BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[CanPayButWouldRatherNot]

Remember remember the 5th of November !

[QUOTE=DonkeyRhubarb;1149465]Duration

The hearing is scheduled to last 3 days.

Dates

It will either be:

Tue/Wed/Thu, 2nd-4th November 2010

OR

Wed/Thu/Fri, 3rd-5th November 2010


..... Ironic timetabling in my book .... DR as Guy Fawkes ...can we wear Bonfire Night costumes in the hearing ?

Cheers

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Follow-up to the letter

My reply was a little vaugue and non commital....... Got it this morning about a week after I sent my letter(not a bad time turn around)

If your MP doesn't offer to forward your letter on to a Treasury Minister for comment, you may want to drop them a reply asking them to do so.

This is the very least we should expect.

[WhiteCat]

Interim reply from my MP received this morning

If your MP doesn't offer to forward your letter on to a Treasury Minister for comment, you may want to drop them a reply asking them to do so.

This is the very least we should expect.

My MP has promised to raise my letter of May 20th with "the new Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Mr Mark Hoban" and then get in touch with me again.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Send more letters

There are only 3 weeks until the budget.

Yes, it is a longshot but what have we got to lose?

You don't need to contact me for the letter, as I have now made it available for download here:

http://wimg.co.uk/kDl.doc

I am working behind the scenes to get this out to as many scheme users as possible.

Don't think about it. Just send it!

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Distraint Office

The last 2 weekends running I have received demands. I suppose the opportunity to spoil a Bank Holiday weekend was too good to miss. Is anyone else being hit in this way? I feel harrassed and very stressed.

Don't feel harrassed and stressed. Forward anything you get from this office to MontP. Check my earlier posts on this if these demands are coming from the Distraint Scheduling Team.

If so, I suggest you call them and advise them that this claim is being appealed and currently in the legal system. One fact I have found is that if the Distraint Office issues a distraint warning letter, they tally up ALL taxes claimed and demand payment. So if you have other SA taxes owing which are not part of the BN66 process then they just add up the figures and demand payment for the lot. So check if the DO has issued warning letters that they have not simply added some other taxes assumed and put the total bill inc (BN66 amounts) to you as a demand. If they have, then ensure that they know the BN66 claim is kept separate from any other non-BN66 claim. Their computer system is separate from the Local Compliance Office system so auto-generated letters come from them without sifting out those claims which are under appeal.

If the DO has issued letters, check how the claims are broken down and ring-fence the BN66 values and let them know that this is under appeal and refer them to the Compliance Office if needed.

I got such a demand from them where they took a less than 5 quid interest difference over my last return and added that to the BN66 challenge then asked me to pay the whole lot or else. 5 quid settled and the remainder is in the courts. They have accepted that and no further actions will happen whilst this is with the Compliance Office. They were also advised that if the DO come around to collect the rest then a writ of violation of my Human Rights under Article 1 Protocol 1 will be issued against the DO. They will not be granted access to my property and they can do no more without a Court Order. Not likely to be granted given that the courts are already dealing with this.

So, don't sit back and do nothing. Inform MontP and contact the office of distraint and make sure they put on file any difference of collections between that which is under the BN66 case and that which is not.

[weeboaby]

Don't feel harrassed and stressed. Forward anything you get from this office to MontP. Check my earlier posts on this if these demands are coming from the Distraint Scheduling Team.

If so, I suggest you call them and advise them that this claim is being appealed and currently in the legal system. One fact I have found is that if the Distraint Office issues a distraint warning letter, they tally up ALL taxes claimed and demand payment. So if you have other SA taxes owing which are not part of the BN66 process then they just add up the figures and demand payment for the lot. So check if the DO has issued warning letters that they have not simply added some other taxes assumed and put the total bill inc (BN66 amounts) to you as a demand. If they have, then ensure that they know the BN66 claim is kept separate from any other non-BN66 claim. Their computer system is separate from the Local Compliance Office system so auto-generated letters come from them without sifting out those claims which are under appeal.

If the DO has issued letters, check how the claims are broken down and ring-fence the BN66 values and let them know that this is under appeal and refer them to the Compliance Office if needed.

I got such a demand from them where they took a less than 5 quid interest difference over my last return and added that to the BN66 challenge then asked me to pay the whole lot or else. 5 quid settled and the remainder is in the courts. They have accepted that and no further actions will happen whilst this is with the Compliance Office. They were also advised that if the DO come around to collect the rest then a writ of violation of my Human Rights under Article 1 Protocol 1 will be issued against the DO. They will not be granted access to my property and they can do no more without a Court Order. Not likely to be granted given that the courts are already dealing with this.

So, don't sit back and do nothing. Inform MontP and contact the office of distraint and make sure they put on file any difference of collections between that which is under the BN66 case and that which is not.

Thanks. I will be forwarding on to NW. I just can't believe I got 2 demands, for basically the same stuff, 2 weeks running.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Standard response from MPs

Some people have received very similar replies from their MPs, so the response is obviously being coordinated at a higher level.

I won't reproduce it in full here but below are a few highlights.

The approach of the last government enhanced the impression that it was presiding over an uncertain and unstable tax system, which was bad for the UK economy as a whole as well as deeply confusing to individual taxpayers.

It was our opinion that this legislation ought to apply prospectively and the question of whether earlier Acts prohibited these practices was an issue for the courts.

The key problem seems to be that the last government was aware of this scheme for some years, yet made no move to close the loophole. This served to create a legitimate expectation amongst taxpayers that the practice would be tolerated by the government, and so people arranged their tax affairs accordingly.

We believe the previous Government should have sent a clear and unambiguous signal to taxpayers at a much earlier stage, rather than standing back and creating the impression that it would tolerate the arrangement – and then acting retrospectively.

We have put forward a number of proposals to ensure that the making of tax law is improved significantly in future, so that such situations do not arise again.

I know that Treasury ministers are aware of the strength of feeling on this issue as they work on the detail of an emergency Budget scheduled for 22 June 2010.

[BolshieBastard]

Some people have received very similar replies from their MPs, so the response is obviously being coordinated at a higher level.

I'd like to feel some encouragement from those comments, presumably from an MP contacted about this affair.

However, I've been in that place before and have learned to keep my powder dry.

Did I see something that the next court appearance is scheduled for November!? Jesus, this thing just drags on, and on, and on and on.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Distraint Office

Thanks. I will be forwarding on to NW. I just can't believe I got 2 demands, for basically the same stuff, 2 weeks running.

No problems. The fact is that HMRC is a disconnected and automated machine and hence why assessment and collections appear to be (and act like) they are totally separate entities. Also, you can call them up and speak to someone who should have "cost savings here please" and others who actually know what they're talking about written on their CV's. just remember that pretty much all correspondance is automated (probaly due to some IR-35 helper git) and that you are not a person to their system - until you let them know in no uncertain terms that you are. The Distraint Office cannot override the Compliance Office so if they try, tell them where they stand. Explain the process being undertaken with the agreement of HMRC Counsel and refer them to to Compliance Office if they don't get it. If any distraint warning pertains specifically to BN66 appeals then they can go whistle. If they come round, send them away and indeed ask them to get a court order and remind them that the courts are already dealing with this. If they still don't get it, you might suggest a writ against HMRC and in any event make sure you take the name, position and their bosses name and position whenever you speak to them - insist on this for your records as they do theirs. You will get a very different attitude from them if you follow this. But, don't get personal or impolite. Keep it relevant, don't get angry or hostile and deal only with the facts. As I mentioned before, the Distraint Office cannot gain unforced entry to collect the assumed liabilities. And if these are the BN66 appeals, then it's not their turf so ask them to leave with the advice above. A camera or video being to hand won't go amiss either in such an event - smile please, you're on retro camera.

BTW, my experience is that after a couple of goes, you do get to speak to someone who is not employed in a "cuts contract" and can actually work with you on this.

[OnYourBikeGB]

Some people have received very similar replies from their MPs, so the response is obviously being coordinated at a higher level.

I won't reproduce it in full here but below are a few highlights.

That sounds promising! I don't want to get my hopes up, but it's a lot better than a kick in the teeth!