Originally posted by Delendog
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Confirmation of settlement
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by webberg View PostIt's not an instant process.
I suggest you give them ten working days or so and check again.Comment
-
Confirmation
Originally posted by EBTContractor View PostThanks mate will do..
My due date was '18th Sept' i have received nothing. I do usually get a letter from then about a week after they are dated. So I have waited. I have since decided that the likelihood was the person i spoke with actually meant 30th Sept...although I did get him to confirm 18th.
In the meantime, i have a stack of letters chasing, all dated a week apart that I have been posting each week since i paid.
Next week , allowing for their poor admin, i will start calling again.Comment
-
Anyone else got their settlment letter and read in detail the statement you sign ?
What do people think of ....
"wholly or in part, because of my failure to meet all of my statutory obligations"
another bit about never reclaiming a refund and numerous other clauses. Must be the most one side agreement I have ever read.
Anyone else managed to get this reworded slightly ?
Its like something you expect from China / Iran / Russia when they extract confessions.Comment
-
Originally posted by lowpaidworker View PostAnyone else got their settlment letter and read in detail the statement you sign ?
Its like something you expect from China / Iran / Russia when they extract confessions.
The documents from the promoters and their supporters are equally scary although usually for the things they don't say.
For example, in almost all instances, once money went to the promoter/trust, they were NOT obliged to pay you a single penny.
If they had decided not to, you had no legal rights to sue them for "your" money, because you had signed all that away without legal recourse.
Again though, nobody forced you to sign.Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.
(No, me neither).Comment
-
Originally posted by webberg View PostNobody forces you to sign it.
The documents from the promoters and their supporters are equally scary although usually for the things they don't say.
For example, in almost all instances, once money went to the promoter/trust, they were NOT obliged to pay you a single penny.
If they had decided not to, you had no legal rights to sue them for "your" money, because you had signed all that away without legal recourse.
Again though, nobody forced you to sign.
I will paint another one. What if the promoter at the time of signing told you that the loans will not be repayable? What if the promoter told you that the loans were purely to allow the tax-planning of the scheme to work? What if the promoter assured you that the sham 'loan' was all perfectly legal? What if the promoter told you that the scheme was approved by HMRC? What if the promoter told you that the scheme had the backing of QC opinion? What if the promoter told you that you had to apply for a 'loan' but it would never be refused as long as the amount did not exceed what you had paid in?
If you just look at the paperwork in isolation then you get the picture that you are painting, which raises the question as to why anybody would sign such an agreement. But you have to also consider the context around it as well as the (false) assurances provided by the scheme promoter. Then you can understand why people were willing to sign such a one-sided agreement.
Of course on hindsight you can see a generous sprinkling of red-flags. Just the word 'offshore' would make us run a mile. But at the time, for someone who was not tax and finance savvy and maybe a little naïve (remember it is difficult enough for a tax professional to understand and deal with all of this never mind the lay-person), you would take all this promoter spiel at face-value, and choose your umbrella like you would choose your car insurance, go for the cheapest (which are usually the 85 and 90%ers.
I am fortunate that I have emails from the promoter stating the loans would not be repayable as well as some other admissions which would have buttressed any arguments I would have put forward in court. This is all hypothetical now as my 'loans' have been 'written-off'. I will keep hold of the evidence though as it should prove useful for others in order to put some context around agreements that they may have signed.Last edited by Superfly; 5 October 2020, 22:34.Comment
-
Originally posted by Superfly View Post
I will paint another one. What if the promoter at the time of signing told you that the loans will not be repayable? What if the promoter told you that the loans were purely to allow the tax-planning of the scheme to work? What if the promoter assured you that the sham 'loan' was all perfectly legal? What if the promoter told you that the scheme was approved by HMRC? What if the promoter told you that the scheme had the backing of QC opinion? What if the promoter told you that you had to apply for a 'loan' but it would never be refused as long as the amount did not exceed what you had paid in?
There's no doubt some people were just financially unsophisticated and their greed made the fall for the patter, but I can't believe a significant number of people were not in the "I know this is too good to be true, but let's take the risk" bucket.Last edited by Paralytic; 6 October 2020, 07:39.Comment
-
Leaving aside the scheme aside I am talking about the agreement to settle with HMRC
The agreement should just say I agree to pay the disputed tax for years x x or z. Why does the first statement say basically this is all my fault. Pretty sure HMRC came in for a lot of criticism in SAMs report.
Also in answer to WebberG if I dont sign it I am in more trouble as by law I should have then delclared these on my SATR. Makes sense now why HMRC left these settlemens so late in the day.
I was thinking of writing an agreement to just pay the tax disputed quoting the agreed figures without prejudice and not admit any liability.Last edited by lowpaidworker; 6 October 2020, 09:25.Comment
-
Originally posted by Superfly View Post.
I will paint another one.
Holding up the settlement contract as a stand alone document allows me to compare the document suite seen in loan schemes.
When you include the context of both situations, it all seems much more reasonable.
I'm not here to judge what you did and I don't do that in my day to day job. I do however think that if you see both "entry" and "exit" mechanisms in a valid comparison, it may help some people reconcile what HMRC wishes them to "admit".Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.
(No, me neither).Comment
-
Originally posted by Superfly View Post
I am fortunate that I have emails from the promoter stating the loans would not be repayable as well as some other admissions which would have buttressed any arguments I would have put forward in court. This is all hypothetical now as my 'loans' have been 'written-off'. I will keep hold of the evidence though as it should prove useful for others in order to put some context around agreements that they may have signed.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment