4. They will demand evidence, but refuse say what evidence they want!

Now we are entering Kafka country! This practice is so bizarre and nasty it’s better to give you some real examples – both happened to me.

The first was with investigator Steve Coomber, here is the schedule paragraph item 11.

25 April 2006 – S Coomber wrote, “What I now require is factual evidence [for the expenses claimed and that you are still in possession of said items]” On 29 April 2006 – NM wrote, “I’m in possession of many of the items listed as expenses… if you could tell [me] what items you are interested in and what evidence you need… I will do my best to provide you with what you require.” No reply was received by NM.

I have since been accused of not providing evidence that has been asked for!

The second two example is a conversation with J Lamper: The audio clip was recorded on 26 May 2006. It is me and J Lamper talking about evidence.

I say, “What sort of evidence would you find acceptable? I’ve been repeatedly asked for evidence… and I repeatedly say what evidence do you need? ”

Chartered Accountant Jon Lunn says, “Asking for that kind of documentation, whilst not specifying what they mean by ‘documentation’ is an ongoing trick, deployed by the Revenue Inspector, allowing closure notices to be issued on the grounds of ‘non customer co-operation’. Penalties follow and so do the Bailiffs soon after that.” Read his blog here.

—

What you need to know:

Techniques like this are unacceptable. Any inspector exposed using tricks like this should be suspended immediately pending a full investigation.