People all over the England and United Kingdom are currently facing the same debt problems. Remember you don’t have to face financial problem alone. We are here to offer some specialist debt advice. After all, debt is a common problem but it needs an individual solution and the debt help and advisory.
Showing posts with label against. Show all posts
Showing posts with label against. Show all posts

The backlash against discount and deals websites – are you cutting back?

by Nazma Noor on March 21st, 2012

Recent reports have suggested that use of discounts and deal websites such as Groupon are on the decline. Vote in our poll and tell us if you’ve decreased your use of these sites.

For some people, shopping on discount and deal websites has become a part of their everyday life. Groupon, one of the most popular discount websites boasts over 414,000 Facebook fans on their US page and over 82,000 Facebook fans on their UK page. However a report released this week by a research group in Australia reported a 34% fall in “group-buying” transactions on websites such as Groupon.

Despite its success, Groupon have come under fire since they were founded in 2008 and are currently under investigation from the OFT regarding exaggerating discounts, failing to honour deals and “unfair terms”. Another deals website, Goodypass.com, which was backed by Daybreak presenter Kate Garraway, has been taking steps to stay afloat by making redundances and applying for a Company Voluntary Arrangement, which works in a similar way to an IVA.

Have you cut down on using deal and discount websites this year? Vote in our poll now and have your say.

Personally, I have been unsubscribed from Groupon and other similar sites for a few months now. I found the deals on offer didn’t appeal to me and I felt like I could do without the temptation to buy things I didn’t need. Stories of poor customer service have also made me think twice before purchasing from a deals/discount website.

Here are some other experiences of these websites:


View the original article here

FSA breakthrough in the fight against boiler room fraud

A broker has been sentenced to two years in prison and disqualified from being a director for six years, following the FSA’s discovery of a boiler room fraud.

David Mason, 29, of Southend-On-Sea, Essex, who conned investors out of £269,000, pleaded guilty to thirteen counts of carrying on a regulated activity without authorisation, one count of making false or misleading statements, promises or forecasts, and three counts of money laundering.  David Mason persuaded the victims to hand over money for shares which he then used to pay unauthorised salesmen to push more shares into the company, which was never even floated. According to the London Evening Standard, Mason wrote letters to his victims under a fake name, assuring them that their money was safe. This is the first boiler room fraud case uncovered by the FSA which has resulted in a criminal conviction. Although these unscrupulous firms are breaking the law by conning would-be investors into buying shares, which are either worthless or non-existent, they usually operate outside of the UK which throws conviction out of the question. The sentencing Judge, HHJ Rivlin QC said: “I am satisfied that without your involvement this scheme could never have operated...I do believe the arrangements made by you were sophisticated...You caused distress, worry, frustration and in some cases serious disruption...You acted with blantant and I would say ruthless dishonesty which was thoroughly reprehensible.” Tracey McDermott, Director of Enforcement and Financial Crime at the FSA, said: “This prosecution must be seen as part of the development of our strategy in the fight against the major menace to the public posed by boiler rooms. “Mason was at the heart of a sophisticated boiler room scam and without his involvement the deals could not have been completed and the proceeds laundered. Like all boiler room fraudsters, Mason was dishonest and posed a very serious threat to honest investors. “This sentence sends a clear message that the court takes boiler room offences seriously and will hand down significant sentences to those involved in them. We will continue to crack down on all types of unauthorised business, such as boiler rooms, and seek the severest penalties where possible.” David Sinclair, the accountant who Mason employed to initiate the business has been forced to fully reimburse the victims. This case is unusual in that the FSA has managed to secure full compensation for all investors, as in the majority of cases investors lose all of their money.
Manchester debt firm is liquidated owing creditors over £2.2m
Wednesday 11th August 2010

Bankrupt football legend probed by police over loan fraud
Monday 2nd August 2010


Mortgage broker ordered to repay £1.5m of client money used to pay off debts
Wednesday 14th July 2010


Barclays lifts lid on banking write-offs
Wednesday 20th February 2008


Send To Friend      Print      RSS Feed      News Archive
If you have any queries about this news story or our news section, please contact us

View the original article here

Welsh council winning a £4m fight against tax evaders

As councils in Wales increased their debt collection rate by 16 per cent, the arrears on council tax payments dropped by £2.1 million. Through 2010 to 2011, they brought in an extra £4 million that had stood in arrears.

The percentage of tax councils were able to collect varied from 98.2 per cent in Denbighshire to 94.5 per cent in Cardiff. Conservatives in Wales have stressed that if Welsh local authorities reached a 98.2 per cent council tax collection rate, Welsh councils would be almost £18 million better off. The additional council tax payments collected will be reinvested into vital council services, thus benefiting local residents. Steve Thomas, Welsh Local Government Association Chief Executive, told Wales Online: “Councils recognise that they have a duty to all taxpayers in their area to ensure that those who should pay taxes do, so that this money can be reinvested into vital council services, however at the same time it is a balance between collecting and helping people who are in financial difficulty. Today’s figures show that council workers have got that balance right. “Councils have been working closely with the WLGA, Welsh Government and the Citizens Advice Bureau to offer people practical support to help them make their payments; from practical suggestions to providing people with access to the financial support they need. They have also been proactive in making people aware of the council tax benefit which they may be entitled to and helping them in making their application. “Councils’ main aim is to help people address their difficult financial situation before they get to an unmanageable level of arrears and today’s figures show that their approach is working. Every council in Wales continues to urge any citizen who is experiencing financial difficulty to contact them for advice and information.” On March 31 this year the amount owed to local authorities still stood at £81.2 million, despite Welsh councils bringing in an extra £4 million in arrears in 2010-11. Kerry feather, head of finance, told Wales Online: “We are very pleased that despite the difficulties being faced by people as a result of the economic downturn that we have been able to increase the amount of council tax collected in the year and have worked positively with those who have experienced difficulties to reduce the level of arrears.” William Graham AM, Shadow Minister for Local Government, told Wales Online: “While it may be somewhat unrealistic to expect councils to collect 100 per cent council tax, they do have a responsibility to raise collection rates to maximise the resources available to invest in local public services. If too many council tax payments are left uncollected, this forces up bills for the vast majority of hardworking law-abiding taxpayers.”
Manchester debt firm is liquidated owing creditors over £2.2m
Wednesday 11th August 2010

Bankrupt football legend probed by police over loan fraud
Monday 2nd August 2010


Mortgage broker ordered to repay £1.5m of client money used to pay off debts
Wednesday 14th July 2010


Barclays lifts lid on banking write-offs
Wednesday 20th February 2008


Send To Friend      Print      RSS Feed      News Archive
If you have any queries about this news story or our news section, please contact us

View the original article here

Demand for more protection against phoenix companies

A recent survey of SMEs has highlighted the controversy surrounding insolvency law, with 96 per cent of those questioned saying they thought insolvent firms should not be allowed to launch similar companies. 

Carried out by the debt collection agency, Daniels Silverman, the survey demonstrates the concern felt by SMEs over the practice of pre-pack administrations – often dubbed as ‘phoenixing’ and seen as a method whereby insolvent firms ‘dump their debt’.

Commenting on the findings, Carole Hughes, managing director at Daniels Silverman, said: “Our survey results indicate that many SMEs would like a rethink in insolvency law to protect companies from unscrupulous directors that take advantage of pre-pack administration.

“They have told us they are becoming more and more frustrated by directors avoiding their debts by going through a pre-pack administration to form a new company from the remains of a failed company.”

Beverley Budsworth, Managing Director of The Business Debt Advisor, commented:”Buying back or restarting a failed business is a tough decision, and all too often new companies, set up out of the ashes of failed companies themselves, fail as they have been underfunded from day one.

“However, there are many success stories and I don’t think we should have an insolvency regime which makes it impossible for owners to buy back the business.”

Paralleled by rising insolvency levels in general, the number of phoenix companies has also increased, frequently generating a ‘business as normal’ impression and hiding the extent of insolvent companies.

Critics of pre-pack administrations claim that customers are misled by new ‘phoenix’ companies, as they operate under a similar name to their predecessor which could lead the customer to believe it was the older, more established company.

According to Daniels Silverman, many of the SMEs surveyed said they believed that creditors lending to these insolvent companies need further protection under the insolvency law. Although the insolvency law does provide some degree of protection, using a completely different name is not outlawed.

Highlighting the plight of the creditors, Hughes said: “It is very hard for a creditor to see an insolvent company trading ‘as usual’ often from the same premises, under the same director and with the same offering, while they are left significantly out of pocket because the money owing to them has been written off.”

Tony Costigan, Managing Director of Pheonix Company Consultants, specialises in company recoveries through pre-pack deals. He said: “In most cases the directors have personally lost substantial sums of money as they have continued to support the failing company way beyond their own financial means.”

In addition, he explained that allowing a company to re-start under a new name means that countless jobs, which would otherwise have been lost, are saved.

So whilst many SMEs voice their resounding dissatisfaction at phoenixing companies and insufficient insolvency laws, in fact, most are just calling for the smaller number of companies who exploit the system to be monitored.

Carole Hughes added: “While there are legitimate reasons for many pre-pack administrations we would call for a look at the number of unscrupulous directors who are exploiting the process to avoid paying their debts and profit from pre-pack administrations.”


View the original article here

Demand for more protection against phoenix companies

A recent survey of SMEs has highlighted the controversy surrounding insolvency law, with 96 per cent of those questioned saying they thought insolvent firms should not be allowed to launch similar companies. 

Carried out by the debt collection agency, Daniels Silverman, the survey demonstrates the concern felt by SMEs over the practice of pre-pack administrations – often dubbed as ‘phoenixing’ and seen as a method whereby insolvent firms ‘dump their debt’.

Commenting on the findings, Carole Hughes, managing director at Daniels Silverman, said: “Our survey results indicate that many SMEs would like a rethink in insolvency law to protect companies from unscrupulous directors that take advantage of pre-pack administration.

“They have told us they are becoming more and more frustrated by directors avoiding their debts by going through a pre-pack administration to form a new company from the remains of a failed company.”

Beverley Budsworth, Managing Director of The Business Debt Advisor, commented:”Buying back or restarting a failed business is a tough decision, and all too often new companies, set up out of the ashes of failed companies themselves, fail as they have been underfunded from day one.

“However, there are many success stories and I don’t think we should have an insolvency regime which makes it impossible for owners to buy back the business.”

Paralleled by rising insolvency levels in general, the number of phoenix companies has also increased, frequently generating a ‘business as normal’ impression and hiding the extent of insolvent companies.

Critics of pre-pack administrations claim that customers are misled by new ‘phoenix’ companies, as they operate under a similar name to their predecessor which could lead the customer to believe it was the older, more established company.

According to Daniels Silverman, many of the SMEs surveyed said they believed that creditors lending to these insolvent companies need further protection under the insolvency law. Although the insolvency law does provide some degree of protection, using a completely different name is not outlawed.

Highlighting the plight of the creditors, Hughes said: “It is very hard for a creditor to see an insolvent company trading ‘as usual’ often from the same premises, under the same director and with the same offering, while they are left significantly out of pocket because the money owing to them has been written off.”

Tony Costigan, Managing Director of Pheonix Company Consultants, specialises in company recoveries through pre-pack deals. He said: “In most cases the directors have personally lost substantial sums of money as they have continued to support the failing company way beyond their own financial means.”

In addition, he explained that allowing a company to re-start under a new name means that countless jobs, which would otherwise have been lost, are saved.

So whilst many SMEs voice their resounding dissatisfaction at phoenixing companies and insufficient insolvency laws, in fact, most are just calling for the smaller number of companies who exploit the system to be monitored.

Carole Hughes added: “While there are legitimate reasons for many pre-pack administrations we would call for a look at the number of unscrupulous directors who are exploiting the process to avoid paying their debts and profit from pre-pack administrations.”


View the original article here

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More

 
Design by Free WordPress Themes | Bloggerized by Lasantha - Premium Blogger Themes | JCpenney Printable Coupons