Reply to: Excluded from the McCann settlement

[woody1]

An awful lot of fishing on this thread.

For what though? Apart from a bit of sympathy, there's nothing anyone here can offer.

McCann is the end of the road.

[clause out]

An awful lot of fishing on this thread.

[loanchargehurt]

You say I am mistaken about every single thing I said in that post. The first point I made was that you are (still) evading/avoiding a question. I am not mistaken.
Everyone on this forum can see that you refuse to say what scheme you were caught up in and when you agreed to settle.

What schemes I was involved in through a number of years is irrelevant and is quite personal. Nor was that question in your last post, which is where I told you that you were mistaken about every single thing you said. That question was at the end of your previous post, after you had rambled a lot of rubbish about Martin Lewis which showed you were clearly on the wrong track. Plus you must know that you can't go after the promoters. Plus I already indicated that settlement (of post-DR loans) was prior to the deadline of 30 September 2020 under threat of the more penal loan charge. As I've been trying to say, those who complied with that deadline (the law) have been treated much worse than those who did not, thanks mainly to a proposal by the ex-President of the CIOT. It is remarkable. Yet the people on here do not seem interested in the least. Rather than address that, people on here have told me I deserve it as a tax avoider and that they don't care about what is currently being mis-sold by those who claim to be helping. It is all very odd to say the least.

[WTFH]

I wasn't able to make sense of most of your post(s), and/or understand the relevance, which is why I didn't reply.

I can tell you that you that you are mistaken in every single thing you have said here.

You say I am mistaken about every single thing I said in that post. The first point I made was that you are (still) evading/avoiding a question. I am not mistaken.
Everyone on this forum can see that you refuse to say what scheme you were caught up in and when you agreed to settle.

[loanchargehurt]

not really, no. especially rude, obnoxious ones like you.

You manipulated the quote to make out that I said something other than what I said, and then you called me rude and obnoxious!

[loanchargehurt]

You are the one avoiding/evading a question, showing no concern about the people behind the schemes, but pouring vile on anyone who has tried to help.
The old "I have a friend who" is almost on a par with "this scheme has been legally verified"

You talk about "legitimate issues" but the only thing you have gone on about is not the people behind schemes, but those who campaigned and worked to try to help. Your MO reminds me a bit of Phil Manley, although I am not saying you are him.
Prove me wrong.

I wasn't able to make sense of most of your post(s), and/or understand the relevance, which is why I didn't reply.

I can tell you that you that you are mistaken in every single thing you have said here.

[sadkingbilly]

Wow.

Not much compassion on here for tax dodgers.

Thanks for the support guys. Nice to know where you all stand.

not really, no. especially rude, obnoxious ones like you.

[woody1]

Not much compassion on here for the 24 thousand loan charge victims who cannot access the McCann Review settlement terms because: like me they have pre-DR loans that are excluded, and agreed settlement prior to the legal deadline on 30 September 2020 in regard to post-DR loans (but may be still paying).

You are getting more of a hearing here than you would on most non-contractor forums. I doubt many of joe public would give tax avoiders the time of day, let alone regard them as victims.

Did you contribute to LCAG? Did you do anything to support the cause? Or are you just bemoaning the fact that what they fought so hard to achieve, over so many years, doesn't benefit the people in your situation?

You may regard this as harsh but the fact is you used a tax avoidance scheme which, whether you realised it or not at the time, was highly risky. Just chalk it up to experience, and move on.

[WTFH]

You are loopy. All you have done is try to block legitimate issues for victims affected by the loan charge. Are you on the payroll of those mentioned above who you heavily promoted here in the past?

You are the one avoiding/evading a question, showing no concern about the people behind the schemes, but pouring vile on anyone who has tried to help.
The old "I have a friend who" is almost on a par with "this scheme has been legally verified"

You talk about "legitimate issues" but the only thing you have gone on about is not the people behind schemes, but those who campaigned and worked to try to help. Your MO reminds me a bit of Phil Manley, although I am not saying you are him.
Prove me wrong.

[loanchargehurt]

Where we stand is very simple - providers of tax avoidance schemes named by HMRC should not be on here pretending to be something that they are not.

I've been told exactly who you are and your modus operandi and everything you've posted confirms to me exactly who you are...

You are loopy. All you have done is try to block legitimate issues for victims affected by the loan charge. Are you on the payroll of those mentioned above who you heavily promoted here in the past?

[eek]

Wow.

Not much compassion on here for the 24 thousand loan charge victims who cannot access the McCann Review settlement terms because: like me they have pre-DR loans that are excluded, and agreed settlement prior to the legal deadline on 30 September 2020 in regard to post-DR loans (but may be still paying).

No support either for those like my friend: who paid WTT several thousand pounds over a 7 year period for a promise of litigation that turned out to be pure fantasy.

Thanks for the support guys. Nice to know where you all stand.

Where we stand is very simple - providers of tax avoidance schemes named by HMRC should not be on here pretending to be something that they are not.

I've been told exactly who you are and your modus operandi and everything you've posted confirms to me exactly who you are...

[loanchargehurt]

Wow.

Not much compassion on here for the 24 thousand loan charge victims who cannot access the McCann Review settlement terms because: like me they have pre-DR loans that are excluded, and agreed settlement prior to the legal deadline on 30 September 2020 in regard to post-DR loans (but may be still paying).

No support either for those like my friend: who paid WTT several thousand pounds over a 7 year period for a promise of litigation that turned out to be pure fantasy.

Thanks for the support guys. Nice to know where you all stand.

[woody1]

For the third time: How difficult would it be for the lobby group to raise this with the APPG (and why is it they are not doing so)?

Maybe you should ask them.

To me it's obvious though that this would go nowhere. Settled = closed/end of/finito. Bit like suggesting an alternative treatment for a deceased person.

[sadkingbilly]

For the third time: How difficult would it be for the lobby group to raise this with the APPG (and why is it they are not doing so)?

'cos they just don't like you? unsurprisingly enough.

[eek]

For the third time: How difficult would it be for the lobby group to raise this with the APPG (and why is it they are not doing so)?

For the third time: What scheme were you caught up in, and when did you agree to settle?