Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Much appreciated for the ammendment. The snottier the better right!   What I am assuming is that this response is to be posted to Gladstones? However, I am seeing some users sending this as an email instead, which is a little confusing.  If we're happy with this response, what would you suggest is the best way to send it over to them (post/email), and is there anything additional I could include (if necessary)?  Thanks again! 
    • Hi @BankFodder I've read through other threads to better inform me of the process from here onwards. When I put in the MoneyClaim it gave me a claim number and it currently says to wait for the defendant to respond, they have until 7 August.  It seems their most likely action is to extend that a further 14 days to about 21 August - this hasn't happened yet, of course, as it is only 27 July but I'm anticipating that may be the case. So when the expected defence action is taken by EVRi I will need to submit DQ with these responses A1 - no mediation B - my contact details C1 - yes to the small claims track D1 - No.  If No please state why.  I believe the defence will provide some rebuttal to the particulars of claim and so I need to include details as to why the claim requires a hearing.  Is there some certain templated text I can include here or will it vary depending on what the defendant comes back with? I see on the form it mentions the following: Relevant reasons include that there are factual disputes which will need the judge to hear from witnesses directly or the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally.  Hoping to reach out to see what may be the most effective statements for D1 reasoning. E1-5 are pretty straightforward. I want to get ahead of things and be ready to take the next step so I appreciate what advice you may have about the DQ.  Thanks!  
    • Rachel Reeves is set to reveal a public finances shortfall of billions on pounds after a snap audit.View the full article
    • Hi What they have asked in what you have highlighted isn't unusual at all as Councils have numerous different departments that deal with specific different areas within that council. So if what you are asking in your DSAR is say specific to Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit, Planning Permission etc then just let them know that specific area. On the other hand if you want every bit of DATA they hold on you then simply tell then ALL DATA they hold on you it's them up to then to go through all depts to check for it. 
    • A growing number of couples are booking a content creators to capture their special day.View the full article
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

HMRC Tax Blunder


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5071 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

The Mail are reporting that Tax Accountants are saying that the HMRC don't have to demand money that has not been paid if the blunder is don to them. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1309639/Tax-blunder-rebellion-Experts-urge-1-4m-pay-taxmans-mistake.html

 

Does anyone have details of the 'A19: Extra-Statutory Concession'?

 

Seems to me MP's should be getting on to the Government asap and stopping this for everyone's sake and wasting time and resources collecting it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jason King

Absolutely not.

 

Will I get to write off £1500 tax because I'm self employed so all tax payers are on an equal footing?

 

PAYE is not exact. It is collected during the year and is often rounded up or down around April, although it is usually just a few quid.

 

In any case, it is still the individuals responsibility, PAYE or self employed, to know their full tax liability for a financial year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/specialist/esc.pdf

 

If they have known for many months, then they should have informed Tax Payers once they found out, not thrust this out of the blue.

 

http://perspicacious.co.uk/all-the-news/tax-blunder-rebellion-experts-urge-14m-not-to-pay-up-for-the-taxmans-mistake/31578/

 

But accountants have revealed that under a technicality, called the ‘A19: Extra-Statutory Concession’, the law states that HMRC may have to write-off the money.

There is no limit to the amount of money which can be written off under this concession.

Under the working of the A19 concession, it states HMRC will back down if the victim ‘could reasonably have believed that his or her tax affairs were in order’.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1309639/Tax-blunder-rebellion-Experts-urge-1-4m-pay-taxmans-mistake.html?ITO=1490

Edited by rebel11
Link to post
Share on other sites

good question on the standered letter template we can use to claim under the A19 concession? i;d like to see one on here so i can use it to sort this blunder out if i get a bill from them . What i dont understand is this > if the dwp overpay u any benefit by there mistake they cant recover it off you by law it should be the sam for the tax office , Or are they a law onto there own ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a standard letter might be the wrong way to go with this.

 

Arrears of income tax and capital gains tax may be given up if they result from the failure of HMRC to make proper and timely use of information supplied by

 

 

· a taxpayer about his or her own income, gains or personal circumstances

 

 

or

 

 

· an employer, if the information affects a taxpayer's coding

 

 

or

 

 

· the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), about a taxpayer's state retirement, disability or widow's pension.

 

 

Tax will normally be given up only if the taxpayer

 

 

· could reasonably have believed that his or her tax affairs were in order

 

 

and

 

 

· was notified of the arrears more than 12 months after the end of the tax year in which HMRC received the information indicating that more tax was due

 

 

or

 

 

· was notified of an over-repayment after the end of the tax year following the year in which the repayment was made.

 

 

In exceptional circumstances arrears of tax notified 12 months or less after the end of the relevant tax year may be given up if HMRC

 

 

· failed more than once to make proper use of the facts they had been given about one source of income

 

 

· allowed the arrears to build up over two whole tax years in succession by failing to make proper and timely use of information they had been given’

 

 

The Low Incomes Tax Reform Group accused the department of being ' notoriously reticent' about the A19 loophole.

 

Chairman John Andrews said: 'It is important to know that the concession exists.'

 

He urged people to treat any letter, particularly the calculation of the underpayment of tax, 'with caution', adding: 'It will be by no means certain that they will be correct or should be agreed.'

 

Mr Warburton said: 'People are perfectly entitled to claim under A19 concession - and they should do so. I am particularly worried about pensioners, many of whom will feel pressured into paying the bill and then will go without the basics to survive financially.'

 

He said taxpayers should write a letter to HMRC stating clearly they thought their affairs were in order, that the letter has come as 'a bolt out of the blue', and they cannot afford to repay the money.

 

Tina Riches, of the Chartered Institute of Taxation, said: 'Most people who get the letters will think "HMRC had all the information-I presumed that the tax I was paying was correct". Most people have no reason to think the tax they were paying was wrong.'

 

If an individual submits an A19 concession but loses, they can turn to the free appeal service run by The Adjudicator's Office, which acts as a 'fair and unbiased referee' on complaints about HMRC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...