Churchill Knight & Boox clients being investigated as Managed Service Companies

[jamesbrown]

That's what was posted recently up the thread about invoicing and the like. Yesterday, I think.

That to me is the crux of this case. If clients chose the advertised premium, fully hand holding service from an accountant, it's quite likely they will lose their case.

Yes, understood, I saw the same post, but it could be that the author was confused (not sure how you could confuse that, but…). Anyway, if true, it would indicate a very different situation.

[Fred Bloggs]

Yes, understood, I saw the same post, but it could be that the author was confused (not sure how you could confuse that, but…). Anyway, if true, it would indicate a very different situation.

Only one person representing themselves saying that at FTT and it's game over.

[GregRickshaw]

If there’s any truth to this, then there really is a case to answer. That is completely nuts, not like accountancy and not very different from CBS. Based on what Greg and others have said, this wasn’t the case for some/most clients but perhaps there was a varied fee structure with corresponding degrees of handholding. If so, oh dear.

That's the thing James isn't it, I suspect there are a few hand holders hands off in CK's client base I say this again because of the wording of CK's captures 'after speaking with clients' I sought clarification of this with CK and CK confirmed HMRC had spoken to less than 2% of their client base, this is back in 2015 remember.

The rest of us used CK as very expensive very minimal effort on their part as we ran our businesses 100% ourselves apart from VAT reminders and CT reminders and EOY accounts.

Guilty by association has alway been the way and proving your company was part of the 98% who were 100% not MSC is the key thing. The devil is going to be in the detail of YOUR LTD company eventually.

[GregRickshaw]

Only one person representing themselves saying that at FTT and it's game over.

Would it be game over? Or uphill struggle? That company may be guilty doesn't mean anyone else's is. Depends on what rules get written back and then re-applied to the next case I guess.

Having said that as long as the double taxation is removed I imagine many at that point will give up, as the bills aren't life changing after CT and Div tax has been removed.

[eek]

Would it be game over? Or uphill struggle? That company may be guilty doesn't mean anyone else's is. Depends on what rules get written back and then re-applied to the next case I guess.

Having said that as long as the double taxation is removed I imagine many at that point will give up, as the bills aren't life changing after CT and Div tax has been removed.

I suspect it would be guilt by association - how would you prove that CK didn’t create your invoices?

[GregRickshaw]

I suspect it would be guilt by association - how would you prove that CK didn’t create your invoices?

Fair shout I guess. For me I had very personal invoices with logos, letterheads, links to the companies website etc., If you have effectively an Excel print out yes it could have come from anywhere.

[eek]

Fair shout I guess. For me I had very personal invoices with logos, letterheads, links to the companies website etc., If you have effectively an Excel print out yes it could have come from anywhere.

All that is available in FreeAgent so it’s perfectly possible for it to be available elsewhere.

my point is that any subsequent appeal is going to have to prove very hard to demonstrate negatives

[GregRickshaw]

All that is available in FreeAgent so it’s perfectly possible for it to be available elsewhere.

my point is that any subsequent appeal is going to have to prove very hard to demonstrate negatives

100% agree with you and your point, it is yes very tough.

I suppose using vernacular such as 'CK generated my invoices ' as opposed to 'I used Ck's software to generate my own invoices' the latter not damning the former quite embarrassing and damning .....makes a big difference to what a judge hears, one would hope any judge worthy of sitting on something so important would be able to drill further into the statement.


As always we will see, sadly at that point the 'we will see' is a dangerous precipice

[deuce]

Hi. A couple of you asked how to join David Kirk's group. The link below is for a page with a form to complete to join the group. If it doesn't work I guess you can just drop him a mail, and I think he still accepts people. He submitted my appeal and replied to my (many) questions. No conditional corporation tax yet, but mine is due in February.

https://www.contractorcalculator.co....ors_group.aspx

Going back to CK, I can see the benefit of a group action, but still, I am not sure it's a good idea to have them in charge of coordinating it. Not to mention the request of raising all funds right now instead going step by step. Also, I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea to have CK hold a webinar a Q&A instead of just reading the updates?

[GregRickshaw]

Hi. A couple of you asked how to join David Kirk's group. The link below is for a page with a form to complete to join the group. If it doesn't work I guess you can just drop him a mail, and I think he still accepts people. He submitted my appeal and replied to my (many) questions. No conditional corporation tax yet, but mine is due in February.

https://www.contractorcalculator.co....ors_group.aspx

Going back to CK, I can see the benefit of a group action, but still, I am not sure it's a good idea to have them in charge of coordinating it. Not to mention the request of raising all funds right now instead going step by step. Also, I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea to have CK hold a webinar a Q&A instead of just reading the updates?

The last paragraph is what I have just suggested to them too