Reply to: BG - WebberG farewell. Right to reply.

[eek]

Eek does make a valid point. It's one thing to ask for donations when an appeal is required, to keep the case alive, but it's a bit different asking for money when the UTT haven't even reached a decision yet. (Although I appreciate the point about there being a limited time window to lodge an appeal.)

Some people here may disagree but, if and when an appeal is needed, I believe it would be in every one's interests (including BG) if the Hoey case continued.

Heck it would even be fine asking for donations now provided it was clear on the posts on this website and / or the Go Fund Me page that there was a possibility that no court case may occur. But that just isn't the case - the campaign is asking for money now to fight a court case that they are saying will occur when anyone who has even glanced at the Lancashire judgement can see that there is a strong possibility that no appeal will be allowed.

And it's taken me 2 weeks of attacks on me and my integrity to get that rather important (and obvious to me) revelation out of the people attacking Big Group while asking for money from people on this site.

[DealorNoDeal]

The Litigation Association for Hoey has been going for a long time and its members have funded legal proceedings to date. The GoFundMe page is designed to allow others to also contribute and I would strongly recommend that all facing LC do that. This case is well-advanced and has a good chance to wipe all tax HMRC is chasing fr pre-2011 years, including the return of APN payments already made. It's a no-brainer

Eek does make a valid point. It's one thing to ask for donations when an appeal is required, to keep the case alive, but it's a bit different asking for money when the UTT haven't even reached a decision yet. (Although I appreciate the point about there being a limited time window to lodge an appeal.)

Some people here may disagree but, if and when an appeal is needed, I believe it would be in every one's interests (including BG) if the Hoey case continued.

[eek]

I disagree with the final point. The risk is that HMRC lodge an appeal after a ruling goes against them, and there is then insufficient time to raise the required funding. Therefore, it's sensible to start raising funds NOW to ensure that HMRC is not allowed a free run at this due to lack of funding over Xmas when people are distracted.

Also, GoFundMe has a clear explanation of how donations can be refunded and, given how invested Mr Hoey is in acting as lead case here, I don't think it's helpful to suggest that he might "access funds at any time", hinting at some sort of scam?!?.

Your post comes across as an attempt to undermine a real legal challenge that's made significant progress )and has a chance to help 000s of people who have open enquiries pre-2011). Why would you seek to do that?

How Do I Refund My Donors? – GoFundMe Help Center

Do you not have the ability to read and check your links before posting them

You may be able to refund all donors to your fundraiser without contacting our team if you have a personal fundraiser based in the US or Canada, have raised no more than $1000 (within the last 6 months), have not added a beneficiary, and have not withdrawn funds. To get started, just follow these steps:

And as this campaign is not
1) based in the US and Canada
2) it has raised over $1000

That statement is again completely wrong.

Be up front and honest and I won't point out the flaws. Hide the truth, make false promises and use inaccurate statements to protect yourself and I will point those issues out.

So let me repeat what we have now found out and what everyone was trying to avoid revealing

1) There is a possibility that Hoey will not be allowed to appeal - the appeal is not a done deal
2) if you donate money to Hoey's fundraising attempt there is no chance of a refund - if Mr Hoey is completely honest your donation will be given to Mind but you cannot be sure of that

3) A lot of people on here have criticised Big Group and WTT for creating false hope. Yet it does seem that the same people ignored the fact that their fundraising was based on something that may actually be worse, as the fundraising is for something that may not even be possible.

[brayveheart]

That is not how gofundme works - it does not have a triggering target - whoever is behind the campaign can access any funds donated at any time.

And thanks for confirming there is a chance that Hoey may not be allowed a subsequent appeal - I've asked that question before and never got a definitive answer. But between the possibility of no further appeal and the approach the gofundme campaign is using all my doubts about the current fund raising campaign are confirmed.

BTW I would have had zero objections to asking people to prepare to give money when an appeal was granted but asking for money via a non-refundable campaign when there is a possibility of no subsequent appeal is a step too far. Especially when those facts haven't been made 100% clear.

I disagree with the final point. The risk is that HMRC lodge an appeal after a ruling goes against them, and there is then insufficient time to raise the required funding. Therefore, it's sensible to start raising funds NOW to ensure that HMRC is not allowed a free run at this due to lack of funding over Xmas when people are distracted.

Also, GoFundMe has a clear explanation of how donations can be refunded and, given how invested Mr Hoey is in acting as lead case here, I don't think it's helpful to suggest that he might "access funds at any time", hinting at some sort of scam?!?.

Your post comes across as an attempt to undermine a real legal challenge that's made significant progress )and has a chance to help 000s of people who have open enquiries pre-2011). Why would you seek to do that?

How Do I Refund My Donors? – GoFundMe Help Center

[brayveheart]

Could anyone join the Hoey litigation association, or was it just for one particular loan scheme?

Why didn't the Hoey team just offer more people the opportunity to join the association, rather than asking for donations via gofundme? Or is the association now closed to new members for some reason?

The Litigation Association for Hoey has been going for a long time and its members have funded legal proceedings to date. The GoFundMe page is designed to allow others to also contribute and I would strongly recommend that all facing LC do that. This case is well-advanced and has a good chance to wipe all tax HMRC is chasing fr pre-2011 years, including the return of APN payments already made. It's a no-brainer

[stonehenge]

Could anyone join the Hoey litigation association, or was it just for one particular loan scheme?

Why didn't the Hoey team just offer more people the opportunity to join the association, rather than asking for donations via gofundme? Or is the association now closed to new members for some reason?

[dammit chloe]

Pretty solid sign that the defence is weak - one would have thought people who paid for it would be interested in any and all scrutiny ASAP because if it falls apart early then the only losers are WG as they would not get continued recurring payments - and that money could have went towards defences that are not relying on being secret.

On the other hand paying 15 quid a month to maintain delusion of having a chance of win isn’t a very high price to pay.

Exactly. We all know now that tax judges take a purposive approach now rather than the letter of the law approach they used to. So anything that is attempting to hide behind a nuance of wording or tiny, tiny loophole is unlikely to pass any muster with a judge.

To have a strong argument it needs to be a robust and on a clear point of law. I suspect those are all pretty well known by all parties now.

[dammit chloe]

Big Group didn't ask for money without providing an outline of what they would do with the money.

Hoey is asking for money while failing to mention the fact that a subsequent appeal may not be allowed and nor has anyone else on here actually highlighted that slight flaw in their requests for money. Meanwhile the same people have attacked BG to the extent that the one of the very few people actually answering questions on this site left it.

I really do hope that when Cojak sees this in the morning she gets her ban hammer out.

I don't care about bans. I care about the silly, nit-picky and pedantic opining of the leading case while sidestepping any critical analysis of what has BG been doing all these years since that post was pinned.

I spoke to 2 out of the main three at WTT 2 years ago and they provided no outline whatsoever of what there plans were, so that's a crock. In fact they contradicted each other. IMO they were making it up as they go along. It was pay to play and you were playing on blind faith. This was the defining reason why I chose not to join.

3 years they spent cosy chats with HMRC. Hoey spent that time dragging HMRC to court.

And once again, you question and misdirect on any uncomfortable facts or questions. No questioning of why there has been no action for years, or dedicated stickies here etc etc. And somehow all the aforementioned posts were charitable work despite every other one ending with a nudge to scare people into their arms. All your criticism reserved for those who have actually led the charge. Very odd.

Are you even aware of Rebus?

[Darkpaw]

That is not how gofundme works - it does not have a triggering target - whoever is behind the campaign can access any funds donated at any time.

Sorry, I did mis-read it. If the GoFundMe appeal doesn't hit the target, Mr Hoey will have to close it and the funds will be donated to the MIND charity as it isn't possible to return the funds to those who donated them.

And thanks for confirming there is a chance that Hoey may not be allowed a subsequent appeal

I never said an appeal wouldn't be allowed. I said if it is not necessary to appeal, i.e. HMRC don't appeal the result. That's twisting what I said, and doesn't help anyone.

There are four possible outcomes:
1. Hoey wins and HMRC appeals: Hoey needs to raise enough funds to cover the costs of the appeal, and this is done via the litigation association(s) and GoFundMe.
2. Hoey wins and HMRC doesn't appeal: Funds contributed via GoFundMe cannot be returned so are donated to the MIND charity; and, contributions to the litigation association(s) are returned to those who donated.
3. Hoey loses: Mr Hoey has said he intends to appeal, so they need to raise the funds (as outcome 1).

But between the possibility of no further appeal and the approach the gofundme campaign is using all my doubts about the current fund raising campaign are confirmed.

Nothing I said should've given you any doubts. The GoFundMe campaign is there for people who are not members of the litigation association(s) but would like to contribute because the result might help them. None of this is secret or dodgy; it is a campaign to raise funds for an appeal that may happen. (See next point.)

BTW I would have had zero objections to asking people to prepare to give money when an appeal was granted

It would be too late to raise the funds then. You only have 28 days after the result to confirm you can afford the appeal.

but asking for money via a non-refundable campaign

Worked for that shyster Manley, but in our case this is actually happening.

[AtW]

The fewer people who know the detail the better. Less chance of it falling into HMRC's hands

Pretty solid sign that the defence is weak - one would have thought people who paid for it would be interested in any and all scrutiny ASAP because if it falls apart early then the only losers are WG as they would not get continued recurring payments - and that money could have went towards defences that are not relying on being secret.

On the other hand paying 15 quid a month to maintain delusion of having a chance of win isn’t a very high price to pay.

[eek]

Where does it say 'allowed"? Another possibility is that there may not be an appeal if whoever loses decides not to. I suspect there is always the possibility that an appeal may not be allowed.

The reason this had to happen now was due to time constraints. There is a very small window between UTT decision and the closing date for the potential appeal. If there are insufficient funds within the timeframe then game over.

I have no idea how gofundme works but I think, given the state of every other litigating case and aspiring litigating cases it is no big deal. Still, you only question the one side that has actually done stuff. Oh well.

It is worth noting that Big Group has had a dedicated sticky post on this forum for years. Hmmm.

Big Group didn't ask for money without providing an outline of what they would do with the money.

Hoey is asking for money while failing to mention the fact that a subsequent appeal may not be allowed and nor has anyone else on here actually highlighted that slight flaw in their requests for money. Meanwhile the same people have attacked BG to the extent that the one of the very few people actually answering questions on this site left it.

I really do hope that when Cojak sees this in the morning she gets her ban hammer out.

[dammit chloe]

That is not how gofundme works - it does not have a triggering target - whoever is behind the campaign can access any funds donated at any time.

And thanks for confirming there is a chance that Hoey may not be allowed a subsequent appeal - I've asked that question before and never got a definitive answer. But between the possibility of no further appeal and the approach the gofundme campaign is using all my doubts about the current fund raising campaign are confirmed.

BTW I would have had zero objections to asking people to prepare to give money when an appeal was granted but asking for money via a non-refundable campaign when there is a possibility of no subsequent appeal is a step too far. Especially when those facts haven't been made 100% clear.

Where does it say 'allowed"? Another possibility is that there may not be an appeal if whoever loses decides not to. I suspect there is always the possibility that an appeal may not be allowed.

The reason this had to happen now was due to time constraints. There is a very small window between UTT decision and the closing date for the potential appeal. If there are insufficient funds within the timeframe then game over.

I have no idea how gofundme works but I think, given the state of every other litigating case and aspiring litigating cases it is no big deal. Still, you only question the one side that has actually done stuff. Oh well.

It is worth noting that Big Group has had a dedicated sticky post on this forum for years. Hmmm.

[eek]

As someone directly affected by the Hoey case, the skeleton arguments were provided to us before the FTT hearing, but, possibly, after having been given to HMRC - which is required when you're going to Tribunal. Both teams exchange their skeleton arguments before the hearing.

You can't add points into the hearing that weren't provided in the skeleton arguments. Indeed, HMRC attempted to do this in the latest UTT hearing, which annoyed the judge.

I've contributed about £350 since 2013/14 and we've gone to the FTT and the UTT, and are awaiting a result. As members of the litigation association(s )tied to this case, we have been asked to give a new minimum contribution of £300 to be used for our appeal, if necessary. If we don't need to appeal the money is returned to us.

Mr Hoey is fundraising externally, on GoFundMe I think, for those who wish to help. Again, if the appeal is not necessary or he doesn't reach the amount needed, those monies are returned. (That's from what I read the other week.)

Yes, Matt Hall has done this for free for the last year or two. Yes, he worked at a company that sold schemes, but since then he has defended us for very little money that has provided very big results.

You can snipe at him all you like, just as he can snipe at WebberG all he likes. Only one of them has produced results.

That is not how gofundme works - it does not have a triggering target - whoever is behind the campaign can access any funds donated at any time.

And thanks for confirming there is a chance that Hoey may not be allowed a subsequent appeal - I've asked that question before and never got a definitive answer. But between the possibility of no further appeal and the approach the gofundme campaign is using all my doubts about the current fund raising campaign are confirmed.

BTW I would have had zero objections to asking people to prepare to give money when an appeal was granted but asking for money via a non-refundable campaign when there is a possibility of no subsequent appeal is a step too far. Especially when those facts haven't been made 100% clear.

[Darkpaw]

Saleos has only disclosed his 'strategy' after the Hoey case had been heard at the UTT.

As far as Im aware, Saleos or whoever was representing Mr Hoey at the time, did not disclose their strategy pre FTT hearing (and possibly pre UTT hearing but by then, it wouldnt matter so much as the main thrust was revealled at the FTT)...

Id be majory surprised if Saleos had spilled his guts on his strategy to all and sundry pre FTT and to a lesser extent, pre UTT hearing...

As someone directly affected by the Hoey case, the skeleton arguments were provided to us before the FTT hearing, but, possibly, after having been given to HMRC - which is required when you're going to Tribunal. Both teams exchange their skeleton arguments before the hearing.

You can't add points into the hearing that weren't provided in the skeleton arguments. Indeed, HMRC attempted to do this in the latest UTT hearing, which annoyed the judge.

I've contributed about £350 since 2013/14 and we've gone to the FTT and the UTT, and are awaiting a result. As members of the litigation association(s )tied to this case, we have been asked to give a new minimum contribution of £300 to be used for our appeal, if necessary. If we don't need to appeal the money is returned to us.

Mr Hoey is fundraising externally, on GoFundMe I think, for those who wish to help. Again, if the appeal is not necessary or he doesn't reach the amount needed, those monies are returned. (That's from what I read the other week.)

Yes, Matt Hall has done this for free for the last year or two. Yes, he worked at a company that sold schemes, but since then he has defended us for very little money that has provided very big results.

You can snipe at him all you like, just as he can snipe at WebberG all he likes. Only one of them has produced results.

[ns1]

New legal argument can be introduced with the agreement of the Tribunal. And a skeleton is what it says, it is the pure 'bones' of a case and not the finer detail. But hey, let's tip off HMRC in advance shall we?

The fewer people who know the detail the better. Less chance of it falling into HMRC's hands.

Case in point, something occurred yesterday that's already leaked out.