More HMRC scandal

Sounds like HMRC themselves have mental issues if they didn't think this case had special circumstances.

Though, paradoxically, this merely strengthens their argument that mental health is common.

I think it perhaps shows how homelessness is now considered by our Government to be a normal way of life?

Thanks Justin this is really useful. I'm dealing with a case at the moment were HMRC have refused to withdraw tax returns from 2011 - 2015 under "exceptional circumstances". My client was on the streets, sleeping rough, in hostels and finally detained in a mental health unit. He didn't know tax returns had been issued until he registered for self employment last year. Why they were issued in the first place isn't clear unless it was because he disappeared from PAYE when he lost his job. HMRC stance is the returns need completing but there is nothing to put on a return and of course the danger is once the blank returns are submitted HMRC will continue to chase the fines.

It was to the entire good fortune of HMRC that the appellant was unrepresented.

If the appellant had been so represented, then Judge Akeksander would surely have, in view of the unreasonable conduct of HMRC, exceptionally awarded Costs against them.

Perhaps, in recognition of that fact, the learned Judge was remiss in not having strongly urged HMRC to make payment (of an amount equivalent to the estimated appellant’s Costs which would have been incurred had the appellant been represented) to SHELTER.

Such payment would 0f course recognise the”special circumstances” of that HMRC misconduct.

Basil.

Thanks Justin for sharing and well done to the judge for his common sense and comments.

How depressing that this case made it that far though...a bit like the Wizard of Oz, some characters clearly missing brains and a heart....

Thank you, Justin. Interesting.
Also noted that HMRC wrongly cited Crabtree v Hinchcliffe to support their case. Scoundrels.

How did this even get to tribunal? Unless you have zilch empathy the penalties should have been withdrawn on initial appeal. However, if Lesley is also experiencing difficulties with a similar situation maybe there is no empaphy at HMRC.

On this one I think most of us will agree.

Is it HMRC's fault though? There is an increasing tendency for legislation to be prescriptive and for a removal of discretion. HMRC has suffered as much as anyone from that shift (and will have taken the action in this case without much thought, in consequence).

The motive for these changes might appear good (it's done in the name of consistency of outcome for all us citizens), but is it really good for us? As the ultimate outcome in this case sounds correct, it won't cause any ripples or lead to a change in this policy trend. And, as has happened in this thread, HMRC gets the blame and no-one questions the policy [well, I am, but who cares about me?], the truck keeps rolling.

"HMRC's decision to pursue Mr Pokorowski for penalties in the circumstances of this appeal is a scandal. For HMRC to expect a homeless person to keep HMRC up-to-date with their address is ridiculous – and just needs to be stated to show its absurdity."

Absurd actions by an absurd organisation, and WE pay for all of this.

Just waiting for HMRC to seek leave to appeal...

Just a quick update we sent a letter to HMRC and my client has now been successful in claiming exception circumstances and has had all his tax returns cancelled.