A Widowed Woman's Experience of Inaccurate Tax Calculations by HMRC - "Bereavement Penalty"
A letter from a Manchester woman, Dr Susan Treagus, reveals how she was incorrectly told her annual income had risen to over £100,000 after the loss of her partner just months prior. This drastic change was made possible through automated computer-generated calculations, rather than human intervention.
Following her husband's death in March this year, Mrs Treagus received two letters from HMRC in April, each informing her of a new personal tax code for 2025-26. It wasn't until she examined her bank statements that May and June that she discovered the substantial change - her small occupational pension had nearly halved, with an extra £62,000 added to her income, pushing it into the higher tax bracket.
An investigation by HMRC revealed that this calculation was based on a computer-generated assessment of Mrs Treagus's income, using data from February and March, which were likely to be linked to funeral expenses or other personal financial matters. The person she spoke to explained that the algorithm had been used, but offered no explanation or reassurance about how this process worked.
The woman remains shocked by HMRC's handling of her situation, particularly given the significant impact it has had on her income as a newly widowed person. She questions why such drastic and potentially life-changing decisions are made without human intervention, raising concerns about the accountability and transparency of automated systems in tax calculations.
Her experience raises questions about the role of AI and algorithms in public services, particularly those with direct financial implications for individuals. As one letter writer notes, who would have corrected this mistake if it hadn't been for their own efforts? The incident highlights the need for greater oversight and human involvement in high-stakes decision-making processes to ensure accuracy and fairness.
Mrs Treagus's story is just one of many examples of how changes in insurance policies after a bereavement can be particularly challenging, as highlighted by another letter writer. Her case serves as a reminder that even seemingly minor adjustments can have significant consequences for an individual's financial situation, especially during times of vulnerability such as those immediately following the loss of a partner.
A letter from a Manchester woman, Dr Susan Treagus, reveals how she was incorrectly told her annual income had risen to over £100,000 after the loss of her partner just months prior. This drastic change was made possible through automated computer-generated calculations, rather than human intervention.
Following her husband's death in March this year, Mrs Treagus received two letters from HMRC in April, each informing her of a new personal tax code for 2025-26. It wasn't until she examined her bank statements that May and June that she discovered the substantial change - her small occupational pension had nearly halved, with an extra £62,000 added to her income, pushing it into the higher tax bracket.
An investigation by HMRC revealed that this calculation was based on a computer-generated assessment of Mrs Treagus's income, using data from February and March, which were likely to be linked to funeral expenses or other personal financial matters. The person she spoke to explained that the algorithm had been used, but offered no explanation or reassurance about how this process worked.
The woman remains shocked by HMRC's handling of her situation, particularly given the significant impact it has had on her income as a newly widowed person. She questions why such drastic and potentially life-changing decisions are made without human intervention, raising concerns about the accountability and transparency of automated systems in tax calculations.
Her experience raises questions about the role of AI and algorithms in public services, particularly those with direct financial implications for individuals. As one letter writer notes, who would have corrected this mistake if it hadn't been for their own efforts? The incident highlights the need for greater oversight and human involvement in high-stakes decision-making processes to ensure accuracy and fairness.
Mrs Treagus's story is just one of many examples of how changes in insurance policies after a bereavement can be particularly challenging, as highlighted by another letter writer. Her case serves as a reminder that even seemingly minor adjustments can have significant consequences for an individual's financial situation, especially during times of vulnerability such as those immediately following the loss of a partner.
ugh, this is so frustrating! i mean, i get it, computers and all that, but come on! how hard is it to double-check calculations? 
it's not like we're talking about some complex financial model here... just a simple tax calculation. and now dr treagus is dealing with the fallout of having her whole life turned upside down because of one mistake. 
shouldn't our gov be doing better than this? at least have some kind of human review process in place before these drastic changes are made to people's lives. 
you guys need to know this! So there's this woman who just lost her hubby and HMRC (tax people) automatically changes her tax code to like £100k+ without even asking! They're using these fancy algorithms to do it, but honestly, that's no excuse for not having human review. I mean, can you imagine if they'd told her the mistake was on them? 
The fact that they relied on computer-generated calculations without human review is just mind-boggling. We need more transparency and oversight in these systems, especially when it comes to our finances and well-being. 
just hearing about this! Automated tax calculations can be SO flawed 
, and it's crazy that Mrs Treagus was misinformed like that after her hubby passed away 
I mean, who's responsible when an AI system gets it wrong? 
Shouldn't there be a safety net in place to prevent this kind of mistake from happening again? 
Also, I'm so sorry that Mrs Treagus is going through this stress and uncertainty after her loss. 
Let's hope HMRC takes steps to improve their systems and ensure accuracy 
#TaxCalculation Fail #AIAccountability #HumanOversightMatters
I'm all for efficiency and streamlining processes, but not if it means people are getting messed with like Mrs Treagus. on the other hand, i mean, think about it, computers are way faster and more accurate than humans... unless... unless that's exactly what they're trying to do - hide behind technology because they don't want to deal with all the potential human fallibility? 
I mean come on, £100k? That's like something you'd expect to make in a year at least 5-10 years from now! What's going on here? Did HMRC just get lazy with their calculations or what? 
The fact that it was based on funeral expenses and other personal financial matters should've been red flag enough. Just wondering how many other people are getting screwed over by these algorithms... 
. It makes you wonder if these automated systems are even reliable or just relying on data from months ago 
. The fact that she had to do some digging herself to catch the error is frustrating, but at least it's good she did or else who knows what would've happened 
.
. I'm all for efficiency and stuff, but come on, can't we have humans double-check these things? It's like, who's gonna catch this mistake if someone doesn't? Anyway, it's just a clear case of human error (or lack thereof) and they need to step up their game 
The government needs to take a closer look at how these automated systems work and make sure they're accurate before affecting people's lives like this. We need more transparency and oversight to prevent similar mistakes in the future 
.
.
.
, what else might be going on behind the scenes? It's actually kind of reassuring that they're having to investigate themselves because it means they're taking mistakes seriously 
. And maybe this will lead to more human oversight and accountability in their automated systems 
. It's crazy that her income was altered by an automated computer calculation without any human review or explanation 