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

[lowpaidworker]

We have in the past resisted such demands from another promoter. We are in the process of doing so with another scheme. We have already supplied our clients who used these schemes with a - as my lawyer friend calls it - a strongly worded "I don't think so" - to the solicitors. This we provided free of charge to existing clients.

Do I think that will be the end of the matter? I hope so, but I cannot guarantee it. If the alleged owners of the alleged loan come back for a second bite, we will no doubt defend again.

Spot bloody on !!!

See my post earlier

I think they are taking liberties trying to scare a few win a few easy bucks.

Been on here a good few years and I am in a similar situation. I spent my 30 mins with GW and it was well worth it. No resolution but situation explained. What I did then is understand is my options. I'm still considering my options and how i get out of this mess. I think I have another couple of months.

As I have said in earlier posts this has morphed into the biggest thread and panic is by some is setting set in (apart from a few like Wazza) I think some calm needs to be applied as I have not seen anyone call anyone a liar and you/we are all in the same boat. Trust me value the opinion of an expert. Doesn't mean its final but its free and very good avice. Before anyone spits their dummy think about reply. Its impartial expert advice. Its not always what you want to hear but its decent advice/response to your question.

[NickLeeson2]

That was my question, but having thought about it, the payment was made from the Agency to IQ Consultants (in my case). They are now dissolved. The trust have nothing to do with it apart from, they "lent" us the money.

If you check your official credit history none of these loans appear against your name. No debt recorded.

Like others have said this is chances trying to make free money...... they may be an under lining issue like a threat of prosecution against a scheme promoter. They can then use the money against whoever makes the challenge. The net is closing in very quickly for everyone.

[Wazza1882]

If you check your official credit history none of these loans appear against your name. No debt recorded.

Like others have said this is chances trying to make free money...... they may be an under lining issue like a threat of prosecution against a scheme promoter. They can then use the money against whoever makes the challenge. The net is closing in very quickly for everyone.

A very good point. But in the same token and this is where Contract Law applies (I have read a bit and don't laugh, but I do watch Judge Rinder ) any piece of paper that intends to create legal relations between two parties shall be done if both parties are agreed to it (signed). Question is, in court, can it be proven that it was a legitimate loan that had to be repaid. I for one think, for a number of reasons, that it wasn't.

However, the burden of proof lies with them, not us. Prove to us this is a valid loan. And when you do, we will shoot you down.

[Culps67]

I think some calm needs to be applied as I have not seen anyone call anyone a liar and you/we are all in the same boat.[/B]

No we are not all in the same boat. My "liability" is a couple of grand. Some folk though it could mean losing their house if its a huge amount. webberg suggested in his reply to my post that we all knew what we were signing up for. We were signing up for a loan and then he explained the definition of a loan. Wow I know what a loan is ! I wasn't told anything about a loan and I can prove it by the emails between myself and Target Umbrella.

That is my only criticism. I know full well he's trying helping folk but no-one seems to know what the true picture is.

[eek]

No we are not all in the same boat. My "liability" is a couple of grand. Some folk though it could mean losing their house if its a huge amount. webberg suggested in his reply to my post that we all knew what we were signing up for. We were signing up for a loan and then he explained the definition of a loan. Wow I know what a loan is ! I wasn't told anything about a loan and I can prove it by the emails between myself and Target Umbrella.

That is my only criticism. I know full well he's trying helping folk but no-one seems to know what the true picture is.

To be blunt we don't need to know the true picture - we see people panicking when they have little time and need to quickly move them into a pro-active mode which only comes after anger and resignation and a lot of people still seem to be in the angry stage.

As for burden of proof - yes if it gets to court they will need to prove that it was a loan but there is a lot they can do before getting to that stage - and it only takes a few people who haven't found this forum and pay up to provide the funds for their next step...

[Wazza1882]

How Many People Are We Talking?

How many people are likely to be affected by this loan recall scam?

A few hundred? Thousands? Tens of Thousands? The larger the group then the more likely we will get some payers.

I really hope people haven't paid large amounts.

But, in order to fund a legal movement against this many people for some sums that have been quoted, I feel, would require millions I feel.

Will it be worth it? Will they have enough of a watertight case? One thing is for sure, they certainly won't be using Gladstone's solicitors to fight their corner.

[Obi1]

I'm assuming this document is legally binding, so they can not come for the remainder of the balance or pass the loan to another company to collect the loan amount as it states "rest of the loan balance, ever". So it shouldn't make a difference who or if they pass it on as they wouldn't be able to claim as this is legally binding

"If you pay £xxx before 12 February 2020, we will release you from all interest and repayment obligations in respect of these loans. To be clear, this would mean that you would not have to pay the interest demanded earlier in this letter, any other interest on the loans, or the rest of the loan balance, ever'."

[SouthKD]

Could it be so simple...

I'm assuming this document is legally binding, so they can not come for the remainder of the balance or pass the loan to another company to collect the loan amount as it states "rest of the loan balance, ever". So it shouldn't make a difference who or if they pass it on as they wouldn't be able to claim as this is legally binding

"If you pay £xxx before 12 February 2020, we will release you from all interest and repayment obligations in respect of these loans. To be clear, this would mean that you would not have to pay the interest demanded earlier in this letter, any other interest on the loans, or the rest of the loan balance, ever'."

---------
I wonder what they'd think of next to get around this clause. On the letter then only refer to one of the loans before this statement. Would you need to make the same arrangement for the 'other' loans?

[webberg]

I'm assuming this document is legally binding, so they can not come for the remainder of the balance or pass the loan to another company to collect the loan amount as it states "rest of the loan balance, ever". So it shouldn't make a difference who or if they pass it on as they wouldn't be able to claim as this is legally binding

"If you pay £xxx before 12 February 2020, we will release you from all interest and repayment obligations in respect of these loans. To be clear, this would mean that you would not have to pay the interest demanded earlier in this letter, any other interest on the loans, or the rest of the loan balance, ever'."

I have no comment on the first part of the post.

On the piece I have put in bold, I would say that a write off for less than 100% of the loan value is very much at risk of creating a tax charge (section 554C ITEPA).

Therefore you should be thinking of it as not 12% but 12% + adding the balance (88%) to your other income in 2019/20.

Simply don't see it as a realistic option.

[DealorNoDeal]

I have no comment on the first part of the post.

On the piece I have put in bold, I would say that a write off for less than 100% of the loan value is very much at risk of creating a tax charge (section 554C ITEPA).

Therefore you should be thinking of it as not 12% but 12% + adding the balance (88%) to your other income in 2019/20.

Simply don't see it as a realistic option.

Except, it sounds like most people here have already settled with HMRC.

If someone has settled, then a subsequent write-off would not create a tax charge.