did your sister fill in a starter checklist which replaced a P46?
    Lloyds OD / Natwest OD / PO CC / Wescott / Argos Card cleared thanks to the 1 debt v 100 day challenge


    Next on the list - JD Williams
    • badmemory
    • By badmemory 9th Feb 18, 3:48 PM
    • 1,555 Posts
    • 1,998 Thanks
    badmemory
    • #4
    • 9th Feb 18, 3:48 PM
    • #4
    • 9th Feb 18, 3:48 PM
    Surely the bill will be for the loss of personal allowance on the actual job plus any tax that may then have been at 40%.

    Was the ex-employer a small business or more probably have a manager running it not an owner? Someone has been putting the nett pay in their pockets, maybe not even realising that the chickens will come home to roost.

    So questions for the OPs sister, would the owner of the business be involved enough to know that they were paying someone who was no longer actually employed? Did she change her bank account at the same time as she changed her job? If so, has she checked to make sure the pay hasn't still gone into that account? Someone from inside the company could be defrauding them, it could be their accountants/payroll providers or they could be just too stupid to notice they are still paying her.

    Whilst this won't solve her problem, it could at least point her in the right direction.

    Alternatively of course they could have "stopped paying" someone who is still working for them. No actually but have deleted their NI no & used hers in error. Never underestimate the stupidity of "computer says".
    Last edited by badmemory; 09-02-2018 at 3:51 PM.
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 9th Feb 18, 4:27 PM
    • 4,552 Posts
    • 7,619 Thanks
    sangie595
    • #5
    • 9th Feb 18, 4:27 PM
    • #5
    • 9th Feb 18, 4:27 PM
    Surely the bill will be for the loss of personal allowance on the actual job plus any tax that may then have been at 40%.

    Was the ex-employer a small business or more probably have a manager running it not an owner? Someone has been putting the nett pay in their pockets, maybe not even realising that the chickens will come home to roost.

    So questions for the OPs sister, would the owner of the business be involved enough to know that they were paying someone who was no longer actually employed? Did she change her bank account at the same time as she changed her job? If so, has she checked to make sure the pay hasn't still gone into that account? Someone from inside the company could be defrauding them, it could be their accountants/payroll providers or they could be just too stupid to notice they are still paying her.

    Whilst this won't solve her problem, it could at least point her in the right direction.

    Alternatively of course they could have "stopped paying" someone who is still working for them. No actually but have deleted their NI no & used hers in error. Never underestimate the stupidity of "computer says".
    Originally posted by badmemory
    But none of that would explain why HMRC says she owed them a bill. If someone had walked away with the net pay, the tax would still have been due to be collected by the employer, and with live updating systems in place now, that would simply be an amount of money the employer owes HMRC - not her personally. I can totally get someone, deliberately or in error, still paying the employee or someone purporting to be them, but I'm struggling to understand why the tax wouldn't have been paid automatically on the wages, and how, with live updates, it's taken so long. Not being given a P45 shouldn't explain how this could occur - lots of people never see their P45s.
    • Xbigman
    • By Xbigman 9th Feb 18, 6:40 PM
    • 3,065 Posts
    • 1,314 Thanks
    Xbigman
    • #6
    • 9th Feb 18, 6:40 PM
    • #6
    • 9th Feb 18, 6:40 PM
    I did see something like this once but it was obvious what had happened and was quickly corrected. Someone left the company but an employee with a similar name was issued a P45 and leaving letter. This was corrected on site within hours but payroll took 6 weeks to sort out their end.
    If allowed to continue the one who left would in theory have had two incomes and would therefore have owed tax even if on emergency tax in their new job. Thats the only explanation that fits if the OP's information is correct.


    Darren
    Xbigman's guide to a happy life.

    Eat properly
    Sleep properly
    Save some money
    • badmemory
    • By badmemory 9th Feb 18, 7:58 PM
    • 1,555 Posts
    • 1,998 Thanks
    badmemory
    • #7
    • 9th Feb 18, 7:58 PM
    • #7
    • 9th Feb 18, 7:58 PM
    But none of that would explain why HMRC says she owed them a bill. If someone had walked away with the net pay, the tax would still have been due to be collected by the employer, and with live updating systems in place now, that would simply be an amount of money the employer owes HMRC - not her personally. I can totally get someone, deliberately or in error, still paying the employee or someone purporting to be them, but I'm struggling to understand why the tax wouldn't have been paid automatically on the wages, and how, with live updates, it's taken so long. Not being given a P45 shouldn't explain how this could occur - lots of people never see their P45s.
    Originally posted by sangie595
    The bill (in this case) is caused mainly by the personal allowance being used twice by both "employers" plus half of anything that then becomes payable at 40% as it would only have been paid at 20% - as in extra tax due*. I did say never underestimate the stupidity of computer says, unfortunately this also applies to those who don't get the basics of their job right.

    *eg 6 months in new job not removed from old job = half of 11500 (personal allowance) at 20% due to HMRC = 1150 tax due. A very unpleasant shock. Of course the employee that they have deleted has lost a years NI & pension incl state & if they need to claim for unemployment or sickness will not be eligible. So the ex-employer has put 2 people up **** street. If the company goes into liquidation the other person will not get redundancy money & the list goes on.
    Last edited by badmemory; 09-02-2018 at 8:09 PM.
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 9th Feb 18, 8:48 PM
    • 4,552 Posts
    • 7,619 Thanks
    sangie595
    • #8
    • 9th Feb 18, 8:48 PM
    • #8
    • 9th Feb 18, 8:48 PM
    The bill (in this case) is caused mainly by the personal allowance being used twice by both "employers" plus half of anything that then becomes payable at 40% as it would only have been paid at 20% - as in extra tax due*. I did say never underestimate the stupidity of computer says, unfortunately this also applies to those who don't get the basics of their job right.

    *eg 6 months in new job not removed from old job = half of 11500 (personal allowance) at 20% due to HMRC = 1150 tax due. A very unpleasant shock. Of course the employee that they have deleted has lost a years NI & pension incl state & if they need to claim for unemployment or sickness will not be eligible. So the ex-employer has put 2 people up **** street. If the company goes into liquidation the other person will not get redundancy money & the list goes on.
    Originally posted by badmemory
    I'd totally agree on the stupidity of computers. But here's the thing. This is now on live updates. So the former employer continues to "pay" them, whatever that means, and pays the tax as notified by the live updates. Because if they don't, it's themthat owes the tax, not the employee. That's how PAYE works. The new employer logs on to live updates and records their new employee and enters their new employees details. That system recognises that the person has two incomes and taxes them accordingly. So where did the bill come from? It would appear the debt is the other way around. The person would be over taxed, not undertaxed?
    • Tracyb82
    • By Tracyb82 10th Feb 18, 7:47 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Tracyb82
    • #9
    • 10th Feb 18, 7:47 PM
    • #9
    • 10th Feb 18, 7:47 PM
    Thank you for your replies. I clarified this today with my sister. She worked in a bar. She was never ever paid via her bank account, always in a brown envelope, never received one single payslip in her time there. I don't know how she could be so naive to let them do that.
    She left in February last year. HMRC were able to tell her that her details were used again from June to September and she did indeed receive a bill. After a phone call with HMRC yesterday they have amended her tax code to pay this outstanding amount.
    Legally I have no idea how to help her. Basically HMRC have said it's her word against the employer. It would be my opinion that they did indeed deliberately use these details but that's another debate.
    • badmemory
    • By badmemory 10th Feb 18, 11:56 PM
    • 1,555 Posts
    • 1,998 Thanks
    badmemory
    I'd totally agree on the stupidity of computers. But here's the thing. This is now on live updates. So the former employer continues to "pay" them, whatever that means, and pays the tax as notified by the live updates. Because if they don't, it's themthat owes the tax, not the employee. That's how PAYE works. The new employer logs on to live updates and records their new employee and enters their new employees details. That system recognises that the person has two incomes and taxes them accordingly. So where did the bill come from? It would appear the debt is the other way around. The person would be over taxed, not undertaxed?
    Originally posted by sangie595
    Their personal allowance has been used twice - even if the employer has paid the tax they have calculated as due, the personal allowance has been used twice. Therefore for every duplicated month the person would owe 11500/12 multiplied by .2. Which is almost 200 for every month it happened. 2300 for a full year. That is without it sending the annual income into the 40% tax rate.

    The new system is obviously what has now caught up and is causing this to happen - HMRC finding the problem is not an instant thing. Most issues only seem to be found 4 years down the line.
    Last edited by badmemory; 11-02-2018 at 12:00 AM.
    • seatbeltnoob
    • By seatbeltnoob 11th Feb 18, 1:14 AM
    • 435 Posts
    • 104 Thanks
    seatbeltnoob
    HMRC is hugely understaffed. But once you get through to the right person they can help you. Just hang in there and dial away until you get through to the right person who can sort this out for you.


    It's a common tax scam by small businesses to have people on payroll just below the NI threshold so they can lower their corporation tax liabilities. Not saying this is the case - could be innocent. But if a company has phantom people on their payroll then HMRC should be very interested in checking the accounts
    • badmemory
    • By badmemory 11th Feb 18, 2:31 AM
    • 1,555 Posts
    • 1,998 Thanks
    badmemory
    A quick conversation with her ex-employer should either sort it (and leave them *****ng themselves) or leave her feeling happy to report them to HMRC for making fraudulent returns. Either way she should write to HMRC stating that she is adamant that she was not working for them at that time & is not liable for the extra tax.

    In writing not on the phone or if by phone then followed up in writing.
    Last edited by badmemory; 11-02-2018 at 2:35 AM.
    • Tracyb82
    • By Tracyb82 12th Feb 18, 8:18 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Tracyb82
    Thanks for all your replies folks. I'll pass everything to her and make sure she gets the help she needs
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,769Posts Today

8,800Users online

Martin's Twitter