UK Tax Refund Limited - bad Financial Advice? - Employer liable?

[Mr _Chips]

Hello,

 

I am writing here on behalf of my mum.

 

My mum works for one of the major food retailers.

 

One day, in the store canteen there was an independent advisor who had set a desk for the day to talk to staff about tax relief/rebates etc.

 

The main points were about how you can claim back allowance for washing your own work uniform and stuff like that.

 

The company that were allowed by the retailers was called UK Tax Refund Limited.

 

As you can imagine,

many staff members at the store, and at 3 other stores around the area were interested in this advice.

 

Unfortunately this has since turned into a bit of spoof, in that people were asked to sign forms in which they were assuming they were giving permission for the person to act their behalf to claim back rebates/ allowances ect.

 

However it now appears that the extra small print on the forms gave up far more than that.

 

I dont have the exact details as this is third hand information, but it appears people have signed away certain rights etc.

 

What I want to ask is,

surely the retailer has liability here for any loses suffered from this.

The retailer allowed the company in and set up on their premises.

 

From a staff point of view,

they did not seek out the advise,

it was brought to them.

 

the staff all made the assumptions that this was something sponsored by the employer, and was therefore safe.

 

at this moment the retailer is washing their hands of it, stating that any member signing a form accepts responsibility for their actions.

Surely that cannot be true.

 

What would be the best course of action for the staff here to get the retailer to acknowledge their liability in this by allowing a company on their property without checking credentials, or, even telling the staff that this was an independant company and in no way affiliated with the retailer?

 

Is there a class action here?

 

we are talking about lots of people across multiple stores that were miss-sold advice.

[king12345]

What's the loss here?

Did they sign up to a lengthy contract of accountancy?

Did they agree that a large percentage of the tax rebate is paid to this individual /company?

Or did they sign a new contract of employment masqueraded as financial advice?

We need specific info please

[huggy41]

first off we need alot more info than you have given .

also if you were not present how do you know what went on as regards what the agent said.

also you can claim for uniform online they will adjust your tax code by 100 takes 2 minutes to do

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I've moved your thread from the media forum to the main employment one. People should be along later with further advice for you, please tell us more as the guys have asked.

 

My best, HB

[renegadeimp]

Its a company that doesnt really do anything but takes a large portion of any reclaim. They mainly operate on facebook tricking the vulnerable into signing up for their services.

 

They work just like the companies that offer fast track visa apps etc. Basically they do absolutely NOTHING you cant do yourself.

[steampowered]

I don't understand what sort of "rights" were signed away by signing these forms.

 

You don't have any rights with regards to a third party company, so I don't see what rights your mum had in the first place. Are you suggesting that the staff members had to pay this third party company for their services?

 

On the face of it, I would say that the retailer is not liable. It sounds like any contract would be between your mum and the third party. If the third party mis-sold something, that should be taken up with the third party directly. I suspect that is likely to be the case but the analysis may change if you are able to provide further details.

 

I think we need to know what the problem actually is if you would like to receive clear input.

[Sidewinder]

Agree with the above - what loss has been suffered? Any cost to the employee would normally be met by a deduction or commission from any refund obtained. For sure it is something so simple to do that it wouldn't require any third party company to reclaim it for you, but that is a matter for the individual

 

Always worth reading the small print in any paperwork signed though as it is easy to be tripped up by various clauses whereby the individual might have to pay substantial fees if a refund is not actually due or where a claim is made on false pretences

 

This thread shows what may result from entering such an agreement and where a false claim was made for business mileage that wasn't actually incurred http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?472472-Please-help.-work-mileage-tax-rebate-Missold-a-service&p=4975443#post4975443

 

This may or may not be a similar situation

[ericsbrother]

it has been reported in the papers about a month ago. The company signs the individual up to reclaim any tax rebates and allowances due. Now the uniform cleaning is a long established claim and you get a £60 a year allowance. this company claims this for you but charges £150-£400 for doing so as they say they have done all of the other rebate work as well. Being only PAYE this is of course nonsense so they are charging a hefty fee for filling out a form that the employee will have to fill out every year from now on themselves and trouser more than the allowance can ever be worth.

 

Now the company know that they are ripping people off but they were invited to be there by the employer who should ahve shown due diligence but have washed their hands of this.

 

I suggest that you go to moneymail online and see how it panned out for the person who got their financial wizards involved and then send both the dodgy advisers and the employer a letter inviting them to each reconsider ther position

Edited February 20, 2017 by honeybee13
Paras.

[sangie5952]

I very much doubt that the employer will be even vaguely ingested in reconsidering their position.

They have done nothing wrong.

They didn't suggest employees signed papers without reading them did they?

 

 

Reading legal agreements that YOU are a party to is YOUR responsibility.

And seriously, well believes their employer anyway when they say, just sign this will you but don't bother reading it?

 

 

I am constantly bemused by the number of people that think that signing something without reading it is someone else's fault.

 

 

Due diligence is an interesting line to attempt to take, since, in law, it means an action people are expected to take to keep THEMSELVES or others and their property safe.

 

 

In other words, it does not apply to the employer in this case as there is no risk to others or their property, but it does apply to the employees who IN THE FIRST PLACE are responsible for taking actions to keep THEMSELVES safe.

 

I have a lot of sympathy for the mum here.

But that doesn't extend to blaming anyone but herself for signing something she hasn't read.

And, regrettably, I must point out that at this moment in time what the company offered is perfectly legal.

Maybe it shouldn't be, but that is a different discussion.

Whatever the employer could have checked would only have demonstrated this fact.

 

 

My employer regularly has advice sessions from various companies offering services, especially pension and financial services.

 

 

I could say the same about many of these.

But it is my responsibility to read the lines that say things like

"the value of your investment can go down as well as up".

 

 

We are not talking about children or vulnerable adults here who need to be protected.

They have to bear responsibility for their own decisions and actions, as all adults do.

 

Sorry, but attempting to pursue this against the employer seems to me to be a method of throwing more money away. And possibly more than just money too.

[ericsbrother]

I wasnt suggesting that they try and sue their employer for any loss over this but as said, read the article about an almost identical case and ask the employer to consider the wisdom of inviting a bunch of less than honest chancers on to their property and invite their staff to listen to their pitch for something that is within the employers remit, the laundering allowance without ascertining why the snake oil salesmen wanted to be there in the first place, . What I would expect the employer to do in reconsidering their position would be to pay the £60 a year laundering and repair relief as a tax free allowance, as many companies already do, nothing else.

The OP's mum could then consider following the path as outlined in the Moneymail article, possibly contacting them if the company is indeed the same as I'm sure that it would be beneficial.