Whittaker v HMRC decision on 27 March 2006

Sue Levett · PayPerShop Newbie Joined: 10 Apr 2006 Posts: 10

I read this decision with interest as, in the dim and distant past, I worked in the Contributions Section of the Department of Health and Social Security and we would occasionally have to deal with cases like this one. Usually, though, the issue was that a woman had not been allowed to continue with her election and wanted to do so.
As I left the Department in 1988 my memory may be a little rusty but the notation on the RF1 dated 01/07/68 is very familiar.
As I recall. when the Married Woman's Election was introduced you had to elect to pay the full rate as it was deemed that was the decision most married women would make. This then changed with the introduction of the CF 9 and all those who had married before this change were automatically recorded as having an 'election'. I cannot say definitively that this all took place around July 1968, as old as I am I wasn't working for the DHSS then. But this could explain why Mrs Whittaker had no recollection of signing any declaration.
If there are any civil servants out there with a better memory than me, perhaps they can advise when this change took place.