User Profile

[eek]

The issue is how can it be if the initial paperwork doesn't exist.......

[eek]

Nope because this is a private company trying to pull a fast one and it's got nothing to do with HMRC.

If you wish to annoy anyone work out the processes for raising a complaint with the SRA about Trethowan's as I suspect they will be the people with the most to lose here....

[eek]

Also thinking about things overnight and this is may not be a today thing but I wonder what the SRA (solicitors regulation authority) will think about a law firm sending letters on behalf of a firm that claims to be CCA authorised but isn't.

I suspect that lack of due diligence would be...

[eek]

Please don’t take an AI’s statement as gospel - it may be hallucinating what you want to hear and you won’t know enough to capture the hallucinations.

now I think you are correct that the CCA is a massive mistake on their part but I suspect the reason isn’t the terms it’s the...

[eek]

I'm going for stupid - remember back in 2020 one theory about the statutory demands (cheap but awkward) was to get them shifted into UK jurisdiction.

But equally I bet the one thing the mountains of paperwork doesn't reveal is that the loan originated from an IoM company, so is there a...

[eek]

Got to say I'm 100% sure they wouldn't have been a licenced and regulated lender and I'm sure we covered this back in 2020 or so......

[eek]

They aren't consumer loans which opens up the question of WhyTF are West 28 talking about the Consumer Credit Act.

On the second point I refer you to my comments back in 2020-2. They don't have the money to actually take people to court so they need to do anything except that......

[eek]

So let's break it down

West 28th Street are trying to resurrect the loans that you disputed with both Felicitas and 28th West street back in 2020-3. The big bundle of papers sent on Friday was designed to legitimise the "loans" so they can attempt to claim the money again. At...

[eek]

Except this is not a consumer loan so the CCA 1974 is completely irrelevant as you will find discussed in a previous period of this thread...

Once again given that this is over 100 pages long and has a lot of old irrelevant bits attached I would suggest keeping West 28th street's current...

[eek]

Let's repeat my post from October 2020


My concern would be that the actual matter that a court would care about is literally just the bit in Bold below

your work > xyz > trust > your bank account

And the bit in Red isn't important for West 28th...

[eek]

I would suggest you post that on https://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc...t-limited.html so that we keep this latest attempt on a single thread,

But I suspect the reason it's now is because they are doing things on an absolute shoestring so they've left...

[eek]

It should always be based on the day the money reaches your account but there are some things like this where the umbrella will insist on doing things incorrectly because that's how they've always done it and they wish to add to their own liability (note please don't ask me to explain that last part,...

[eek]

The purpose is to ramp up the pressure so someone pays them some money which would allow them to try and get more money off others.

But don't expect a law firm to check the validity of a claim, they get paid money for writing scary letters so they write scary letters based on the facts...

[eek]

The reason I mentioned statutory demands is that we know a pile of them were sent back in 2020 and those demands flipped things from something from the IoM that could be ignored to something in the UK that you had to respond to.

Apart from that the important thing is that you don’t accidentally...

[eek]

But you disputed it in October 2020 - so it’s hard to say that you accepted it was valid in October 2020.

so it’s then a matter of what was the last previous communication that occurred where you accepted there was a debt and that will be time served.

literally the only...

[eek]

So reply back saying that the statutory demand was for a disputed debt that is now time served and that they should have argued against it some point in 2020-21/2 before it became time served.

And that you are more than ready to go to court because I’m sure the judge could do with a ...

[eek]

Surely these are now completely time served - as over 6 years has passed...

[eek]

Um no. The umbrella is legally required to use the tax code it is given by HMRC.

So if HMRC gets its estimate wrong it’s nowt to do with the umbrella...

[eek]

It was a daily mail story - I think the third party site with added risks is less dangerous than actually visiting the daily mail website...

[eek]

Clarity is one of very few who deal with overseas payments as exchange rate changes are a continual risk...