IQ Consultants, Felicitas Solutions, ECS Trustees - loan repayment demands

[cojak]

So I had a missed call by an unknown number, which I think is a bum dial that then went to voicemail.. The guy said 'nah nah nah mate, you've got him a 1000%', then the line was cut. The caller is a fat bloated middle aged guy (white) with a black chick. (saved number and checked his pic on WhatsApp. I think it's one of these lot, any ideas? He's sprouting a white beard too. Can you post pics on here?

If you did I would remove them. That's WhatsApp territory I'm afraid.

[Wtaf]

If you did I would remove them. That's WhatsApp territory I'm afraid.

I did, I just did it to see if they had a pic. I've found who he is anyway and I'm having my friend (cop) check him out.

[piebaps]

Great to think this could be gaining traction.
Not sure it counts as a nugget, but one thing that struck, as extremely "unusual", was that

• The letter from the trustees (with my best interests in mind) who had decided to sell the "debt" and
• The letter, from Felicitas, telling me they now owned the "debt"

Came on the same double sided sheet of paper.
That seems to indicate a closer than is healthy relationship between the two and smacks of sharp practice, to me. (Don't know where sharp practice ends an fraud begins (and it's IOM rules to make it even murkier))

Dan

I'm currently based in the IOM so if you want anything about "IOM rules" (whatever you mean by that), just shout and I'll link you to them. everything should be online and I've become quite familiar with it recently!!

The only practical difficulty is that if the "loans" are IOM loans (and it should say this in the agreement) then any proceedings will be in the IOM which is a separate legal jurisdiction. While a UK solicitor can represent you, an IOM Advocate would be needed if the matter went to Court. An advocate here is a hybrid between a solicitor and a barrister. Most of the laws are broadly similar but there are some little quirks here and there.

Just shout if you want anything.

[Superfly]

Dan

I'm currently based in the IOM so if you want anything about "IOM rules" (whatever you mean by that), just shout and I'll link you to them. everything should be online and I've become quite familiar with it recently!!

The only practical difficulty is that if the "loans" are IOM loans (and it should say this in the agreement) then any proceedings will be in the IOM which is a separate legal jurisdiction. While a UK solicitor can represent you, an IOM Advocate would be needed if the matter went to Court. An advocate here is a hybrid between a solicitor and a barrister. Most of the laws are broadly similar but there are some little quirks here and there.

Just shout if you want anything.

I was with Sanzar and never made the switch to Garraway when people were being transferred. But prior to the transfer, approximately 20 minute group telecon was delivered in the first quarter of 2011 to a group of us in the office laying out how the new Garraway arrangement would work. I have a recording of this whole 20 minute presentation laying out the new 'solution' following changes to legislation for EBTs proposed around December 2010. This was delivered by a Garraway representative who introduces themselves at the beginning of the recording. It was in this telecon that the word 'loan' began to be mentioned. We were instructed to apply for 'loans' from the trust. The loan agreement would state that this agreement is governed by and to be construed in accordance with the law of the Isle of Man (one for you piebaps). When questioned why we should be applying for loans in order to access our money, the response was that this is how the tax planning was expected to function in order to ensure that it does not attract IT and NICs. Naturally one of the participants mentioned that if it is a loan then we would be expected to pay it back at some point. The response *very important* was that we would never be requested to pay back the loan, it is our money. The rep further mentioned that the loan application process is purely to allow the tax planning to function, and *very important* the loan would always be approved as long as our loan application amount did not exceed what we had paid into the trust. They then went on to talk about registering as self employed and trust meeting dates timetables etc. There are other questions by participants in the recording pertaining to lack of DOTAS and assurances regarding the legality of the arrangement.

I have this and a few other recordings, the above being the longest and the only one which I think was a telecon format.

I will make this recording available to ETC Tax and WTT at some point, once I get round to editing and anonymising the voices of my former colleagues in the recording. I never took up the Garraway solution myself, and bailed when Sanzar ended so it is not much use to me.

So, with regards to Garraway I believe they were IOM loans.

[standup]

I was with Sanzar and never made the switch to Garraway when people were being transferred. But prior to the transfer, approximately 20 minute group telecon was delivered in the first quarter of 2011 to a group of us in the office laying out how the new Garraway arrangement would work. I have a recording of this whole 20 minute presentation laying out the new 'solution' following changes to legislation for EBTs proposed around December 2010. This was delivered by a Garraway representative who introduces themselves at the beginning of the recording. It was in this telecon that the word 'loan' began to be mentioned. We were instructed to apply for 'loans' from the trust. The loan agreement would state that this agreement is governed by and to be construed in accordance with the law of the Isle of Man (one for you piebaps). When questioned why we should be applying for loans in order to access our money, the response was that this is how the tax planning was expected to function in order to ensure that it does not attract IT and NICs. Naturally one of the participants mentioned that if it is a loan then we would be expected to pay it back at some point. The response *very important* was that we would never be requested to pay back the loan, it is our money. The rep further mentioned that the loan application process is purely to allow the tax planning to function, and *very important* the loan would always be approved as long as our loan application amount did not exceed what we had paid into the trust. They then went on to talk about registering as self employed and trust meeting dates timetables etc. There are other questions by participants in the recording pertaining to lack of DOTAS and assurances regarding the legality of the arrangement.

I have this and a few other recordings, the above being the longest and the only one which I think was a telecon format.

I will make this recording available to ETC Tax and WTT at some point, once I get round to editing and anonymising the voices of my former colleagues in the recording. I never took up the Garraway solution myself, and bailed when Sanzar ended so it is not much use to me.

So, with regards to Garraway I believe they were IOM loans.

What you have is gold for our defences. I joined in 2011, and none of this was explained to me to be honest. I assumed its just a normal umbrella until I was send a link to apply for a loan. If you could share with WTT or ETC that would be most amazing as it would help hopefully many of us...

[pnr8uk]

I was with Sanzar and never made the switch to Garraway when people were being transferred. But prior to the transfer, approximately 20 minute group telecon was delivered in the first quarter of 2011 to a group of us in the office laying out how the new Garraway arrangement would work. I have a recording of this whole 20 minute presentation laying out the new 'solution' following changes to legislation for EBTs proposed around December 2010. This was delivered by a Garraway representative who introduces themselves at the beginning of the recording. It was in this telecon that the word 'loan' began to be mentioned. We were instructed to apply for 'loans' from the trust. The loan agreement would state that this agreement is governed by and to be construed in accordance with the law of the Isle of Man (one for you piebaps). When questioned why we should be applying for loans in order to access our money, the response was that this is how the tax planning was expected to function in order to ensure that it does not attract IT and NICs. Naturally one of the participants mentioned that if it is a loan then we would be expected to pay it back at some point. The response *very important* was that we would never be requested to pay back the loan, it is our money. The rep further mentioned that the loan application process is purely to allow the tax planning to function, and *very important* the loan would always be approved as long as our loan application amount did not exceed what we had paid into the trust. They then went on to talk about registering as self employed and trust meeting dates timetables etc. There are other questions by participants in the recording pertaining to lack of DOTAS and assurances regarding the legality of the arrangement.

I have this and a few other recordings, the above being the longest and the only one which I think was a telecon format.

I will make this recording available to ETC Tax and WTT at some point, once I get round to editing and anonymising the voices of my former colleagues in the recording. I never took up the Garraway solution myself, and bailed when Sanzar ended so it is not much use to me.

So, with regards to Garraway I believe they were IOM loans.

Not sure this is useable as evidence as technically it could be anybody on the phone and unless they state the date and time at the start of the call?

It would be gold if they gave date/day/year and who they were in the company. Worth sending to ETC and WTT anyway for sure. Thank you for this help

[pnr8uk]

MP actions

Morning all

Just a quick message to let you all know, my local MP has taken the time to read the information I sent he has decided it does warrant forwarding to the correct government Minister and he has assured me he is taking this very seriously as will the minister (he does not say who it is and I'm not sure).

Hopefully you are getting similar responses from your MPs

Stay strong, united and safe

P

[Iter]

Morning all

Just a quick message to let you all know, my local MP has taken the time to read the information I sent he has decided it does warrant forwarding to the correct government Minister and he has assured me he is taking this very seriously as will the minister (he does not say who it is and I'm not sure).

Hopefully you are getting similar responses from your MPs

Stay strong, united and safe

P

By Minister I would hope he’s not talking about Jesse Norman?

[Safe]

ETC Tax fee

Hi all,

Has anyone got an email from ETC Tax almost 2 weeks ago with the subject of "next Step"? They propose a fee, based on outstanding loans and and also letter from Barrister. Adding cost of these two is almost 18% of the fee if I settle with Felicitas based on 5%. What do you think? Is it wise i directly go and settle with Felicitas and not to pay 18% to ETC?
I appreciate for your guidance.

Thanks,
Safe

[pnr8uk]

Hi all,

Has anyone got an email from ETC Tax almost 2 weeks ago with the subject of "next Step"? They propose a fee, based on outstanding loans and and also letter from Barrister. Adding cost of these two is almost 18% of the fee if I settle with Felicitas based on 5%. What do you think? Is it wise i directly go and settle with Felicitas and not to pay 18% to ETC?
I appreciate for your guidance.

Thanks,
Safe

What a strange question....