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

[grahamc]

No they haven’t. The trusts are still up and running and well.

They have just passed on the data to another organisation. Why do that when you’re owed multi-millions in unsecured debt because you loaned money that wasn’t even yours? Your guess is as good as mine.

But if you rearrange the words below in to a coherent sentence, you might get my view on it.

Leg
On
No
Stand
To

I wonder if its a method of making more money (obviously) from those that are not clients anymore, without using the official/advertised company name.

[Socialsarah73]

Hi All,

I have P11D for all years involved 2012 -2017 with IQ Loan

Can anyone explain what "Cash equivalent of loans after deducting any interest paid by the borrower" as it is considerably less than the loan amount

Thanks

I also have a question about pd11 it has a date when loans discharged what does this mean?

Really confused

[Micky20]

Big group

Spoke to WTT today and pleased with what they had to say. I will be registering for the group. Also called Freeths who were very helpful. Finally feel like I am getting somewhere after the initial panic in the first few days calling every accountant and solicitor I could think of and getting no answers. Lets fight this!!

[neveragain]

Today's the day

By the sounds of it from this forum, no-one will be paying the ‘offer’ to cancel the loan forever.

If anyone has, I’m assuming they’re not going to say?

As they letter states, I have chosen option '2. To dispute the amount due.' I have mailed them twice.
I have not had a response with regards to providing any proof/evidence how the ‘loan’ & ‘loan capital’ will be released from me IF this ‘offer’ is paid, from any IOM or England business.
Also why they have given under 7 days to pay. Outrageous!!
Plus all the other queries I asked.

As this is now a legal issue rather than a tax issue, has anyone got any good feedback from legal people they’ve spoken to?

I don’t have the funds to 1) pay the offer and 2) afford a solicitor/lawyer to look into this. The ‘free’ sessions don’t give not enough time for proper legal details.

I’m pretty sure though, that they can’t take action for non-payment as they have to go to court before proceeding legally and prove to them that the loan & interest are legit & payable in English courts/law, as we have been taxed on it my HMRC.

Still curious how the loan agreement which states is governed by IOM laws & courts, is allowed to be actioned in English law.

I think piebaps post may have something we can use to sort these people out. But legal eyes are needed to decrypt it.

Guess it’s a waiting game for their next move.

[eek]

The legal issues also intersect with Tax issues - just speak to Webberg as the legal and tax items interact with each other so you don't need a standard lawyer you need someone who understands the complete picture and there isn't many of those.

[BrilloPad]

The legal issues also intersect with Tax issues - just speak to Webberg as the legal and tax items interact with each other so you don't need a standard lawyer you need someone who understands the complete picture and there isn't many of those.

Personally I would be tempted to ignore everything from theses scammers. Engaging with them only makes things worse.

If legal action starts(which I doubt) then go to webberg or one of the others. Interesting how the only few people in this field all seem to recommend themselves or others. Sadly they are all super busy and cannot cope with the demand.

IANAL. IANAA. In my opinion. etcetc.

[eek]

Personally I would be tempted to ignore everything from theses scammers. Engaging with them only makes things worse.

If legal action starts(which I doubt) then go to webberg or one of the others. Interesting how the only few people in this field all seem to recommend themselves or others. Sadly they are all super busy and cannot cope with the demand.

IANAL. IANAA. In my opinion. etcetc.

Remember I have zero to do with any scheme - I'm so risk adverse when they tried to sell them to me I refused instantly as it wasn't under my control.

I'm merely posting here as people were angry and not rational and seemed to be doing things in anger which could come back to hurt them later. My advice always has been get beyond anger and work out what you need to do, doing nothing is an option - stating that you dispute the debt (and saying absolutely no more than that) is an option, talking to someone is an option.

Writing a letter talking about counterclaims and similar really wasn't - it showed anger which will probably result in you screwing up and saying the wrong thing, either making them more annoyed so they push further or accidently saying something that confirms the debt is valid.

[BrilloPad]

Remember I have zero to do with any scheme - I'm so risk adverse when they tried to sell them to me I refused instantly as it wasn't under my control.

I'm merely posting here as people were angry and not rational and seemed to be doing things in anger which could come back to hurt them later. My advice always has been get beyond anger and work out what you need to do, doing nothing is an option - stating that you dispute the debt (and saying absolutely no more than that) is an option, talking to someone is an option.

Writing a letter talking about counterclaims and similar really wasn't - it showed anger which will probably result in you screwing up and saying the wrong thing, either making them more annoyed so they push further or accidently saying something that confirms the debt is valid.

Absolutely. And you are quite right to state your opinion from your viewpoint. It is a very valid view.

Sadly, many of the people involved in schemes are very messed up. And your assistance is superb.

People will probably take the advice they want to hear.

I hope as well that people will try to remember that HMRC actively monitor these forums. They feed off negativity. They are bullies. I hope this year to see them get their come-uppance.

[eek]

Absolutely. And you are quite right to state your opinion from your viewpoint. It is a very valid view.

Sadly, many of the people involved in schemes are very messed up. And your assistance is superb.

People will probably take the advice they want to hear.

I hope as well that people will try to remember that HMRC actively monitor these forums. They feed off negativity. They are bullies. I hope this year to see them get their come-uppance.

Finally it's probably worth repeating this.

Ideally there would have multiple people to refer you to. Those people really don't exist and Webberg is very much the exception. This stuff is complex and has inter-relationships that

1) really reduce the options available
2) increase the level of complexity far beyond your typical solicitor (for instance, you need one that knows both UK and IoM law and your local ones won't know the IoM parts) - and that's ignoring the tax pieces.

[webberg]

I also have a question about pd11 it has a date when loans discharged what does this mean?

Really confused

A P11D details the "benefits in kind" an employer makes available to you.

In the case of a loan from an employer, the "benefit" is the difference between the interest you would have paid at an "official rate" and the actual interest paid - usually NIL.

So the P11D will include this interest difference.

Further, a loan made by an employer may be written off/forgiven or otherwise allowed to lapse.

Clearly as you are no longer indebted to the employer you have benefited. That benefit arises courtesy of your employment. Therefore the amount of the loan written off etc, is a work related benefit and is taxable.

In this instance the P11D will also include the write off as a benefit.

If your empllyer is operating some sort of tax scheme, a loan being written off and taxed is going to remove most of the benefits.

Therefore some schemes (Sanzar I suspect in this case) had a mechanism by which the loan was allegedly repaid or removed as a personal liability. In that case the P11D will set outr the fact that a loan was made and then allegedly repaid - or to use the words in the form "discharged".

As to whether that discharge actually happened or not, we don't have enough space here to discuss. Let's just say that HMRC is unlikely to be in the "believer" camp.