Failure to communicate changes to CJRS
9. On 20 March 2020, the government brought in the CJRS. The scheme paid employers 80 percent of an employee’s wages if they were furloughed because of the pandemic. When the scheme was first brought in it was supposed to run until 30 June, to cover the expected period of lockdown. On 22 May the government decided the original CJRS would close on 30 June and be replaced by another CJRS scheme (CJRS Flex) from 1 July. It said CJRS Flex would help employers to use more flexible furlough options as lockdown restrictions eased. In May, when the government announced the end of the original CJRS scheme, it set a deadline of 31 July 2020 for claims under the original scheme.
10. Mr K had already made two successful claims under the original CJRS, for the period to 15 June 2020. He says he got into a pattern of submitting his claims about every six weeks. In August 2020 Mr K went online to submit his claim for the period 15 to 30 June 2020, but the system would not allow him to submit it. He called HMRC and was told the deadline had been changed to 31 July and HMRC could not accept claims for that period. Mr K complains he was not aware of that deadline because HMRC did not properly advertise it.
11. Our principles say organisations should make sure customers are clear about their entitlements and their own responsibilities. HMRC have given evidence showing information about the scheme was on the gov.uk website from 31 May 2020. Information about the changes was put in a highlighted box at the top of every page including information about the CJRS scheme. Firstly, that information included, ‘Employers will have until 31 July to make any claims in respect of the period to 30 June’. On 12 June 2020, more information was published about CJRS Flex and gov.uk was updated to say, ’31 July is the last day that you can submit claims for periods ending on or before 30 June’. HMRC said, as well as putting information on gov.uk, it also advertised the changes on social media platforms and held webinars. HMRC says it worked with key stakeholders and professional organisations to share the information with their members. The information about changes to the scheme was also reported widely in mainstream media.
12. Mr K says he did not visit the website during that period, so did not see the information. He believes HMRC should have emailed all claimants individually to alert them to the changes. We understand Mr K was working hard to keep his business going and to protect his employees, as well as adjusting to the challenges of lockdown and restrictions. We know this meant changes to Mr K’s business and finances, and he would have found it helpful to get an email about the changes. In line with our principles, we have thought about whether HMRC was being customer focussed when it advertised the deadline for claims under the original scheme.
13. HMRC made sure information about the changes and deadline was clearly put on every webpage about CJRS by 31 May 2020. That was two months before the deadline for submitting claims. While we accept Mr K did not visit the website during that period, when CJRS was first introduced it was originally meant to end on 30 June 2020. Because of the original end date for CJRS and the advertised changes to the scheme, it would have been wise for Mr K to have checked the latest position before the original scheme was due to end.
14. We asked HMRC if it had considered emailing customers about the 31 July deadline. HMRC said between 29 May and 29 July 2020 they issued six employer emails and one employer bulletin to 2.2 million employers and 100,000 agents who had subscribed to their email update service. These included information about the deadline and directed customers to gov.uk for more information. HMRC said Mr K did not subscribe for those updates and so would not have got them. We find HMRC were customer focussed as it did advertise the changes clearly and widely. It made sure the information was clearly displayed and easily accessible on gov.uk, through the media and by email to those who had subscribed to that service. We consider it was reasonable for HMRC to email only those who had subscribed to that service.