Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 219

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    lydiamight is offline Registered User
    Location : North West Kent
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    633

    Default Fairline Dorset Limited---VAT Fraud

    From the HMRC web-site

    A Dorset yacht broker who charged £210,000 VAT on the sale of six luxury motor boats and then failed to pay the money to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has been jailed.

    Following investigations by HMRC officers, James Williams (51) was found guilty on six counts of cheating the public revenue and one count of false accounting. He was sent to prison for three years.
    John Cooper, HMRC Assistant Director Criminal Investigation said:

    “Williams used his position as director of a yacht brokers to commit VAT fraud. He sold boats which had previously been supplied VAT-free for export to the Channel Islands, but failed to account for the VAT on their subsequent sale in the UK. This blatant attack on the tax system not only robbed the Exchequer of public funds, but is also unfair to those businesses that diligently abide by the rules.

    "Tackling VAT fraud is a priority for us and we will not hesitate to pursue those who commit this type of offence. Anyone who has information about suspected VAT fraud can call the Customs’ Hotline on 0800 59 5000 or email customs.hotline@hmrc.gsi.gov.uk

    HMRC investigators discovered that Williams charged VAT to UK customers, but failed to pass the money to HMRC on six occasions. This fraud totalled £209,225.10. The total VAT inclusive price of the six motor cruisers was £1.4 million (£1,404,998.60).

    Williams also falsified a sales invoice, in the name of another company, that suggested an inflated amount of VAT had already been paid on a motor yacht. This invoice was fabricated to make it appear that VAT had been charged on the sale of the vessel.

    Upon sentencing at Bournemouth Crown Court, His Honour Judge John Harrow said:

    “This was a deliberate and calculated attempt to deprive the Revenue.”

    Williams’ business ‘Fairline Dorset Limited’ was VAT registered between August 2005 and November 2007. HMRC VAT officers became suspicious of the company’s financial activity because although Williams received around £32,500 in VAT reclaims, and charged and collected VAT from UK customers, no output tax was declared to HMRC.

    Williams used the proceeds of this crime to fund a seemingly comfortable lifestyle. He sent his children to private school and bought and renovated a 44 foot yacht ‘Siri’ based in Portland Harbour, Dorset. The yacht has since been sold.

    HMRC are pursuing confiscation proceedings.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    554

    Default

    From what has been said in other posts i understand that this lowlife was not a broker but rather was trading as a principal.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    3,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beejay190 View Post
    From what has been said in other posts i understand that this lowlife was not a broker but rather was trading as a principal.
    Not a member of ABYA either.
    John Rodriguez Yachts. Cruising & Bluewater Yachts www.jryachts.com

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7

    Default Know the person Know the facts

    Quote Originally Posted by beejay190 View Post
    From what has been said in other posts i understand that this lowlife was not a broker but rather was trading as a principal.
    I am just wondering if you know the accused beejay or are you just enjoying kicking someone who is down? It is people like yourself that should hold their heads in shame for using such phrases. As regards for your word "low life" I assume that speak on some authority on subject?

  5. #5
    PaulGooch's Avatar
    PaulGooch is offline Registered User
    Location : Home = Norfolk, Boat = The Wash
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    4,498

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JFJ View Post
    I am just wondering if you know the accused beejay or are you just enjoying kicking someone who is down? It is people like yourself that should hold their heads in shame for using such phrases. As regards for your word "low life" I assume that speak on some authority on subject?
    Only reason he's "down" is because he got sent down, for stealing £210,000 of VAT money he'd collected.

    How does stealing £210,000 NOT make him a low life ?

    It what way are you related to him ?
    Jeanneau Merry Fisher 805 For Sale. www.gooch.co.uk

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7

    Default Speak as you find

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulGooch View Post
    Only reason he's "down" is because he got sent down, for stealing £210,000 of VAT money he'd collected.

    How does stealing £210,000 NOT make him a low life ?

    It what way are you related to him ?
    How do you actually know that the accused "stole" the alleged £210,000 VAT? If you speak on authority on this case then you identify yourself as an interested party (ie you are involved in the case). I do not know you personally but you sound very unchristian in your attitude towards this man. As regards to your last question I am not related to him, but I do not make judgements on the outcome of the court case as I know different and you should speak as you find not join in with the rest of the pack wolves.

  7. #7
    PaulGooch's Avatar
    PaulGooch is offline Registered User
    Location : Home = Norfolk, Boat = The Wash
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    4,498

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JFJ View Post
    How do you actually know that the accused "stole" the alleged £210,000 VAT? If you speak on authority on this case then you identify yourself as an interested party (ie you are involved in the case). I do not know you personally but you sound very unchristian in your attitude towards this man. As regards to your last question I am not related to him, but I do not make judgements on the outcome of the court case as I know different and you should speak as you find not join in with the rest of the pack wolves.
    Here's a clue for you :

    James Williams (51) was found guilty on six counts of cheating the public revenue and one count of false accounting. He was sent to prison for three years.
    Last edited by PaulGooch; 17-04-12 at 17:29.
    Jeanneau Merry Fisher 805 For Sale. www.gooch.co.uk

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Posts
    11,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JFJ View Post
    I am just wondering if you know the accused beejay or are you just enjoying kicking someone who is down? It is people like yourself that should hold their heads in shame for using such phrases. As regards for your word "low life"
    He's not the accused, he's the convicted criminal. As such he should be hanging his head in shame. Surely you're not trying to say that he made an innocent mistake?
    Last edited by longjohnsilver; 16-04-12 at 17:11.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by longjohnsilver View Post
    He's not the accused, he's the convicted criminal. As such he should be hanging his head in shame. Surely you're not trying to say that he made an innocent mistake?
    Hi LJS
    What I am saying is, all is not what it seems and just because a Jury has found the person guilty it does not mean he is. The case against this chap was made very complicated by the HMRC, which in turn made it extremely difficult for the Jury to sort out the wheat from the chaff.
    There has been many cases in history where an innocent man has been "set up" and hanged for a crime he did not commit for instance "George Kelly was executed at Walton jail on Merseyside in March 1950," google this and it might enlighten you. Of course it is too late to "undo" the hanging as no amount of pardoning can bring him back.
    I have known the man in question for over 20 years and I know him to be an honest and trustworthy person. Yes he has made mistakes, as we all have, but this case was about being sucked in by the big fish and swallowed up. The real criminals have escaped any form of punishment, and in my opinion this was a stitch up.
    His family and friends are serving this sentence with him as we all know that he is not wholly to blame for the mess he has been dropped in, so I would ask that comments about this matter be restricted to fact as it is a nightmare for all his family at the moment. Thank you

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JFJ View Post
    Hi LJS
    What I am saying is, all is not what it seems and just because a Jury has found the person guilty it does not mean he is. The case against this chap was made very complicated by the HMRC, which in turn made it extremely difficult for the Jury to sort out the wheat from the chaff.
    There has been many cases in history where an innocent man has been "set up" and hanged for a crime he did not commit for instance "George Kelly was executed at Walton jail on Merseyside in March 1950," google this and it might enlighten you. Of course it is too late to "undo" the hanging as no amount of pardoning can bring him back.
    I have known the man in question for over 20 years and I know him to be an honest and trustworthy person. Yes he has made mistakes, as we all have, but this case was about being sucked in by the big fish and swallowed up. The real criminals have escaped any form of punishment, and in my opinion this was a stitch up.
    His family and friends are serving this sentence with him as we all know that he is not wholly to blame for the mess he has been dropped in, so I would ask that comments about this matter be restricted to fact as it is a nightmare for all his family at the moment. Thank you
    If that is the case, then he should appeal against his sentence. Coming on here protesting his innocence will not do any good. Nobody here is qualified to judge whether the verdict is correct - that is a job we in society leave to our courts. The argument that the case is "too complicated" for a jury does not hold water. The jury makes its decision based on the evidence presented by both parties. If there is a "failure" it is with the defence not being able to persuade the jury their account of what went on was correct.

    I suggest you direct your efforts towards launching an appeal - which is what his legal advisers will be doing if they believe there has been a miscarriage of justice.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •