Settlement whist in review

[Iter]

When I settled a scheme in April they sent me the settlement docs which I had to ‘wet’ sign and return back.
They then sent me another letter to confirm they accept my offer, which were also signed by them (the investigator). Shortly after they sent me the notification of charge slip which just confirms the payment details, I then paid.

[MLeggsy]

To date, almost all the settlements we have dealt with, which have reached the point of the offer being sent to HMRC, have NOT resulted in anything from HMRC accepting that offer. The incidence of copies of countersigned contracts being sent back to us are as rare as hen's teeth.

Somewhere in HMRC must be a room stacked floor to ceiling with unsigned contracts.

Thanks Webberg!

That is my experience... I have received a demand for payment (3) but never received a signed acceptance from HMRC (2). I consider settlement to be incomplete. I asked for my settlement to be suspended awaiting the review,but HMRC were "unsure" if this was possible after I'd signed the contract (1). Anyway I'm on a list for them to call me!

I agree with your statement that it will be incredibly difficult for Settlements to be undone, but if I'm able to stop mine before completion then it will give me options. Hopefully more once the outcome of the review is known?

Thanks again.


MLeggsy

[Paralytic]

For what it's worth, my opening position will be (in the event of settlement being amended) that any contract that remains unsigned by an authorised HMRC officer is NOT complete and my client can withdraw from it. If HMRC claims that the contract is signed or their acceptance letter is as good as signing, I will contest that and demand proof that is incontrovertible.

What I'd consider doing if i'd signed the settlement agreement, had not received a countersigned copy or an acceptance letter, and now regretted my decision, is to write to HMRC revoking my offer of settlement and requesting confirmation of the same. That should either result in a "no, you've agreed to settle", in which case ask for proof, or they might even agree. There might also be no response, but that could potentially be used in any future argument if the LC is scrapped/diluted but previous settlements remain valid.

The risk here, of course, is that the signed-but-not-countersigned settlements are sitting in a box somewhere and such a request accelerates its processing (to counter-signature) when otherwise (post LC review) it might get dealt with differently.

Not an envious position to be in.

Not advice, i'm not a lawyer etc etc