Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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 insist on sending a tax return for 21/22, after we've already made a declaration and paid a penalty


kp278

Recommended Posts

Hi, we have been ebaying since 2020 and never told HMRC. Ultimately it caught up with us around middle of 2023, we made a declaration for the periods 20-21 and 21-22 and paid what we owed plus the penalty.

A couple of months later we sign up for self-assessment in readiness for submitting the 22-23 tax year and receive a letter asking us to complete a tax return for 21-22.

We spoke to them but they insist because we were self employed in that period and earned over £1k we reach the threshold for submitting a tax return. In our eyes we've already paid the tax owed for 21-22. What am I missing?

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi KP,

1. When you declared trading income for 20-21 and for 21-22, did you discuss with or declare to HMRC other income (PAYE or S/E earnings, savings income, etc)?

2. You say "we" so did HMRC assess you and your partner together for the eBay trading?

3. Did you submit the 22-23 return(s) by the paper deadline of 30-9-23 or online deadline of 31-1-24?

Regarding your primary question about the need to submit tax return(s) for 21-22, it's probably better to just comply and file the return(s) regardless of you already paying tax and penalties for the tax year.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 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

Hi thanks for your input

1. I cannot recall. Usually I'm good at taking a photo of everything for my records but I neglected to take photos of the declaration before I sent it in. I did consider other earnings when calculating tax owed as I recall we were very close to the limit for the higher tax bracket. I likely need to file a SAR with hmrc to get a copy of the submitted paperwork for my records and to aid in completing a tax return for the same period, if needed.

2. It is in my partners name only.

3. Yes I employed a (semi) professional. A friend of the family who is a corporate accountant by trade but is extending into personal accounts.

I've submitted an online form 'if you no longer need to send a tax return' and referred the case reference for the declaration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi KP,

You say you "did consider other earnings when calculating tax owed" .  I think 2 points arise :-

First, you need to distinguish between your own and your partner's tax affairs. The extra tax due on eBaying sounds like it was YP's issue so surely HMRC considered all YP's income when determining the extra tax owed.

Second, is this thread about YP's tax affairs, your own, or both ?

Re my Q3. above, I was not concerned about who submitted the tax return(s) but am more concerned that any return was submitted by the appropriate deadline.

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, everything is related to my partners income and tax return, mine is not in play, apologies for any confusion on that.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi KP and thanks for the clarification.

So did YP submit the 22/23 TR by the relevant deadline to avoid late penalies ?

Re the original question you asked, I still think YP should file a 21-22 tax return if it'll keep HMRC happy. Fail to do so and you could end up with penalties and further hassle you really don't need.

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...

Hi, yes 22/23 was submitted before Jan 2024 deadline so no penalties

 

I received a reply to "I've submitted an online form 'if you no longer need to send a tax return' and referred the case reference for the declaration."

Their response is Yes - "You need to fill in a tax return because you have recently been advised that based on your gross earnings within the 21/22 tax year, you will still need to file a return."

 

I've submitted a SAR because I don't have to hand the details we submitted for the 21/22 disclosure and I'll obviously need these to fill out the tax return.

MP is going to call the team that dealt with the case ref and confirm with them if I need to fill out the return. I expect it'll be of little use.

 

Still frustrated that MP has to fill out a tax return despite making a disclosure for the same period.

 

Thanks, Kris

Link to post
Share on other sites

MP spoke to the disclosure team who were very helpful, but they told us if we submit a tax return, we will likely need to pay the taxes again, then call the disclosure team and get a refund....! I've made a complaint to hmrc in the meantime, but still preparing to file a tax return at the last minute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How mad is that, telling you to pay and then seek a refund.

If it were me, I'd submit a written complaint about their advice to pay again !

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...