Help Needed - V.A.T Registered Question *** Discontinued***

[stubumbles]

VAT is payable as you are aware on the supply of goods or services, so it would appear that it is the sellers responsibility to pay the VAT.

However, I know there are some slight differences with transfer of going concern.

I am not in work today and so don't have access to my VATA manual (with handwritten notes) so I will check in the morning and PM you if that's ok

 

Kind regards

Gbarbm

Many thanks ... It could be on that basis the she should not have paid the full amount at all. I'm not sure how that would fit in with defence though.

[numbers666]

Hi,

 

The VAT shown on the POC is incorrect

 

The VAT charged to the claimant was:

 

£1575 against fixtures and fittings

£1225 against stock (Goods as above)

£3200 which is what she paid.

The CCJ claim is:

 

A quick calc from the vat figure to net -

gross net vat rate

19000 15833.33 3166.667 20%

19000 16170.21 2829.787 17.50%

19000 16521.74 2478.261 15%

 

Above shows vat due on the 19k payment if a gross figure

 

VAT CLAIMED

net figures based on vat paid

vat value 20% 17.50% 15%

1575 7875 9000 10500

1225 6125 7000 8166.667

 

I believe that the vat as detailed by the claimant is incorrect - i cannot work back on any of the 3 rates over the past 3 years to the 19k or the breakdown.

 

I would mention this and report them to HMRC if you are particularly ****ed off with them .

 

N

Edited April 30, 2012 by numbers666
vat wrong

[stubumbles]

Many thanks. That was my error because it should read:

 

£9K F&F ........... 17.5% VAT £1575

£7K Goods ........ 17.5% VAT £1225

£3K Goodwil .... 0% VAT (Actually )% goodwill really, the guys reputation stinks!)

[stubumbles]

Hi Andy - PM'ing you but, assuming Gbarbm say's we are correct on the VAT (albeit I have no idea how to go after getting it back for her) is this OK in the defence?

 

Pursuant to CPR 15.10b/2/3 (b) the Defendant states in her defence that she has paid to the Claimant the full amount of the original invoiced claim.

• (1) The Defendant therefore respectfully requests that the court will send notice to the Claimant requiring him to state in writing whether he wishes the proceedings to continue.
  
• (2) When the claimant responds, he must serve a copy of his response on the defendant.
  
• (3) If the claimant fails to respond under this rule within 28 days after service of the court’s notice on him the claim shall be stayed.
  

The Defendant believes the Claimant has behaved ‘unfairly and unreasonably’ in the way that he has pursued this claim by not allowing the Defendant sufficient time to investigate its validity.

 

Further, the Defendant believes that she has over paid the Claimant by £1225.00 as whilst the Claimant quotes breaches the Agreement date 18th March 2010, he fails to take into account clause 16.3 which states that “all VAT payable in respect of goods and services supplied or deemed to be supplied by the Seller prior to the close of business on the date of completion of the sale and the purchase and all interest on the same and penalties in respect of the same shall be paid to HMRC by Seller”.

 

However, as can be seen below, the Claimant has not allowed the Defendant a ‘fair or reasonable’ amount of time to investigate fully.

 

On 3 April 2012 the Defendant received a letter from her solicitor dated 30 March 2012, enclosing the letter from the Claimant's solicitors dated ten days earlier on 20 March 2012 which is mentioned in point 11 of the Claimants Particulars of Claim and includes two invoices totalling £3200.00.

 

On 16 April 2012 the Defendant signed for a Special Delivery letter from the claimant's solicitor, dated thirteen days earlier on 3 April 2012 demanding payment within three days by 6 April 2012 which was the Good Friday.

 

On 18 April 2012, under duress and prior to completing a full investigation into the validity of the Claimants claim, the defendant sent a cheque for £3200.00 to the Claimant by special delivery. The Post Office has confirmed that this letter was signed for on 19 April 2012 and the monies were withdrawn from the Defendant’s bank on 23 April 2012.

 

On 26 April 2012, the Defendant received a claim form post marked 25 April 2012, claim number xxxxxxx from the Claimants solicitors with the issue date of 27 April 2012. It should be noted that the Particulars of Claim are dated 16 April 2012 which is the same day that the Defendant signed for the special delivery 'final demand'.

[AndyOrch]

Defence is ok Stu

 

However the use of CPR 15.10 can only be used with regards to the summons amount not the invoiced amount, so if the VAT is still outstanding or in question and unpaid then you will have to remove reference to CPR 15.10.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[stubumbles]

Defence is ok Stu

 

However the use of CPR 15.10 can only be used with regards to the summons amount not the invoiced amount, so if the VAT is still outstanding or in question and unpaid then you will have to remove reference to CPR 15.10.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Thanks Andy. The summons is: £3447.53 which is for £3247.53 (includes interest they have added) Court Fee £ 120.00. Solicitors Costs £ 80.00. Whilst the invoice, which has been paid, was for £3200.00.

 

So - Would the amended defence below be OK?

 

The Defendant states in her defence that she has paid to the Claimant the full amount of the original invoiced claim and respectfully requests that the court will send notice to the Claimant requiring him to state in writing whether he wishes the proceedings to continue and that when the claimant responds, he must serve a copy of his response on the defendant. She also requests that, if the Claimant fails to respond within 28 days after service of the court’s notice on him the claim shall be stayed.

The Defendant believes the Claimant has behaved ‘unfairly and unreasonably’ by not allowing her sufficient time to investigate the validity of the claim. She believes that she may have over-paid the Claimant by £1225.00 because, whilst the Claimant quotes breaches the Agreement date 18th March 2010, he fails to take into account clause 16.3 which states that “all VAT payable in respect of goods and services supplied or deemed to be supplied by the Seller prior to the close of business on the date of completion of the sale and the purchase and all interest on the same and penalties in respect of the same shall be paid to HMRC by Seller”.

 

The time scale below shows that the Claimant has not allowed the Defendant a ‘fair or reasonable’ amount of time to investigate fully.

 

On 3 April 2012 the Defendant received a letter from her solicitor dated 30 March 2012, enclosing the letter from the Claimant's solicitors dated ten days earlier on 20 March 2012 which is mentioned in point 11 of the Claimants Particulars of Claim and includes two invoices totalling £3200.00.

 

On 16 April 2012 the Defendant signed for a Special Delivery letter from the claimant's solicitor, dated thirteen days earlier on 3 April 2012 demanding payment within three days by 6 April 2012 which was the Good Friday.

 

On 18 April 2012, under duress and prior to completing a full investigation into the validity of the Claimants claim, the defendant sent a cheque for £3200.00 to the Claimant by special delivery. The Post Office has confirmed that this letter was signed for on 19 April 2012 and the monies were withdrawn from the Defendant’s bank on 23 April 2012.

 

On 26 April 2012, the Defendant received a claim form post marked 25 April 2012, claim number XXXXXXX from the Claimants solicitors with the issue date of 27 April 2012. It should be noted that the Particulars of Claim are dated 16 April 2012 which is the same day that the Defendant signed for the special delivery 'final demand'.

Edited May 1, 2012 by stubumbles

[AndyOrch]

Closing or selling your business and VAT registration

 

If you close or sell your business, you need to tell HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) within 30 days.

If you close or sell your business you may need to cancel your VAT registration. However, if you sell your business as a going concern or transfer it to another legal entity, then in some circumstances the new owner can apply for your registration number to be reallocated to them.

 

 

Closing your business

 

If you close your business because you cease trading, you should tell HMRC and cancel your VAT registration using form VAT 7. You need to do this within 30 calendar days of closing your business if you want to avoid becoming liable for a financial penalty.

 

 

Selling your business

 

For VAT purposes, HMRC considers that you have transferred your business as a going concern if:

you retire and another person takes over the assets of your business

you sell your business and its assets to someone else

you sell part of your business that is capable of being operated separately to somebody else

When you transfer your business as a going concern, you normally have to cancel your VAT registration.

However in some situations, the new owner of the business can apply to keep your VAT registration number. If you agree and allow the new owner to keep the VAT registration number, then you don't need to cancel your registration. Both you and the new owner of the business should complete form VAT 68. You need to do this within 30 calendar days of selling your business to avoid becoming liable for a financial penalty.

If you decide to allow the transfer of your VAT registration number to the new owner of the business you should cancel any Direct Debit that you have set up to pay your online VAT Returns. The new owner of the business can set up a new Direct Debit through the VAT online service

Send your completed VAT 68 to:

HM Revenue & Customs

VAT Registration Service

Imperial House

77 Victoria Street

Grimsby

DN31 1DB

Go to form VAT 68 - Request for transfer of a registration number

 

 

Treatment of the sale for VAT purposes

 

Normally when you sell something, the sale is treated as a supply for VAT purposes. However when you sell your business, in certain circumstances special rules apply and the sale will not be treated as a supply, for VAT purposes, so no VAT should be charged. In other circumstances, you'll have to charge VAT in the normal way.

These special rules help businesses by improving their cash flow. They also avoid the need to separately value assets that may be liable at different rates or are exempt but have been sold as a whole package.

[AndyOrch]

It would appear to me that the vendor as got into a pickle with their VAT returns and are passing them off to the buyer. Stu the invoice as been paid the only argument now is the interest and court fees correct?

 

Andy

[stubumbles]

Hi Andy, thanks for both of the above. You are right. In fact, we know that the vendor was chased by HMRC and has been subject to an investigation (he may be going bankcrupt).

 

Unfortunately, as the business was transferred as a going concern. The HMRC, the Defendant's solicitor/accountant, have all told her she should have already been VAT registered to avoid this issue, especially as the Agreement states “Under clause 16..2. the Defendant warranted that it is registered for the purpose of VAT legislation” and “It was an express term of the Agreement under clause 16.1.6. that if any VAT shall be payable on the sale , under the Agreement the Defendant shall pay to the Claimant such tax and any penalty or interest incurred by the Claimant for late payment of such tax.”

 

However, she may have paid too much because there is another clause in the agreement which states “16.3: All VAT payable in respect of goods and services supplied or deemed to be supplied by the Seller prior to the close of business on the date of completion of the sale and the purchase and all interest on the same and penalties in respect of the same shall be paid to HMRC by Seller”.

 

I'm disappointed that she paid the money because I really don't think she'll get any back so the defence is really just that she has already paid the original invoice and that the Claimant has 'rushed' this to a CCJ ... the rest about the £1225.00 etc is just a 'warning shot' so to speak. Will the latest revision be OK?

Edited May 1, 2012 by stubumbles

[AndyOrch]

I'm liking the second clause, lets put " Pursuant to CPR 15.10b/2/3 (b) the Defendant states in her defence that she has paid to the Claimant the full amount of the original invoiced claim." back into the defence and see what response we get from the Claimant.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[stubumbles]

How's this ...

 

Pursuant to CPR 15.10b/2/3 (b) the Defendant states in her defence that she has paid to the Claimant the full amount of the original invoiced claim and respectfully requests that the court will send notice to the Claimant requiring him to state in writing whether he wishes the proceedings to continue and that when the claimant responds, he must serve a copy of his response on the defendant. She also requests that, if the Claimant fails to respond within 28 days after service of the court’s notice on him the claim shall be stayed.

 

The Defendant asserts that the Claimant behaved ‘unfairly and unreasonably’ by not allowing sufficient time to investigate the validity of the claim and believes that she over-paid the Claimant by £1225.00 in that, whilst the Claimant quotes breaches in the Agreement date 18th March 2010, he fails to take into account clause 16.3 which states that “all VAT payable in respect of goods and services supplied or deemed to be supplied by the Seller prior to the close of business on the date of completion of the sale and the purchase and all interest on the same and penalties in respect of the same shall be paid to HMRC by Seller”.

 

The dates below demonstrate the Claimant has not allowed a ‘fair or reasonable’ amount of time:

 

3 April 2012: the Defendant received a letter from her solicitor dated 30 March 2012 with enclosures from the Claimant's solicitors dated ten days earlier on 20 March 2012. This is the letter mentioned in point 11 of the Claimants Particulars of Claim and includes two invoices totalling £3200.00.

 

16 April 2012: the Defendant signed for a letter from the claimant's solicitor, dated thirteen days earlier on 3 April 2012 demanding payment within three days by 6 April 2012 which was Good Friday.

 

18 April 2012: under duress and prior to completing a full investigation, the defendant sent a cheque for £3200.00 to the Claimant's solicitor by special delivery. The Post Office confirms this letter was signed for on 19 April 2012. Monies were withdrawn from the Defendant’s bank on 25 April 2012.

 

26 April 2012: the Defendant received a claim form post marked 25 April 2012, claim number XXXXXX from the Claimants solicitors with the issue date of 24 April 2012 and stamped "served on: 27 April 2012."

 

NB: The Particulars of Claim are dated 16 April 2012 - the same day that the Defendant signed for the special delivery 'final demand'.

Edited May 1, 2012 by stubumbles

[AndyOrch]

Yes that's excellent Stu now it just needs a closing statement to deny the claimant any relief and that the claim is unfounded and without merit.

I will draft one shortly for you and its good to go assuming Gbarbm is happy with the VAT details.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[stubumbles]

Many thanks Andy you are as they say, a star!

[AndyOrch]

How's this ...

 

Pursuant to CPR 15.10b/2/3 (b) the Defendant states in her defence that she has paid to the Claimant the full amount of the original invoiced claim and respectfully requests that the court will send notice to the Claimant requiring him to state in writing whether he wishes the proceedings to continue and that when the claimant responds, he must serve a copy of his response on the defendant. She also requests that, if the Claimant fails to respond within 28 days after service of the court’s notice on him the claim shall be stayed.

 

The Defendant asserts that the Claimant behaved ‘unfairly and unreasonably’ by not allowing sufficient time to investigate the validity of the claim and believes that she over-paid the Claimant by £1225.00 in that, whilst the Claimant quotes breaches in the Agreement date 18th March 2010, he fails to take into account clause 16.3 which states that “all VAT payable in respect of goods and services supplied or deemed to be supplied by the Seller prior to the close of business on the date of completion of the sale and the purchase and all interest on the same and penalties in respect of the same shall be paid to HMRC by Seller”.

 

The dates below demonstrate the Claimant has not allowed a ‘fair or reasonable’ amount of time:

 

3 April 2012: the Defendant received a letter from her solicitor dated 30 March 2012 with enclosures from the Claimant's solicitors dated ten days earlier on 20 March 2012. This is the letter mentioned in point 11 of the Claimants Particulars of Claim and includes two invoices totalling £3200.00.

 

16 April 2012: the Defendant signed for a letter from the claimant's solicitor, dated thirteen days earlier on 3 April 2012 demanding payment within three days by 6 April 2012 which was Good Friday.

 

18 April 2012: under duress and prior to completing a full investigation, the defendant sent a cheque for £3200.00 to the Claimant's solicitor by special delivery. The Post Office confirms this letter was signed for on 19 April 2012. Monies were withdrawn from the Defendant’s bank on 25 April 2012.

 

26 April 2012: the Defendant received a claim form post marked 25 April 2012, claim number XXXXXX from the Claimants solicitors with the issue date of 27 April 2012.

 

It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant’s claim is entirely spurious and without merit,the Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to any of the relief claimed or at all.

[stubumbles]

Brilliant! ... here's the whole thing, as short as possible:

 

Pursuant to CPR 15.10b/2/3 (b) the Defendant states in her defence that she has paid to the Claimant the full amount of the original invoiced claim and respectfully requests that the court will send notice to the Claimant requiring him to state in writing whether he wishes the proceedings to continue and that when the claimant responds, he must serve a copy of his response on the defendant. She also requests that, if the Claimant fails to respond within 28 days after service of the court’s notice on him the claim shall be stayed.

 

The Defendant asserts that the Claimant behaved ‘unfairly and unreasonably’ by not allowing sufficient time to investigate the validity of the claim and believes that she over-paid the Claimant by £1225.00 in that, whilst the Claimant quotes breaches in the Agreement date 18th March 2010, he fails to take into account clause 16.3 which states that “all VAT payable in respect of goods and services supplied or deemed to be supplied by the Seller prior to the close of business on the date of completion of the sale and the purchase and all interest on the same and penalties in respect of the same shall be paid to HMRC by Seller”.

 

The dates below demonstrate the Claimant has not allowed a ‘fair or reasonable’ amount of time:

 

3 April 2012: Defendant receives a letter from her solicitor dated 30 March 2012 with enclosures from the Claimant's solicitors dated ten days earlier on 20 March 2012. This is the letter mentioned in point 11 of the Particulars of Claim and includes two invoices totalling £3200.00.

 

16 April 2012: Defendant signed for a letter from the claimant's solicitor, dated 3 April 2012, thirteen days earlier, demanding payment within three days by 6 April 2012 which was Good Friday.

 

18 April 2012: under duress and prior to completing a full investigation, the defendant sent a cheque for £3200.00 to the Claimant's solicitor by special delivery. The Post Office confirms this letter was signed for on 19 April 2012. Monies were withdrawn from the Defendant’s bank on 25 April 2012.

 

26 April 2012: Defendant receives a claim form post marked 25 April 2012, claim number XXXXXX from the Claimants solicitors; issue date 24 April 2012 and stamped "served on: 27 April 2012." NB: The Particulars of Claim are dated 16 April 2012 - the same day that the Defendant signed for the special delivery 'final demand'.

 

It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant’s claim is entirely spurious and without merit. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to any of the relief claimed or at all.

[AndyOrch]

[stubumbles]

Lol. Many thanks again. I think I have a bit of time to wait for verification from Gbarbm before I acknowledge with this defence because it looks like the claim was issued on the 24th so I should have until the 12/13th of May.

 

The claim form says it's in Colchester CC but has a Northampton stamp and was posted from Salford Business Centre.

[Gbarbm]

Hi

Sorry for the delay in responding have been off sick so couldn't access VAT manual however a colleague e mailed the public notice on VAT issues regarding transfer of going concern. It's a bit turgid, but read through it as it should provide the info you need.

 

10 UK VAT law concerning TOGCs

top ^

10.1 Extract from the Value Added Tax (Special Provisions) Order 1995 – Statutory Instrument 1995 No. 1268

'5 (1) Subject to paragraph (2) below, there shall be treated as neither a supply of goods nor a supply of services the following supplies by a person of assets of his business -

(a) their supply to a person to whom he transfers his business as a going concern where -

(i) the assets are to be used by the transferee in carrying on the same kind of business, whether or not as part of any existing business, as that carried on by the transferor, and

(ii) in a case where the transferor is a taxable person, the transferee is already, or immediately becomes as a result of the transfer, a taxable person or a person defined as such in section 3(1) of the Manx Act;

(b) their supply to a person to whom he transfers part of his business as a going concern where -

(i) that part is capable of separate operation,

(ii) the assets are to be used by the transferee in carrying on the same kind of business, whether or not as part of any existing business, as that carried on by the transferor in relation to that part, and

(iii) in a case where the transferor is a taxable person, the transferee is already or immediately becomes as a result of the transfer, a taxable person or a person defined as such in section 3(1) of the Manx Act.

(2) A supply of assets shall not be treated as neither a supply of goods nor a supply of services by virtue of paragraph (1) above to the extent that it consists of -

(a) a grant which would, but for an election which the transferor has made, fall within item 1 of Group 1 of Schedule 9 to the Act; or

(b) a grant of a fee simple which falls within paragraph (a) of item 1 of Group 1 of Schedule 9 to the Act,

unless the transferee has made an election in relation to the land concerned which has effect on the relevant date and has given any written notification of the election required by paragraph 3(6) of Schedule 10 to the Act , no later than the relevant date.

(3) In paragraph (2) of this article -

'election' means an election having effect under paragraph 2 of Schedule 10 to the Act;

'relevant date' means the date upon which the grant would have been treated as having been made or, if there is more than one such date, the earliest of them;

'transferor' and 'transferee' include a relevant associate of either respectively as defined in paragraph 3(7) of Schedule 10 to the Act.

(a) Schedule 10 was amended by the Value Added Tax (Buildings and Land) Order 1995 (S.I. 1995/279)

top ^

10.2 Extracts from the Value Added Tax Act 1994

44 (1) Subject to subsections (2) to (4) below, subsection (5) below applies where -

(a) a business, or part of a business, carried on by a taxable person is transferred as a going concern to a body corporate treated as a member of a group under section 43;

(b) on the transfer of the business or part, chargeable assets of the business are transferred to the body corporate; and

© the transfer of the assets is treated by virtue of section 5(3)© as neither a supply of goods nor a supply of services.

(2) Subsection (5) below shall not apply if the representative member of the group is entitled to credit for the whole of the input tax on supplies to it and importations by it -

(a) during the prescribed accounting period in which the assets are transferred, and

(b) during any longer period to which regulations under section 26(3)(b) relate and in which the assets are transferred.

(3) Subsection (5) below shall not apply if the Commissioners are satisfied that the assets were assets of the taxable person transferring them more than 3 years before the day on which they are transferred.

(4) Subsection (5) below shall not apply to the extent that the chargeable assets consist of capital items in respect of which regulations made under section 26(3) and (4), and in force when the assets are transferred, provide for adjustment to the deduction of input tax.

(5) The chargeable assets shall be treated for the purposes of this Act as being, on the day on which they are transferred, both supplied to the representative member of the group for the purpose of its business and supplied by that member in the course or furtherance of its business.

(6) A supply treated under subsection (5) above as made by a representative member shall not be taken into account as a supply made by him when determining the allowance of input tax in his case under section 26.

(7) The value of a supply treated under subsection (5) above as made to or by a representative member shall be taken to be the open market value of the chargeable assets.

(8) For the purposes of this section, the open market value of any chargeable assets shall be taken to be the price that would be paid on a sale (on which no VAT is payable) between a buyer and a seller who are not in such a relationship as to affect the price.

(9) The Commissioners may reduce the VAT chargeable by virtue of subsection (5) above in a case where they are satisfied that the person by whom the chargeable assets are transferred has not received credit for the full amount of input tax arising on the supply to or acquisition, or importation by him of the chargeable assets.

(10) For the purposes of this section, assets are chargeable assets if their supply in the United Kingdom by a taxable person in the course or furtherance of his business would be a taxable supply (and not a zero-rated supply).'

49 (1) Where a business carried on by a taxable person is transferred to another person as a going concern, then -

(a) for the purpose of determining whether the transferee is liable to be registered under this Act he shall be treated as having carried on the business before as well as after the transfer and supplies by the transferor shall be treated accordingly; and

(b) [omitted by FA 2007, s. 100(2)© and repealed by FA 2007, s. 114 and sch. 27, Pt. 6(2).]

(2) Without prejudice to subsection (1) above, the Commissioners may by regulations make provision for securing continuity in the application of this Act in cases where a business carried on by a taxable person is transferred to another person as a going concern and the transferee is registered under this Act in substitution for the transferor.

(2A) Regulations under subsection (2) above may, in particular, provide for the duties under this Act of the transferor to preserve records relating to the business or part of the business for any period after the transfer to become duties of the transferee unless the Commissioners, at the request of the transferor, otherwise direct.

(3) Regulations under subsection (2) above may, in particular, provide -

(a) for liabilities and duties under this Act (excluding sections 59 to 70) of the transferor (other than the duties mentioned in subsection 2A above) to become, to such extent as may be provided by the regulations, liabilities and duties of the transferee; and

(b) for any right of either of them to repayment or credit in respect of tax to be satisfied by making a repayment or allowing a credit to the other;

but no such provision as is mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b) of this subsection shall have effect in relation to any transferor and transferee unless an application in that behalf has been made by them under the regulations.'

 

Regards

 

Gbarbm

[stubumbles]

Phew - flippin eck! Thanks but that's waaaaay beyond my meagre mental capabilities.

 

I do know that a person buying a going concern should be registered for VAT on or before the sale and if they're not they can be liable for the sellers VAT/penalties. This and the two clauses in the agreement, shown below is why she paid them:

 

16..2. the buyer warrants that it is or will be registered for the purpose of VAT legislation

and

16.1.6. on any VAT payable on the sale , under the Agreement the buyer shall pay to the seller such tax and any penalty or interest incurred by the seller for late payment of such tax.

 

However, another clause seems to contradict a part of the VAT element to do with stock:

16.3: All VAT payable in respect of goods and services supplied or deemed to be supplied by the Seller prior to the close of business on the date of completion of the sale and the purchase and all interest on the same and penalties in respect of the same shall be paid to HMRC by Seller.

 

This could mean she paid them £1225 too much as the sale price of £19K was made up of:

 

£9K Fixtures &Fittings .. 17.5% VAT £1575

£7K Goods/stock ......... 17.5% VAT £1225

£3K Goodwill.............. .... 0% VAT

 

The defence is actually that she has paid them already but it would be good (if the above supposition was true) to use this as leverage.

[Gbarbm]

Yes I know it's a bit heavy going!

Essentially, the goods/services will not attract VAT as there has presumably not been any material change, this is the advantage of selling a business as a going concern.

As I am sure Andyorch will reiterate, all the District Judge has to go on is evidence and most of them are generally speaking not specialists in VAT.

It is therefore important that you provide evidence to them. I know thus from personal experience when a large public body tried to double claim VAT from a non VAT registered individual and I had to quote S33 of the VAT act to the judge.

He asked me if I had the actual legislation and as luck would have it, I had copies of it with me. He read through it and ended up disallowing the VAT, thereby saving the claimant £750

[stubumbles]

Heavy indeed but I honestly don't understand if it works in her favour or not. However, thanks for the help.

 

Her defence will be that she already paid the invoices and that the Claimant has unreasonably 'rushed' this through. The question as to the VAT on goods has more to do with creating a fear of opening a whole new 'can of worms' if they continue so, I think I'll have to leave it as it stands.

[Gbarbm]

Ok well I'd say the defence is sound and Andyorch has given you some good pointers.

I hope it all goes well; post back here with the outcome if you can.

 

Kind regards

Gbarbm

[stubumbles]

Hi to all the helpful folk here - We appear to have won this one!?

 

I submitted the defence referenced in #40 above.

 

The claimants solicitor sent a Claimant's Reply in the **Northampton (CCMCC) County Court** and has ticked Box [2] I do not wish to proceed with my claim and Box [3] I have sent a copy of this completed form to the defendant.

 

In their letter they also say;

 

Please note that we have on two occasions written to the Court on the 25 April & 23 May confirming that payment had been received in full and asking for the proceedings to be withdrawn. We have not yet received any response from those letters and assume that the Court has failed to deal with the same.

 

My concern is that my ex has never received any response from the Court to the Acknowledgement of Service or the Defence either?

 

I'm also confused that the Claimant's Reply was in the**Northampton (CCMCC) County Court** but the original claim was in the**Colchester County Court** (albeit stamped Northampton CC. However, the response pack stated that acknowledgement/defence should be sent to CCMCC, Salford, M5 0BY which is where we sent them?

 

PS: The Claimants solicitor also sent my ex the invoice for their clients bill for £350.00 in error!

Edited June 7, 2012 by stubumbles

[AndyOrch]

Well done stu

 

It was never in any doubt that would be the result achieved.I will amend your title to reflect the result.

 

 

Delighted for you.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[freakyleaky]

Great news.

Well done Stu.