Tax credit check letter

[Jellybeans24]

Hi I recently got a letter about my tax credits saying they are checking my claim and they want information from April 2019 to July 2019 Basically they have asked if me kids dad is living at my property and they named him on the letter he doesn’t live with me but sometimes sleeps over we had our 2nd child together last year we just don’t get on when we live together hence why we live apart

I pay all my bills etc so everything is in my name but he does get letters sent to my address as his mam opens his letters when they go to hers even thought she shouldn’t. But I’ve got all my proof that he doesn’t live he but I’m only worried because they have asked for bank statements but we always transfer each other money he does give me money for the kids but he isn’t the best with money so he gives me money to keep for him then I put it in my savers and transfer it back to him when he needs it.

Do I tell hmrc all this and will they understand or will they stop my tax credits?

I hope you can live with the thought you and your “ ex “ could be getting watched any time. He’s conveniently moved out, you’ve moved him from the rent book, bills. He’s registered with his mum just so yous can get a few more extra bucks. I bet your claiming the childcare as a single parent too. I’d be watching over your shoulder as I know a girl who was jailed for this!!!

I remember you now Babyroobs.

Last time I came across you on a thread you were angry because refugees were allowed to reunite with their families and claim EU citizenship after they had settled for a number of years.

I don't know why you are doing the job you are doing.

It can't be good for you facing a constant stream of people whose problems make you mutter 'bloody pisstakers' under your breath. You must get through a fuckton of rennies.

It can't be good for your clients either. I've worked in lots of jobs where there is a requirement to be non-judgmental and I know that just paying lip service is not good enough. If your idea of being non-judgmental is just waiting until they are out of the room to mutter obscenities about them then they will pick up on your attitudes. Many of them have been dealing with people like you all their lives. They won't trust you and they'll find it difficult to engage with the service you identify as providing.

It's not even a well paid job. I'm sort of curious about why you're doing it at all but at the same time I probably don't want to know.

Nice bit of insight there @pencilsinspace thank you.

Some people seem to forget we are all human, all the same, just on different journeys.

We need to leave judgement behind and re learn compassion and love.

And start asking ourselves "Am I being the very best loving version of myself today?"

If there's room for improvement, that's where our energy should go, not condemning others for failing to meet our expectations, although that is the easier option.

Pencils - I love the job I do. the vast majority of clients are people in genuine people in severe hardship usually through illness and It's amazing to be able to help them access benefits through a difficult time. But we all know there are also those who quite frankly are taking the piss. As I said above I would never let that show in any way. But yes I am human and some situations really do grate because there are so many genuine people who do are denied the benefits they desperately need or have a huge fight on their hands just to get enough to survive. I see it every day people going through life threatening situations yet can't even pay their heating bills or afford travel to hospital appointments.

pencils - fortunately I don't have to see many people who claim to be single whilst having a partner ( I accept that this situation I completely above board), they are mostly ill people. Yes I admit I would find it more difficult faced with 'single' parents with a partner living round the corner at his mums every day. I wouldn't want to do the job if that was the majority of my clients . Dealing with greedy people defrauding the system would not be rewarding. I know the op's situation is completely allowed but having a working partner living elsewhere paying little rent whilst she claims as single and maintenance not being taken into account at all does seem to be a loophole in the system.

@Babyroobs people do what they have to to survive. I have a friend, who had dd, was due to go back to work, childcare costs were more than what she was earning, because if dp wages they were entitled to zero tax credits, although his job was average not great. It wouldn't be worth her working all wages would go on childcare. Because of this they decided to split and she then got tax credit with childcare mostly paid. She could have give work up but then when dd went to school she would not have been guaranteed job back, where she had worked for over 10 years and enjoyed. She had post natal depression and that work-home balance helped. She did what she had to do to survive.

ihearyoutoo. That's ridiculous to be honest, most honest people with kids don't defraud the system in this way. I had four kids and we managed by working around each other to reduce childcare costs whilst they were little. There are ways to have kids without turning to benefit fraud. Don't make excuses for people commiting fraud. On both tax credits and Universal credit people get significant help with childcare costs if on a low income.

It's not defrauding the system though, as previously stated, it's completely legitimate as confirmed by HMRC.

ihearyoutoo

I don't think that's a very good example of a valid reason for exploiting the system. If the main reason your friend wanted to continue working was to ensure continuity of employment for the future, and achieve a home/work balance to help with PND, why would it have mattered if most of her wages would have been spent on childcare? Why, when the DP was clearly earning a reasonable, if not enormous wage, should the state be paying to look after his child?

The problem with people who do this kind of thing is that they get a bad name for people who genuinely have no choice but to rely on state help.

My take on it is this - if there's an alternative option a person can safely take to avoid needing state help, they should take it. State help should be available in necessity, not choice.

ihearyoutoo - Do people really do this ? Live separately from their partner even though they are together just for extra money ? They really split the family up living in separate households for the sake of paying a couple of short years childcare costs ? Assuming a full years maternity leave is taken and 30 free hours of childcare kicks in at aged 3, that is two years ??

But relationships can be complicated. I have a friend with three kids who chooses not to move in with her boyfriend - he's not the kids' father - because they figure it's best for all of their children (he has children too, although non resident). She works but claims tax credits. He stays over at hers sometimes and contributes to days and meals out etc. She pays for the running of the household but he did, for example, sub her when her car failed its MOT. Lots of situations especially when there are older kids involved are like this. Lots of people are separate not so they can fraud but because that's genuinely how their lives are. But really they are running two households. They wouldn't be treated as a single family unit for any other purpose including tax/council tax etc. But they are in a relationship.

CreekIsRising I think it's a different scenario if a couple have no children together and have never lived together. If they have children together, and are still in a relationship, then they become a family unit whether living together or not.

Obviously, they might split up for genuine reasons, but this isn't what's happened here - we are hearing about couples who have children together and regularly stay over at each other's houses and regard themselves as in a relationship - but are living apart because it entitles them to more state help.

@CreekIsRising yes that's a very normal situation but the OP here isn't in that situation. The partner in question is the father of her children.
Ok they can't live together for whatever reason but they're still w couple the OP states this. Why shouldn't he use his income to pay for the children properly. Surely it's the same as someone who works away? They live somewhere else but their wife or partner isn't countered as a single parent and wouldn't be allowed to claim as a single parent because they're joint incomes are used to fund the family. This is what the OP should be doing. I expect of the OPs partner is living with his mother then his rent will be minimal if anything. What's he doing with the rest of his money? Why should the state pay to allow him to keep his income (part from the "maintenance" he pays) when they could still combine their income to support their children even without him living at home.

Narcheska - Exactly ! It's different if the kids aren't his, I can totally understand why someone wouldn't move in with a boyfriend if they were going to lose all their benefits because of his income and he would be expected to support her kids, but op's situation is completely different.

@TheMemoryLingers and @Narcheska my point is that the family and financial structure is the same, in practical terms, which is why it isn't fraud. I agree that men who do this are pretty scuzzy. The guy in the OP has clearly opted out of day to day family life, living as a singleton but coming round for regular shags, homecooked meals and nice evenings with the kids while the op carries everything for him, but I don't think it's against the law to be an arsehole, unfortunately.

@CreekIsRising I haven't accused anyone of fraud - I have said they are exploiting the system.

The problem with this is that the system becomes over-burdened with claimants who are claiming because it suits their lifestyle/gives them extra money on top of what they need to live.

Sooner or later the money will run out and the system will be tightened up, which might sound like a good thing, but could lead to the situation a pp mentioned where women are forced to stay with abusive partners; or alternatively everyone will get less money (see Universal Credit for a precedent) which will make life even more difficult for those who are genuinely single, with no partner's income in the background to 'sub' them for this, that and the other.

Re the Indian pensioner - I thought that there would be no entitlement to a state pension as they wouldn’t have paid the NI stamp?

Is this not the case?

LASH38 - You are correct this is the case. I was just pointing out that it doesn't stop people assuming they will get the state pension despite never living here or working here before.

Oh ok, the example seemed to insinuate that it was a regular possible occurrence. It wouldn’t bother me, as while people try to take the piss it clearly isn’t an option in that scenario.

On the other point I do wonder the implications of children growing up where the core household is mum and kids but dad is an optional extra as he isn’t 100% within in the unit on a daily basis. It’s a strange lesson to teach them I think and not one that the government should be assisting.

New relationships are different as the person isn’t dad (or mum).

@Babyroobs, I'm surprise you say that what OP is doing is legal, because my understanding is that it isn't at all, however, the DWP in too many cases don't bother to pursue because when you have couples who know how to make the best to tick the right boxes, the cost of investigating them and take them to court is more than what people are claiming, so it's not worth it financially.

My neighbour got done though in the exact same situation than OP so maybe it depends on the local teams and resources.

people do what they have to to survive
What a pathetic excuse! There are millions of couple with children who are on lowish income. They don't separate with one going back to live with mum and dad to claim a bit more tax credits. They work and cut their budget according to their income to survive.

I think it is legal as op is not living with her partner so can claim as single as long as finances are separate. Whether the dwp want to investigate their status as they have had a child together recently, that is a possibility but if he has a different address and does not support her financially ( the exception being child maintenance) then she isn't doing anything wrong.

The letters for him arriving at op's address are most likely what has triggered the problem as that obviously suggests he lives there and as they have had a child recently and he does actually have a property or tenancy in his name it could be tricky proving they aren't living together.

@Babyroobs well that is very judgmental even though you say you have to be non judgmental

@Babyroobs I definitely think you are in the wrong job 🤔

@Babyroobs would the fact that he pays money into her account which is then apparently returned to him not raise questions?