BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Look, we all want an end to this.

Some people may think this has become a bit of hobby for me but trust me I want this to go away just as much as everyone else.

If HMRC offered me a deal tomorrow I'd be tempted but I know that ain't going to happen.

Most of us are caught between a rock and a hard place. We want this to end soon but the consequences of having to cough up are far worse.

For me, there is no option other than fighting on to the bitter end.

[Fireship]

Actually Montpelier said they would fight it, but ho ho ho, it would never get to this stage.

And did we really know the lengths we'd have to go to? If we did why are people on this forum saying they wished they'd taken out a CTD but hadn't because of the advice given to them by Montpelier? Because if I'd had half an inkling it would take this long I would have done so long ago.

If Montpelier want to refund my fees (generously I'll even let them keep the interest it's earned) then I'll happily take my chances on my jack with Hector. If not then I've paid for a service, and I retain my right to manage my affairs as I see fit.

As individuals we are all responsible for our own due diligence when entering into any contract or financial arrangement. I for one did mine and researched WG’s and MTM’s (as they were then) case history against HRMC’s past challenges going back over several decades. So in answer to your question, if you did what was required of you then yes you would know because 1) they told you, and 2) the information was freely available for you to satisfy yourself of the chances of such a challenge being brought and defeated!

If you didn’t bother to check then I guess you’ve learned a valuable lesson but you can’t say you weren’t informed nor had the opportunity to perform your own research into past case history.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I see no point negotiating a settlement at this stage; we might as well wait for to see what happens at the Supreme Court.

If you have a CTD it will stop vast amounts of interest building up.

We have known about this for 3 years now (or is it 4?! years). So if you are still contracting and haven't been saving to cover your liability then you are almost as stupid as when your first made the decision to join this scheme!

I mostly agree with you except the last few years of recession have been tough on contractors. Many people I speak to have spent extended periods on the bench.

[Emigre]

........bring back brillopad !

It may surprise you to know that Brillo was with us in Court yesterday and in good form.

[RingStinger]

Look, we all want an end to this.

Some people may think this has become a bit of hobby for me but trust me I want this to go away just as much as everyone else.

If HMRC offered me a deal tomorrow I'd be tempted but I know that ain't going to happen.

Most of us are caught between a rock and a hard place. We want this to end soon but the consequences of having to cough up are far worse.

For me, there is no option other than fighting on to the bitter end.

Agree. As someone who's life will be completely turned upside down if we lose, I'm in til the end. As already stated, I aint ready for the bedsit yet.

[Fireship]

Fireship, these are BAD times for all of us, through no fault of our own. I think your underlying assumption is that I have the money to pay it - I DON'T, thus the naive hope of some sort of settlement!
LIKE YOU - I also have two children and a wife, who, LIKE YOU, face loosing their home, so I sympathise with you.

My only worry is if were to loose in the SC, then WHAT? - I think at that stage then the HMRC may well act and act QUICKLY!!

It is not my intention to undermine any part of the legal process...

Ah, I see, you would like a settlement but aren’t able to pay – only one option then I’m afraid and that’s to see the fight through to the end, that way we may see justice done and if not you’ll have a little extra time to save up!

In addition, I don’t believe MP will entertain any kind of negotiation whilst they are in a legal battle as it’s likely to undermine their case. They certainly don’t have the ability to negotiate on the behalf of individuals at this time as the required manpower just isn’t available.

If it does all go pear shaped and you’re facing bankruptcy they can’t just kick you out of the house. There is process to be followed and you may even be able to avoid bankruptcy should your case end up in front of a sympathetic court who, like everyone else I speak to, expresses disbelief in the retroactive aspect of BN66! Unlikely but you never know! All in all the process takes approx 12+ months from filing to selling the house….. There are some good posts on this forum which can provide more detail….

[BolshieBastard]

Montpelier are not going to open up a dialogue with HMRC for indviduals or small numbers of people.

This would weaken their hand and would not be fair on those people, I believe are the vast majority, who want them to fight this all the way.

If you want to negotiate with HMRC then this is something you will have to instigate yourself.

Why dont MP tell us that DR instead of using you? No disrespect but I'd rather hear it from the horse's mouth!

[nevergiveup]

Agree. As someone who's life will be completely turned upside down if we lose, I'm in til the end. As already stated, I aint ready for the bedsit yet.

I'm in it to the end and if the government wants to pay my rent for 12 months whilst I'm bankrupt then that's up to them. To be honest I'll probably end up in a bedsit anyway when the wife divorces me due to stress

[BolshieBastard]

The couirts are being asked what to rules on and they rule on what is asked - That is, is BN66 proportionate and does it strike a fair balance when tested against HR. And the answer (thus far) is yes. But is the right question being asked? It's pretty clear that all the valid points made here over time about HMRC behaviour and the like don't wash with the courts. But is this because it doesn't wash in terms of the HR claim on which the courts are being asked to rule alone or would it wash if approached in a different way?

Isnt it a bit late in the day to decide or at least question whether that's the right angle of attack? Excuse me but what strategy have MP been following for the last two court cases?

At the WG presentation, I was told this is a loophole in the DTA. So, I find it hard to understand why exactly we have gone down the HR avenue instead of following up the principles MP said the scheme was founded upon.

Its as if they have chucked that overboard and jumped on the HR bandwagon (which we know only serves illegal immigrants, theives and the like).

[nevergiveup]

Why dont MP tell us that DR instead of using you? No disrespect but I'd rather hear it from the horse's mouth!

Not heard directly from MP for ages and this forum/DR is my main source of info (thanks again DR).

Probably should email/call MP again. What's the best number/contact to speak too?