Hoey - Court of Appeal legal fees

[eek]

I stand corrected, the Hoey FTT has published but not the UTT which is awaited. But your beligerence doesnt alter the fact the next step in the legal process will cost money.

Which is fine

And it's fine that people ask on the forums where the people who may be impacted may visit (although most left years ago and what this forum is now full of is loan charge or even later schemes).

What isn't fine is attacking the organisation that a lot of people are currently a member of (Big Group) when asking for that money - as it doesn't work as an approach and it just wasn't necessary.

but the thing is this should could all have been explained in a few paragraphs

This is to raise money for the subsequent appeal of the Hoey.... v Revenue and Customs UTT.

Hoey won on x, which means y and z and consequently...

For the appeal to occur leave to appeal most be asked for and this will cost..

My issue here are 3 fold:-

1) people have made assumptions that people already have a significant level of knowledge and that really isn't the case. Most Big Group members will be paying £15 a month as it's a trade off between money and thinking and the money is so small they won't miss it.
2) people are asking for money too early
3) attacking people on here because you don't like them isn't appropriate - by attacking webberg and then refusing to replace the work he willingly did here you really haven't helped your cause.

[eek]

To be fair, I think eek's criticism of asking for donations, for something that might not happen, isn't without validity.

Personally, I wouldn't have done that. I would have waited until an appeal needed to be made, even though this wouldn't have left that much time to raise the funds.

I wouldn't even be that awkward. I would be very happy for them to be asking for names and highlighting the fact money would be required some point in the future. Heck if it was an argument I liked (I far prefer where Lancashire won than Hoey) I would probably be paying some money towards it myself but asking for money when the release of the judgment could be a year away seems too much.

[lowpaidworker]

this thread is joke. I am so neutral you would not believe it. I am up too my eyes in phone calls with HMRC trying to settle and the fence I sit on is wider than my grandma's arse.

EEK you have made your point and whilst I accept you get people (whom I have no idea who they are or whos side they are batting) try and undermine you, I think sometimes less is more. I beginning to think you have some skin in the game and a phrase used often on here which you consistently say you don't. You appear to argue like a little kid at school that wants to make a point. You have made it so many times my humble opinion is the people that should be interested are not.

The real issue and point of this thread is about a contribution to the Hoey appeal. Firstly and most importantly is its voluntary and no one is being forced to. Secondly the critique of Webberg/WTT or Saleous is wrong and I personally ignore it. Those that are fully paid up members of WTT (I am not) can make their own assumptions about value for money. I for one could not afford this. Maybe I need to pay for a tax advisor but I need one to help me settle rather than litigate. I need closure not another 2/3 years or more and more money fighting for what seems to me be a totally fruitful exercise, but that's my own opinion. I would love to see HMRC get a bloody nose but not one person or company has convinced me they have the punch power.

I think its about time this site actually forced people to declare their interest or background. Webberg and Saleous are clear they are operating in an advisory capacity. So either you a contractor impacted, an advisor or moderator. If none of these you here to clearly here to stir it up or you're just an HMRC plant to help divide and conquer.

[starstruck]

To be fair, I think eek's criticism of asking for donations, for something that might not happen, isn't without validity.

Sure, that sounds reasonable to me also; that's my point, I've got nothing to do with Hoey, I don't know about it or have any opinion on it at all.

I got involved in this insane farce simply to say I'd had a bad experience with BG/WTT and Phil Manley, both of whom I found via this forum and both of whom I paid money to and I'm not happy with the service received from either. I'm not going to go over it all again, I've said my thoughts on them both.

Somehow now I'm being accused of being a mate and/or crony of Saleos (I don't know the man), asking for money (I have zero interest in Hoey, not affected one iota), using lies, fake promises and careful omissions etc. and being told I've said things I haven't.

I am literally just an ex-contractor warning others of my experience *, go check all my posts and you will see there is nothing more sinister than that. I'm not sure how I've managed to get myself embroiled in this madness. But really eek is mad.

* EDIT - because they are recommended on here and I trusted that recommendation myself

EDIT2 - I stand by all my comments as being real and truthful.

[lowpaidworker]

Sure, that sounds reasonable to me also; that's my point, I've got nothing to do with Hoey, I don't know about it or have any opinion on it at all.

I got involved in this insane farce simply to say I'd had a bad experience with BG/WTT and Phil Manley, both of whom I found via this forum and both of whom I paid money to and I'm not happy with the service received from either. I'm not going to go over it all again, I've said my thoughts on them both.

Somehow now I'm being accused of being a mate and/or crony of Saleos (I don't know the man), asking for money (I have zero interest in Hoey, not affected one iota), using lies, fake promises and careful omissions etc. and being told I've said things I haven't.

I am literally just an ex-contractor warning others of my experience *, go check all my posts and you will see there is nothing more sinister than that. I'm not sure how I've managed to get myself embroiled in this madness. But really eek is mad.

* EDIT - because they are recommended on here and I trusted that recommendation myself

EDIT2 - I stand by all my comments as being real and truthful.

exactly same as me a real impacted contractor

[eek]

Sure, that sounds reasonable to me also; that's my point, I've got nothing to do with Hoey, I don't know about it or have any opinion on it at all.

I got involved in this insane farce simply to say I'd had a bad experience with BG/WTT and Phil Manley, both of whom I found via this forum and both of whom I paid money to and I'm not happy with the service received from either. I'm not going to go over it all again, I've said my thoughts on them both.

Somehow now I'm being accused of being a mate and/or crony of Saleos (I don't know the man), asking for money (I have zero interest in Hoey, not affected one iota), using lies, fake promises and careful omissions etc. and being told I've said things I haven't.

I am literally just an ex-contractor warning others of my experience *, go check all my posts and you will see there is nothing more sinister than that. I'm not sure how I've managed to get myself embroiled in this madness. But really eek is mad.

* EDIT - because they are recommended on here and I trusted that recommendation myself

EDIT2 - I stand by all my comments as being real and truthful.

Well firstly given that you joined in the attacking Big Group game as everyone else did I'm sorry that I tagged you with the same motive with the others had (and grouped you with them) when you joined in their attacks on Big Group.

But given that you have twice spent money with people who have failed to deliver what you think they promised you, I hope you can see why I'm loathed to recommend any scheme or campaign as a solution to anything and why I'm so anti this fundraising.

[starstruck]

Well firstly given that you joined in the attacking Big Group game as everyone else did I'm sorry that I gave you with the same motive with the others had (and grouped you with them) when you joined in their attacks on Big Group.

But given that you have twice spent money with people who have failed to deliver what you think they promised you, I hope you can see why I'm loathed to recommend any scheme or campaign as a solution to anything and why I'm so anti this fundraising.

My involvement in all this started here https://www.contractoruk.com/forums/...ml#post2836788
8 days ago. I wanted to know why WTT is continually recommended on here and I posted my honest, genuine experience of them in that post. Since that moment I have been under attack by you non stop. You demanded I provide an alternative advisor and I told you many times I can't and it's just spiralled from there. Can you not just for one second consider I'm telling the trust about my experience?!

EDIT - "I'm loathed to recommend any scheme or campaign as a solution" - and that is my point exactly, you keep recommending BG/WTT and openly admit to it. It was exactly that I was trying to counter balance.

[eek]

My involvement in all this started here https://www.contractoruk.com/forums/...ml#post2836788
8 days ago. I wanted to know why WTT is continually recommended on here and I posted my honest, genuine experience of them in that post. Since that moment I have been under attack by you non stop. You demanded I provide an alternative advisor and I told you many times I can't and it's just spiralled from there. Can you not just for one second consider I'm telling the trust about my experience?!

EDIT - "I'm loathed to recommend any scheme or campaign as a solution" - and that is my point exactly, you keep recommending BG/WTT and openly admit to it. It was exactly that I was trying to counter balance.

Nope we signposted WTT for lack of other options for at the time we had and knew of no other options we could point people towards - and we now have a couple more albeit with different reservations to the WTT ones.

It's probably worth saying that our reservations of ETC are so great we would never signpost them and that webberg was never a problem as given his history he was never party to the creation and selling of these loan schemes. He is making money fixing historic issues (albeit not in ways you like) but he isn't profiteering from fixing things he himself created.

[DealorNoDeal]

It's probably worth saying that our reservations of ETC are so great we would never signpost them and that webberg was never a problem as given his history he was never party to the creation and selling of these loan schemes. He is making money fixing historic issues (albeit not in ways you like) but he isn't profiteering from fixing things he himself created.

Unfortunately, on its own, that isn't an assurance.

As far as I know, Phil Manley wasn't involved in the creation of any schemes. There was also another advisor on here a few years ago (Michael ?) who didn't create schemes but was (allegedly) engaged in sharp practise. Even if I could remember his surname, I wouldn't say it because he threatened to sue people.

This whole area attracts a certain "type". From the shady offshore scheme promoters to ambulance chasers and sharks like Felicitas. Even some of the QCs seem a bit dodgy.

The only people I would trust, to any extent, are fellow scheme users. NTRT is not a bad example. At least this is not for profit and is run by users for users.

[eek]

Unfortunately, on its own, that isn't an assurance.

As far as I know, Phil Manley wasn't involved in the creation of any schemes. There was also another advisor on here a few years ago (Michael ?) who didn't create schemes but was (allegedly) engaged in sharp practise. Even if I could remember his surname, I wouldn't say it because he threatened to sue people.

This whole area attracts a certain "type". From the shady offshore scheme promoters to ambulance chasers and sharks like Felicitas. Even some of the QCs seem a bit dodgy.

The only people I would trust, to any extent, are fellow scheme users. NTRT is not a bad example. At least this is not for profit and is run by users for users.

Actually Phil Manley did create a scheme afterwards as reported in the last Times article about him Tax inspector Phil Manley who backed avoidance scheme disappears | Money | The Times so we can rule him out (yes I know it's a 2018 scheme to solve a problem but a scheme to fix a failed scheme is likely to be just another failed scheme).

NTRT was always about the best approach but given it's limited scope and unwillingness to cover other schemes it wasn't a solution for everyone Big Group covers - but it would clearly be preferable if the person controlling the purse strings wasn't using it as a core source of income. Sadly though no similar option exists so, given that fact, it's surely better that the money is spent by someone who understands the issues but didn't create the schemes rather than someone who helped create this mess.