Child Tax Credit confusion over payments made

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
  • #19944

    I would appreicate any advice on this:

    21/09/05 weekly instalment £36.25

    26/10/05 payment of £150.35

    27/10/05 payment of £144.67

    02/11/05 paymnet of £144.20

    16/11/05 weekly instalment of £33.47

    When speaking to TC they have stated that CTC was suspended after 21/09/05 payment as their yearly amount has increased from £2241 to £5525. Their weekly entitlement based on the £5525 figure should have been £149.43 but as above it wasn’t paid. Their yearly entitlement then reduced again from 16/11/05.

    TC have advised that the increased payments are a mixture of backdated payments due to the suspension they had implied and normal entitlement.

    I am not sure on how to deal with these payments – are they adjustments and should be treated as capital or as the yearly entitlement increased are they to be used as weekly entitlements



    These things are often easier to determine if you have the award letter but from the details you have obtained from the help line my view would be:

    Normal pay day is a Wednesday and a normal weekly payment made 21.9.05.

    Reassessment due.

    No payment on 28.9.05,5.10.05 & 19.10.05.

    Two payments made on 26 & 27.10.05 – one of these will be arrears and one a normal payment. Do you pick the one on the normal pay day or the one closest to the subsequent payment as the normal payment? My view would be to pick the 144.67 because it is nearer the next payment.

    Therefore treat 150.35 as arrears and 144.67 as the payment that should have been paid on 26.10.05 (paid a day late due to the reassessment).

    Normal payment on 2.11.05.

    Reassessment due.

    No payment made on 9.11.05

    Payment of 16.11.05 is the new normal payment (your post does not say but I presume the help line confirmed this amount continued every week.

    I’m not saying the above is correct but it is how I would treat it.

    david farrar

    I would agree with Junderwo, with the proviso that payments are treated as having been made in respect of week ending with payment date.

    up to 21/09/05 36.25
    22/09/05 to 19/10/05 nil
    i would treat the 150.35 as arrears
    20/10/05 to 26/10/05 144.67 (despite the fact that payment was a day late)
    27/10/05 to 02/11/05 144.20
    03/11/05 to 09/11/05 would be nil (as long as you are sure there was no payment on 09/11/05)
    10/11/05 ongoing 33.47

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.