HM Revenue and Customs

3. Mrs L complains that HMRC processed her child benefit claim form but did not update her bank details, meaning it wrongly paid child benefit payments into an account that belongs to her ex-husband. She says she did not know the claim had been processed until she realised her ex-husband was getting the payments.

4. Mrs L says her wages went above £50,000 and she had to pay avoidable charges.

5. Mrs L wants evidence that shows HMRC got it wrong, for inconsistencies and processes to be investigated, an apology, and financial compensation.

6. On 5 December 2005 Mrs L became a child benefit customer after making a claim.

7. On 16 November 2006 Mrs L updated her bank details so payments could be made into another account.

8. On April 2019 Mrs L says she sent in a new child benefit claim form as she suspended payments.

9. In April 2019 HMRC began making payments into the bank account used before the claim was suspended.

10. On 19 February 2021 HMRC received a letter from Mrs L stating she no longer wished to receive child benefit payments due to the high-income child benefit charge (HICBC). This is a charge made when someone earns over £50,000 and claims child benefit. HMRC cancelled the claim on this date.

11. On 27 February 2021 Mrs L wrote a complaint to HMRC, explaining the child benefit payments were being paid to her ex-husband and she no longer had access to that account. Mrs L says she made a claim in April 2019 but did not hear anything back and did not get any money, so she thought the claim had not been processed.

12. On 19 March 2021 HMRC replied to Mrs L’s complaint and explained it had used the bank details it had held since November 2006. It asked Mrs L for the new details to update its system. Mrs L provided these on 23 March 2021.

13. On 13 June 2021 Mrs L wrote to HMRC and complained she had not had a response to her complaint dated 27 February 2021, despite contacting HMRC more than once.

14. On 13 July HMRC replied to Mrs L’s claim and explained it could not comment on the child benefit claim form from April 2019, as this had been destroyed due to data protection. It also told Mrs L it was her responsibility to get any money it had paid from the person into whose bank account the payments had been made. It gave details for appealing the HICBC charge if she wanted to.

15. On 26 July 2021 Mrs L escalated her complaint to the Adjudicator’s Office, as the next stage of the complaints process. As she was unhappy with the Adjudicator’s Office report, she then complained to us.

18. Mrs L says HMRC processed a child benefit claim form she submitted in April 2019. She tells us that on this form she submitted new bank details, but HMRC continued to use old details.

19. The Adjudicator’s Office was unable to make a decision because of the lack of evidence available from HMRC and Mrs L. HMRC destroyed any files in line with its 14-month data retention policy. We cannot see what information, including bank details, was on the form.

20. We asked HMRC for any phone calls or data about this issue to see if we could make a decision on what most likely happened. HMRC told us it does not have any data, meaning there is nothing for us to review.

21. HMRC says it reviewed the case and it no longer thinks Mrs L submitted a new child benefit form in April 2019. It says the computer system shows that Mrs L’s claim was reinstated after she sent an email requesting this on the 18 April 2019. It therefore tells us it believes it did not make any mistakes in the handling of any information from Mrs L. HMRC cannot recover this email.

22. Mrs L says that although HMRC has destroyed its data, this does not mean it did not make a mistake. We understand Mrs L feels very frustrated about this matter.

23. Due to lack of evidence, we cannot reach a firm and independent view about what happened. As set out above, we have made enquiries to both parties to make sure we have done everything we can to explore the available evidence . Despite this, we simply say what most likely happened at the time. We know this will feel like an unsatisfactory outcome for Mrs L, and we have not reached this conclusion lightly.

24. Mrs L also says HMRC must have policies and procedures in place to make sure they pay the correct account. We looked at HMRC’s internal policy about making payments and can see that it can make child benefit payments through different methods, including by BACS payment, which is bank-to-bank transfer. HMRC’s internal CBM180200 manual says ‘the account used can be an account that the customer nominates that can accept a BACS payment’.

25. It also says ‘if the customer wants to use an account that is not theirs, they may do so; it is up to the customer to make sure they get the money from that person’. This is supported by Child Benefit and Guardian’s Allowance (Administration) Regulations 2003, regulation 16, which says:

‘A person entitled to Child Benefit or Guardian’s Allowance will have their payments made by direct credit transfer into an account either: • in their own name, or • in their partner’s name, or • in the name of someone acting on their behalf, or • jointly in their own and their partner’s names, or • jointly in their own name and in the name of someone acting on their behalf’.

26. We agree with Mrs L that HMRC should have policies and processes in place, and we can see it does. We also agree that HMRC should act in line with those policies and processes.

27. The difficulty in this case is that we simply do not have enough evidence to reach a view on whether HMRC did or did not act in line with those standards. We have no way of reconciling the different views of what happened. Having thought carefully about these matters, we will take no further action.

1. We have carefully considered Mrs L’s complaint about HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). We are sorry to learn the reasons for Mrs L’s complaint, and the reasons for bringing it to us.

2. Due to the lack of evidence available, and despite making enquiries and carefully reviewing the evidence we have, we are unable to make a decision on whether HMRC failed to act within guidelines and got things wrong. We have decided to take no further action, and we will explain our reasons in this statement.