HMRC seek repayment after Fast Tax Rebates Ltd take most of rebate

[Schipoo]

I have also sent another email today to Northumbria Police urging them to look into this case, see below

 

Hi

 

I am writing again because I have not received a response regarding this matter.

 

I called Northumbria police also and it seems you do not know anything about this case, but this isn’t what we are being told by Action Fraud and the NFIB.

 

There are many many people who have been scammed by this company who are based in Northumbria and this matter needs to be taken seriously.

 

I am at the tribunal stage with HMRC and don’t have much time left before they reach a final decision.

 

This is going to cripple me to repay the money Fast Tax Rebates Ltd have stolen by fraud. 

 

Please would someone come back to me ASAP it is now a matter of urgency. 

Edited January 18 by dx100uk
spacing

[Schipoo]

I have also received the attached files from the tribunal 

 

2022-01-12 HMCTS Ack Notice of Appeal.pdf 2022-01-12 HMCTS resp decision Notice.pdf

[slick132]

Hi Schipoo,

 

I've already said this several times to users here - improve your chance of NOT being ignored by visiting the police station in person and making a formal complaint with details about FTR Ltd and the people involved.

 

I'll come back about the letters from the Tribunal over the weekend.

[slick132]

Hi Schipoo,

 

In the 2nd document above from HMCTS, it starts by referring to 3 items attached, namely :-

 

Appeal/Application

Respondant Decision Notice

Supporting Documents

 

I assume the 2nd item is the first PDF posted above but please confirm.

 

If there are any other documents, can you post them up, redacted.

 

I'm not experienced in this appeal tribunal process but we'll do all we can to support you. However, are you prepared to follow guidance, submit documents/replies in the manner we suggest and meet any deadlines. Please confirm.

 

At the risk of repeating myself, any joy yet in visiting the police ? Of all the issues likely to affect your case, I think this is crucial.

[Schipoo]

Hi

there weren’t any attachments with either of the letters. 
Do I need to confirm back to them that I am happy to communicate via email?

I am happy for any guidance. 
 

Re the police, I’m no further forward. Local police refer to Northumbria Police and them to Action Fraud 

[slick132]

Re the police, was this contact in person or by phone ?

 

Yes, you should reply confirming your email addy but I'm thinking also of possibly objecting to them deciding if they'll accept your "late appeal".

 

Bear with me but come back 3 or 4 days BEFORE the 14 day deadline so we don't miss it. I'll seek advice on this.

[Schipoo]

Hi

 

Just received another email today regarding the tribunal 

 

2022-01-18 HMCTS Appeal Allocated.pdf

[Schipoo]

21 hours ago, slick132 said:

Re the police, was this contact in person or by phone ?

 

Yes, you should reply confirming your email addy but I'm thinking also of possibly objecting to them deciding if they'll accept your "late appeal".

 

Bear with me but come back 3 or 4 days BEFORE the 14 day deadline so we don't miss it. I'll seek advice on this.

I contacted the police via phone and email. 

[slick132]

Surely a visit is worth trying seeing no other contact has worked so far.

 

 

[Schipoo]

I will do that this weekend. 
 

the email received today is a result of the letter I sent to the Solicitor's Office and Legal Services Reviews and Litigation on your recommendation.

 

What you suggest my response should be, and should it be the same response I give when replying to the tribunal emails?

Edited January 18 by dx100uk
spacing

[dx100uk]

pdf's sorted

[slick132]

Thanks DX

 

Hi Schipoo,

 

Follow my advice in post #131 - if I've not come back just before the deadline, post here to remind please.

[slick132]

Hi Schipoo,

 

You need to comply with the court letter of 12th Jan so should now reply to the HMCTS Tribunal (Tax Chamber) and the HMRC Solrs Office emails ([email protected] and [email protected]) as follows:-

 

Dear sir or madam,

 

I refer to HMCTS's email of 12th January and can confirm this is my email address for all communication.

 

Yours faithfully,

Schipoo

 

Let us know how you got on with the police. Then we can decide on how to reply fully in the Tribunal process.

[slick132]

Hi Schipoo,

 

Please confirm if you sent my suggested reply above, or not.

 

If so, on what date ?

 

Thanks  

[Schipoo]

Hi

I asked Dixon2094 for the details of the person they dealt with at NP so I could speak to them direct but they haven’t replied. 

[honeybee13]

That's a shame, Schipoo. I hope @dixon2094replies soon, it's in the interests of Alan O'Hara's 'victims' to stick together and help each other.

 

HB

[Schipoo]

Hi

I think I may have missed my deadline for the tribunal, on the tribunal letter posted on 18th January I’m sure it said 14 days, or am I getting mixed up with confirming my email address?

[slick132]

Hi Schipoo,

 

Did you send the reply to HMRC as I suggested here on 23rd Jan - https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/437942-hmrc-seek-repayment-after-fast-tax-rebates-ltd-take-most-of-rebate/?do=findComment&comment=5150645

 

 

HMRC's letter to you of 18th Jan was their reply to you, as required by the HMCTS process outlined in their letter of 12th Jan.

[Schipoo]

Yes I did but that was from their correspondence on January 12th. 
I am referring to the letter on January 18th. 
 

 

Tribunal letter 3.pdf

[slick132]

Hi Schipoo,

 

The letter you linked above dated 18th Jan makes no demands of you.

 

If you mean item (a) on the Tribunal letter of 12th Jan, it's unclear about what is to be submitted and by when.

[unclebulgaria67]

Last post temporarily hidden. Checking whether MP's letter details can be made public without redaction.

[slick132]

The following legislation has been brought to our attention by our contact at TaxWatch

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/282/regulation/8/made

 

" Information delivered electronically on another’s behalf

 

8.  Any information delivered by an approved method of electronic communications on behalf of any person shall be deemed to have been delivered by him unless he proves that it was delivered without his knowledge or connivance. "

 

You have good grounds to argue that the info delivered by Maxwell/FTR was delivered without your knowledge or connivance. Yes, you knew they were acting on your behalf but you were never aware of the nature of the EIS tax relief being claimed.

 

I'll come back later about how to present this to HMRC or Tribunal.

[honeybee13]

That looks like a great spot, Slick and I hope it helps. Good work by TaxWatch.

 

HB

[Schipoo]

1 hour ago, slick132 said:

The following legislation has been brought to our attention by our contact at TaxWatch

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/282/regulation/8/made

 

" Information delivered electronically on another’s behalf

 

8.  Any information delivered by an approved method of electronic communications on behalf of any person shall be deemed to have been delivered by him unless he proves that it was delivered without his knowledge or connivance. "

 

You have good grounds to argue that the info delivered by Maxwell/FTR was delivered without your knowledge or connivance. Yes, you knew they were acting on your behalf but you were never aware of the nature of the EIS tax relief being claimed.

 

I'll come back later about how to present this to HMRC or Tribunal.

How do we prove that?

[Schipoo]

I have received HMRC’s request to the tribunal for the case to be struck out 

 

 

 

Strike out.pdf

Edited February 17 by Schipoo