No To Retro Tax – Campaign Against Section 58 Finance Act 2008

[Guttersnipe]

If all else fails, and there's a few of you, you could just turn up mob handed at his surgery.

Remind him of his democratic responsibility.

I've no issue with an MP positioning themselves for the betterment of their career but to not even meet constituents is neglecting one of the core reasons for his career even existing.

[Disgusted of Coventry]

Does this mean what I think it means?

A recent bout of Google-assisted OCD offered up the following extract from a recent judgement in a case involving HMRC:

"Where one is dealing with a general statement of policy [...] and there is no question of the public authority changing that general policy [...], then ordinary rules of public law preventing a public authority from acting arbitrarily and capriciously will have the effect that the authority will not be entitled to disapply that policy in an individual case where there is no rational basis for distinguishing that case from the general run of cases covered by the policy:"

There's bound to be an insane amount of legal complexity lurking behind that statement, but it appears to imply that there's a set of laws governing the extent to which hmrc must behave with internal consistency.

So where does that leave, for example, hmrc's previous issuance of Closure Notices?

Come to think of it, if you're looking for a description of hmrc's behaviour throughout this shoddy business, then "acting arbitrarily and capriciously" sounds about right.

[TAF4]

Still no Joy.....

I have been banging on at my MP for over a year now for a meet at Westminster or his surgery. This guy is a fresh out of the box brand new Tory with a slim majority and a gravy train to protect.
He has responded to my letters and emails with increasingly irritated responses. Yesterday I resorted to calling his Westminster office, which appears field all calls with a voice mail capture. All that generated was an email response saying (in essence) '**** off and stop wasting my time'.

Jeez - I'm angry!!

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I have been banging on at my MP for over a year now for a meet at Westminster or his surgery. This guy is a fresh out of the box brand new Tory with a slim majority and a gravy train to protect.
He has responded to my letters and emails with increasingly irritated responses. Yesterday I resorted to calling his Westminster office, which appears field all calls with a voice mail capture. All that generated was an email response saying (in essence) '**** off and stop wasting my time'.

Jeez - I'm angry!!

Anything in here which would help House of Commons - The Code of Conduct together with The Guide to the Rules relating to the conduct of Members

Surely there are rules about representing constituents concerns

[foolishboy]

I have been banging on at my MP for over a year now for a meet at Westminster or his surgery. This guy is a fresh out of the box brand new Tory with a slim majority and a gravy train to protect.
He has responded to my letters and emails with increasingly irritated responses. Yesterday I resorted to calling his Westminster office, which appears field all calls with a voice mail capture. All that generated was an email response saying (in essence) '**** off and stop wasting my time'.

Jeez - I'm angry!!

Please name and shame him here on this forum so that we all know who he is.

[TAF4]

Please name and shame him here on this forum so that we all know who he is.

I'd love to - but live in hopes that I might get to meet him sometime soon.

I don't need him to be wound up even further by some HMRC goon drawing his attention to this forum and my observations.

[mossman]

Help!

I was under the impression that everything was on hold pending the outcome of Montpelier’s legal challenges.

Suddenly out of the blue I’ve received a demand for money from a Mr N Holt at HMRC Glasgow.

It’s not a huge amount of money, less than £2000. It relates to the tax year ended April 2005. The point is I wasn’t in the scheme in that tax year, my last contract in the scheme having ended in the previous tax year.

It seems to relate to a small amount of money which came into my bank account in the new tax year. I was under the impression that Montpelier had included it in the claim for the tax year ended April 2004. After this length of time it’s difficult to remember exactly what happened, though I should have the paperwork somewhere in my ever-growing pile of scheme-related correspondence.

The letter from HMRC was dated 10 May, arrived 15 May, and gives me until 9 June to pay up or face surcharge + interest.

Why have they suddenly demanded this money after all these years? What’s the situation where money came in late after the end of the tax year that you left the scheme?

Presumably I need to speak to Montpelier and try to get this put on hold like the bulk of the disputed tax?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Presumably I need to speak to Montpelier and try to get this put on hold like the bulk of the disputed tax?

Yes, get in touch with Montpelier straight away and ask them to appeal it.

PM me if you need contact details.

[mossman]

Thanks DR

Yes, get in touch with Montpelier straight away and ask them to appeal it.

PM me if you need contact details.

I've PMd for the contact details

[doublebubble]

First things first: you need to join NTRT here: No To Retrospective Taxation | Campaign Against Retrospective Tax Legislation

This is the campaign that is fighting for us.

They have a number of briefing packs to use when attending your meeting.

There is a huge amount of information on the forum, possibly getting too long to surf through and pick out what you need.

If your meeting is only 15 minutes long then you really need something very brief, I put together a brief set of notes to use with my MP which have now been used with 2 other MPs to positive affect.

Drop me a PM and I'll send them onto you if you like.

Hi there,

I did drop you a mail but not received a reply. If you get a chance, I am meeting my Mp 11am tomorrow

thanks