HMRC seek repayment Maxwell and FTR Ltd

[Rob Carr]

Hi,

I am late to this thread but after months of searching I  have just had the link forwarded to myself.

I was also scammed by fast tax rebates/Allan maxwell. Very similar to the points above.

Provided my details on the grounds of a uniform/work related expenses rebate. No mention of EIS.

Expected to pay back the full amount. Received 4k over 3 payments, hmrc wanting 12k back.

I have written to my mp, he appealed on my behalf (unsuccessful).

I reported to action fraud > forwarded to Northumbria police.

Was told there were several other victims and assured it was being looked into.

Provided hmrc with a crime number - a few weeks later the case is dropped by the police and left for hmrc to deal with “to save duplicity in the investigation”

as far as I can see hmrc are only interested in collecting the money from the victims.

I have no legal representation but have just sent off my tribunal letter this week.

Out of interest where are the people on this thread based?

I’m from fleetwood and know of 15 other people affected by this. 

[slick132]

Hi Rob and welcome to CAG

 

Your post has been moved to your own topic to avoid hijacking the other thread. Use this from now on.

 

Please don't post a single block of text - very hard to read !! I'll sort this in a mo. Oops, HoneyBee and/or DX have edited into paragraphs already - thanks .

Edited March 11, 2022 by slick132

[honeybee13]

Hi Rob, welcome to CAG. I'm sorry to hear that you and 15 others have been caught up in this scam.

 

This thread is for advising Schipoo, you might also like to post on our general thread about Alan O'Hara and Allan Maxwell.

 

Best, HB

[slick132]

Hi Rob,

 

Is that Fleetwood in Lancs.

 

Read other threads here, particularly those for Dixon and Schipoo. Also, there will be important updates on Schipoo's thread over the next few days, about the Tribunal so you should subscribe to that thread and get updates when folk make posts there.

 

 

[Rob Carr]

Hi, yes, Fleetwood in Lancs.

 

 

[Rob Carr]

@dixon2094 how do I go about sending you a DM? When I try it says I don’t have access

[honeybee13]

You wouldn't normally need to talk via PM, Rob. We recommend keeping discussions on the open forum.

 

HB

[dx100uk]

quite correct 

we dont allow that for newbies as you could be a scamming solicitor touting for business and charging fees.

 

why do you need to do so anyway?

if you have questions...

ask them here on your own thread here please:

 

dx

 

[Rob Carr]

It was just regarding #161.

HMRC asking me to repay Fast Tax Rebates Ltd scam rebate - Page 8 - HMRC - Consumer Action Group

 

I reported through action fraud and eventually got it passed to NP.

 

It went nowhere and they told me they were leaving it for hmrc.

This was sometime last summer, maybe July.

I was wanting to see if it was worth logging again.

 

Also noted that their mp is from Blackpool and I know a lot of people that live in my area but work in Blackpool that were referred though work colleagues.

 

We could potentially have mutual friends and wanted to see if he wanted to pick up/share info through Facebook etc. 

[Rob Carr]

Hi,

 

After some advice and hopefully people don’t mind sharing their information.

 

I have just had an independent review, however, I am aware of another independent review that has been conducted by another officer and the wording is very similar.

 

Both cases say “akin to providing your pin code” and “intended victims for this crime is the public purse” 

 

is it fair to say that if different hmrc officers are simply copying and pasting replies for a pre written script that this isn’t independent and I’m I within my rights to complain?

[dx100uk]

probably correct

but if they are investigating this lot of scammers behind the scenes ...

they wouldn't want to give the game away..

[slick132]

Hi Rob,

 

If you've read through the threads of Schipoo and Dixon, you'll see how their cases have panned out.

 

When you object to their determination and tax demand, HMRC review the case and then review the review.

 

It may then be referred to the Tribunal process. In this regard, see my recent comments on Schipoo's thread.

 

The Tribunal process is not really appropriate but it HAS bought our users some valuable time. The Tribunal is really there to ensure that tax deemed payable has been correctly determined with regard to all applicable taxation legislation.

 

In your case, HMRC gave you a tax refund for EIS tax relief claimed fraudulently by Maxwell/FTR - the tax relief was not due so HMRC want it all repaid. So a Tribunal is likely to determine the tax must be repaid unless they consider Regulation 8, recently referred to on Schipoo's thread (The Income and Corporation Taxes (Electronic Communications) Regulations 2003; UK Statutory Instruments 2003; No. 282; PART 3; Regulation 8).

 

You're not that far through the process yet but forewarned is forearmed.

[Rob Carr]

Hi @slick132, 

 

I have read through their posts and found the content posted by yourself and others really useful. 
 

However, I am at the same point as schipoo. I have had both my review and independent review decisions upheld and recently sent off my appeal to tribunal.

 

I did this just before finding this page so wasn't aware of regulation 8 etc. 
 

Similar to mentioned on #157 of that thread I laid my appeal to tribunal out as a relay of the story rather than to question if HMRC have followed the correct processes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[slick132]

Hi Rob,

 

If you've already made your submission in the Tribunal process, act quickly now to make a further submission.

 

Something like :-

 

Further to my submission to the Tribunal of xxxx date, I wish to add the following points for consideration. [Rob, use the example on Schipoo's thread to make the further points about .........

 

1. You are now aware of  the Income and Corporation Taxes (Electronic Communications) Regulations 2003; UK Stat'y Instruments 2003; No. 282; PART 3; Regulation 8

 

2. You were totally unaware of the claim made on your behalf by Maxwell/FTR.

 

Etc, etc.

 

Post a draft here before submitting to the Tribunal if you want. 

 

Make sure you copy every submission to HMRC Legal Team as required in this process.

 

 

 

[honeybee13]

Thread reopened.

 

HB

[Rob Carr]

I received communication from the tribunal.

“If the respondents do not object, they have been instructed to deliver to you a statement of case within 60 days from the date of this letter.  

You will then have 42 days in which to provide a list of documents to the Tribunal and the respondent unless the Tribunal directs otherwise.

communications in this appeal:  The Tribunal directs that, if you have not already done so on your notice of appeal, you must within 14 days notify the Tribunal and the other party of your email address or notify the Tribunal that you do not have one.”

Is it just a case of waiting for communication from HMRC now? 

[honeybee13]

That's how I read it but Slick is the expert. Have you provided your email address to the tribunal and the other side?

 

HB

[slick132]

Yes HB, I agree

[Rob Carr]

Yes, both the tribunal and hmrc have my email address. Shortly after this hmrc emailed me with the email address and phone number of a litigator but I’m guessing there is more to come and I don’t need to do anything just yet?

[Rob Carr]

Today’s update...

 

DIRECTION SOUGHT
1. The Respondents apply for the following direction under Rule 5(3)(a) The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2020:
“The time limits for the Respondents’ to provide the Respondents Statement of Case is extended until 5pm on 22 December 2022.
GROUNDS FOR APPLICATION
2. In accordance with the directions dated 26 August 2022, the Respondents are due to serve the Respondents Statement of Case on 24 October 2022.
3. The Respondents now seek an additional 60 days to comply with the direction as the Respondents are holding ongoing discussions with the stakeholders to confirm HMRC’s position and to finalise the draft Statement of Case.
4. As the Tribunal are aware, there are a number of similar appeals now being appealed and the discussions are necessary to ensure any defence of the case is robust and may also lead to a narrowing of the issues under appeal. The Respondents contend there is no prejudice to the Appellant.
CONCLUSION
 OFFICIAL

5. In view of the overriding objective at Rule 2 and in accordance with Rule 5 of the Tribunal Rules, the Respondents consider that the extension of time requested is reasonable and proportionate and respectfully request the direction be granted.

[unclebulgaria67]

Surely a positive, that HMRC are needing to hold ongoing discussions, as this may indicate that they are not as confident about their position as previous stated.  

 

Also, if the stakeholders include Government officials, they may not like the politics of having people made responsible for sums they had not personally received, when it appears that there are still many suspect tax rebate schemes still operating, which HMRC have not been carrying out sufficient checks on or actions taken to stop them from operating

[slick132]

Hi Rob,

 

Did you see what I posted 12 days back on the General thread - https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/439099-information-on-fast-tax-rebates-ltd-and-the-eis-scam/?do=findComment&comment=5184436

 

[Rob Carr]

Hi, Yes thanks, I keep up to date with all related threads. I get notifications for each post.

 

I will keep you updated if I hear anything back before the December deadline.

[Rob Carr]

I have just received a copy of HMRC’s statement of case.
 

They have requested that the tribunal rejects the appeal. 

 

I can upload if anyone would find it useful to see the full statement. 

[slick132]

Please see Dixons thread and let us know if the Statement of Case is the same - if so, no need to post it here.

 

Let us know ......