Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

On Feb 9, 12:27*pm, "tim...." wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message

...



On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 20:26:59 -0000, "Recliner"
wrote:

"tim." wrote in message

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
ual.net...
On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 17:25:29 +0000, Sam Wilson
wrote:
In my brother's village there is a small, free car park. *The
Parish
Council have to pay VAT on the notional value of the parking
service
they provide.

Never heard of that; I thought VAT was only charged on actual sales.

Does that happen anywhere else?

When my flat management company "hired" a small one man clamping
company, because we weren't VAT registered we had to pay the VAT due
on the "fines" collected (I could never work out why the person being
"fined" didn't have to pay it).

That seems very odd -- if the firm's turnover is not large enough to
have to register for VAT, it should not be charged and does not need to
be paid to HMRC. *And if the one man's clamping company was registered
for VAT, he should be responsible for including it in the fines and
paying the money over to HMRC.

ITYF the flat management company was doing the extorting with the man
in the van as their servant applying the clamps..

People have a choice to obey the sign that says: "Private property, no
unauthorised parking, clamping in operation".

I can assure you that the clamper was "responsible" in the way that he chose
to clamp a car. *He wasn't a rogue that clamped delivery vans etc
temporarily stopped on the entrance driveway.

Remember that these spaces that were being abused by outside parkers
actually BELONG to the individual flat owners. *Would you think it ok if
someone drove up to your house and decided that it was OK for them to put
their car in your garage without permission?

I've always been a great believer in the rising bollard.

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

"tim...." wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"tim." wrote in message

If the flat management company wasn't VAT registered (because the
turnover's below the threshold), then no need to add VAT to the
clamping fee.

Actually the flat management company is unregistered because, as a
resident owned company, it is not allowed to register.

Why is that?

It's not a trading company.

I didn't think HMRC cared who the proprieter is. And, if not
registered, how could the company even pay money to HMRC?

It's registered at CoHouse and pays CT to HMRC, but it's not allowed
to register for VAT.

It pays money to HMRC for VAT in the same way that every other
consumer does.

Now I'm even more confused -- consumers don't pay VAT to HMRC. They pay
it to a trader, who passes it on to HMRC. Consumers have no mechanism
for paying VAT directly to HMRC.

I think what you're saying is that you paid VAT to the clamper, who must
have been VAT registered. Did you pay him for his services (which would
have been VATable), or did he get paid through collecting VAT-inclusive
charges from illegal parkers? Or, I wonder, did he illegally collect
"VAT" from you, and just pocket it?

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...

"tim...." wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"tim." wrote in message

If the flat management company wasn't VAT registered (because the
turnover's below the threshold), then no need to add VAT to the
clamping fee.

Actually the flat management company is unregistered because, as a
resident owned company, it is not allowed to register.

Why is that?

It's not a trading company.

I didn't think HMRC cared who the proprieter is. And, if not
registered, how could the company even pay money to HMRC?

It's registered at CoHouse and pays CT to HMRC, but it's not allowed to
register for VAT.

It pays money to HMRC for VAT in the same way that every other consumer
does.

Now I'm even more confused -- consumers don't pay VAT to HMRC. They pay it
to a trader, who passes it on to HMRC. Consumers have no mechanism for
paying VAT directly to HMRC.

Yep, and tha's exactly how the MC paidm VAT to HMRC

I think what you're saying is that you paid VAT to the clamper, who must
have been VAT registered. Did you pay him for his services (which would
have been VATable), or did he get paid through collecting VAT-inclusive
charges from illegal parkers? Or, I wonder, did he illegally collect
"VAT" from you, and just pocket it?

I don't know how he accounted for it, but I understand that his MO was that
he charged the clampee a "fine" and the business who hired him the VAT
element of that fine, which they would claim back from HMRC on their VAT
return.

Except than in our case we weren't registered and hence not able to claim it
back.

No, I still don't know why he worked that way (or indeed, if it was legally
correct).

tim

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

"tim...." wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...

"tim...." wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"tim." wrote in message

If the flat management company wasn't VAT registered (because the
turnover's below the threshold), then no need to add VAT to the
clamping fee.

Actually the flat management company is unregistered because, as a
resident owned company, it is not allowed to register.

Why is that?

It's not a trading company.

I didn't think HMRC cared who the proprieter is. And, if not
registered, how could the company even pay money to HMRC?

It's registered at CoHouse and pays CT to HMRC, but it's not allowed
to register for VAT.

It pays money to HMRC for VAT in the same way that every other
consumer does.

Now I'm even more confused -- consumers don't pay VAT to HMRC. They
pay it to a trader, who passes it on to HMRC. Consumers have no
mechanism for paying VAT directly to HMRC.

Yep, and tha's exactly how the MC paidm VAT to HMRC

I think what you're saying is that you paid VAT to the clamper, who
must have been VAT registered. Did you pay him for his services
(which would have been VATable), or did he get paid through
collecting VAT-inclusive charges from illegal parkers? Or, I wonder,
did he illegally collect "VAT" from you, and just pocket it?

I don't know how he accounted for it, but I understand that his MO was
that he charged the clampee a "fine" and the business who hired him
the VAT element of that fine, which they would claim back from HMRC on
their VAT return.

Except than in our case we weren't registered and hence not able to
claim it back.

No, I still don't know why he worked that way (or indeed, if it was
legally correct).

It doesn't sound right. I would have thought he should have included VAT
in the fine, being prepared to issue a VAT receipt on request to the
clampee (just like, say, NCP does with its parking charges). He would
then pay the VAT collected to HMRC.

Did he issue you with VAT receipts (whether or not you could claim it
back)? If not, I suspect he was illegally pocketing it (clampers not
being renowned for their decency and honesty). There's a good chance
that he wasn't VAT registered (either because his turnover was genuinely
too low, or because he simply wasn't declaring all, or any, of his
taxable earnings).

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

On 09/02/2011 14:29, tim.... wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
wrote in message

If the flat management company wasn't VAT registered (because the
turnover's below the threshold), then no need to add VAT to the
clamping fee.

Actually the flat management company is unregistered because, as a
resident owned company, it is not allowed to register.

Why is that?

It's not a trading company.

I didn't think HMRC cared who the proprieter is. And, if not
registered, how could the company even pay money to HMRC?

It's registered at CoHouse and pays CT to HMRC, but it's not allowed to
register for VAT.

It pays money to HMRC for VAT in the same way that every other consumer
does.

Now I'm even more confused -- consumers don't pay VAT to HMRC. They pay it
to a trader, who passes it on to HMRC. Consumers have no mechanism for
paying VAT directly to HMRC.

Yep, and tha's exactly how the MC paidm VAT to HMRC

I think what you're saying is that you paid VAT to the clamper, who must
have been VAT registered. Did you pay him for his services (which would
have been VATable), or did he get paid through collecting VAT-inclusive
charges from illegal parkers? Or, I wonder, did he illegally collect
"VAT" from you, and just pocket it?

I don't know how he accounted for it, but I understand that his MO was that
he charged the clampee a "fine" and the business who hired him the VAT
element of that fine, which they would claim back from HMRC on their VAT
return.

Except than in our case we weren't registered and hence not able to claim it
back.

No, I still don't know why he worked that way (or indeed, if it was legally
correct).


Doesn't sound correct to me. Did he charge you a base fee for his services?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

Graeme Wall gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

I think what you're saying is that you paid VAT to the clamper, who
must have been VAT registered. Did you pay him for his services (which
would have been VATable), or did he get paid through collecting
VAT-inclusive charges from illegal parkers? Or, I wonder, did he
illegally collect "VAT" from you, and just pocket it?

I don't know how he accounted for it, but I understand that his MO was
that he charged the clampee a "fine" and the business who hired him the
VAT element of that fine, which they would claim back from HMRC on
their VAT return.

Except than in our case we weren't registered and hence not able to
claim it back.

No, I still don't know why he worked that way (or indeed, if it was
legally correct).

Doesn't sound correct to me. Did he charge you a base fee for his
services?

If he did, that'd have been subject to VAT on the invoice for it. But in
the situation described, somebody was definitely being a bit disingenuous.

If Joe Public is charged £100+VAT for a VATable service, Joe Public pays
£20 VAT, not some other entity.

If the VAT-reg service provider wants to charge Joe Public £100 all-in,
and get another £20 all-in from somebody else as "commission" or
whatever, then he can - by charging Joe Public £83.33+vat, and the other
entity £16.67+vat. But that other entity will only be able to claim back
£3.33 on their return, not £20.

Anything else is a scam.

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

"bobharvey" wrote:

On Feb 9, 12:27 pm, "tim...." wrote:

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
[snip]
ITYF the flat management company was doing the extorting with the man
in the van as their servant applying the clamps..

People have a choice to obey the sign that says: "Private property, no
unauthorised parking, clamping in operation".

I can assure you that the clamper was "responsible" in the way that he
chose
to clamp a car. He wasn't a rogue that clamped delivery vans etc
temporarily stopped on the entrance driveway.

Remember that these spaces that were being abused by outside parkers
actually BELONG to the individual flat owners. Would you think it ok if
someone drove up to your house and decided that it was OK for them to
put
their car in your garage without permission?

I've always been a great believer in the rising bollard.

A pain in the rear end from the (legitimate) users point of view though.

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...

"tim...." wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...

"tim...." wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"tim." wrote in message

If the flat management company wasn't VAT registered (because the
turnover's below the threshold), then no need to add VAT to the
clamping fee.

Actually the flat management company is unregistered because, as a
resident owned company, it is not allowed to register.

Why is that?

It's not a trading company.

I didn't think HMRC cared who the proprieter is. And, if not
registered, how could the company even pay money to HMRC?

It's registered at CoHouse and pays CT to HMRC, but it's not allowed to
register for VAT.

It pays money to HMRC for VAT in the same way that every other consumer
does.

Now I'm even more confused -- consumers don't pay VAT to HMRC. They pay
it to a trader, who passes it on to HMRC. Consumers have no mechanism
for paying VAT directly to HMRC.

Yep, and tha's exactly how the MC paidm VAT to HMRC

I think what you're saying is that you paid VAT to the clamper, who must
have been VAT registered. Did you pay him for his services (which would
have been VATable), or did he get paid through collecting VAT-inclusive
charges from illegal parkers? Or, I wonder, did he illegally collect
"VAT" from you, and just pocket it?

I don't know how he accounted for it, but I understand that his MO was
that he charged the clampee a "fine" and the business who hired him the
VAT element of that fine, which they would claim back from HMRC on their
VAT return.

Except than in our case we weren't registered and hence not able to claim
it back.

No, I still don't know why he worked that way (or indeed, if it was
legally correct).

It doesn't sound right. I would have thought he should have included VAT
in the fine, being prepared to issue a VAT receipt on request to the
clampee (just like, say, NCP does with its parking charges). He would then
pay the VAT collected to HMRC.

Did he issue you with VAT receipts

No idea.

I didn't "run" the company, I was just at a meeting where the person who did
explained that we had to pay the "VAT" on the clamping fee.

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 09/02/2011 14:29, tim.... wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
wrote in message

If the flat management company wasn't VAT registered (because the
turnover's below the threshold), then no need to add VAT to the
clamping fee.

Actually the flat management company is unregistered because, as a
resident owned company, it is not allowed to register.

Why is that?

It's not a trading company.

I didn't think HMRC cared who the proprieter is. And, if not
registered, how could the company even pay money to HMRC?

It's registered at CoHouse and pays CT to HMRC, but it's not allowed to
register for VAT.

It pays money to HMRC for VAT in the same way that every other consumer
does.

Now I'm even more confused -- consumers don't pay VAT to HMRC. They pay
it
to a trader, who passes it on to HMRC. Consumers have no mechanism for
paying VAT directly to HMRC.

Yep, and tha's exactly how the MC paidm VAT to HMRC

I think what you're saying is that you paid VAT to the clamper, who must
have been VAT registered. Did you pay him for his services (which would
have been VATable), or did he get paid through collecting VAT-inclusive
charges from illegal parkers? Or, I wonder, did he illegally collect
"VAT" from you, and just pocket it?

I don't know how he accounted for it, but I understand that his MO was
that
he charged the clampee a "fine" and the business who hired him the VAT
element of that fine, which they would claim back from HMRC on their VAT
return.

Except than in our case we weren't registered and hence not able to claim
it
back.

No, I still don't know why he worked that way (or indeed, if it was
legally
correct).


Doesn't sound correct to me. Did he charge you a base fee for his
services?

No.

He came around for free, but whenever he extracted a fine from a
transgressor, we had to pay the VAT (so we were told)

tim

Oxford to London commute - ridiculous??
 

On 09/02/2011 18:18, tim.... wrote:
"Graeme wrote in message
...
On 09/02/2011 14:29, tim.... wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
wrote in message

If the flat management company wasn't VAT registered (because the
turnover's below the threshold), then no need to add VAT to the
clamping fee.

Actually the flat management company is unregistered because, as a
resident owned company, it is not allowed to register.

Why is that?

It's not a trading company.

I didn't think HMRC cared who the proprieter is. And, if not
registered, how could the company even pay money to HMRC?

It's registered at CoHouse and pays CT to HMRC, but it's not allowed to
register for VAT.

It pays money to HMRC for VAT in the same way that every other consumer
does.

Now I'm even more confused -- consumers don't pay VAT to HMRC. They pay
it
to a trader, who passes it on to HMRC. Consumers have no mechanism for
paying VAT directly to HMRC.

Yep, and tha's exactly how the MC paidm VAT to HMRC

I think what you're saying is that you paid VAT to the clamper, who must
have been VAT registered. Did you pay him for his services (which would
have been VATable), or did he get paid through collecting VAT-inclusive
charges from illegal parkers? Or, I wonder, did he illegally collect
"VAT" from you, and just pocket it?

I don't know how he accounted for it, but I understand that his MO was
that
he charged the clampee a "fine" and the business who hired him the VAT
element of that fine, which they would claim back from HMRC on their VAT
return.

Except than in our case we weren't registered and hence not able to claim
it
back.

No, I still don't know why he worked that way (or indeed, if it was
legally
correct).


Doesn't sound correct to me. Did he charge you a base fee for his
services?

No.

He came around for free, but whenever he extracted a fine from a
transgressor, we had to pay the VAT (so we were told)


That has to be a nonsense, if there is any VAT involved it is in the fee
(fine) charged to the errant motorist.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net