IQ Consultants, Felicitas Solutions, ECS Trustees - loan repayment demands IQ Consultants, Felicitas Solutions, ECS Trustees - loan repayment demands - Page 95
Page 95 of 131 FirstFirst ... 45859394959697105 ... LastLast
Posts 941 to 950 of 1306
  1. #941

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    3,723

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eek View Post
    What evidence do you have that they won't litigate? All the experts seem to be working on the basis that its a strong possibility.
    Possibility? Yes.

    Strong possibility? Perhaps.

    Gladstones will continue working for as long as their client pays them or perhaps they have some sort of percentage deal whereby they keep x% of what they collect. (I'm not sure that is actually possible by the way).

    Most of us "experts" are probably planning for the worst (and hoping for better).

    Again though, don't assume that because Gladstones make their money chasing small claims and have a poor reputation (which appears to be based on shoot the messenger) and/or that those behind Felicitas - and now their connections - have a chequered history in the contractor space, means that a Court will hold their claims to be invalid.

    This thread should have moved beyond outrage and name calling and should be focusing on practical measures to resolve/mitigate the issues.

    Whilst there can and have been some good ideas and suggestions from "lay" folk here, making statements as to the intent, operation, likely next steps and potential outcomes of those making repayment claims is unhelpful if not backed by some commercial intelligence or professional qualification.

    This is a serious situation and needs a serious response.

    Put aside your anger and speculation and let's have a discussion about this based on knowledge.
    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

    (No, me neither).

  2. #942

    I Am Legend


    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    108,496

    Default

    IMO people should take the advice they want to hear. I think there is no chance of this reaching court. If people are stressed then get an adviser.

    But feel free to choose other advice. I will even return what you paid me.
    Fight HMRC now! Help sue HMRC individual officers/government ministers for malfeasance in office. Visit https://www.loanchargejustice.com/ and scroll to the bottom of the page to donate.

  3. #943

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    3,723

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrilloPad View Post
    IMO people should take the advice they want to hear.
    This though is a professional forum which is meant to be a place for professionals to dispense such information and advice and knowledge as they consider is helpful or useful.

    I understand perfectly that there has to be a venting of frustration and anger, but that should - must - pass.

    Instead there needs to be a discussion on what is sensible, legal, practical.

    If some of the views above about the likelihood of litigation and the abilities or otherwise of the legal agents of the principal are backed by prior experience or informed knowledge - great - but please say so.

    If they are based on little more than hoping for the best and the ability of a Court to ignore legal documents because the money "was always ours", I suggest that we have now heard all variations of that tune. Repeating them does not add any strength to their position.
    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

    (No, me neither).

  4. #944

    I Am Legend


    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    108,496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by webberg View Post
    This though is a professional forum which is meant to be a place for professionals to dispense such information and advice and knowledge as they consider is helpful or useful.

    I understand perfectly that there has to be a venting of frustration and anger, but that should - must - pass.

    Instead there needs to be a discussion on what is sensible, legal, practical.

    If some of the views above about the likelihood of litigation and the abilities or otherwise of the legal agents of the principal are backed by prior experience or informed knowledge - great - but please say so.

    If they are based on little more than hoping for the best and the ability of a Court to ignore legal documents because the money "was always ours", I suggest that we have now heard all variations of that tune. Repeating them does not add any strength to their position.
    Sorry but this is unpaid so a place for amateurs. And even if it was for professionals, or experts, how often are they wrong? Though clearly if advice is totally rubbish I hope the mods will do the necessary.

    I am absolutely certain there will be no court action over this. But I understand why people are worried. I do have a very good reason - but I am not going to go into a publicly. I have been wrong before and no doubt will again.

    As ever I fully respect your opinion and your right to make your comments and can fully understand why people may take your advice. You have done huge amounts to help people - I doff my cap to you Sir.
    Fight HMRC now! Help sue HMRC individual officers/government ministers for malfeasance in office. Visit https://www.loanchargejustice.com/ and scroll to the bottom of the page to donate.

  5. #945

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    3,723

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrilloPad View Post

    As ever I fully respect your opinion and your right to make your comments and can fully understand why people may take your advice.
    I just want to move this debate past the righteous outrage stage into the "what can/should we be doing".

    I think we've all seen the attempted rise and swift demise of schemes designed to "solve" outstanding loans for tax and other purposes. The legacy of those has largely been to leave people more exposed than they were before.

    I fear that the longer there remains uncertainty, desperation and frankly hopeless suggestions being made and wild guesses as to likely actions from experienced lawyers, the more likely it is that a "solution" will arise (probably from a paid professional) seeking to take advantage of those with few choices.

    It's happened before and although many of them have promised much and delivered not a thing, there is a lot of money here.
    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

    (No, me neither).

  6. #946

    Fingers like lightning

    DealorNoDeal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    942

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by webberg View Post
    This is a serious situation and needs a serious response.
    If it was as serious as you suggest, I can't believe ETC Tax would take it on pro bono.
    Last edited by DealorNoDeal; 1st April 2020 at 15:21.

  7. #947

    bored now

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    24,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DealorNoDeal View Post
    If it was as serious as you suggest, I can't believe ETC Tax would take it on pro bono.
    At the moment it's just a matter of sending holding pattern letters which you can do at little cost. Down the line I'm sure they can see money being required... At the moment it's called marketing and building up a marketing list.
    Last edited by eek; 1st April 2020 at 15:33.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  8. #948

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    3,723

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DealorNoDeal View Post
    If it was as serious as you suggest, I can't believe ETC Tax would take it on pro bono.
    And they have not.

    If you read what they say, they are clear that should the situation escalate they will have to charge a fee.

    I also observe that correlating a firm willing to offer pro bono work to the alleged seriousness of the situation is clutching at the very thinnest of straws.
    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

    (No, me neither).

  9. #949

    Fingers like lightning

    DealorNoDeal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    942

    Default

    These schemes are the gift that keep on giving.

    They've created a nice little earner for many over the years. (On both sides of the fence )

    It's a win win (£££££) for everyone involved. (Except the users of course)

    And, yes, I am a cynical old bastard.

  10. #950

    Nervous Newbie


    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by webberg View Post
    This though is a professional forum which is meant to be a place for professionals to dispense such information and advice and knowledge as they consider is helpful or useful.
    I suggest that we have now heard all variations of that tune. Repeating them does not add any strength to their position.
    I have seen repeatedly the term "strength in numbers" on this thread. It just backs up the allegations of a mis-sold scheme even further. Yes, all those who entered into the scheme did so willingly, but under false pretence.
    I'd also like to point out that shooting people down who seek some kind of 'hope' from this threat is not mindful of the mental heath issues associtated with this. Please understand this is stressful, not to mention the added threat of loosing friends and family during this epidemic.

    The firms that seem to 'advertise' here also have a lot to make from this. "Strength in numbers." Scare mongering and adding to people's anxiety also makes for a nice earner at a time like this.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •