No problem - I will let you know once I receive anything through

HMRC have emailed 2-weeks prior to the Tribunal hearing date, and have withdrawn from my appeal. HMRC: Tribunal response:

Sorry, I've not been well at all this past week and have been asleep most days - extremely fatigued. I'll get this done today and upload it here for review if that's okay. HMCTS has yet to respond to my email regarding the extension of 14 days, but I'll still do it and send it to them prior to Thursday 21st (14 days from 7th). FYI: In advance, HMRC has submitted a revised Statement of Case, adding info re the Robson case - see below.

I'll study it over the weekend and make comparisons and notes. So I'll draft, say, a paragraphed list of comments, on how this case meets/matches mine and how HMRC's comments against me, contradict what has been ruled in this case, in favour of the appellent. Essentially... HMRC said XXX, but a judge ruled in the opposite favour as set out in XXX by ruling that XXX, etc?

I didn't, no, I've not sent anything in preparation for any hearing. All of what I wanted to bring to their attention previously, was contained within HMRC's "bundle"

It's interesting as in my original "hearing", the HMRC agent did mention, in front of the Judge, that this was indeed a "scam". In relation to the Witness Statement, HMRC has previously provided a "Bundle" which contains 100+ pages of everything I've submitted to FTR/HMRC, etc., and I do remember being able to agree that is all there is to be included. Is it not a case of just saying I agree with everything that's been provided, with maybe the addition of this case, and so forth? As opposed to providing everything again (I will certainly lose the plot gathering all of that). This is from the recent letter: Do I simply not just state I'm calling not Witnesses? Following the above, my letter states: I don't have any "witnesses".... or is this precedence a "witness" to wrongdoing? I'm really confused by their term "witness" Thanks in advance,

Done

The Directions PDF is more just reiterating the process from 2022 to 2023+. The Letter To Me PDF, is them just reminding me to submit a Witness Statement - I have no idea what that is, or how I do it. However, it kindly makes reference to an appeal that was decided upon a few months ago, in a case similar to mine, in which the appellent won, as the Tribunal: "concluded that *agent* was the not authorised agent of *appellent*. That being so, the return cannot be deemed to have been submitted on behalf of *appellent*. As s29 TMA requires the filing of a return the statutory requirements are not satisfied... For the reasons set out above, the appeal is allowed." This is exactly the same situation as mine, is it not? So the Tribunal have shown favour to the appellent, against HMRC, and the appellent is no longer required to pay HMRC anything.

Sorry for the massive delay, I'm due to go back into hospital for surgery on 26th Sep 2023, so my mind has been elsewhere. I have an update provided by the Tribunal, sent on 11th Aug 2023 which I've just seen in emails. 1 - see attached PDF "Letter to Me". I believe this is in relation to me still needing to provide a Witness statement. Please can somebody help with what I need to provide here? It's passed the 14 days, but I'm sure I'll be okay if I get a response to them today. Contained within the "Letter To Me" are details re a "Case of Robson", which contains precedence for a likewise case in relation to mine, in which the appellant won and the Tribunal accepted their appeal. 2 - see attached PDF "Full Directions". This is the full log and event for the Directions and proceedings. Just so you can see where things are up to and what's due to come across the next few weeks/months. Robson v Revenue And Customs (DISCOVERY ASSESSMENTS - EIS - whether taxpayer responsible for actions of fraudulent agent) [2023] UKFTT 226 (TC) (02 March 2023) WWW.BAILII.ORG Full Directions.pdf Letter to Me.pdf

sorry lol i've not been actively keeping up to date with it - i've been in hospital for surgery since Oct and only getting round to existing things like this needing updates. FYI: this was sent by HMRC yesterday:

I've not unfortunately - are you able to link me or paste here?

Hi, please see attached the updated directions - the next "deadline" I believe is 27th Jan which is Friday, however, do I need to send anything across? Everything I've sent, is included within their file isn't it? Unless there's anything else now I can include, which may be useful? Directions updated.pdf

Hi slick, I've emailed Tax Appeals and said: "Following HMRC's Application for an Extension of Time and recent Statement of Case PDF, please can I be provided with updated Directions for myself with updated/accurate deadlines?"

Thanks slick. A load of it seems repetitive insofar what I've already told them multiple times, but then again, this is their "overview" I presume.

Hi, please see attached HMRC's Statement of Case. Do I need to do anything now - does this change anything? It's been a long while since the last hearing. PS: the Tribunal did grant the extension in the end. 20221014 Statement of Case.pdf

Hi, I sent this to the FTT and CCd HMRC on Tuesday; still yet to receive a reply. Surely they should’ve acknowledged HMRC’s application for an extension, whether it was acceptance or rejection? Hi, Please can you confirm if HMRC’s application for an extension of time was accepted? I’ve not heard anything via email or phone relating to a decision, so I’m not sure what’s going on. Thanks in advance,

Ahhh, interesting. It seems HMRC are really second-guessing their approach here.

Hi all, Hope you're all well. Just as an update, HMRC sent this last month to myself and Tribunal but I don't have a response (I presume the Tax Appeals response would also CC me). Does this mean it's NOT been accepted? PS: it's interesting the nature of why they're asking for an extension... PPS: I presume there's nothing I need to do until HMRC has sorted there side? Application for Extension of Time.pdf

Yes that's right. However, I presume that's also more time for me to prepare and others to potentially help find useful information, and perhaps other articles/outlets to feature reports/Government meeting updates, etc. Also, I understand my interest on the amount "owed" to still be paused, pending outcome of this appeal, so I can't see any problems my side - unless I'm wrong?

Hi all, Sorry for delay - I've been working non-stop but just got a bit of time now to update you. Essentially, the hearing lasted 10-15 mins and was in relation to HMRC's strike out application. In summary, the Judge finally refused their application as they don't see any clear or obvious reason to accept the strike out, and so now my appeal progresses on. The notes I prepared, etc, weren't required so I will save them for later. I didn't really need to say anything as it was more for HMRC to provide definitive reasoning behind their application, which they couldn't, hence the Judge's decision. Please see attached for PDFs for next steps, etc. Directions.pdf

Last time, the Judge provided me with, I would say, the most amount of time to speak. She started with HMRC, and they moved on to me. Essentially, since HMRC last responded to me (the original document I scribbled notes on), I feel it's right I should go first and just comment on each of their responses. I'll leave sending that link to them, just in case HMRC then find something against it. I'll just bring it up, and mention the above quotes.

I could also add... In a time where the nation has the least amount of trust in Government and their departments, whereby the taxpayers believe the Government is pretty much taking the p*ss out of residents left, right, and centre... HMRC is doing this..

Hi, please see my notes for this afternoon's hearing. Please let me know if I've missed something major, or if I've included something irrelevant. PS: is it worth me sending that ParliamentLive.TV link to Tribunal and HMRC in preparation for the hearing (with the timestamp auto locked)? I'm aware the "bald guy" sorry - I don't know who that is - response is "we DO need to look at whether our balance of checking is right". "It's an unregulated market, and no doubt there are agents who scam us [HMRC] or taxpayer" "It is an area of concern, and need to drive standards up, and PROTECT taxpayers" In relation to HMRC checking whether EIS schemes companies and checks exist... "We do security checks" - which implies HMRC recognised them as valid... Process now, check later introduced in 1990's - WAY OUTDATED! "We need to focus on bad players in the market..." I'M LITERALLY GIVING THEM ONE, AND THEY'RE PUNISHING THE TAXPAYER. SO MUCH FOR "PROTECTION". Notes.pdf

I told HMRC/Tribunal (and it is the truth) that I was aware FTR were submitting a tax rebate on my behalf, as I was eligible - that's the extent of me "knowing" what FTR we're doing and their "scheme" of keeping a % of the rebate. What I was never aware of, was the fact they were submitting tax returns for EIS relief... EIS was never explained to me, and the first I heard of that and of Cryoblast was from HMRC's letters. To answer HB, yes it was me that went through MCOL and issued a warrant against FTR. They turned up at their address only to find it was a virtual office/they weren't there, etc. It BAFFLES me how the police can't get involved/rejecting investigation, or anyone helping of that matter. IT'S LITERALLY FINANCIAL FRAUD and there's tons of proof/victims. Even HMRC referred to it as a "scam" in my first hearing...

This was just HMRC's reply to my Direction's response following the hearing. It now moves to the hearing on 10 August where the Judge will make a decision on how it proceeds - I presume. Not looking good though, I think, from what I can see. I'm going to exhaust all possible avenues before agreeing to pay something I never received, and am apparently liable for, even as the victim of a scam...