BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[TheBarCapBoyz]

For anyone going through divorce, Montpelier have a letter to pass on to the solicitor which explains everything.

Ok thanks DR. My wife was getting worried HMRC would put a block on it somehow. As for settlement we will be splitting the equity from the house sale 50-50 and putting half each in to a pot to await the outcome of the BN66 court case, but it certainly did complicate the negotiations. Fortunately we arrived at an agreement with having to argue our case with solicitors, courts and so on.

[Morlock]

For anyone going through divorce, Montpelier have a letter to pass on to the solicitor which explains everything.

Blimey. Impressed. Montpelier have gone up in my estimation.

Big commiserations, BCB.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Blimey. Impressed. Montpelier have gone up in my estimation.

Sadly this has come up quite a lot over the past couple of years, hence the pre-prepared letter.

[Maddog]

Super Injunction

Sadly this has come up quite a lot over the past couple of years, hence the pre-prepared letter.

Luckily I have been granted a super injuction, so my wife will not find out how much exposure "we" have to this !

I'd appreciate it, if this fact was not broadcast on Twitter !

Mad

[smalldog]

way out there

I had a really crazy thought last night. Is there any chance that the COA could sit on this indefinitely? Are there any time limits on them delivering a verdict?

Reason I ask is them sitting on it indefinitely would be a nice easy way of not making a call either way, it suits the government if the decision is swaying in our favour and stops them having to let off a load of tax evading scumbags like us and also saves HMRC humiliation.

The flipside being they already decided long ago against us, but are in cahoots with HMRC to let the interest ramp up for as long as possible by delaying judgement.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

The court has to reach a judgment.

However, it is not completely unheard of in exceptional cases for decisions to take more than a year.

[smalldog]

The court has to reach a judgment.

However, it is not completely unheard of in exceptional cases for decisions to take more than a year.

but within what time frame, 1, 10, 50, 100 years?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

but within what time frame, 1, 10, 50, 100 years?

In our case, probably 7 years.

The latest stats I could find are for 2008. Out of approx 1300 appeals disposed of in that year, 35 (3%) took more than 9 months.

See Graph 5, page 34.

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c..._year_2008.pdf

[moira under the stairs]

I had a really crazy thought last night. Is there any chance that the COA could sit on this indefinitely? Are there any time limits on them delivering a verdict?

Reason I ask is them sitting on it indefinitely would be a nice easy way of not making a call either way, it suits the government if the decision is swaying in our favour and stops them having to let off a load of tax evading scumbags like us and also saves HMRC humiliation.

The flipside being they already decided long ago against us, but are in cahoots with HMRC to let the interest ramp up for as long as possible by delaying judgement.

How weird I was thinking the self-same thing last night..... Ministers et al. burying this in litigation.....

[Taffia]

The court has to reach a judgment.

However, it is not completely unheard of in exceptional cases for decisions to take more than a year.

Have a look at this link:-

http://www.taxbar.com/Image_Rights_a...010_PW.pdf.pdf

Maybe they're trying to come up with a way of making something similar, albeit on a longer timeframe, work for us! I doubt it though . . . . .