HMRC asking me to repay Fast Tax Rebates Ltd scam rebate

[Ethel Street]

Tax advisers don't have to be regulated. There's a government consultation on whether they should be but that's no help to you now.

 

HMRC are right that a tax adviser is just your agent and you are responsible for anything the agent submits on your behalf. So if Fast Tax Rebate Ltd claimed a tax rebate for you which you aren't entitled to then you have to repay it to HMRC. The £1k you received comes from your pocket and Fast Tax Rebate Ltd return the £2k they kept. If you are satisfied that HMRC are right and you weren't entitled to a £3k tax rebate then by repaying it you aren't 'out of pocket' because you were never entitled to it in the first place.

 

Your £1k of it you'll just have to find one way or another. It's getting the £2k out of FTR that will be the challenge. In theory what you can do is straightforward. You appointed them to act as your tax agent, you paid them £2,000 to do that job, they did it incompetently and you want your £2,000 back. [ie, the £2,000 of the tax rebate they kept]. You write to Fast Tax Rebates Ltd  at their registered office following the usual pre-action protocols and if they don't pay you bring a small claims/MCOL action against them. I guess this what the solicitors you spoke to meant by you "should pursue corporate litigation or something similar".

 

At the moment there seems to be no grounds for a personal claim against Alan O'Hara, but I'd be interested to know what site team colleagues think. He is not only no longer a director but according to Companies House also no longer has a controlling interest [both ceased today]. Which probably means he's sold it to the new director.

 

We don't know what their defence will be (if any) and, importantly, what their terms and conditions are. Their website is not just down, the domain name appears to be for sale. 

 

But winning in court might not get you your money back. They've never filed accounts so we have no idea whether there is any cash in the company to pay a court award. It was set up as  £100 company by a  company formation agent and their 'registered office' is just a brass plate at the agent's address, along with hundreds of other comapnies. FTR don't operate from their registered office. it's not clear if they even have any actual physical business premises or whether it exists only as internet company.

 

However, if you don't contact them and tell them there is a problem nothing will ever happen! They have a registered office address so send them a copy of what you've received from HMRC and ask for their comment. Separately send them a Data Protection Subject Access Request. You can send them by email if their email is still working, but if so send a copy by post to the registered office address (get a free proof of posting from Post Office). Fast Tax Rebates Ltd 19 Main Street, Ponteland, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE20 9NH

 

Do you have a copy of the tax returns they submitted? 

 

What time deadline are HMRC giving you to make the repayment?

 

It's possible that you get information suggesting that the company operated fraudulently, which would change things a lot. But at present you have no evidence of that.

 

 

 

 

[Ethel Street]

what dx100uk said, you never know what the information you get from an SAR might reveal. 

 

For it example it might show why they have not imposed any penalty on you and are asking for just the rebate back. Typical HMRC practice is to ask for some penalty on top of the refunded tax rebate to reflect what HMRC consider is the taxpayer's lack of care. That might (only might) mean that they know already that you are a victim of fraud so no penalty is justifed.

 

They'll probably redact information about FTR but you never know. Organisations do release stuff sometimes that's more than they should have! Ask and see what happens.

[Ethel Street]

1 minute ago, dixon2094 said:

FYI: I've just gone over the letters and the total rebate amount actually totals £3700ish. So, actually FTR took around £2500, and I still got £1200. But HMRC are only requesting £3000.

Could that be because not all of the rebate arose from the (non-existent) EIS investment? Maybe there were other tax allowances which you were genuinely entitled to for those tax years but hadn't claimed before? 

 

Just a thought. It's a bit surprising otherwise why HMRC aren't asking for all the rebate back.

[Ethel Street]

Once you have judgement come back here and let us know. I doubt you'll hear from FTR so you'll need to consider how, or whether, to enforce it. My guess is you'll find no-one and no assets to enforce it against, but when you have judgement let's see what others think. In any event having judgement is one more thing you can use as evidence in your appeal with HMRC and as another reason why you suspect fraud.

[Ethel Street]

There is an exemption for Data Protection SARs of data held for the prevention or detection of crime and the apprehension or prosecution of offenders. It doesn't have to be disclosed if you submit a SAR.

 

HMRC might use that exemption as a reason not to disclose data about you that's linked to their investigation of FTR. Just a thought, I don't know whether this is relevant here or not.

[Ethel Street]

21 minutes ago, dixon2094 said:

FTR are still trading and aren't insolvent/going through insolvency as I understand, so they're still liquid.

 

Can I ask how you know this @dixon2094 ?  Comapnies House is still showing no accounts have ever been filed and I can't see anything online to suggest they are still trading.

[Ethel Street]

That just confirms they haven't filed for insolvency. It doesn't mean they are still trading. There are very many companies registered at Comapnies House  that have ceased trading but not bothered to file for insolvency or otherwise asked to be struck off.

 

It also confirms that they have filed no accounts so we don't know whether tney have any assets you could enforce your judgement against.

 

My guess is still that you will find no assets, no premises, and nobody to enforce your judgement against. Just because FTR Ltd still exists as a company doesn't mean it has any money!

[Ethel Street]

3 minutes ago, dixon2094 said:

They accepted and signed for my letters when I sent them, only a month ago... is that not an indication?

 

Their registered office is just a brass plate business services company isn't it? There are hundreds of companies registered at that address, the people who take in letters don't work for any of them and aren't responsble for any of them. It's just a post box.

[Ethel Street]

Apparently their website per Post# 4 was www.fasttaxrebate.co.uk but that no longer functions. 

 

Their Registered Office address is a business services company called SME Centre of Excellence - a brass plate post box I imagine. More than 50 comapnies have the address as their Registered Office.

Business Support | Business Growth | Newcastle upon Tyne

WWW.SMECOFE.COM

---

All the support you need to help your business start, survive and thrive. Access all your back office support through the SME Centre of Excellence.

 

[Ethel Street]

1 hour ago, dixon2094 said:

With regards to the police, I've only ever contacted Action Fraud who gave me a crime ref number and eventually, this response:

 

Bear in mind that the reference number Action Fraud give you is not a formal Crime Reference Number. (Do they actually call it a Crime Reference Number? I thought they didn't). 

 

The difference matters because Action Fraud's number is just an administrative number to identify your report.  It does NOT mean that your report has been assigned to any police force to investigate the specific crime you have suffered. What it usually means, as you've found out, is that your report has been recorded as 'intelligence' and then filed away. Nobody is investigating the specific crime you have been a victim of and so you will not get any updates.

 

A Crime Reference Number is something different. It's issued by a police force if and when it accepts your report (either direct to the police or via Action Fraud) and decides they will investigate it.  By issuing the Crime Reference Number thay are confirming that on the face of it a crime has taken place, you have been a victim of it, and the police have a duty to investigate it. Quite often that investigation never gets further than the initial assessment and they decide that there is insuficient evidence or whatever for them to take any further action, but they still have to give you a formal written letter confirming the outcome of their investigation and why they aren't taking it further. 

 

Every police force has its own procedures so that's a generalisation of what happens, but it's pretty similar in most of England.

 

The importance for you in this case though is that if you've only reported it to Action Fraud, not direct to the police, then unless Action Fraud have specifically told you a police force are going to investigate it nothing will be happening and you will not be given any further infomation.

[Ethel Street]

ICO response is pretty much what we expected -  that FTR have breached DP law but nothing ICO can do to take enforcement action as FTR have disappeared and cannot be found.

 

But even though it doesn't directly help you it's another piece of indirect evidence that supports your position. If Northumbria Police don't already have ICO's response I'd pass it to them. It all adds to the weight of evidence that you are a victim of fraud.

[Ethel Street]

Yes, getting Action Fraud to pass it to police means you have got over a significant hurdle. 

 

According to AF website last year they received some 415,000 reports of which 38,000 were referred to police. So over 90% of reports to AF just get filed. Dixon is in the 9% that get through to the next stage.

 

As a matter of interest this is how AF decide whether to pass to police for further investigation;

 

How we choose which crimes are sent to forces

Several factors are considered when a dissemination is made. This includes whether or not there are viable lines of enquiry and the threat, risk and harm to the victim. Crimes are disseminated to police forces for investigation primarily based on the location of the suspect, where there are viable lines of enquiry to be made and when officers have the best opportunity to detect and deter. However, all reports are stored for further analysis so that if new information is discovered it can be used as part of any future investigation.

[Ethel Street]

@dixon2094 I've been thinking what I would say if I were in your position at the hearing (although I have no personal experience or expertise or special knowledge of how these hearings work).

 

I would be insistent in putting it to the hearing that I am a victim of a fraud. But because the actual fraudsters can't be found I am expected to pay HMRC's bills and that's just wrong. (I wouldn't be arguing that as a point of technical tax law,  just as a 'person in the street' point about fairness and justice).

 

I would want to point out that what HMRC are painting as me being negligent or complicit in the fraud  are actually examples of me being a victim of skilled fraudsters. 

 

I would ask HMRC whether they have had other reports of FTR Ltd committing similar frauds? Do they consider FTR Ltd to be fraudsters? They'll duck and dive to avoid answering that one but remind them of the facts - FTR Ltd registerd to a brass plate service address. Not responding to court cases (you have a CCJ), Not responding to ICO (you have ICO support that FTR Ltd acted ilegaly) etc etc. Do HMRC consider that charcteristic of fruadulent tax reclaim companies?

 

Ask HMRC what steps (if any) they have taken to find FTR Ltd? Remind the Tribunal of all the steps you have taken.

 

That's just a personal view - experts please say if you think I'm leading dixon on a wild goose chase.

 

Good luck