Paperwork error lists man as dead - and he's not!

Matthew Jay with, from left, Katrina Johnson, Courtney Johnson and Jacob Jay Matthew Jay with, from left, Katrina Johnson, Courtney Johnson and Jacob Jay

A DELIVERY driver and his family face eviction after he discovered he was listed as dead when he tried to claim working tax credit.

Matthew Jay was left in shock after weeks of trying in vain to apply for the payment for people on a low income.

The former firefighter was told there had been a verification error because his previous employer had sent the wrong details to HM Revenue and Customs.

Mr Jay, 33, and partner Katrina Johnson, 28, were served an eviction notice by their landlord as they struggled to pay bills and buy food for their two children.

He said: “I tried to claim for six weeks but every time they just came back and said it was still being processed. We finally went to the Citizens Advice Bureau and that’s when we found out there was a death certificate against my name and National Insurance number.

“I was shocked and annoyed as we are living on my wages and I have not been able to pay for petrol or insurance to get to my work in Stanford in the Vale which is well away from the bus route.

“We have been given an eviction notice and I also risk losing my job because I am absent without leave. It’s frustrating.”

The family, who live in a private let in Old Town , have since been given an emergency payment and will be paid the backdated credits on Monday.

Mr Jay tried to claim after moving in with Miss Johnson in June.

Miss Johnson said: “At first they said it was a verification error, then they blamed Matthew’s previous employer for ticking the wrong box. At no point did they apologise.

“In the meantime we have been left to try to survive and we were worried that we would be left homeless.

“It’s almost as if it’s easier to exist completely on benefits rather than try to pay your own way.”

The couple, who are being helped by South Swindon MP Robert Buckland, have got five weeks to move out with their children Courtney Johnson, one, and three-year-old Jacob Jay.

A HMRC spokesperson said: “When errors are made by others or by HMRC we correct them as soon as possible.”

Comments(5)

Davey Gravey says...
11:24am Sat 11 Aug 12

One can't help thinking they possibly would be getting evicted regardless of the error. A payment has been made and the error will be fully rectified on monday. Why not explain the situation and pay what's owed? Shouldn't be a problem surely?

RichardR1 says...
5:18pm Sat 11 Aug 12

I hardly think our erstwhile MP would have allowed his name to be linked with this story were there anything untoward, as you imply.

I could of course be wrong.

Davey Gravey says...
5:42pm Sat 11 Aug 12

RichardR1 wrote:
I hardly think our erstwhile MP would have allowed his name to be linked with this story were there anything untoward, as you imply.

I could of course be wrong.
I didn't imply anything of the sort.

RichardR1 says...
7:09am Sun 12 Aug 12

So are you saying you know this family are being evicted for 'serial' debt.


'One can't help thinking they possibly would be getting evicted regardless of the error. A payment has been made and the error will be fully rectified on monday. Why not explain the situation and pay what's owed? Shouldn't be a problem surely?'

The above post really does suggest that.

Davey Gravey says...
10:08am Sun 12 Aug 12

RichardR1 wrote:
So are you saying you know this family are being evicted for 'serial' debt.


'One can't help thinking they possibly would be getting evicted regardless of the error. A payment has been made and the error will be fully rectified on monday. Why not explain the situation and pay what's owed? Shouldn't be a problem surely?'

The above post really does suggest that.
You're clearly here to cause trouble and put words in my mouth with your 2 incorrect assumptions so i will explain in detail what I meant. I didn't say I know anything as i used the word 'possibly'. I also didn't say anything that would point to me thinking anything untoward was going on.
The article claims that the missing money was needed to pay the rent. That money is being provided so I don't understand why they still need to be evicted. Which is why I think they may have had trouble paying anyway. I could of course have it wrong which is why i said I said it how i did. I did not cast judgement,just threw my thoughts out there.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree