Churchill Knight & Boox clients being investigated as Managed Service Companies

[CA100]

Boox have written today to say they are charging £90 to submit conditional claims against overpayment, which by the way is a charge they completely failed to mention in their original communication.

Does anyone remember what David Kirk intends to charge for conditional claims?

[Hareforthebear]

Boox have written today to say they are charging £90 to submit conditional claims against overpayment, which by the way is a charge they completely failed to mention in their original communication.

Does anyone remember what David Kirk intends to charge for conditional claims?

Would be nice if they instead wrote with an update of how their ongoing discussions with HMRC were progressing, if at all..

[GregRickshaw]

Boox have written today to say they are charging £90 to submit conditional claims against overpayment, which by the way is a charge they completely failed to mention in their original communication.

Does anyone remember what David Kirk intends to charge for conditional claims?

David charged £250 to join the group if you wanted him to draft your appeal letter
or £175 if you had already sent your appeal. He has then offered to complete your appeal against conditionals for 'free'.

So £90 for Boox to submit conditionals is cheaper. However CK have done it for free for us, you have to submit yourself though, don't have Boox do it anyway... involvement and all that...

[rdw1970]

David charged £250 to join the group if you wanted him to draft your appeal letter
or £175 if you had already sent your appeal. He has then offered to complete your appeal against conditionals for 'free'.

So £90 for Boox to submit conditionals is cheaper. However CK have done it for free for us, you have to submit yourself though, don't have Boox do it anyway... involvement and all that...

David said he will submit it for free if the data is in a "digestible form", else he will charge around £100 if he has to contact Boox/CK for the figures.

I will not be paying Boox a single penny for their behaviour during this investigation. Not a single update from them since the initial 2 emails sent in early April.

[GregRickshaw]

David said he will submit it for free if the data is in a "digestible form", else he will charge around £100 if he has to contact Boox/CK for the figures.

I will not be paying Boox a single penny for their behaviour during this investigation. Not a single update from them since the initial 2 emails sent in early April.

He did yes, apologies.

CK sent out a perfectly good form for creating the conditionals for free not long after I joined David's group.

[Guy Incognito]

Would be nice if they instead wrote with an update of how their ongoing discussions with HMRC were progressing, if at all..

Boox has been pretty poor so far. However I don't think an email saying "we have made no progress at all because everything is going to take years" would go down that well!

[GregRickshaw]

Boox has been pretty poor so far. However I don't think an email saying "we have made no progress at all because everything is going to take years" would go down that well!

To be fair to CK they have sent that email to us.

[Hareforthebear]

Boox has been pretty poor so far. However I don't think an email saying "we have made no progress at all because everything is going to take years" would go down that well!

Well it would deffo go down better with me than an email offering more services (that may or may not be necessary) for cash upfront!

I understand there is a 4 year limit for the CT part but surely there would be some leeway applied in this instance if it came to it, given they are still uncertain of their position. Why should we be shelling out more for advisers to submit this that and the other when they haven’t even confirmed their final position.

I may end up regretting it but I am very reluctant to pay for this currently. It’s not reasonable to expect normal limits to apply in these circumstances. Not suggesting for a moment that HMRC has any grasp of that concept of course. I would be looking to involve my MP if a ‘late’ claim was rejected.

[CA100]

I may end up regretting it but I am very reluctant to pay for this currently. It’s not reasonable to expect normal limits to apply in these circumstances.

I know what you mean but potentially it makes such a huge difference to the amount eventually liable (if it goes against us) that I think it's worth it.

I had originally told Boox they could submit my claim for me, but as I've now joined the Kirk group I might go that route instead, although I suspect I would fall into the extra charge group. I've frankly not been very impressed with Boox or David Kirk so far.

I've held off contacting my MP as yet as I want to keep resources in reserve for when they're most needed.

[Guy Incognito]

I think it's good that the Cheif executive of HMRC is receiving emails from MPs asking why their constituents are receiving these (in some cases, large) determinations based on Hectors flakey interpretation of the legislation.

My MP is a more a 170 gsm manilla envelope kinda guy.