HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

by midnight Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:19 am

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/26/automatic-fines-late-tax-returns-may-not-legal-judge-rules/

by **LionsShare** Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:02 am

I wonder who at the revenue will sign & accept full unlimited commercial liability under the penulty of purgery?

by MikeThomas Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:31 am

And yet......... nobody thought to mention Article 12 of the 1688 Bill of Rights!!!!! Mad

by **LionsShare** Sat Jan 27, 2018 12:48 pm

MikeThomas wrote:And yet......... nobody thought to mention Article 12 of the 1688 Bill of Rights!!!!!

Too true, yes you are right!

by **assassin** Sat Jan 27, 2018 2:04 pm

Judge Richard Thomas said: "In my view the requirement...is for a flesh and blood human being who is an officer of HMRC to make the assessment, that is to decide to impose the penalty and give instructions which may be executed by a computer." HMRC has decided not to appeal the decision.

This is the important bit, the flesh and blood human being, as any private company is a dead entity or a legal fiction and only a flesh and blood human being can take actions on behalf of a dead entity.

What this judge has done is applied the law correctly and operated under no assumptions.

I wonder who at the revenue will sign & accept full unlimited commercial liability under the penulty of purgery?

The Prime Minister is the First Lord of the treasury and it is her who is actually liable.

by handle Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:37 pm

What does Article 12 of the 1688 Bill of Rights say? I tried to Google but it just comes up with a 1688 or 1689 act.

by jss64 Sun Jan 28, 2018 5:27 pm

I wonder how many other fines, penalty charges and other notices orders are "issued" by computer?

by Kestrel Sun Jan 28, 2018 5:46 pm

handle wrote:What does Article 12 of the 1688 Bill of Rights say? I tried to Google but it just comes up with a 1688 or 1689 act.

Grants of Forfeitures.

That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegall and void.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2/introduction

Turned into a statute many years ago but it is frequently ignored by the corporate ('criminal') courts.

In other words it is 'illegal' to make demands of monies 'fines' etc without a court hearing & if it has been done speeding 'fines' etc (ones that have not made the court) then they are null & void but sadly on planet reality we are up against criminals & they do as they bloody well please...

by Kestrel Sun Jan 28, 2018 5:48 pm

jss64 wrote:I wonder how many other fines, penalty charges and other notices orders are "issued" by computer?

Most idiots that work in these places are no more than computers, i.e. they are programmed!

by **assassin** Sun Jan 28, 2018 7:18 pm

jss64 wrote:I wonder how many other fines, penalty charges and other notices orders are "issued" by computer?

Quite a lot of them so now a precedent is in place, they can all be legally challenged.

by Sponsored content

HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules

Re: HMRC: Automatic fines for late tax returns may not be legal, judge rules