Reply to: Winchester Contracts Letter - I received Today

[GreenMirror]

My view of these parasites is totally unprintable!

Targeting those at their lowest ebb is beyond evil!

Do not even consider engaging with these clowns!

HMRC or trust helpline?

HMRC really should be targeting trust helpline.

One of the loan providers is aggressively targeting users of other schemes. However those that ignore them are left alone.

I know others may disagree. But I would change my email address and burn all letters that come from them. Worked for me in another scheme.

[Dmac]

I to was foolish enough to get caught up in one of these schemes but fortunately only for 3 months. I have settled with HMRC but am now receiving emails from the Trust Helpline telling me that they represent Winchester and that I need to purchase a "Deed of release" to avoid having to repay the loan.
Having done some research I'm not sure how they can currently represent Winchester as it was forcibly dissolved in November 2015. Can a company that no longer exists take action?
In addition the "Trust" that the so called loan was made via (Retentia Ltd of Anguilla) does not seem to have ever existed and I can find no record of it at all!
I would be interested to hear the views of others

My view of these parasites is totally unprintable!

Targeting those at their lowest ebb is beyond evil!

Do not even consider engaging with these clowns!

[gorilla]

Trust Helpline

I to was foolish enough to get caught up in one of these schemes but fortunately only for 3 months. I have settled with HMRC but am now receiving emails from the Trust Helpline telling me that they represent Winchester and that I need to purchase a "Deed of release" to avoid having to repay the loan.
Having done some research I'm not sure how they can currently represent Winchester as it was forcibly dissolved in November 2015. Can a company that no longer exists take action?
In addition the "Trust" that the so called loan was made via (Retentia Ltd of Anguilla) does not seem to have ever existed and I can find no record of it at all!
I would be interested to hear the views of others

[dammit chloe]

I was a sucker who goy caught up with these dodgy guys selling schemes about 5 years ago. I am trying to help people through my experiences as I settled with the HMRC... Cheers..

Of course you are love! Cheerleader for HMRC more like.

You need to look at the discussions in these threads.

Tax issues are decided by reference to tax law.

Loan issues are probably decided by reference to contract law.

Trust issues are decided by reference to trust law.

It is entirely possible for a payment of money to be treated as income for tax purposes, but a loan for contract law purposes.

So in short, it can be income and a loan.

Whether HMRC think you have satisfied your loan liabilities is irrelevant. That are not party to the loan agreement and have NO INFLUENCE.

(I consider that HMRC is deliberately misleading people when they promise to "exit you from avoidance". That they cannot do. They take money of you for tax allegedly due, but cannot force the lender to write off or forgive the loan. That is entirely beyond their legal reach).

--------

A trust operating anti avoidance schemes cant hide behind the law...

When a contract is illegal it cannot be enforced by a court or tribunal. A contract that exists for an illegal purpose is void and will not be enforced by the courts. So a contract to evade tax will be illegal and unenforceable.

This is my lawyers stance, you can disagree all good ... cheers

------

Which dept of HMRC do you work for? Or do you work for BI?

I was a sucker who goy caught up with these dodgy guys selling schemes about 5 years ago. I am trying to help people through my experiences as I settled with the HMRC... Cheers..

I am already in the process of settling with HMRC. My loan was around �6k. The Trust helpline (I don't trust them) is looking after Winchester. They are asking for �250 admin fee. And 5% of the loan for the deed of realease. When I spoke to HMRC all they said is I would have to pay tax owed. They do not want the deed of release.

-----------

Agreed the HMRC laughed at the idea of a deed of release, the so called deed that represents a scheme which can be broadly be described as an income trust, example being a type of disguised remuneration scheme, it aims to divert income from a business into a trust. The trust then loans it back to the business owners, their families, or both, claiming that no Income Tax or National Insurance Contributions (NICs) arise.

I paid my tax with the HMRC and they laughed when I called them loans and mentioned the agreement I had, that trust agreement wont stand up in any court, it was a non compliant tax avoidance scheme aka disguised remuneration.

[dammit chloe]

-------------------

I agree and I am not repaying a loan as its not a loan, I settled and as far as im concerned my scheme was a miss sold disguised remuneration scheme and all my payments I received where income, I paid tax and penalty interest and the HMRC are happy my affairs are up to date be it tainted now.

I have been hassled by Trust Helpline and they want me to settle loans, It cant be a loan and income its one or the other.

If you don't settle and go the loan route you will pay eventually... good luck with that option, I found the HMRC useful and fair once you speak with the senior most guys.

Which dept of HMRC do you work for? Or do you work for BI?

They sent me this today, I'm already settling with HMRC. And they want the loans to be repaid! - No Chance.

2 — imgbb.com

1 — imgbb.com

-------------------

I agree and I am not repaying a loan as its not a loan, I settled and as far as im concerned my scheme was a miss sold disguised remuneration scheme and all my payments I received where income, I paid tax and penalty interest and the HMRC are happy my affairs are up to date be it tainted now.

I have been hassled by Trust Helpline and they want me to settle loans, It cant be a loan and income its one or the other.

If you don't settle and go the loan route you will pay eventually... good luck with that option, I found the HMRC useful and fair once you speak with the senior most guys.

[webberg]

--------------

I agree with the above, I settled with HMRC and they were very good and helpful. I am getting hounded by info trust helpline and there emails are badly composed and inaccurate. The HMRC are satisfied I have settled all my debts and that no IHT is due. Surely in a court of law if they took me there a judge would see an illegal anti avoidance scheme is trying to get money from a person who has settled his tax obligations on income, it cant be income and a loan surely. So I have paid tax on my income, its not a loan as they wrongly describe in their sham trust deed.

You need to look at the discussions in these threads.

Tax issues are decided by reference to tax law.

Loan issues are probably decided by reference to contract law.

Trust issues are decided by reference to trust law.

It is entirely possible for a payment of money to be treated as income for tax purposes, but a loan for contract law purposes.

So in short, it can be income and a loan.

Whether HMRC think you have satisfied your loan liabilities is irrelevant. That are not party to the loan agreement and have NO INFLUENCE.

(I consider that HMRC is deliberately misleading people when they promise to "exit you from avoidance". That they cannot do. They take money of you for tax allegedly due, but cannot force the lender to write off or forgive the loan. That is entirely beyond their legal reach).

First of all, why on earth is anyone still using these companies post 2011, let alone 2016 or now! Crazy.

My advice would be to deal with HMRC directly and forget about Winchester - don't contact them, terminate all ideas about paying an admin fee and 5% of loan fee. They are only after more money from you and are not interested in helping.

Cooperate with HMRC and go ahead with a settlement offer. Compare the settlement with potential liabilities in LC next year and make your decision (settlement will be cheaper unless you haven't worked this year). Pay up (lump sum and over time) and get on with your lives.

That's what I've done and I have saved another fortune in fees, stress and I found HMRC quite amicable to deal with.

--------------

I agree with the above, I settled with HMRC and they were very good and helpful. I am getting hounded by info trust helpline and there emails are badly composed and inaccurate. The HMRC are satisfied I have settled all my debts and that no IHT is due. Surely in a court of law if they took me there a judge would see an illegal anti avoidance scheme is trying to get money from a person who has settled his tax obligations on income, it cant be income and a loan surely. So I have paid tax on my income, its not a loan as they wrongly describe in their sham trust deed.

[webberg]

For legacy schemes pre-April 2011, a P11d was provided by the scheme operator who was also your employer paying you a minimum wage. On the P11d, it is stated that the loan had been discharged at the end of that tax year.

Can this be used as evidence that the loans have been written off? Do we need to buy another piece of paper from these snake-oil salesmen?

The P11d went to HMRC also, so effectively you have made them aware that the loans have been written off at the end of the tax year.

The P11D is a statement from an employer to HMRC. It is not YOU telling HMRC anything and they are not obliged to take any notice of it.

The loan was written off? Do you have any evidence other than the P11D which is notoriously inaccurate at the best of times.

Do not rely upon "effectively". Either you have proof of something or you do not.

You have no proof that the loan was repaid. Just a statement. You cannot point to your bank account and show the repayment being made.

[piebaps]

For legacy schemes pre-April 2011, a P11d was provided by the scheme operator who was also your employer paying you a minimum wage. On the P11d, it is stated that the loan had been discharged at the end of that tax year.

Can this be used as evidence that the loans have been written off? Do we need to buy another piece of paper from these snake-oil salesmen?

The P11d went to HMRC also, so effectively you have made them aware that the loans have been written off at the end of the tax year.

See webberg's post #20 - its a pretty comprehensive summary.

[hudson]

For legacy schemes pre-April 2011, a P11d was provided by the scheme operator who was also your employer paying you a minimum wage. On the P11d, it is stated that the loan had been discharged at the end of that tax year.

Can this be used as evidence that the loans have been written off? Do we need to buy another piece of paper from these snake-oil salesmen?

The P11d went to HMRC also, so effectively you have made them aware that the loans have been written off at the end of the tax year.

[webberg]

Let's establish a few facts here.

The original trustee behind a range of scheme names such as Winchester, Darwin, Danzar, IQ, Garraway, Longacre, Eximius, Tudor Pay, etc was - and remains - a company owned by Baker Tilly in the IOM.

To the best of my knowledge this firm of accountants severed connections with the larger UK outfit some time ago and I'm not suggesting that the UK firm (now rebranded) is in any manner connected.

The above schemes were characterised by money going to the trust and the trust - via the trustee - loaning that money to you. To record this, a loan agreement was signed - by you - and this contains a number of rights and obligations and a process for repayment. You have agreed to legally binding conditions around drawing the loan and repaying it.

It is an irony that money you generated by working at the end client but which went through agency, promoter and trust, you had no call on - legally.

I have studied many schemes are almost all of them could have created a situation in which you could have done the work, submitted the time sheet but have no legal recourse to what you generated. Instead, as soon as the funds went to the promoter, the destination of that money was entirely in their hands. If they had failed to pay you (in whatever fashion) your legal recourse was at best limited and at worst non existent.

None of the above was a sham. So if you took this to a Court and claimed that it was all an elaborate fiction, what would a Judge say?

I know that a tax Judge would look at the facts and work out what happened and then make some assumptions as to the intentions of the parties at the time.

What would a Judge versed in contract law do?

I have no idea.

Or rather I have a better idea now than I did 3 years ago.

That judge would not be able to lay aside the loan agreement you signed. The judge may consider that the other agreements you signed created a series of rights and obligations that were connected, more or less strongly, with that loan agreement. The judge may even consider that the intentions of the parties at the time the loan was agreed should be taken into account in determining the ability of the parties to the loan agreement to exercise their rights and obligations.

We are advised however that a judge deciding that the entire set of transactions and documents should be set aside and declared invalid, is such an unlikely event as to be not worth contesting unless or until we are down to the final dregs of desperation.

Instead, there are a number of channels that can be pursued in a defence against claims, real or not, exaggerated or not, that can be used. We have discussed these with a number of IOM and CI law firms.

For the moment, we have not received from a client, any loan repayment demand that we have not been able to resist without recourse to a Court room. To date, we have been able to convince the lender that our clients have good grounds not to repay the loan.

We expect the activity of lenders (and those acting on behalf of lenders) to ramp up as we move towards the end of the tax year. We will certainly be advising our clients that loan repayment will not, as is often claimed, result in HMRC dropping enquiries and/or not applying the loan charge.

Repaying loans will not have any effect on enquiries or loan charge (unless - for the loan charge only - you are prepared to repay the loan and never see that money again).

If you settle, having the loan written off is generally a good idea. You DO NOT NEED any special bit of paper from the lender (or their agent) to convince HMRC of write off. You probably should have a letter, establishing in legally binding form, that the lender has given up all rights, but that is a very simple document.

We are aware that some trustees and their agents are charging what we consider to be extortionate amounts for such a letter. We cannot make a judgement for you as to the worth of what you are receiving, but please consider carefully the ratio between the work required by a trustee/agent and the fee.

So, resisting loan repayments is sensible but it has to be done on the basis of the facts, the historic transactions and the documents. It can be done but will almost certainly require expert knowledge.

Relying on a Judge deciding that the whole arrangement is a sham and can be declared invalid, is a desperate last throw of the dice.

Dealing with trustees/agents should be done carefully as many are seeing the end game here as an opportunity to make fees.