Tuesday 31st October 2017 – I Send My Request For A Judicial Review To Royal Courts Of Justice (re: Child Benefit 1st Claim)

I haven’t posted anything on here since the 2nd of September 2017. I’ve been focusing my energies on actively job hunting, and Tribunal issues. I’ve got so much to post on here when I get the chance, and will fill in the gaps when I can.

After losing my Child Benefit Appeal (1st claim) again on the 24th April 2017 (Judge Verman), (second time around), I again further appealed to the Upper Tribunal Office, and again lost.

When an appellant (me) has no legal help or expertise to draw upon, it is so incredibly difficult to try to formulate an effective argument, when I have to convince the Upper Tribunal that the First Tier Tribunal erred in law.  It has been pointed out to me, that it isn’t about arguing over the facts of the case.

So, this is the legal matter that has preoccupied me for the last month.   The DECISION NOTICE  from the Upper Tribunal listed 2 possible routes for me to pursue:

  1.  Apply to SET ASIDE the Upper Tribunal Decision (Judge Wikeley).
  2.  Apply for a Judicial Review.

I’ve been waiting for Bar Pro Bono to find someone to assist me, since Khalid Mahmood MP referred me to them a year and a half ago.  Periodically, Bar Pro Bono ask me if I still require assistance, I confirm that I do, and they assure me that they continue to search.

I’ve tried several other avenues too: CAB (who managed only to book me a free 15 minute phone call with “Greens Solicitors”, but who actually don’t deal with Judicial Reviews for Child Benefit, or advise on Child Support maintenance appeals); Birmingham Pro Bono/FLAG; Birmingham Settlement; Royal Courts of Justice Personal Support Group; Birmingham Personal Support Group; none of these would assist me!

Birmingham Law Centre told me I must phone them at 9am on Tuesday mornings to try to get appt for that Thursday. But alternate Tuesdays I have my “signing on” appts, and I had to try and get this one done ASAP, as I’ve already exceeded the 16 day time limit.

I did manage to get the claim form in for this Judicial Review within the 16 day time limit, and I stated that I’d list my grounds etc….as soon as I was able to.  A few days later, I sent my grounds etc…

But the Royal Courts of Justice sent my claim back to me, as it lacked detail, and I hadn’t completed it properly (never done one before, and got no legal help). A few days later I received my grounds back in the post too.

I have used 3 ink cartridges printing off my application and copies for this JR. I’ve done the best that I can, and hope they don’t bounce it back to me again, as I’ve prioritised this above everything else (apart from job hunting, and other necessary activities) over the last month.

I sent it off via Special/Guaranteed delivery this afternoon.  Fingers crossed…..

Here’s what I wrote:

Statement Of Facts Relied On, & Supporting Documents

Child Benefit 1st Appeal – Judicial Review

(My Grounds, Directions, Statement of Facts, Supporting Documents, & Remedies May Overlap – I’m daunted with all this)

In the signed and dated response from [my Ex], to HMRC, dated 24th December 2013, [my Ex] wrote “N/A” (not applicable), and drew a line through the segment that asked: “Do they live with you some of the time?” [Pages 6, 7 & 8 of Appeal Bundle].

[My Ex] didn’t say that [daughter] lived/stayed at [boyfriend’s] house for 3 nights per week on average, as [my Ex & his girlfriend] have subsequently claimed at Tribunal.

Referring to Judge Verman’s STATEMENT OF REASONS (dated 13/-6/2017, issue date 24/06/2017):   Point 24 lists documentary evidence produced by the 2nd Respondent. It includes a Bank statement dated 7th March 2014 (featuring [my Ex’s] address). Page 38 of bundle shows a Bank statement dated 9th December 2013, featuring my address – []. Both of these bank statements are in the material period, same bank, for [daughter]. Yet neither of these prove that [daughter] lived at my or her father’s houses. FACT is she lived at [her then-boyfriend’s house]  from some point in July 2013, to some point during the second week of April 2014, when she then moved back into her dad’s house (before briefly living with [daughter’s next boyfriend]). 

 [Daughter] hasn’t lived at my house since 31st May 2017, yet she still has some post that comes here, as recently as today! [Daughter] only recently registered with a GP closer to where she’s been living for last few months.

Page 28 – dental letter – is outside of the material period.
Page 29 – college letter – is outside of the material period. If the Judges/HMCTS had issued the Directions I’d requested, the college would have CONFIRMED that
 [daughter] had updated her address – confirming that she was living with [her then-boyfriend’s family], for the material period. [Daughter & then-boyfriend] attended the same college together [].

In Point 35, Judge Verman specifically states that “[my Ex] did not have any documentary proof of the money he gave [daughter].”
This is because he didn’t financially contribute to [daughter] for the material period, when she lived at [her then-boyfriend’s address].

So, to summarise, [my Ex] has failed to produce ANY documentary proof that he financially supported [daughter] during the material period. [Daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother] has confirmed that [daughter] lived as part of  [then-boyfriend & his mother’s] household for the material period, and that [my Ex] wasn’t financially contributing to [daughter’s] upkeep. Whereas I have been able to prove some of what I’ve contributed, though not all, and  [daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother] confirms that I did financially contribute towards [daughter].

Application for Directions
If the Judicial Review is unable to grant/approve my Appeal on the existing evidence, I request that the Judicial Review/Court issues the Directions that previous Judges have refused to grant.

 

JR1-2. Statement of Facts Relied On.
JR3-8. Judicial Review, my grounds for Appeal. (My Grounds, Directions, & Remedies May Overlap).
Supporting Documents:
JR9. My Bank statement giving £150 to [Daughter]
JR10-11. [My Ex’s] declaration (dated 24/12/3013) that [daughter] spent no time away from his house, to HMRC.
JR12. My January 2013 Denplan fees.
JR13. [Daughter’s] Bank statement dated 9th December 2013 featuring [my] address, during material period, even though she wasn’t residing here.
JR14. [Daughter’s] Bank statement dated 7th March 2014, featuring [my Ex’s] address, during material period, even though she wasn’t residing there.
JR15. [Daughter] wanted/needed me to go to her enrolment at  Campus on 28/8/13. £64 for the round trip. The other 2 x receipts were for me & [my son] to & from Merry Hill on 23/12/13, as I’d just received lump sum from CSA. [Daughter] wanted spree at Merry Hill, I paid separately for her to travel to/from Merry Hill (approx £30 return from her end, she didn’t obtain receipts though).
JR16. My January 2014 Denplan fees.

JR17.   College letter – outside material period. I’ve already stated [daughter] had moved back in with her dad, at some point during the 2nd week in April 2014.
JR18.  Dental practice letter, again outside material period.
JR19-23.   detailed & reasonable request for Directions, which if granted, would have provided strong evidence in support of my claim.
JR24.   Judge SD Ennals’ DECISION NOTICE, refusing to issue the Directions I’d sought.
JR25-26.   My Submission dated 19th April 2015.
JR27.   Medical Certificate, listing Tribunal stress.
JR28.   Handwritten letter by
 [daughter], confirming my version of events.
JR29-36.    Elisa Collins, for the Commissioners of HMRC, supporting my request to “Set Aside” Decision of 1st May 2015. [Dated 19th September 2016].
JR37-40.   19th October 2016 – My Reply To The Observations of 1st Respondent (HMRC).
JR41-44.   1st December 2016, I submit further evidence for Appeal, a 2 paged letter from (
[daughter’s then-boyfriend]’s mother), she confirms [daughter] lived with them for the whole of the material period 1st August 2013 to mid-April 2014.
JR45-49.   Judge Verman’s STATEMENT OF REASONS dated 13/6/2017 (issued on 24/6/2017).

JR50-54.    23/7/17 My Request to Set Aside Decision, &/or Appeal to Upper Tribunal. Also 2 pages of information about [daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother]. I believe that   [daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother’s] neutral evidence should have been pivotal.
JR55.   Judge Verman refuses my Appeal, & refuses me permission to Appeal to Upper Tribunal.
JR56.   A recent Barclays letter (dated 4th September 2017) to
 [daughter], to my address, even though she hasn’t lived here since 31st May 2017.
JR57-60.   Upper Tribunal Judge Nicholas Wikeley’s Decision of 20/09/2017.
JR61.   Judge Verman’s Decision Notice (FTT) dated 24/04/2017.
JR62.   My Grounds For Appeal to UTO, sent on 29/08/2017.

 

Judicial Review – My Grounds For Appeal

(My Grounds, Directions, Statement of Facts, Supporting Documents, & Remedies May Overlap – I’m daunted with all this)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I had already sent you my Judicial Review claim form within the 16 day time limit, (albeit lacking detail), and you received it, but then you sent it back to me. I had also, separately, compiled my grounds for review etc, sent it to you, but you also sent that back to me too.

Section 5 – My Detailed Statement of Grounds

I request that the perverse Decision of the Upper Tribunal on 20th September 2017 is Quashed.

I submit that Justice has not been served, that Upper Tribunal/Judge Nicholas Wikeley, erred in law, & there were procedural errors, by failing to recognise that the FTT had erred in law, by:
a.  FAILING to issue the DIRECTIONS that I’ve requested since lodging this Appeal with HMCTS, which resulted in crucial documentation/evidence not being available for the FTT to consider.
b.  FAILING to recognise that no reasonable Judge would have arrived at the perverse Decision of 24th April 2017, given the available evidence, and also considering the evidence that would have been produced if Judges had granted my earlier requests for DIRECTIONS.

c.   FAILING to recognise the need that if any parent, or person with care, informs HMRC that a relevant child has moved to live with a different person or household, in a material period, HMRC ought to be duty bound to contact that household/person, to ascertain if that is indeed the case. HMRC have FAILED to do this over the last 4 years. HMRC shouldn’t hide behind data protection laws for this situation.
Over the last 4 years, I have reported to HMRC‘s Child Benefit Office, several times, that my daughter [] had moved out of her father’s house [] at some point in July 2013, and he wasn’t financially supporting her.

From some point in July 2013, up to some point during the 2nd week of April 2014, my daughter lived at her then-boyfriend’s house [].  My daughter moved back into her dad’s at some point during the 2nd week of April 2014.

[Then-boyfriend & mother] have since moved house, to:  [].

1. I want the Judicial Review to clarify whether HMRC ought to have directly contacted [then-boyfriend & his mother] since I first reported to HMRC that my daughter was living as part of their household for the relevant period, and to ascertain if [my Ex] was providing any financial support to [then-boyfriend’s mother] or to [daughter] .
HMRC have repeatedly failed/refused to do this, despite me urging them to do this several times since 2013.

2. I have made many requests for Directions from HMCTS, since lodging this Appeal. HMCTS have consistently failed to issue the reasonable Directions that I’d requested, meaning evidence wasn’t made available, which would otherwise have supported my claim.
P33 to P38 of Appeal Bundle: On 14th November 2014 I wrote to HMCTS (stamped received by HMCTS on 19th Nov 2014) requesting Directions be sent to HMRC,
 [] Campus, & []  Jobcentre Plus (in addition to a few others). I gave detailed reasons as to why these were necessary. [Daughter] had independently updated the fact that she was living as part of [her then-boyfriend’s] household with each of these organisations. But due to data protection, they didn’t provide me directly with the evidence.
P41 of Appeal Bundle: On 21/1/15, Tribunal Judge SD Ennals briskly refuses to issue the Directions I’d requested, saying simply: “It is not appropriate to issue the Directions she seeks, as they are not likely to provide evidence to support her claim, whether or not they undermine the claim of
  [my Ex].”
I strongly disagree with Judge SD Ennals’ rationale/refusal. Clearly, if these Directions had been granted, there would have been strong, independent evidence to support my claim. Why else would I have requested them….
I want this Judicial Review to clarify whether HMCTS/Tribunal Judge SD Ennals ought to have issued the reasonable Directions I’d requested.

3.   I have never been added as a Party to an Appeal of [my Ex]. I have repeatedly informed HMRC that my daughter lived with [her then-boyfriend & family], from some point in July 2013 to some point in the 2nd week of April 2014. So why didn’t HMRC suspend [my Ex’s] own ChB claim, prompting him to either terminate his own claim, or progress it to HMCTS, and then add me as a Party to his Appeal?
Is there a specific law preventing this?
It concerns the same child (our daughter), for the same period.
I want this Judicial Review to clarify whether HMRC ought to have contacted
 [my daughter’s then-boyfriend & his mother], in respect of [my Ex’s] own claim for ChB.

4.   [My daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother], a much respected and admired solicitor, who I’ve never actually met or spoken to, prior to November 2016, phoned me in November 2016, after I’d written to her asking her to confirm the FACT that [daughter] lived as part of  [then-boyfriend & mother’s] household for the relevant period, otherwise I’d have to apply for a Witness Summons. It was then that [his mother] rang me, the first time, and only time we’ve ever actually spoken to each other. We’ve never met. [Daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother] wrote directly to HMCTS, and HMCTS sent me a copy for my appeal bundle.
[Daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother’s] letter ought to be the pivotal piece of neutral evidence. But Judge Verman still chose to attach more credence to [my Ex & his girlfriend’s] unsupported evidence.
I want this Judicial Review to clarify whether Judge Verman was right to have attached less credence to
 [daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother’s]  letter/evidence, because she didn’t turn up in person, as Judge Verman has explained.
I also want this Judicial Review to clarify whether Judge Verman should have attached more credence to
 [daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother’s] letter/evidence, as [daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother]  does not stand to benefit either way from a decision, I’ve never met her, especially as I’ve spent 4 years accusing [my Ex & his girlfriend] of ChB fraud.

5. At the Tribunal Hearing on 24th April 2017, Mrs Checkly (HMRC) told Judge Verman that HMRC would have ignored [daughter’s] request to update her address/details when [daughter] had phoned HMRC on 21st November 2013, as [daughter] was not the claimant (ChB claimant) for this period! Mrs Checkly was either genuinely ignorant, or deliberately misleading the Tribunal.

[Daughter] actually rang HMRC on 21st November 2013 on 0845 915 7006, to update her address/details, as she’d been living at [her then-boyfriend’s]  house since July 2013. [Daughter] rang HMRC’s National Insurance/Registrations, NOT Child Benefit! At 2:3?pm on 21st November 2013, [daughter] rang me to tell me she’d just phoned HMRC on 0845 915 7006, and she’d updated her address to [her then-boyfriend’s address].

Either way, HMRC should have updated [daughter’s] address to [then-boyfriend’s address]. It was only at this Tribunal on 24th April 2017 that HMRC’s representative (Mrs Checkly) announced that HMRC would have ignored [daughter’s] new evidence/updated address! Truly shocking!
Not only are HMRC disinclined to establish concrete facts, but HMRC wilfully ignore and disregard evidence when they are contacted directly!

Details of Remedy Being Sought

Main Point: I request that the Decision of 20th September 2017 be Quashed, (and for a Judicial Review To award me Child Benefit for the period in question, if this is possible as part of the Judicial Review).

1.   I want this Judicial Review to clarify whether HMRC ought to have directly contacted [my daughter’s then-boyfriend & his mother] since I first reported to HMRC that my daughter was living as part of their household for the relevant period, and to ascertain if [my Ex] was providing any financial support to [then-boyfriend’s mother] or to [daughter].
HMRC have failed/refused to do this, despite me urging them to do this several times since 2013.

2.   If there is a specific law prohibiting HMRC from contacting a person, (in this circumstance [my daughter’s then-boyfriend & his mother]), to establish whether or not a relevant child is a member of their household, that law needs to be changed, as [my Ex] ought to have been stripped of his ChB entitlement in Summer 2013.
Clearly, it is in the interests of Justice to establish where a child is living, and whether a parent is contributing to their upkeep.

3.   As a consequence of being made a Party to my Appeal, [my Ex] has been provided with a copy of the Appeal Bundle, which contains lots of information about my Child Benefit claim, in respect of our daughter.
However, it is utterly bizarre, and manifestly unfair, that information from
 [my Ex’s] own Child Benefit claim, which covers this relevant period, is not made available to me or to HMCTS, despite it being for the same child, for the same period!
I would like the Judicial Review to clarify whether, under current rules, I ought to have been provided with a copy of
 [my Ex’s] ChB claim for the relevant period, as he has been provided for mine.

4.   If there is a specific law prohibiting HMRC from providing information or documentation from the Respondent’s ChB claim[my Ex], when it concerns the same child for the same period as the Appellant’s ChB claim (me), then again, that law is lopsided, disadvantaging the Appellant, whilst advantaging the Respondent.
I therefore believe that if this is presently the law, then that law needs to be amended, so that the Respondent’s ChB claim is subject to the same scrutiny as the Appellant’s (my) claim.

5.  I have made many requests for Directions from HMCTS, since lodging this Appeal. HMCTS have consistently failed to issue the reasonable Directions that I’d requested, meaning evidence wasn’t made available, which would otherwise have supported my claim.
6.   I would like the Judicial Review to assess whether the Directions that I’d requested ought to have been granted/issued, and whether each Judge that refused my request for Directions was reasonable or unreasonable in doing so, and whether the chronic failure to issue the Directions I’d requested negatively affected the outcome of my Appeal.

7.   I have never been added as a Party to an Appeal of [my Ex]. When I have repeatedly informed HMRC that my daughter lived with [her then-boyfriend & his mother], from some point in July 2013 to some point in the 2nd week of April 2014. So why didn’t HMRC suspend [my Ex’s] own ChB claim, resulting in him either discontinuing his claim, or progressing it to HMCTS, and then add me as a Party to his Appeal?
Is there a specific law preventing this?
It concerns the same child (our daughter), for the same period.
I want this Judicial Review to clarify whether HMRC ought to have contacted
[her then-boyfriend & his mother], in respect of [my Ex’s] own claim for ChB.

8.   [My daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother], a much respected and admired solicitor, who I’ve never actually met or spoken to, prior to November 2016, phoned me in November 2016, after I’d written to her asking her to confirm the FACT that [my daughter] lived as part of [her then-boyfriend & his mother’s] household for the relevant period, otherwise I’d have to apply for a Witness Summons. It was then that [his mother] rang me, the first time, and only time we’ve ever actually spoken to each other. We’ve never met.  [My daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother] wrote directly to HMCTS, and HMCTS sent me a copy for my appeal bundle.
[My daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother’s] letter ought to be the pivotal piece of neutral evidence. But Judge Verman still chose to attach more credence to [my Ex & his girlfriend’s] unsupported evidence.
I want this Judicial Review to clarify whether Judge Verman should have attached less credence to
[my daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother’s] letter/evidence, because she didn’t turn up in person, as Judge Verman has reasoned so.
I also want this Judicial Review to clarify whether Judge Verman should have attached more credence to
[my daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother], as [my daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother] does not stand to benefit either way from a decision, I’ve never met her, especially as I’ve spent 4 years accusing [my Ex & his girlfriend] of ChB fraud.
I want this Judicial Review to attach more evidence to
[my daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother’s] evidence, than to [my Ex & his girlfriend’s]  evidence.

9.   It was only at this Tribunal on 24th April 2017 that HMRC’s representative Mrs Checkly (HMRC) told Judge Verman that HMRC would have ignored [daughter’s] request to update her address/details when [daughter] had phoned HMRC on 21st November 2013, as [daughter] was not the claimant (ChB claimant) for this period! Truly shocking! I don’t know whether Mrs Checkly was genuinely ignorant, or deliberately misleading the Tribunal.

[Daughter] actually rang HMRC on 21st November 2013 on 0845 915 7006, to update her address/details, as she’d been living at [her then-boyfriend & his mother’s] house since July 2013. [Daughter] rang HMRC’s National Insurance/Registrations, NOT Child Benefit, to inform them of this! At 2:3?pm on 21st November 2013, [daughter] rang me to tell me she’d just phoned HMRC on 0845 915 7006, and she’d updated her address to [her then-boyfriend’s address].

Either way, HMRC should have updated [daughter’s] address to [boyfriend’s address].
Not only are HMRC disinclined to establish concrete facts, but HMRC wilfully ignore and disregard evidence when they are contacted directly!
I want this Judicial Review to clarify that HMRC should have updated
 [daughter’s] address when [daughter] rang HMRC’s NI Registrations on 21st November 2013 on 0845 915 7006, to update her address/details, as she’d been living at [then-boyfriend & his mother’s] house since July 2013. [Daughter] confirmed this herself, directly to HMRC in that phone call. 

10.   Judge Nicholas Wikeley’s Guidance on jurisdictional matters:
I respectfully disagree with his guidance that the new FTT should merely have focused on the 3rd part of HMRC’s decision (from 6th January 2014). I had only recently been able to obtain a written statement from
 [daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother] (HMRC & HMCTS failed to obtain this themselves, & my previous request(s) to  [daughter’s then-boyfriend’s mother] went unanswered). I believe that ought to have sufficed as regards stripping [my Ex] of his entitlement to ChB for the period of some point in July 2013 to some point during the second week of April 2014. As HMRC (as a result of this Tribunal) now have this strong evidence in its possession, HMRC need to explain why they subsequently failed to strip [my Ex] of his entitlement to ChB. Despite [daughter] not living with her father for that period, & [my Ex]  failing to financially support [daughter], and despite repeated reports/complaints from me, HMRC proved to be utterly useless. As a consequence, I had to keep paying [my Ex] CSA maintenance for that period, & [my Ex] was able to reduce the amount of CSA maintenance he paid me (for [our son]).

It is therefore vital that the FTT should have reached a just decision as to who was entitled to ChB for the entire period in dispute.
Also, ChB/HMRC specifically permit the backdating of ChB for 3 months (+ possibly longer in certain/exceptional circumstances??). So I again respectfully disagree with Judge Nicholas Wikeley’s guidance that the new FTT didn’t need to consider the earlier period. If ChB regs permit the backdating of ChB for up to 3 months (possibly more than this in exceptional circumstances??), then it should automatically be concluded that a fraudster [my Ex] can be disentitled to his ChB for any period that he wasn’t entitled to it for (July 2013 to April 2014). Then, I would become entitled to ChB, especially as I have been able to prove more of what I actually spent on [daughter], that [my Ex’s] fictitious amounts.

I Requested The Following DIRECTIONS (on 25th Dec 2016):

1.  That HMCTS Directs HMRC to explain why they have consistently failed to thoroughly investigate [my Ex’s] entitlement to Child Benefit, for the disputed periods (July 2013 – mid-April 2014, & 5th June 2015 to 9th Sept 2015 for SC024/16/****0). 

2.   That HMCTS Directs HMRC to use the evidence for this Tribunal (SC024/14/****3), and my other ChB Tribunal (SC024/16/****0), to assess [my Ex’s] entitlement to Child Benefit for the same periods.  It is quite bizarre, and unfair, that [my Ex] can be added as a Party to Proceedings for my Child Benefit Appeal, yet I am not privy to any aspect of his Child Benefit Claim, even though it concerns the same child! I have, over the last few years, repeatedly informed HMRC of  [my Ex’s] fraud. Yet I’m not aware of any Tribunal that [my Ex] may be facing with regard to his claim for ChB. If he is facing any Tribunal for his ChB claim, please Direct that HMRC adds me as a Party to Proceedings. If [my Ex] isn’t facing any Tribunal for his ChB claim, please direct HMRC to explain their inaction, and financially compensate me for the ChB, CTC, Bedroom Tax, & CSA maintenance I’ve been deprived of through their maladministration and incompetence (plus other expenses/costs). The CSA base their entitlement on who’s in receipt of ChB for any given period.
Even before I’d made the claim for ChB in Dec 2013, I had repeatedly reported
 [my Ex’s] fraud to HMRC & the CSA.

3. That HMCTS Directs HMRC to provide evidence of any steps that HMRC may have taken, to ascertain [my Ex’s] entitlement to ChB over the last three and a half years. As far as I can see, HMRC have consistently failed to strip [my Ex] of his entitlement to ChB for the periods in dispute.

4.   That HMCTS gives fair and reasonable consideration to whether the law ought to be amended/changed so that the new FTT does have jurisdiction to decide whether [daughter] was living with [my Ex] in the period before the date of my claim (Dec 2013). The law, as seems to currently be interpreted by Judge Nicholas Wikeley, is failing to serve the interests of justice, if it fails to enable a Tribunal panel to ascertain something so fundamentally pivotal, such as the living arrangements of the child in question, for the period in question. Until, I’ve been provided with a paper copy of CF/2826/2007, & had the opportunity to fully digest it, I can’t confidently argue that the then Commissioner Turnbull (as he was) may have himself erred in his guidance on this type of issue. Though I’m more confident that I could if I get the opportunity, time, energy. (Too much weight on my shoulders.)

5. That HMCTS Directs HMRC to list times/dates of all the times [my Ex] was reported for ChB fraud, whether online, in writing, or over the phone, in the last 3 and a half years. As I’ve reported him several times (sometimes anonymously). 

To confirm, I assert that for the whole of the period (some point in July 2013 to some point during the second week of April 2014), [my Ex] should be stripped of his entitlement to Child Benefit for [daughter], and I should have my ChB backdated to cover that whole period.
If HMRC had properly investigated [my Ex]  in the months prior to my ChB claim, they would have already stripped him of his entitlement, irrespective of whether this Tribunal (re: my ChB Appeal) existed.

I want the Judicial Review to conclude that the guidance of Judge Wikeley was flawed, as the whole of the relevant period (some point in July 2013 to some point during the 2nd week of April 2014) is material.

Damages (Financial)

Financial redress for enduring years of continued failure of HMRC and HMCTS in this case/claim, and the devastating impact it’s had on me, financially and healthwise. It has been a constant weight on my mind. I have spent 4 years slogging away, interacting with HMRC, CSA, HMCTS, all because HMRC and HMCTS have FAILED to properly ascertain or enable me to gather conclusive evidence of my daughter’s living arrangements for the relevant period. Every time I have the mindset and energy to put my mind to something complex, such as my paperwork, it means less time spent doing something more constructive, or relaxing, being in the garden, etc… I have also incurred significant cost in terms of printer ink, stationary costs, postage (I send everything through post via “Signed For” service, (pretty much). I want to be financially recompensed for the loss of ChB, CSA maintenance, bedroom tax etc.. (I haven’t yet calculated amount, this could be done once Judicial Review has concluded).

Yours Sincerely “

About slowlyrotting

I am constantly having to deal with several different benefits issues. I've got Appeals and Tribunals coming out of my ears, and have pretty much lost any faith I ever had in the British Justice/Tribunals system. I've lost count of the formal complaints I've had to make. I've had numerous interactions with the DWP, HMRC, Birmingham City Council, etc for years, so I've literally got several hundred posts (maybe thousands) to compose for this website. I can't post them to here as quick or as often as I'd like to, for a variety of reasons. Over the last few years, I have endured a conveyor belt of shit decisions from HMCTS. The piss-poor postal services that HMCTS, HMRC, Birmingham City Council, the DWP, & CSA rely on (bulk printing and several different carriers), compound the ineptitude of these departments and agencies. I intend to go back years, eventually. But at this rate, I don't think I'll ever get to post everything I want to. You can see from what I've put up so far that I've got a lot of crap to deal with. I'm probably not even 1% or 2% done. I am slowly rotting....................
This entry was posted in 1st Child Benefit Appeal, BarProBono, Child Benefit, HMCTS, HMRC, Judge G. I. Marsh, Judge Jeff Blackett - His Honour, Judge Mrs J. Verman, Judge Nicholas Wikeley - Upper Tribunal, Judge S. D. Ennals, Judges, Judicial Review, Legal, Member of Parliament, Royal Courts Of Justice, Slowly rotting, The Upper Tribunal Office (Administrative Appeals Chamber), Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.