Phil Manley MIA Phil Manley MIA - Page 5
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Posts 41 to 50 of 52

Thread: Phil Manley MIA

  1. #41

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eek View Post
    I don't accuse innocent 3rd parties of commiting fraud which is what you have done. Just apologize and take your unfounded allegations elsewhere. Or just go elsewhere...
    Did I accuse an innocent 3rd party of fraud? When did I mention fraud full stop? Maybe you should **** off elsewhere instead of poking your nose in.

  2. #42

    bored now

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    26,275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LOL17 View Post
    Did I accuse an innocent 3rd party of fraud? When did I mention fraud full stop? Maybe you should **** off elsewhere instead of poking your nose in.
    For the hundredth time you posted

    Quote Originally Posted by LOL17 View Post

    2) Do you think it's a coincidence that the director of PM Tax Consulting, <mod snip: not Phil Manley> is also usually resident in Portugal and that the company was dissolved the day before the Loan Charge deadline?

    Mod Note: Phil Manley's PMTC LTD (Company number 12007123) and PM Tax Consulting Limited (Company number 11372173) are two separate unconnected companies.

    He just wrote that name on his invoices because of sloppy admin.

    and

    Quote Originally Posted by LOL17 View Post
    It’s not much of a jump when Phil states that as his company name on communications to his clients.

    Mod Note: Phil Manley's PMTC LTD (Company number 12007123) and PM Tax Consulting Limited (Company number 11372173) are two separate unconnected companies.

    He just wrote that name on his invoices because of sloppy admin.
    Which has required 2 separate moderators to edit your posts to correct the allegations you were trying to make.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  3. #43

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    3,972

    Default

    Bored now.

    Perhaps the issues here are being lost in the teacup storm?

    We are slowly piecing together a picture of where some of the clients Phil was helping are, in terms of agreement (or otherwise) with HMRC.

    We would strongly recommend any such persons who have not settled or who are unsure of their situation - contact HMRC and advise them that they require some time to investigate and resolve the position.
    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

    (No, me neither).

  4. #44

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eek View Post
    For the hundredth time you posted




    and



    Which has required 2 separate moderators to edit your posts to correct the allegations you were trying to make.
    As I thought. At no point did I mention fraud at all I did was ask if something was a coincidence and you’ve put 2 and 2 together to get 5. Slow clap.

  5. #45

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by webberg View Post
    Bored now.

    Perhaps the issues here are being lost in the teacup storm?

    We are slowly piecing together a picture of where some of the clients Phil was helping are, in terms of agreement (or otherwise) with HMRC.

    We would strongly recommend any such persons who have not settled or who are unsure of their situation - contact HMRC and advise them that they require some time to investigate and resolve the position.
    I’d also suggest getting in contact with their MP as some MP have been decent in helping constituents with HMRC. It could help people buy a bit more time to sort something out with HMRC.

  6. #46

    bored now

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    26,275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LOL17 View Post
    As I thought. At no point did I mention fraud at all I did was ask if something was a coincidence and you’ve put 2 and 2 together to get 5. Slow clap.
    Actually all the evidence was that you were hoping other people would do that and I was making sure that they couldn't. Otherwise why would you have been making the insinuations that you were making..

    Now unless you have anything of value beyond false rumours, false allegations and innuendos could you kindly go elsewhere to spread your unfounded allegations as I really don't think you are helping.

    At the moment webberg's advice is all that is required - If you were using Phil Manley for advice tell HMRC ASAP what has happened and they will give you some leeway....
    Last edited by eek; 2nd October 2020 at 15:47.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  7. #47

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    3,972

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LOL17 View Post
    I’d also suggest getting in contact with their MP as some MP have been decent in helping constituents with HMRC. It could help people buy a bit more time to sort something out with HMRC.
    You have much more faith in MPs than I have.

    We spent three years badgering MPs, getting questions asked at the highest levels, briefing committees, appearing in committees and the result was - HM Treasury are just too powerful.

    We stopped doing that and turned to litigation.

    LCAG took up the political baton and to their credit made great strides on the question of loan charge if not the proper analysis around the liabilities in the year of payment.

    We see evidence of MP involvement at an individual client level quite regularly. Usually consists of "a letter to my friend, Jesse", the usual drivel and nonsense in response, much of which has been shown to be inaccurate press statements from HMRC, and the MP saying "I've done all I can". The next letter to the MP gets passed to a researcher with even less time and understanding than the MP.

    Claims that MPs involvement have led to "better" time to pay agreements turn out, on proper examination, to be no better than HMRC published terms.

    I can say that the difference an MP has made to one of our clients, I can count in one hand (and still have change).
    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

    (No, me neither).

  8. #48

    Some things in Moderation

    cojak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Look to your right...
    Posts
    20,761

    Default

    We have looked into this and I repeat (for the last time).

    Phil Manley's PMTC LTD (Company number 12007123) and PM Tax Consulting Limited (Company number 11372173) are two separate unconnected companies.

    He just wrote that name on his invoices because of sloppy admin.


    If I have to repeat myself again the whole post will be removed...
    "I can put any old tat in my sig, put quotes around it and attribute to someone of whom I've heard, to make it sound true."
    - Voltaire/Benjamin Franklin/Anne Frank...

  9. #49

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by webberg View Post
    You have much more faith in MPs than I have.

    We spent three years badgering MPs, getting questions asked at the highest levels, briefing committees, appearing in committees and the result was - HM Treasury are just too powerful.

    We stopped doing that and turned to litigation.

    LCAG took up the political baton and to their credit made great strides on the question of loan charge if not the proper analysis around the liabilities in the year of payment.

    We see evidence of MP involvement at an individual client level quite regularly. Usually consists of "a letter to my friend, Jesse", the usual drivel and nonsense in response, much of which has been shown to be inaccurate press statements from HMRC, and the MP saying "I've done all I can". The next letter to the MP gets passed to a researcher with even less time and understanding than the MP.

    Claims that MPs involvement have led to "better" time to pay agreements turn out, on proper examination, to be no better than HMRC published terms.

    I can say that the difference an MP has made to one of our clients, I can count in one hand (and still have change).
    In my experience MP are a bit of a mixed bag. There are a few good ones, lots of mediocre ones and then you have the likes of Emily Thornberry. I think politically LCAG might have been more successful if it hadn’t been for BREXIT and then COVID but we are where we are.

  10. #50

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eek View Post
    Actually all the evidence was that you were hoping other people would do that and I was making sure that they couldn't. Otherwise why would you have been making the insinuations that you were making..

    Now unless you have anything of value beyond false rumours, false allegations and innuendos could you kindly go elsewhere to spread your unfounded allegations as I really don't think you are helping.

    At the moment webberg's advice is all that is required - If you were using Phil Manley for advice tell HMRC ASAP what has happened and they will give you some leeway....
    You can read minds now can you and tell me I was hoping for. You should join the circus with that act 🤡

Posting Permissions

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