BN66 - the road to Judicial Review

[DonkeyRhubarb]

HMRC network traffic

Apparently it might be possible to monitor the traffic coming from HMRC's network.

It would be great to know how much time they spend reading this.

[srhcompcon]

Thanks DR

Your where right. can't believe my eyes !!!

Retweet I cannot believe they have gone this far knowing what they know

[Toocan]

Retweet I cannot believe they have gone this far knowing what they know

I don't think any of us can. Have you considered what this means?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Genuine advice

Some of you Guys just don't get it.

If Montpelier win (i.e. if i lose my Appeal in March 2010) then i will be made bankrupt .

If i win then i will NOT be bankrupt but will NOT make money out of it.

I have to put my best case forward. Only truthful submissions will be considered.

It is not a grudge match or battle. Montpelier sued me . I believe they were wrong and i have to defend their allegations or lie down and "die".

That's it and nothing else. Whatever other spin other parties put on it or give to DR to post is irrelevant.

The large and almighty Montpelier thought they could give me a good kicking. They might end up succeeding but i am fighting to the bitter end - just like you guys.

Although there are some similarities between your situation and our's, there is one major difference. We are up against the State. I don't know if you have ever seen the film the Terminator but that cyborg is HMRC. They cannot be bargained or reasoned with, and they absolutely will not stop until we are screwed into the ground.

Montpelier are a commercial company. I am aware that Mr Gittins has a fierce reputation but at the end of the day he is also a businessman. It doesn't sound like there's anything in it financially for Montpelier to pursue you. And you have already stated that there is no gain in it for you either.

Don't you think negotiation/reconciliation would be a better approach than more lengthy litigation? (And by the way, no-one has prompted me to suggest this.)

There is surely a danger if you continue down your current path that it could blight many more years of your life and cause a further deterioration in your health. You won't have made many friends gatecrashing the JR but I believe it's never too late to change course.

HMRC will show us no leniency or mercy, and we have no choice but to continue fighting to save our families. But I have to ask...

Is "fighting to the bitter end" really your only option when that "end" could be financial ruin or worse?

[srhcompcon]

I don't think any of us can. Have you considered what this means?

YES

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Judgement timescale

I have heard from our legal team that it's possible we could get a judgement within the next 2-3 weeks, but in any event before the end of February.

PWC's hearing in the Court of Appeal is scheduled for 9th March. I believe this is where they are appealing the High Court's decision to refuse their JR application. If you recall, their case involves a different argument to Human Rights.

[srhcompcon]

I have heard from our legal team that it's possible we could get a judgement within the next 2-3 weeks, but in any event before the end of February.

PWC's hearing in the Court of Appeal is scheduled for 9th March. I believe this is where they are appealing the High Court's decision to refuse their JR application. If you recall, their case involves a different argument to Human Rights.

Would PWC be likely to proceed if our result is favourable or do they still need to pursue their challenge?

[bananarepublic]

Vote Labour! ???

Just had a thought. What if we win the JR - and any subsequent appeal - and the bit of the Finance Act dealing with BN66 is declared to be incompatible with our Human Rights - what happens next?

For the retrospection to be removed, doesn't the government have to amend the Finance Act? But I thought that the Tories were committed to repealing the Human Rights Act. So if they win the election then they could legitimately ignore the court ruling (or is that also retrospective?). Not that I trust Labour but they are committed to the Human Rights Act so surely more likely to repeal the offending articles.

Don't get me wrong I've loathed these creeps since day-1 but is it more in our interest to vote Labour than vote to get them out?

[BolshieBastard]

Just had a thought. What if we win the JR - and any subsequent appeal - and the bit of the Finance Act dealing with BN66 is declared to be incompatible with our Human Rights - what happens next?

For the retrospection to be removed, doesn't the government have to amend the Finance Act? But I thought that the Tories were committed to repealing the Human Rights Act. So if they win the election then they could legitimately ignore the court ruling (or is that also retrospective?). Not that I trust Labour but they are committed to the Human Rights Act so surely more likely to repeal the offending articles.

Don't get me wrong I've loathed these creeps since day-1 but is it more in our interest to vote Labour than vote to get them out?

I dont think one needs to tie oneself up with such hypothetical situations.

[BrilloPad]

How does someone find lot of information about someone from a bulletinboard? I'm not really an expert on that, nor would go to that trouble. You don't need to worry about me turning up on your doorstep.

You want to turn up on my doorstep do so anytime. In fact anytime you want to meet up just let me know.