Child Tax Credit

I don’t think that your husband can claim an adjustment based on your son that he doesn’t have parental responsibility for, but Sirius should know for certain.

If the 30 hours childcare was through a local authority school, contact your council office and ask what should happen. If they provide you a letter saying they are forgiving the debt, it won’t affect future applications.

I know it sucks when you find out someone told you information that was wrong and you’ll have to repay. It truly sucks.

I’m glad you’ve hired someone to support you in the child support claim.  I would think that’ll be pretty easy to sort.

Thank you, I have joined a CMS group and seems like he is considered because he lives with us and our responsibility. New to the group so trying to find out more at this stage. They said NHS and School letter is enough to prove residency and he will be considered but again IDK how it all works.

The school use to give my husband the 30hor form and he completed it. I dont have a copy if it but this was for the local authority. I think he also did application on gov.uk to get a ref # that the school needed.

I dont know I will have to call around and ask. The person we hired said it would take 12months to get everything sorted, so this will be a nightmare for atleast a year.

Thanks for all your help though.

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk

HMRC are not immigration experts and they will not know.

Agreed HMRC are not immigration experts. However, there are rules about who can make a claim to CB and who cannot (based on their immigration status). People at the ChBO will be able to see if an ILR holder can claim for a non-EU dependent. I did also advise this route with CAUTION. It is also very possible to register a child for CB and NOT take the PAYMENT from ChBO (as I previously stated). It doesn't matter the reason for not taking the money. And an ILR holder is definitely allowed to claim, it's the question of whether the claimant can claim for a non-EU child subject to immigration rules. There is guidance - they will be able to check it. It would be wise to take this route with caution (as I previously alluded to!).

There have been lots of posts where a visa has been refused because they took Child Benefit, or they had to quickly repay all the benefit money when they realised they should not have taken this benefit to get another visa. Usually this is because they were told about Child Benefit at the hospital after the birth and thought they couild claim this benefit too, even though it is a Public Fund. 

This is pretty irrelevant in this case, no?

Child Benefit is remaining with HMRC because it is easy for them to check the earnings of a parent as this benefit has an earning cap. They can also check if the parent has completed an SA form, even if they are PAYE; issue fines if they had not; check their RTI system. They do run sweeps for the DWP and UKVI.

No, no. Just no. This is all wrong on so many levels. First of all, the ChBO is a seperate office to the tax office. ChBO have NO access to your income/ earnings details because CB is not means tested. (I don't think you know what I do for a living?). They cannot access PAYE, SA, TBS, NIRS, or any of the other myriad systems that the tax office use (RTI is within PAYE). And actually, the tax office have VERY limited access to CB info.

HMRC don't regularly open enquiries into this sort of thing (and yes - they would have to open an actual enquiry for this sort of thing). An HMRC employee cannot simply check anyone's records on a whim. There would be ZERO reason or authorisation to look into any old CB claimant's SATR. The only cross-over between ChBO and the tax office is the high income child benefit charge, and a tax office employee can only look into a record if they recieve information that there could be non-compliance.

To think ChBO have access to SA is just stupid. Data Protection (and the range of associated laws with protecting it) says that only people who need access to your data to perform their job can have the access. No one at ChBO needs to check your income as it is NOT means tested!!!!



And yes, I agree that using school records/ letters is a far more straightforward way of proving that your husband lives with a second child.

I don’t think that your husband can claim an adjustment based on your son that he doesn’t have parental responsibility for, but Sirius should know for certain.

As kelks has confirmed, it's children in the household. I had a look at a CSA board last night and it seems the parent without care, can use the children of their new partner to reduce the maintance payments of their own children (who live with the parent with care).

Agreed HMRC are not immigration experts. However, there are rules about who can make a claim to CB and who cannot (based on their immigration status). People at the ChBO will be able to see if an ILR holder can claim for a non-EU dependent. I did also advise this route with CAUTION. It is also very possible to register a child for CB and NOT take the PAYMENT from ChBO (as I previously stated). It doesn't matter the reason for not taking the money. And an ILR holder is definitely allowed to claim, it's the question of whether the claimant can claim for a non-EU child subject to immigration rules. There is guidance - they will be able to check it. It would be wise to take this route with caution (as I previously alluded to!).

This is pretty irrelevant in this case, no?

No, no. Just no. This is all wrong on so many levels. First of all, the ChBO is a seperate office to the tax office. ChBO have NO access to your income/ earnings details because CB is not means tested. (I don't think you know what I do for a living?). They cannot access PAYE, SA, TBS, NIRS, or any of the other myriad systems that the tax office use (RTI is within PAYE). And actually, the tax office have VERY limited access to CB info.

HMRC don't regularly open enquiries into this sort of thing (and yes - they would have to open an actual enquiry for this sort of thing). An HMRC employee cannot simply check anyone's records on a whim. There would be ZERO reason or authorisation to look into any old CB claimant's SATR. The only cross-over between ChBO and the tax office is the high income child benefit charge, and a tax office employee can only look into a record if they recieve information that there could be non-compliance.

To think ChBO have access to SA is just stupid. Data Protection (and the range of associated laws with protecting it) says that only people who need access to your data to perform their job can have the access. No one at ChBO needs to check your income as it is NOT means tested!!!!



And yes, I agree that using school records/ letters is a far more straightforward way of proving that your husband lives with a second child.

From what you have said on here, you are an Assistrant Officer at Leeds RC? Empolyees definately can't check. HMRC does carry out sweeps and shares information. Every so often there are still posts from those who didn't realise they earned too much for Child Benefit and have got a fine for not completing an SA. Just as the NHS has given addresses to UKVI when requested; the DWP look for data foorprints using the credit reference agencies, to check who lives in a single claimants household; the DWP receive information from HMRC about savings of a claimant or an account a claimant didn't declare; councils receive information from HMRC to check for single person discount claims. The government has been data sharing between departments for years.

For Data Protection, if the government suspects fraud then they can look at data. And isn't there another act/change to an act, going through to give the goverment greater powers to check?

As kelks has confirmed, it's children in the household. I had a look at a CSA board last night and it seems the parent without care, can use the children of their new partner to reduce the maintance payments of their own children (who live with the parent with care).

Not touching that with a 10 foot pole! 

Not touching that with a 10 foot pole! 

It does seem a weird allowance because in addition to using the non biological child of their new partner to reduce their maintenance payments to their own biological children, they have maintenance payments coming into their household from the biological parent of that same child.

But it is the two child limit for the low income benefits rule, that is really weird.
e.g. if the chidren stay with the mother, she meets a new partner and they have a child and are on a low income. They can't claim extra low income benefits for that child and have to keep that child themselves.
But if  the father leaves his children with their mother as their main carer, (the children sleep at their mother's more than at their father's) he could have two more  children with a new partner and claim low income benefits for both of them. Then he could leave that partner with the children too and do the same, again and again, all the time claiming benefits for his newest two children and reducing his payments to all his children. I don't think the government has thought this through in only applying the two child limit for low income benefits, to one parent.

It does seem a weird allowance because in addition to using the non biological child of their new partner to reduce their maintenance payments to their own biological children, they have maintenance payments coming into their household from the biological parent of that same child.

But it is the two child limit for the low income benefits rule, that is really weird.
e.g. if the chidren stay with the mother, she meets a new partner and they have a child and are on a low income. They can't claim extra low income benefits for that child and have to keep that child themselves.
But if  the father leaves his children with their mother as their main carer, (the children sleep at their mother's more than at their father's) he could have two more  children with a new partner and claim low income benefits for both of them. Then he could leave that partner with the children too and do the same, again and again, all the time claiming benefits for his newest two children and reducing his payments to all his children. I don't think the government has thought this through in only applying the two child limit for low income benefits, to one parent.

It all sounds so easy on paper.....we are not trying to unfairly lower the payments. We have religiously taken the kids every weekend and every holiday.

We do not live close to them, we travel 3 hrs just to get them and have this done. All at an expense to us, but when someone can just simply turn around and say they don't take care of them and it's gospel. That's just crazy.

Yes we do have support coming in which I personally reduced just to be able to move here with my son (have this in a court order)

Since Covid-19 and lockdown, she became the part-time parents and we became the full time parent, with us having the kids 5 days and she 2 and we still paid the support.

We are not trying to cheat the system or lower our payments unnecessarily, we are just trying to get a fair adjustment.

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk

No. I’m not an ‘assistant officer at Leeds rc’. And your talking about people who didn’t pay their high income child benefit, which has nothing to do with the ChBO. Child benefit remains a non-means tested benefit. And it’s quite simple to opt out of the payment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk