• 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!

Phil Manley MIA

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #41
    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.

    Comment


      #42
      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

      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

      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

      Comment


        #43
        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).

        Comment


          #44
          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.

          Comment


            #45
            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.

            Comment


              #46
              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; 2 October 2020, 15:47.
              merely at clientco for the entertainment

              Comment


                #47
                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).

                Comment


                  #48
                  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...

                  Comment


                    #49
                    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.

                    Comment


                      #50
                      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 ?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X