Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good evening, My husband and I are looking for some help regarding a faulty car which we have recently purchased from Big Motoring World Enfield. The details are as follows: - Make - Nissan Qashqai 2017 1.2L milage 55,349 miles.  Date purchased -   01/06/2024 Price paid - Deposit £9000, finance £4794 (this includes the 3yr Nissan extended warranty), buyers fee £249.      Total including all fees etc = £ 13794.        Initially, during the test drive, there was no problem with the car at all and this is why my husband bought the car on the day. No problems on the way home from the dealership and up to three days after purchase, the car drove smoothly. However, after day 4, occasionally we would feel a slight shudder during some gear changes (automatic car). Over the next few days these shudders worsened and then on day 5 the car would make very a very loud shudder with every single gear change. It was at this point we contacted Big Motoring World for advice as we are still under the 14 days no questions asked return.  My husband contacted BMW for advice on 06/06/2024 and stated the problems as above. He spoke to a sales person who informed him that he should only take the car to a Nissan dealership (we have now been told that this is false information). We were also promised that a courtesy car would be provided for us after the fault on the car had been identified and confirmed by their mechanic fixing the car. We took the car to the garage that Big Motoring World had told us to go. Upon arrival there we discovered it was a third-party garage, not Nissan. We took the car to the garage on day 9. The mechanic ran a diagnostic test which found no faults, but after the test drove the car and below are his findings...   we scan the car but no faults with the gearbox showing but when I test drove the car it was really juddering and jumping.I spoke to my auto transmission specialist and he said they are very common on these as the CVT belt starts jumping within the box due to pressure loss.  We had this vehicle in for diagnostics for gearbox mate but both the gearbox and battery are faulty.Gearbox supplied and fitted comes to £3500 plus vat   Where we are at now…. My husband spent all of day 10 (11/06/2024) making phone calls between the garage, Warranties2000 and Big Motoring World. He tried, unsuccessfully to find out if the diagnostic reports had been shared between all three. Everyone kept saying the report hadn’t been received and yet the garage assured us it had been sent. Eventually we were told that the courtesy car would be given to us if it was deemed the works to fix the car would take longer than 8 working hours, and that decision would be made after 48hours of receiving the report. Today is day 11 and no decision has been made as nobody is telling us any decisions as people are off sick or on holiday! Today we called the garage and told the mechanic NOT to start any work as we will be returning the car. He said none have been started and we have left the car in his storage as he has deemed the car undrivable. I have sent an email to BMW now formally stating that we want to return the car and I have used the terminology that was suggested.   What can we do next?   Thank you everyone. .  
    • Yes will do thanks Dave, I wonder what will happen at the preliminary hearing no idea what they will ask I assumed once I sent the proof they asked for about my sons condition that I would have just  been given the go ahead to be Litigation friend
    • First the judge will rule on you representing your son, which will be a doddle. After that the full hearing date will be fixed, with WSs exchanged 14 days before. So for the moment just concentrate on getting the right to represent your son.  
    • Thank you, the mediations in a couple of days so hopefully they show up this time. I'll update this thread after how it goes
  • 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
      • 161 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 chasing 2010 self assessment late filing fees - can they now?


stuber
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 199 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Morning Caggers, i've recently had correspondence from hmrc chasing me for a 4 figure sum of outstanding fines. These date back to 2010 when I lost my company due to the credit crunch and the repurcussions of the Banking Crisis.

At that time my head wasn't in a good place, lost my company and my marriage and didn't comply with Self Assessment etc, no profits clearly and the fall out from this inaction was a fine for late filing which grew and grew.

So here we are in late 2023 and they have raised their heads and are now chasing the debt, none of which is Tax, just late filing fines . . . so my question is;

Can this debt be time barred?

 

Many thanks in advance Caggers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

nope gov't debts are never sb'd.

goto to the hmrc website, search there for SAR.

get one off to them.

they must be able to prove the debt, and not just by a simple note from some external auditing company they might have used at the time.

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to HMRC chasing 2010 self assessment late filing fees - can they now?

Hi Stuber,

Can you confirm the breakdown of what HMRC say you owe, for each tax year concerned.

I doubt this is down to any external auditing - more likely they're just chasing this now because the amounts are more significant. 

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

2010 - £63.03
2011 - £22.89
2012 - £110.33
2013 - £1688.70
2014 - £1.60
2015 - £1978.68
2016 - £1934.48
2017 - £0
2018 - £0
2019 - £0
2020 - £318.42
2021 - £1.40

I thought HMRC became a 'normal' creditor in regards to chasing debt? They used to be the first in line but changed to be an ordinary creditor some time ago, therefore surely they are governed by the time barring like everyone else no?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without going into detail, do you have any idea why the amounts differ so much for each year.

Are you sure these are penalties. Could the amounts be estimated tax liabilities ?

Hopefully this will all be clear when the SAR response comes back ..............

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

I've found this online;

 

EM5001 - Penalties: Time Limits: General

TMA70/S103

All penalty action is subject to time limits. If the relevant time limit has expired then you cannot

  • proceed for a penalty before the tribunal, or
  • determine a penalty formally, or
  • include a penalty in a negotiated contract settlement other than by way of voluntary restitution.

For these reasons you must

  • review your working enquiry cases in line with EM3254
  • avoid the premature issue of a closure notice, or premature determination of an appeal against a discovery assessment or against an amendment to a self assessment, and
  • settle the case as quickly as possible by reviewing for formal penalty action once the closure notice has been issued and/or any appeals against discovery assessments or self assessment amendments have been determined.

Where a penalty is tax geared the time limit for penalty proceedings or determination is within

  1. six years after the offence was committed, or
  2. if later, three years after the tax on which it is based was finally determined.

For non tax geared penalties the time limit is within six years after the date on which the offence was committed.

Section 16(1)(b) Social Security Contributions & Benefits Act 1992 applies all the time limits to Class 4 NIC.

Under Section 118(4), the amount of tax covered by any assessment or self assessment is not finally determined until the assessment or self assessment can no longer be varied, whether by the tribunal on appeal or by the order of any Court (see the Court of Appeal judgement in Salmon v Havering Commissioners & CIR 45TC77). It follows that a demand for a stated case under TMA70/S56 will keep open the time limits until the final order of the Courts or the prior settlement of the appeal.

-------------------------------------------------------------

I'm thinking this 'debt' falls into the above category?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noted but please answer the Q in my last post

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...