HMRC says it has no record of my SDLT correspondence: what should I do?

Introduction

Readers often search for this issue when they believe they contacted HMRC about Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT), but HMRC later says it has no record of the correspondence. This commonly matters where a taxpayer is trying to claim a refund, amend a return, rely on relief, or argue that a claim was made in time. The practical question is whether the taxpayer can still protect their position and what evidence will be needed.

The Question

A taxpayer has received or seen a letter indicating that HMRC has no record of earlier correspondence. The likely concern is whether an SDLT claim, amendment, refund request or relief application has been missed, rejected or treated as out of time. The key issue is what the taxpayer should do next and what legal position may apply if HMRC says nothing was received.

Nick’s Explanation

Nick’s response was to ask for the missing factual context before giving a firm view. In substance, his point was that the meaning of HMRC saying it has “no record” depends entirely on what the taxpayer was trying to do.

In anonymised form, his explanation was essentially this: if the taxpayer is trying to claim SDLT relief or a repayment, it is necessary to identify the exact type of claim, when it should have been made, and whether there is a concern that the claim is now out of time. A letter from HMRC saying it has no record of earlier correspondence may matter a great deal if the taxpayer needs to prove that a valid claim or amendment was submitted before the deadline.

That is the right starting point. In SDLT matters, deadlines are strict, and whether something was sent, received and properly made can be decisive.

The Law

SDLT is governed mainly by the Finance Act 2003. The relevant legal framework usually includes:

• the filing and amendment rules for SDLT returns under the Finance Act 2003;
• the time limits for claiming repayment or relief, depending on the nature of the claim;
• HMRC’s enquiry and closure powers where a return has been filed;
• the general rules on evidence and proof where HMRC disputes receipt of a document.

The exact provision depends on what the taxpayer was attempting to do. For example:

• an amendment to an SDLT return is subject to a statutory time limit;
• some relief claims must be made in the return itself or within a specified period;
• repayment claims, including some higher rates refund claims, have their own deadlines;
• if the matter concerns whether a property was suitable for use as a dwelling, the substantive SDLT charging rules and the case law on dwelling suitability will be relevant.

Where a taxpayer argues that a property was not suitable for use as a dwelling at the effective date of transaction, the threshold is now relatively high following Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799. Ordinary disrepair, dated condition, or the need for renovation will often not be enough. The condition must be serious enough to take the property outside the concept of a dwelling for SDLT purposes.

Analysis

The correct analysis is usually a step-by-step one.

First, identify exactly what was sent to HMRC. Was it:

• an SDLT return;
• an amended return;
• a claim for repayment;
• a claim to a relief;
• a letter challenging an assessment;
• supporting evidence for an existing claim?

Secondly, identify the statutory deadline. In SDLT matters, the legal result often turns on whether the relevant document was made within the permitted period. If the deadline has passed, HMRC may say the matter is out of time unless there is another procedural route available.

Thirdly, check what evidence exists that the document was actually sent and, if possible, received. Useful evidence may include:

• a copy of the signed letter or submission;
• proof of posting or tracked delivery records;
• email transmission records;
• portal submission confirmations;
• file notes showing the date and method of submission;
• any HMRC acknowledgement reference.

Fourthly, distinguish between sending and making a valid claim. Even if a taxpayer can show something was sent, HMRC may still argue that the document did not amount to a legally valid claim because it lacked required information or was sent to the wrong place or in the wrong form.

Fifthly, consider whether HMRC’s letter is really about non-receipt, or whether it is saying there is no record because the correspondence was not matched to the transaction. That can happen if identifying details were incomplete, the wrong Unique Transaction Reference Number was used, or the correspondence was handled outside the normal SDLT processing route.

Sixthly, if the underlying issue concerns relief on the basis that a property was uninhabitable or not suitable for use, the substantive merits must be tested carefully. Even if the timing point can be overcome, the claim may still fail if the property condition does not meet the legal threshold. Following Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799, that threshold is now relatively high.

Outcome

If HMRC says it has no record of earlier correspondence, that does not automatically mean the taxpayer has no case. But it does mean the matter becomes evidence-heavy and deadline-sensitive. The practical conclusion is that the taxpayer must establish:

• what was intended;
• what legal route applies;
• what the relevant time limit was;
• whether there is proof of submission;
• whether the underlying SDLT position is substantively strong.

Without that information, no reliable answer can be given on whether the claim is still alive, whether it is out of time, or whether HMRC can be challenged.

Practical Steps

A reader in this position should usually do the following:

1. Find the HMRC letter and identify exactly what it says. Check whether HMRC says it has no record of any correspondence at all, or only no record of a particular letter or claim.
2. Gather all supporting documents, including copies of letters, emails, proof of posting, submission receipts, and any SDLT return references.
3. Identify the transaction date and the date any SDLT return was filed.
4. Work out what was being claimed or amended and the statutory deadline that applied.
5. If the issue concerns dwelling suitability or uninhabitability, collect the contemporaneous evidence from the effective date of transaction, such as survey reports, photographs, contractor reports and utility evidence. Assess that evidence against the stricter approach confirmed in Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799.
6. Write to HMRC clearly, enclosing the evidence of submission and asking HMRC to trace or log the earlier correspondence.
7. If necessary, consider whether the matter should be pursued as a formal review, appeal, amendment issue or repayment claim, depending on the procedural posture.

Conclusion

When HMRC says it has no record of SDLT correspondence, the answer depends on what was sent, when it was sent, and whether it was a valid claim made within time. The immediate priority is to reconstruct the paper trail and match it to the correct SDLT procedure. If the underlying issue is an uninhabitable or unsuitable-for-use argument, readers should note that the legal threshold is now relatively high after Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799.

Legal References Used

• Finance Act 2003
• Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799

This page was last updated on 22 March 2026.

See all questions and answers categorized in this sitemap. Or use Google site search below.