Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

HMRC tax credit debt letter out of the blue - not sure what to do


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3745 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

My partner received the attached letter today from HMRC stating that she owes a debt for overpayment of Child Tax Credit and Working tax credit and the dates given are periods ending 05/04/2007 and 05/04/20008.

 

At this time my partner was still married and living at the marital home and was claiming both allowances correctly up to the time she left on the 20th November 2008

 

She has a letter from the tax office confirming that she stopped both working tax and child tax credit on the 20th November which was the last day she lived at the marital home.

 

My partner then did not live with her children (she lived round the corner in a house share) and claimed nothing from the time she left to March this year. She did pay CSA payments in the time she was the absent parent.

 

My partner got divorced in 2009 and moved in with me in August 2012, the only one of her children still under the age of 18 (17 at the time) came to live with us in November 2012.

 

As his father refused to give him any money my partner went to the CSA to make a claim and claimed the child allowance (he was still claiming it up to that point) in March 2013.

 

Now this letter has arrived claiming a debt of over payments for the child and working tax credits for 4 and 5 years ago - not sure why or what we should do, any advice please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

set your default scan page size to A4 less than 300DPI [150 will do]

scan the required letters/agreements/sheets - as a picture[jpg] file

don't forget you can use a mobile phone or a digital camera too!!

'

BUT......

ENSURE: remove all pers info inc. barcodes etc using paint program

but leave all monetary figures and dates.

*********************************************************

{DO NOT USE A BIRO OR PEN OR USE SEE THRU TAPE OR LABELS]

try www.pdfescape.com TO BLANK STUFF,

*************************************************************

or

DO IT IN MSPAINT.EXE or any photo editing program

goto one of the many free online pdf converter websites ...

http://freejpgtopdf.com/

..

if you have multiple scans/pics

put them in a word doc FIRST and convert that to PDF

or use www.pdfmerge.com

 

convert existing PC files to PDF [office has an installable print to PDF option]

..

 

it would be better to upload a multipage pdf if

you have many images too rather than many single pdfs

.

or if you have PDF as an installed printer drive use that

or use word and save as pdf

try and logically name your file so people know what it is.

though dont use full bank names or CAG in the title

i'e Default notice dd-mm-yyyy TSB

.

open a new msg box here

hit go advanced below the msg box

hit manage attachments below that box

hit the add files button on the top right

hit select files, navigate to your file on your pc

hit upload files

.

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

dunno what that was by it weren't PDF just pages & pages of symbols.

 

attach the file as a PDF please

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's better

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

right that's page 2

how you get a single half page to be 4.5MEG I don't know!

what reg are you scanning at ?

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

cant see what passing the debt to a dca can do

 

they cant enforce it

 

only hmrc can

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I thought and any DCA turning up at my door will get short shrift from me.

 

What's odd is why haven't they chased her before for this and why does it go back to 2007 and 2008 for over payments - bearing in mind she was legit in claiming it and stopped it the day she left the marital home so there shouldn't be any over payments.

 

If this was enforceable then surely they would have chased it before?

 

She has pretty much lived in one place since leaving the marital home up to moving in with me and she works so she pays tax as a PAYE employee so it's not like she's hard to find.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are referring to it not being unenforceable because you think it to be Statute Barred, debts from the public purse never become SB. It may be UE in terms of it being incorrect. You need to dispute this all the way. The DWP are appalling and act as judge and jury on this type of thing.

 

They do use a range of DCA's nowadays who, I assume, have the powers of a normal DCA - but remember that includes acting with the OC which is likely here.

 

Phone their helpline and ask how to appeal this overpayment. Be prepared to keep battling, even when they tell you it can't go any further - they lie!

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes they do lie!

 

I believe that the only think they can do is take it from future benefits.

 

however you seem to have evidence that its notright anyhow

 

so go with that route first.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are referring to it not being unenforceable because you think it to be Statute Barred, debts from the public purse never become SB.

 

Yes they do - as per s7 of the Limitation Act 1980. The 6 years runs from when the final decision re: the overpayment was made (unless there have been payments or a written acknowledgments since).

 

It's important to note, however, that even though the legal remedy via court action is barred, recovery can still be undertaken indefinitely via alternative measures - such as a deduction from an ongoing benefit; solid provisions were introduced by the Welfare Reform Act which got rid of the decision in Joseph v Newham (this argued that deductions beyond 6 years were unlawful).

 

** Important **

 

The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee have arrived at a decision along with HMRC which states that overpayments from between 2003/4 and 2008/9 for which no payment has been received in the past 12 months should not be collected upon. Given this, I think a formal complaint should be there way to go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See the amendments to the Welfare Act that came into force March 2011, particularly reference to stat barred. section 108.

Edited by BRIGADIER2JCS

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ta all, so it seems like this: The 'debt' is disputed as she believes it was claimed correctly during the claimed over paid periods and stopped when she was no longer entitled (on the exact day) Am I correct in thinking that from sequenci's post the Tax Office cannot pursue this overpayment through debt collectors/court etc and the only way they can claim it back is to stop any future benefits?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Welfare Reform Act 2012 change a greater part of this.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ta all, so it seems like this: The 'debt' is disputed as she believes it was claimed correctly during the claimed over paid periods and stopped when she was no longer entitled (on the exact day) Am I correct in thinking that from sequenci's post the Tax Office cannot pursue this overpayment through debt collectors/court etc and the only way they can claim it back is to stop any future benefits?

 

Yes, that's likely to be true - but only if the final decision of the overpayment was over 6 years ago, I'm not sure it was. You're better to argue that HMRC have made the decision not to try and collect these old overpayments - look to a formal complaint. Read my above post :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done some digging on the HMRC website and can't find any mention of the decision to not chase these old over payment claims - no surprise there then!

 

Any links to that information?

 

Regards the complaint is that via the dispute over payment form on the HMRC or to another department?

 

As she was married and living with the ex husband in those years quoted as over paid 2007 & 2008 would the 'debt' be half his as it was a joint claim for a married couple?

 

Finally, if we chose to ignore this are they likely to just send another claim letter next year or take it further? I know ignoring is not the best policy - I'm just thinking about options.

Edited by Homer67
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another thought - partner is still on a very low income, she works part time on minimum wage 16 hours per week, she doesn't claim anything currently but I suspect she would be entitled to Working Tax Credit.

 

We are not married and I own the house in my name only, therefore I presume my salary is not considered?

 

If she made a claim now and then agreed for the over payments to be taken out of it, would the tax office be likely to agree that?

Edited by Homer67
Link to post
Share on other sites

OP - I owe you an apology, I was wrong.

 

Seq, I think the attached pdf if what you were looking for. [ATTACH=CONFIG]45621[/ATTACH]

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...