Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      • 160 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
  • Recommended Topics

HMRC asking me to repay Fast Tax Rebates Ltd scam rebate


dixon2094

Recommended Posts

Hi Dixon,

 

The SAR to HMRC is your absolute right and will make no difference to how they deal with you repaying the debt. Click on this link to see the HMRC page - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/hmrc-subject-access-request You just need data about your income tax account for the last 6 years.

 

 

The idea is to see how HMRC came to review your rebate - ie. was it random; or were they aware of FTR making false EIS claims on behalf of clients. If the latter, the timing may be crucial in arguing that HMRC should have been aware of FTR's activities when they refunded you.

 

How did you contact HMRC asking for time to pay them. If this was only done by phone, you should request time to pay IN WRITING immediately.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi slick,

 

I always ONLY correspond in emails and in writing. If there was a phone call, I always follow up by email and start "as discussed over the phone".

 

Here is the email I sent to HMRC yesterday: https://i.postimg.cc/Wpf4kt4M/Screenshot-2021-06-10-at-12-52-03-pm.png

 

I'll submit the SAR to HMRC now.

 

It may seem silly me asking, but I just want to ensure I do this right...

 

So, do I go to https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/shortforms/form/DPU_SAR and fill this out?

 

Selecting "Other" in Part B, and then in Part C mention "I would like all data about my income tax account for the last 6 years"?

 

Once this has information been received, how would I decipher to understand whether they knew about FTR's dealings prior to paying out? I understand the rebate was applied for/paid out June 2020.

 

Here is a snippet from the initial letter I received: https://i.postimg.cc/HnVcGy6t/Screenshot-2021-06-10-at-12-59-56-pm.png

 

I got the same letter for 17/18, 18/19, and 19/20 - all in one go.

 

They mention it's a "compliance check". Does this change things at all?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes 

 

and please dont use hosting sites

if you wish to post letter

follow our upload guide and use ONE multipage PDF only 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry - will follow the guides moving forward.

 

The fact they say it's a "compliance check", doesn't this mean it was random?

 

Also, how would I decipher from the information I receive that they DID know about FTR at the time of my rebate being submitted for EIS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

just type no need to hit quote everytime..

 

await the various sar info, you never know what the notes might say.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay great, thanks dx.

 

I'll submit the SAR to HMRC now.

 

But I'm confused as to why FTR would be mentioned in relation to their awareness to HMRC via my information? Surely the only mention of FTR on my info would be from the tax rebate?

 

How would I know if HMRC were aware of FTR, prior to my dealings from a SAR into my personal dealings?

 

Sorry if I sound dumb, I'm just trying to understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well lets not speculate for now..see what info you get and then we'll know what cards we can play with..

 

Dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks both.

 

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.

 

So it's actually less than the rebate amount (as I understand it), with no penalties attached (which the HMRC agent did explain a further letter that they weren't adding any).

 

Let's see what the SAR brings up and i'll keep you updated.

 

Anything else you think I should know, please feel free to let me know!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dixon,

 

Use that form to submit the SAR but in Section B tick "Income Tax", use 6/4/2016 as the start date and 5/4/2021 as the end date, and enter your Tax Ref No.

 

In the Further Info box in Part C, I suggest you put :-

 

I require copies of any and all information held about my personal tax affairs including tax returns; submissions made and documents submitted on my behalf by Fast Tax Rebates; communications between HMRC and Fast Tax Rebates; tax calculations; files notes; memos sent or received; information about the decision to review my tax return and/or income tax affairs.

 

I suggest you also let us know how much you can afford monthly to repay to HMRC. It's unrealistic to expect HMRC to hold collection at this stage based on any intention to act against FTR.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, wait to see if Carol replies about your request to delay payments. But don't be surprised if demands start being made later this month.

 

We may need more info in due course about the actual figures involved - eg why a refund of £1,864.54 was made on a £3K investment which equates to tax relief at just over 62%. And we'll need to see why HMRC are reclaiming less than the amount they refunded to FTR.

 

But not yet.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@dixon2094
For the EIS, this relates to buying shares in a small company (less than 250 employees). Were you aware of there being any investment involved for the EIS related tax rebate ?

 

If you were not aware of any investment in shares related to tax rebate and no shares were bought on your behalf, then if it were me, I think I might want to contact Action Fraud at some point, when more information about what has happened was available.  If this does turn into being a criminal matter, I wonder whether some compensation may be available through restitution. 

 

I suspect HMRC will have been investigating companies offering tax rebate help and gradually looking into individual taxpayer records to recover any amounts.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is HMRC's response to my email:

 

The tax has been postponed pending the outcome of your appeal. My letter of 9 June 2021 was my decision about your appeal but this is not the end of the matter. You can ask for an independent review and a hearing at Tribunal which was explained in my letter. The appeal will remain open and the tax postponed whilst you go through this process; or withdraw your appeal. I have removed Fast Tax Rebates from your record as instructed.

 

I'd never even heard of EIS prior to receiving the letter from HMRC saying that I'd submitted a rebate in relation to it - well, FTR has done so "on my behalf".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dixon,

 

In post #27 above, your 1st and 3rd links lead to the same email you sent to Carol at HMRC.

 

Can you post up their reply of 9th June, personal info redacted and in PDF format as DX suggested earlier, thanks.

 

Even if you don't have to pay HMRC immediately, I suggest you put the money away each month, ready to pay what you can when necessary. I've seen nothing so far to convince me that HMRC will have interest in, or sympathy for, your misfortune with FTR.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

PDF attached for screenshots in #27.

 

I've also yet to hear back from FTR in relation to the SAR or LBA. I've not yet responded to HMRC as per my quote reply in #40.

 

Note: a different friend of mine claims that he has spoken to HMRC and ONLY has to pay back what he was given by FTR, which seems interesting.... PDF attached (messages.pdf).

Screenshots.pdf Messages.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the text exchanges, is yours the dark box on the left or the red text on the right.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you know others who were involved in the same issue, it may help you resolve your case.

 

Can you get YF to provide you anything he/she received confirmiing HMRC are willing to accept only what YF received instead of the full refund. Preferably a letter or email from HMRC if possible - see what you can get as it could make a big difference.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

any news?

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 27/06/2021 at 18:38, dx100uk said:

any news?

 

Hi dx,

 

Sorry for the late replies, I tested positive for COVID last week and so i've not been feeling too great! Finally getting back to it now.

 

With regards to HMRC, I've applied for the case to go to tribunal on 24th and i'm still awaiting a response from this, not sure how long it takes.

 

With regards to FTR, they didn't get back to me regarding the LBA (surprise!), and so I've issued a claim via MCOL on 25th - again, still waiting on an update.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry you're under the weather, hope you start to feel better soon. 

 

Thank you for updating the thread and please keep us posted about how it goes for you. 

 

I asked this question of Alvinsmalvin who joined at the weekend and has the same problem with FTR. Have you seen anything in your tax records that says which company FTR told the Revenue you invested in?

 

I know it may not help you in the short term but I'm just wondering if there's something else dodgy that happened. There are a few comments online about the Revenue not checking EIS claims properly.

 

You say you sent FTR a LBA, did you also send them a SAR?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dixon,

 

I assume no response yet to your SAR to HMRC but please confirm.

 

I think it was a bit soon to issue a claim against FTR but it's done now so let's see how/if they respond.

 

How much have you claimed for and can you post up your Particulars of Claim, minus any identifiers.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dixon,

 

The following was kindly posted by CAGger @taxhelper in response to my request for opinion. Please read it carefully and respond here to any Q's raised.

 

I have read all comments/posts in both threads. I know that HMRC are looking closely into what they term “bulk repayment agents" as this story is not unusual. Please feel free to post whichever parts of my comments would prove helpful in these two threads.

 

It appears that both Dixon2094 (“D”) and Alvinsmalvin (“A”) gave FTR some form of authority to act on their behalf. D says clearly “I allow them access to my Government Gateway account” and presumably A also handed over his personal access codes. They should NEVER have revealed this information.

That said, we are where we are.

 

If D and A were recommended by friends/mates to use FTR, and the friend/mate received an introductory commission from FTR, how did the friend/mate get their money? If by bank transfer or cheque they may have FTR’s bank details. Those may help investigations.

 

I see that both D and A have been asked to supply details of the “investment” made on their behalf. In other words – in which EIS company/companies was their money invested? I cannot see a reply to this from either D or A.

 

If, as we all suspect, there is no such investment, and FTR simply stole the money, then this is clearly a scam, a wholly criminal matter to be reported to the police and they must tell HMRC that the crime has been reported and send the crime number to HMRC immediately.


As Unclebulgaria said in post 39 to D’s thread…..D and A must report everything to ActionFraud…..

 

 

favicon.ico Action Fraud

WWW.ACTIONFRAUD.POLICE.UK

National Fraud & Cyber Crime Reporting Centre

 

As many victims as possible need to make crime reports so the police and HMRC can pool data to track down O’Hara and McNabb to take necessary action.

 

Once proven compensation may be due via the CICS…

 

6554b6be8c0d829a8bf63ae0c82cf121_link.pn How victims of crime can apply for compensation

WWW.MET.POLICE.UK

If you've been the victim of crime, find out how to seek compensation for any losses or injuries you have received.

 

As other have said this situation also needs to be reported to the Information Commissioners Office, Trading Standards and Companies House.

 

IMO all victims should also report this to their Members of Parliament and local/national press.

 

If publicity is high then authorities will not be able to ignore it and HMRC may well be forced to take a more sympathetic approach.

 

Perhaps e-victims.org would also be able to help.

 

 

The issue of success at appeal has been somewhat dismissed but I think a different outcome is possible. Particularly if it is proven they were victims of a scam/crime.

Both D and A were ignorant about what was going on. They trusted what they believed to be an authoritative source. HMRC will undoubtedly counter this with the mantra “ignorance of the law is no excuse” but that has been held to be too short sighted in several recent cases.

 

 

An exception to this general principle would be justifiable where there are finely balanced issues which are unclear.

 

In one case the judge considered that a taxpayer had informed his advisor but the advisor (in this case FTR) had failed to inform the taxpayer of his filing obligations. The judge accepted this argument on the facts and quashed the penalty.

 

Whatever the outcome of the debate on ignorance of the law D and A should consider running alternative grounds for ‘reasonable excuse’ or, if penalties are imposed in the end, a ‘special reduction’. Such arguments succeeded in Welland v HMRC [2017] and  Hart v HMRC [2018] despite the judges’ strict approach on the main issue of ‘ignorance’.

  • Thanks 2

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...