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

[webberg]

I have this letter too, I have sent this to my tax advisor though I suspect it will be out of their jurisdiction. However if I do get any solid feedback I will let you all know.

I am also very keen to hear what everyone else is intending to do.

I too have settled with HMRC for these loans.

Make no mistake here.

Whether you have settled the tax or not, makes little or no difference (at the moment) to whether the loan is properly repayable or not.

A loan within Part 7A of the tax act (ITEPA) which is written off, will create a tax charge.

Do not go down the 12% route unless you have settled AND have written confirmation from HMRC that they will not tax the write off.

Given current lead times, that might take 6 to 10 weeks.

[NeedTheSunshine]

Do not rely upon advice from an anonymous poster on a public forum.

If the number if significant, you do need to think about getting professional advice.

Deleted as got mixed up with another thread

[Kawa]

Gladstones chasing debt.....

I got a letter from Gladstones too chasing interest payments on loans....

They have some interesting reviews on google...

I'm guessing they want to bully people into settling their loans under the misconception that this will remove the HMRC loan charge liability...

Very sad that these type of solicitors exist....

[Trust Punisher]

Gladstone Demanding Payment

I too received a demand to pay interest that has accrued since 20## with the original promoter IQ.

After listing the interest element owned they added the following...

"You are now required to bring the remaining payments of interest up to date. Provided you bring your account up to date by 12 February 2002, we will waive the right to any interest that was due on 5th April in years prior to 20##."

Clearly they are doing me a favour.

I spoke to HMRC this morning (already settled my tax affairs with them) to ask how come I am demanded for interest payments on these loans when clearly the law of the land / HMRC have deemed these loans as part of my earnings and taxed me accordingly. It was the first they have heard of this demand across their desk so said he would call back within 20 min.....yep he called back, again said that he was surprised IQ came out, sold the loans on and now demands are being sent out - no one else at HMRC has heard about this. He categorically stated these were not loans hence the recent change in legislation etc to tax us accordingly.

I asked would HMRC get involved as this is clearly some kind of scam - if the law states these are not loans then clearly someone is committing some kind of fraud in trying to convince me otherwise and get me to pay up. HMRC advised to seek legal representation as it is clear that these people need to prove these are loans, should be hard if the law states they are not.

So yes people, seek Legal Advise for a specialist solicitor.....I spoke to some big firm accountants they too said its a legal matter. Made some calls all day, not many general corporate solicitors new about Loan Charge/Schemes but offered to take my case on to look in to this (which means, to educate themselves) then write back to Gladstones Solicitors explaining why they dont have a legitimate claim based on the Loan Charge ruling etc......but as you expect come at a price....most were charging approx £500 to engage to write a letter only. Will cost more when things progress but bearing in mind this is all new to them so most of the cost involved will be to educate them.

Best find a solicitor which knows this area, if anyone is speaking to a solicitor firm that is clued up on Contractor Loan Schemes/Loan Charge and face off with these leeches please share. Rest assured I will still be making calls to find the right solicitor, if i do find one will share on here so more work the firm gets could potentially lower the cost for representation.

thought this was buried after entering settlement but these leeches do not die!

[Socialsarah73]

Well, assuming we put together a decent strategy to resist/manage the situation, it's likely to be not too far away from our Big Group model.

In other words a joining fee plus an ongoing maintenance fee.

The difference here is that resisting the loan demands is primarily a legal matter and we are tax specialists. Therefore our role is to limit the lawyers to the grounds we can identify as fruitful for clients and dealing with the tax consequences of whatever that strategy is.

To a degree we will be taking a punt on numbers but we have a decent starting pot of clients who have used the schemes in question. Assuming they will be on board, hopefully the per capita cost will be reasonable.

Count me in! I haven’t received a letter yet but do have an array of information (SAR) Which may or may not help

[MattWills78]

Darwin / IQ Contracts LTD / Felicitas / Gladstones

Hi Guys,

Also received the same letter described yesterday. Sorry to hear more of you are having to deal with these morally bankrupt leeches.

I inadvertently used Darwin / IQ in 2012 - 2013.

I wrote back to Gladstone’s yesterday disputing the claim - await their response.

I asked for:
- a signed copy of the loan agreement
- details of how the Loan value and interest had been calculated
- details of how the alleged loans were transferred to Felicitas
- why, if they were genuine loans, I have not received statements or advice of interest / charges in any previous year (a legal requirement)
- why they feel they can threaten legal action now (in my case over 6 years later) which is beyond the statute of limitations as I understand it

In the meantime I plan to speak to Michal J Perry FCA who is knowledgeable on the scheme apparently. I am also speaking to Freeths later this morning to get a legal view.

Happy to post up what I establish later today.

I fail to see how any money can be owed but the HMRC declined to get involved stating it’s a private matter despite having asserted they were not loans when demanding income tax (which I settled years ago).

All in all this is seriously unsavoury. I fail to see how money can be owed on a loan when the HMRC determined it as income + any monies paid to me via what IQ described as a loan was pre-paid to them via my employer before any payments were made.

Will keep an eye on this thread for any further / useful advice you guys can share and will update you with my findings / advice received later on.

Best,

Matt

[Scrogbank]

Well, assuming we put together a decent strategy to resist/manage the situation, it's likely to be not too far away from our Big Group model.

In other words a joining fee plus an ongoing maintenance fee.

The difference here is that resisting the loan demands is primarily a legal matter and we are tax specialists. Therefore our role is to limit the lawyers to the grounds we can identify as fruitful for clients and dealing with the tax consequences of whatever that strategy is.

To a degree we will be taking a punt on numbers but we have a decent starting pot of clients who have used the schemes in question. Assuming they will be on board, hopefully the per capita cost will be reasonable.

Count me in too.

[Scrogbank]

Make no mistake here.

Whether you have settled the tax or not, makes little or no difference (at the moment) to whether the loan is properly repayable or not.

A loan within Part 7A of the tax act (ITEPA) which is written off, will create a tax charge.

Do not go down the 12% route unless you have settled AND have written confirmation from HMRC that they will not tax the write off.

Given current lead times, that might take 6 to 10 weeks.

I understood that if you had settled early enough with all the so called loans being treated as earned income then Part 7a did not apply

[webberg]

I spoke to HMRC this morning (already settled my tax affairs with them) to ask how come I am demanded for interest payments on these loans when clearly the law of the land / HMRC have deemed these loans as part of my earnings and taxed me accordingly. That is untrue. The "law of the land" says that the loans are income and that tax is due, but not necessarily from you. It suits HMRC to say that as they know where you are and the employer has probably long ago left the building.

He categorically stated these were not loans hence the recent change in legislation etc to tax us accordingly. That is also untrue and contrary to the legal documents you signed. No tax settlement and no HMRC officer can interfere with the legal obligations you signed up to.

I asked would HMRC get involved as this is clearly some kind of scam - if the law states these are not loans again untrue. The law says that contract you signed has power unless it fails certain tests. To the best of my knowledge nobody has attempted to run those tests so far. then clearly someone is committing some kind of fraud in trying to convince me otherwise and get me to pay up. HMRC advised to seek legal representation as it is clear that these people need to prove these are loans, should be hard if the law states they are not. That is correct and sensible.

I get the fact that the letters are scary but I suggest that the off the cuff statements of an HMRC officer who knows little or nothing about contract law and perhaps little or nothing about the history of these loans, carries very little weight.

By all means we should be sharing information but please - seriously please - be sure to distinguish between hard information from a qualified and reputable source and opinion or hearsay based on the ramblings of those who have neither the qualifications or experience required.

[webberg]

I understood that if you had settled early enough with all the so called loans being treated as earned income then Part 7a did not apply

Correct.

However Part 7A et seq is a TAX law.

Loans are managed under CONTRACT law.

A tax law cannot (usually) interfere with law in another area.