BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[Britspud]

Would this work?

Chaps ... just seen this online. It's about a year old...and I realise it's not proof etc being just a forum Q&A...

HMRC Debt Recovery | AccountingWEB

The first answer says, 'This demonstrates the utterly unrealistic and some might say vindictive attitude of HMRC. They work "by the book" and ignore common sense. I have come across a similar stuation and we drew a total blank with HMRC. An application was made to the courts and an injunction obtained ordering HMRC to take no action for a period of one year - which allowed client time to realise assets and pay HMRC'.

Is this a possible avenue, assuming no further appeals etc are available and MP don't have a credible Plan B...i.e. apply to the court, demonstrate a willingness to pay and acceptance that it is now due...and ask them to intervene to allow us time to pay it, rather than just letting HMRC bankrupt loads of people etc?

[smalldog]

Chaps ... just seen this online. It's about a year old...and I realise it's not proof etc being just a forum Q&A...

HMRC Debt Recovery | AccountingWEB

The first answer says, 'This demonstrates the utterly unrealistic and some might say vindictive attitude of HMRC. They work "by the book" and ignore common sense. I have come across a similar stuation and we drew a total blank with HMRC. An application was made to the courts and an injunction obtained ordering HMRC to take no action for a period of one year - which allowed client time to realise assets and pay HMRC'.

Is this a possible avenue...i.e. apply to the court, demonstrate a willingness to pay and acceptance that it is now due...and ask them to intervene to allow us time to pay it, rather than just bankrupting loads of people etc?

Absolutely! However each case will be judged separately there is no blanket rule that can be applied to all

[smalldog]

Chaps ... just seen this online. It's about a year old...and I realise it's not proof etc being just a forum Q&A...

HMRC Debt Recovery | AccountingWEB

The first answer says, 'This demonstrates the utterly unrealistic and some might say vindictive attitude of HMRC. They work "by the book" and ignore common sense. I have come across a similar stuation and we drew a total blank with HMRC. An application was made to the courts and an injunction obtained ordering HMRC to take no action for a period of one year - which allowed client time to realise assets and pay HMRC'.

Is this a possible avenue...i.e. apply to the court, demonstrate a willingness to pay and acceptance that it is now due...and ask them to intervene to allow us time to pay it, rather than just bankrupting loads of people etc?

Absolutely! However each case will be judged separately there is no blanket rule that can be applied to all

[silver_lining]

I would say careful what you wish for. It would be very easy for a journalist to twist that around - something like "ALthough HMRC have bodged their dealings with Vodafone and Golides, they don't always screw things up. Look how dilligently they have been at chasing down this bunch of evil tax dodgers. Bravo to them - and more of the same please".

In the current "hang a tax dodger" climate, what do you think would sell more newspapers.

At the very least, be careful who you target it to.

Agree completely; in the current climate it will be laughed at.

I feel the only avenues now are europe) or tribunals.

Regardless of europe, I feel we have no choice (if you can) to settle or sadly face bankruptcy; I think short-term could be anything up to 12 months if it gets extremely drawn out in tribunals or dare I say it negotiations. Practically speaking I see the collections side of it done and dusted in 6 months.

My last ray of hope now is that MP can do a deal and remove some of the pain.

I wish MP would at least say something in the interim - even if it was as an interim note stating what has happened and that they are working on something, but the silence does not help.

[moira under the stairs]

An Optimistic point of view

Agree completely; in the current climate it will be laughed at.

I feel the only avenues now are europe) or tribunals.

Regardless of europe, I feel we have no choice (if you can) to settle or sadly face bankruptcy; I think short-term could be anything up to 12 months if it gets extremely drawn out in tribunals or dare I say it negotiations. Practically speaking I see the collections side of it done and dusted in 6 months.

My last ray of hope now is that MP can do a deal and remove some of the pain.

I wish MP would at least say something in the interim - even if it was as an interim note stating what has happened and that they are working on something, but the silence does not help.

People, I know we have been hit with the disappointing news being refused the SC hearing for the reason of not being in the public interest.... of course it isn't.... does the government want the HMRC put on yet another public display of Humiliation ... another demonstration of an un-governed institution out of control, they are an embarrassment .... This needed taking out of the public domain, the fight continues... I expect to see some encouraging news coming from MP, et al.

[bananarepublic]

People, I know we have been hit with the disappointing news being refused the SC hearing for the reason of not being in the public interest.... of course it isn't.... does the government want the HMRC put on yet another public display of Humiliation ... another demonstration of an un-governed institution out of control, they are an embarrassment .... This needed taking out of the public domain, the fight continues... I expect to see some encouraging news coming from MP, et al.

I don't!

All I want to know is when I will need to pay up and whether MP can make some blanket agreement about repayment without us having to argue the toss individually with our tax office. Personally I can pay but only giving me 28 days to do so is stretching it.

There also seems a lot of wishful thinking! HMRC won't cut a deal. They probably aren't even able to. A PR campaign will open us to ridicule - Joe Bloggs won't give a toss. And parliament won't step in. Probably the vague chance that the ECHR might make a judgement in about 5 years time. But I can't see HMRC suspending collection until then. And lets be honest we probably only have a case if somebody is ruined by this.

Face facts we are screwed.

[OnYourBikeGB]

I don't!

All I want to know is when I will need to pay up and whether MP can make some blanket agreement about repayment without us having to argue the toss individually with our tax office. Personally I can pay but only giving me 28 days to do so is stretching it.

There also seems a lot of wishful thinking! HMRC won't cut a deal. They probably aren't even able to. A PR campaign will open us to ridicule - Joe Bloggs won't give a toss. And parliament won't step in. Probably the vague chance that the ECHR might make a judgement in about 5 years time. But I can't see HMRC suspending collection until then. And lets be honest we probably only have a case if somebody is ruined by this.

Face facts we are screwed.

Unfortunately, I agree. There may be some negotiation, there may be some leeway, but the chances of us escaping this are pretty slim. MPs silence is a bit strange, I wouldn't be surprised to find it's not so much about strategy as negotiation with Hector. I think we need to be careful that we don't get an overly optimistic view because on this is our forum and we reinforce our own beliefs. This is wrong, this is unfair, but that's not going to stop it. Maybe the the tribunals will cut us some slack, more than the courts did, but they may not. This is a time to take stock and prepare.

I was cautiously in favour of a PR campaign, but the only way I could ever see it working was by forcing HMRCs hand to apply it unilaterally. So we get it, Goldman Sachs gets it, Vodafone gets it, expenses-fiddling MPs get it. That way, I thought they might back off a bit. Now I'm not so sure. No-one gives a sh*t about us or the effect it has on tax legislation. At least, not until it arrives at their door, and it will.

One thing I do think is definitely worth doing, is writing to your MP and asking him/her to intercede on your behalf if HMRC get too heavy. Mine backed off a mile on our initial campaign, but at the same time when I asked him to intercede if HMRC set an unreasonable timeframe he was willing to help.

[moira under the stairs]

Unfortunately, I agree. There may be some negotiation, there may be some leeway, but the chances of us escaping this are pretty slim. MPs silence is a bit strange, I wouldn't be surprised to find it's not so much about strategy as negotiation with Hector. I think we need to be careful that we don't get an overly optimistic view because on this is our forum and we reinforce our own beliefs. This is wrong, this is unfair, but that's not going to stop it. Maybe the the tribunals will cut us some slack, more than the courts did, but they may not. This is a time to take stock and prepare.

I was cautiously in favour of a PR campaign, but the only way I could ever see it working was by forcing HMRCs hand to apply it unilaterally. So we get it, Goldman Sachs gets it, Vodafone gets it, expenses-fiddling MPs get it. That way, I thought they might back off a bit. Now I'm not so sure. No-one gives a sh*t about us or the effect it has on tax legislation. At least, not until it arrives at their door, and it will.

One thing I do think is definitely worth doing, is writing to your MP and asking him/her to intercede on your behalf if HMRC get too heavy. Mine backed off a mile on our initial campaign, but at the same time when I asked him to intercede if HMRC set an unreasonable timeframe he was willing to help.

Guys the Pessimist in me would tend to agree with your points, but this IS WRONG, we followed the LAW at the time, there has to be something in the Arsenal to challenge this.

[SantaClaus]

There's a great deal of speculation on this forum at the moment, but that's all it is - speculation.

We can guess what's going to happen, but the truth is, all we have to go on is a letter from HMRC who do not have our best interests at heart.

At the same time, Montpelier have been very poor on the communication front. They may very well be working on something, but by now at least a holding letter should have been sent informing us of the situation.

[nick4notax]

It's never too late

I understand the negativity surrounding our plight. I face ruin, without any uncertainty. I'm sure I'm not alone. I've resigned myself that if the worst comes to the worse, my house, car, and miserable pension contributions will probably be lost, I will be bankrupt and out of work. I say this with a heart heavier than lead. I try to suppress my urge to rant and wish harm to those who have done this to us, but it does require a lot of effort, and more so as the months tick on.

That said, we know MPs were bound to allow the legal process to conclude before they would entertain any involvement. We know that both a large collection of MPs and the JCHR all voiced opposition to the retrospective nature of Section 58. We know Padmore 1987 specifically exempted those caught by it, thus it's reasonable to expect the same of finance Act 2008. We also know that the then Conservative opposition tabled amendments to remove the retrospectivity from Section 58. Surely, now is the very best time to contact you MP and request that they represent you to petition the Chancellor to remove the retrospective element of this act. Or, at the very least, exempt those known to be caught by it up until the date the act was passed, just like Padmore 1987.

I have already written to mine, the MP in question has already responded (last night) and I can at least take some comfort that he will be writing to a Chancellor who is not part of the loony, vindictive, dishonest bunch of liars and cowards who occupied Nr 10 prior to the last election. Please, can we all think about writing to our MPs.