Reply to: Is there a "good" time to switch accountants, and who does CUK recommend?

[SueEllen]

They did force the businesses to pay back with interest because of course by then it was late.
Before it went electronic it wasn't so easy (maybe even possible) to do this type of fraud.
.

Before it was electronic people got caught out writing cheques to "IR" that were intercepted and could then be altered to fit the bank account the criminal opened up....

[ZARDOZ]

This is somewhat different then. In my view, the fraud is against HMRC, not the business.

That is indeed harsh if they then forced the business to pay the CT.

It's also incredibly negligent of HMRC and it would seem they lack the controls in place to prevent this kind of fraud.

They did force the businesses to pay back with interest because of course by then it was late.
Before it went electronic it wasn't so easy (maybe even possible) to do this type of fraud.

It may have been possible to chase HMRC but from what I have read on Accountingweb etc it is not guaranteed and usually leads to them being vindictive and going through all affairs with a fine tooth comb e.g. expect an IR35 inspection.

However, I think after signing permission to act as an agent and signing usual accountant terms where they can hold money on your behalf this gives HMRC all the get out they need.

[SueEllen]

There were warnings about this guy on thus forum, I recall posting some myself, but many ignored the signs and warnings probably because it was too much effort to move accountants.

The forum also carefully moderated posts until he was unable to post on it as he threatened legal action.

[Waldorf]

There were warnings about this guy on thus forum, I recall posting some myself, but many ignored the signs and warnings probably because it was too much effort to move accountants.

[pr1]

AIUI, many people paid their corp tax direct to HMRC. He then submitted a correction saying they didn't owe the corp tax, and got it refunded to his own account. It could have happened to any of us.

and the Ltdco's are losing out? surely IPSE or similar should have been all over this? no way should they have to pay twice

[SueEllen]

Refunding to different account from the one money were received was totally wrong thing to do by HMRC - from money laundering perspective too, crazy that they did it.

Absolutely.

Will HMRC listen? Will they f***. They are above the law.

[FrontEnder]

AIUI, many people paid their corp tax direct to HMRC. He then submitted a correction saying they didn't owe the corp tax, and got it refunded to his own account. It could have happened to any of us.

This is somewhat different then. In my view, the fraud is against HMRC, not the business.

That is indeed harsh if they then forced the business to pay the CT.

It's also incredibly negligent of HMRC and it would seem they lack the controls in place to prevent this kind of fraud.

[AtW]

AIUI, many people paid their corp tax direct to HMRC. He then submitted a correction saying they didn't owe the corp tax, and got it refunded to his own account. It could have happened to any of us.

Refunding to different account from the one money were received was totally wrong thing to do by HMRC - from money laundering perspective too, crazy that they did it.

[ZARDOZ]

AIUI, many people paid their corp tax direct to HMRC. He then submitted a correction saying they didn't owe the corp tax, and got it refunded to his own account. It could have happened to any of us.

Something like that, and he asked HMRC to make the refund to the client's Ltd bank giving their Ltd name but his bank details. HMRC didn't/ don't cross check Co name with bank details and as long as there is an acc number and sort code it matters not what the name is to clear. He could give such an instruction without the client's knowledge because he had permision to act as an agent with HMRC. That permision also absolves HMRC of blame.

[SueEllen]

I forgot about that, I think many got no money back from that and some of those were much larger than the corp tax losses.

Yep.

He was stealing from contractors to pay of this and to keep his mistress. Luckily for him his wife was otherwise occupied being pregnant and then having their first kid.

[mudskipper]

Harsh, but fair. This can easily be avoided.

In this case, my accountant says "you owe HMRC - pay it to account 12345678". While it probably wouldn't cross my mind that they are trying to fleece me, when I make the transfer, I'm going to look up "how to pay corporation tax" and pay to those details. I'll also check my HMRC account to see that it's been received and that nothing is owed.

Personally, I'm not trusting anyone else with access to my bank account. I'm not paying any bill worth thousands unless I'm absolutely sure I know who the recipient is.

This is beside the point anyway - why should HMRC foot the bill for someone's crime? It's a tulip situation, and I do have sympathy with the victims of fraud. But HMRC aren't a compensation scheme for them.

AIUI, many people paid their corp tax direct to HMRC. He then submitted a correction saying they didn't owe the corp tax, and got it refunded to his own account. It could have happened to any of us.

[ZARDOZ]

Remember he started an investment scheme as well without a licence and had to pay all that money back as well plus his fines.

I forgot about that, I think many got no money back from that and some of those were much larger than the corp tax losses.

[SueEllen]

Remember he started an investment scheme as well without a licence and had to pay all that money back as well plus his fines.

[ZARDOZ]

I wonder if his PII paid out? There hasbeen a few discussions lately about PII.

No, nor could liquidators provide any money. He did however pay some money back as condition of getting a reduced sentence.

Irony is he was once a name in one of these accountant recommendation threads. This is why I would be cautious, DYOR etc.

[SueEllen]

I wonder if his PII paid out? There hasbeen a few discussions lately about PII.

He committed criminal offences and PII doesn't cover criminal acts.