BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[scott_free]

They should give a refund? Have we lost then? Am I missing a major news item?

I thought the fight was just beginning...

very true, but would be nice to know as it would it would contribute a very nice sum to my demand if it comes to that

[DonkeyRhubarb]

They should give a refund? Have we lost then? Am I missing a major news item?

I thought the fight was just beginning...

According to a mate who is in the same situation, they said they would refund the 4% if we lost.

Yes the fight is just beginning but I think many of us are taking the approach plan for the worst, hope for the best.

[BrilloPad]

According to a mate who is in the same situation, they said they would refund the 4% if we lost.

Yes the fight is just beginning but I think many of us are taking the approach plan for the worst, hope for the best.

I am planning for the worst financially only! If I thought any more about it then everything would go pear shaped.

I seem to have difficulty internalizing my stress. I tend to find those responsible (if any) and make life worse for them than for me. There are some around who just dont play by the rules - it just is not cricket.

[elpinar]

hi

am new to the thread - been reading it a while- im on the paying the 4% gig and we were all told we get it back if it fails - questin is waht do thye count as failure?

also noticed someone a few days ago said they tryrd to pay money on accoutn - why woudl you do that when they have advised not to - why would you not buy a CTD - what do you get from paying it on acct compared to a CTD ?

[poppy01]

According to a mate who is in the same situation, they said they would refund the 4% if we lost.

Yes the fight is just beginning but I think many of us are taking the approach plan for the worst, hope for the best.

It occurs to me that if MP have already stated they would refund the 4%, then they have already accepted hmrc's arguments for re-opening a return outside the prescribed limits, I understood that this was a cornerstone of the scheme, ie they could NOT re-open. I was actually hoping they would fight that corner if they lost the main event, looks like even that slim hope will be dashed...

[BrilloPad]

It occurs to me that if MP have already stated they would refund the 4%, then they have already accepted hmrc's arguments for re-opening a return outside the prescribed limits, I understood that this was a cornerstone of the scheme, ie they could NOT re-open. I was actually hoping they would fight that corner if they lost the main event, looks like even that slim hope will be dashed...

I have a friend who paid the 4% almost immediately - so as not hanging over him. Maybe DR's mate was in the same boat?

I don't see montp conceeding anything to the bully-boy HMRC - who only joined HMRC as they couldn't get a decent job. Hello Mr Brannigan

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Maybe DR's mate was in the same boat?

MTM called in the loan immediately after the Jan 31 deadline. HMRC didn't re-open the return for several months. My mate asked about getting the money back but as I recall MTM only agreed to repay it if they lost the case.

It's all a bit irrelevant now because when Clause 55 becomes law HMRC can use this as grounds for re-opening any tax returns that slipped through the net.

[TheGadgetMan]

Maybe DR's mate was in the same boat?

MTM called in the loan immediately after the Jan 31 deadline. HMRC didn't re-open the return for several months. My mate asked about getting the money back but as I recall MTM only agreed to repay it if they lost the case.

It's all a bit irrelevant now because when Clause 55 becomes law HMRC can use this as grounds for re-opening any tax returns that slipped through the net.

Hi DR...DR and I have actually spoken about this very issue in the past...possibly I'm the guy DR is referring to...

in my case, HMRC actually re-opened a year 10 months after the deadline...when I asked MTM about getting my 4% back they agreed to do this but only if they lost the case...my concern at the time was that it would drag on for a few years (boy, was I proved right!) and that I would lose out...so I came to an agreement with MTM that if we lost and that the money had to be repaid back to me, then i would receive it with interest (lets face it, MTM are earning interest in the meantime)...

obviously, I would rather that we dont end up in the situation where they have to pay it back to me....

[elpinar]

sorry to come to the party late - but am a tad confused - there are the two 4%'s - those of you early joiners who pay 6 and owe 4 if the scheme works (and there seem to be some of you who have in the mena time had things passed and pay the 4 only to have years reopeend...)

and then there are those of us who joined paying 10% witht he promise from day 1 tht in the 'unlikley' event of a failure we would get our 4% back. I am in the latter group...... so dont think the 4% argument shows anythign about what MTM think or predict as an outcome - its jsut that they worked out they could keep the case rahter than dishing it out. Whehter those of us in that camp ever see the 4% ... who knows.

BUT what I am a tad unhappy bout is what have they now moved us onto? can anyone get an answer on that - as it seems to be loan based - but we havent signed loan agreements. Does anyone have detail on this? as at the mo we seem to be 10% for ??????

[BrilloPad]

BUT what I am a tad unhappy bout is what have they now moved us onto? can anyone get an answer on that - as it seems to be loan based - but we havent signed loan agreements. Does anyone have detail on this? as at the mo we seem to be 10% for ??????

I went to see the LOndon office who took me through it. It looks good to me. But I have 2.5 years of exposure now - when contract renews in Oct I am going back to Ltd. That is no reflection on montp.