BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[SantaClaus]

Please could someone enlighten me as to the police matter? Unless passing of information amongst UK citizens got made illegal while I wasn't looking, which wouldn't surprise me...

There were some threatening posts made in jest on this bulletin board to the Inland Revenue guy who signs the letters.

They were lighthearted and the threats were obviously not going to be carried out.

But he got paranoid and his boss got Manchester CID involved.
They questioned me and a couple of others, we confirmed no harm was meant and that was the end of matter.
In the days of anti-terrorism legislation and the big brother state, the police and govt. have powers way beyond that of a civilised country and so we have to be careful what we say in a way that you thought was only possible in a communist country!

However, this episode was useful in confirming that Mr YouKnowWho (TM) reads this forum...avidly!

DR, if you read this, maybe we could add this to Page 1 so I dont have to explain this every 100 posts

[Toocan]

very very good point

am I the only one getting upset that the serious business has not started yet? the sooner we get on with it the better.......

Whether it’s YouKnowWho or AB or whatever, I don’t think he is particularly important either. The tone of his letters and choice of words speaks volumes. I think he/HMRC are playing tactics.

The further they take this the more money it is going to cost HMRC. It is my belief that HMRC know that when they send out closure notices a certain percentage pay up to settle the matter. These poor sods then get more attention from HMRC as HMRC know they are “easy targets”.

Once all of the closure notices are sent out, and people have either paid up or appealed, the “game” changes. HMRC are going to lose this one. If they’ve been reading this forum, then they will know that. If they give up at that point then they’ll save themselves a lot of cash and still be able to use retrospection in the future. If they continue, they will lose a lot of money and never be able to use retrospection again. Would you give up your biggest sword?

Statements from their boss, Dave Hartnett, demonstrate that they do not understand the difference between law and their interpretation (should I say belief?) of the law. For example, “Most tax avoidance schemes are blocked or don't work” was one of his recent quotes. But if you think about it, it’s a self-referential statement (who would use any in that category?).

What is the JR taking so long? Hmmmm... Oh almost forgot:

[SantaClaus]

The further they take this the more money it is going to cost HMRC

Hey, whats a few more million on top of our 1 trillion national debt!

[BrilloPad]

Just to confirm we were threatened with questioning (at client site!) if full co-operation not forthcoming. The co-operation involved listening to the police. Personally I disagreed with almost everything the police said. But I was required to say nothing except that I understood what was said to me and confirm that next time we should be serious on the forum.

Just to re-iterate what SantaClaus said : HMRC are avid readers of this site. Lets be careful what we say.

And a message for HMRC head office : we now have 100+ people on this thread : I would estmate several hundred lurkers. Play your childish mind games all you want. We are ready for you.

[Toocan]

But he got paranoid and his boss got Manchester CID involved.
They questioned me and a couple of others, we confirmed no harm was meant and that was the end of matter.

...

However, this episode was useful in confirming that Mr YouKnowWho (TM) reads this forum...avidly!

It would be much easier for YouKnowWho if this forum didn't exist. Perhaps he was looking for an excuse to have it closed down. Yet another failed exercise.....

(I'd be complaining to my MP if that happened to me without cause)

[bombaycat]

Just to re-iterate what SantaClaus said : HMRC are avid readers of this site. Lets be careful what we say.

And a message for HMRC head office : we now have 100+ people on this thread : I would estimate several hundred lurkers. Play your childish mind games all you want. We are ready for you.

Well said BP, there is massive power in numbers.

The 1st time my client changed their paying agent on about 250-300 direct contractors back in the 90's just post IR35 the agent made a huge mistake and emailed us all with some info or other. This meant that we all knew who the other contractors were of course!

We ended up clubbing together, getting the best legal representation we could find (cheap since we split the cost) and got the contract that they were attempting to force on us totally rewritten - fantastic lesson in the power of numbers. The icing on the cake was that we direct contractors were so professional and didn't play any games, unlike the petulant lawyer that the agent put up against our requests, that the clients thought we were fabulous and put huge pressure on agent to stop lying, playing games and to simply get on and change the contract. Taught me a lot about standing up to bullies and liars, stand together and remain totally professional and you may win and get a good reputation for excellent conduct in the process.
Ironically I had to do the exact same thing at the next client and it worked just the same way! Once again they emailed all the direct guys - every time the same mistake, quite funny!

So HMRC, be careful, we are paid a fair amount for our skills because we are quite bright people, and often very innovative - it's what we're paid to do!

[seadog]

Well said BP, there is massive power in numbers.


We ended up clubbing together, getting the best legal representation we could find (cheap since we split the cost) and got the contract that they were attempting to force on us totally rewritten - fantastic lesson in the power of numbers.

Something fro us all to remember when the time comes

[Squicker]

Just to confirm we were threatened with questioning (at client site!) if full co-operation not forthcoming. The co-operation involved listening to the police.

Tantamount to blackmail; unsurprising to a lot of us. When the infamous Criminal Justice Bill that sought to outlaw public protest was floated some 14 years back, I am proud to say I protested against it (not that it did any good due to the country having already been brainwashed at that point).

My peers from my professional group, white collar high earners like myself, thought I was nuts; after all who cares what happens to a load of road protesters, animal rights defenders or other people in the 'out-group'?

I ruefully quoted Niemöller ("first they came for the Jews....And when they came for me there was no one left to speak for me..."), kind of wondering how long it would take.

It doesn't seem that long at all.

Thank you for the information and please forgive my digression.

[ASB]

My peers from my professional group, white collar high earners like myself, thought I was nuts; after all who cares what happens to a load of road protesters, animal rights defenders or other people in the 'out-group'?

I ruefully quoted Niemöller ("first they came for the Jews....And when they came for me there was no one left to speak for me..."), kind of wondering how long it would take.

That's possibly because you are nuts....

I mean who in their right mind could possibly worry about the anti terrorism legislation for example. Obviously you need to be able to monitor these miscreants to ensure our civilised society can continue. Any suggestions that this big brother power might be abused are of course nonsense and scare mongering.

It's all perfectly reasonable - to any right thinking person.

Of course the fact that pretty much the only users of said legislation are local authorities to check on people is just a minor quirk.

[paulsc]

Delurking

I have been lurking very sporadically since some kind, anonymous soul informed of the existence of this thread last November. Whilst catching up with the last month's postings I noticed that there have been estimates of how many people are reading so I though I would 'out' myself to make estimating a little easier. For what it's worth I was part of the Montpelier scheme for two years but I have since taken the employers shilling.
I have been shocked to read of people being visited by the bailiffs. Am I right in assuming that this has only happened to those that have had closure notices served?