What should the punishment be for disabled VAT fraudsters?

[EL77]

I'm gob smacked that this has been going on for so long and more worryingly this hasn't just been a con by people pretending to be disabled it has been assisted by the disabled themselves.

i'm in the motor trade myself and it grates me that there are people out there making a living out of cheating the system that majority of us stick by.

surely fraud by deception requires a hefty sentence and a life long penalty/restrictions for future trading?

[Chrispy Porker]

I don't see why disabled criminals should be treated any differently from anyone else, in terms of sentence.

[r5gttgaz]

Clamp 'em.

[Stu R]

hurdles

[7db]

Given that the response to road crime seems to be abolishing roads, surely the response to VAT crime is to abolish taxes...

[saxmund]

To be honest it looks as if the system has been wide open to this... buy at a discount, sell on at a profit. Not sure why that should even be classified as fraud. If the system allows you to buy, sell on and then buy again... why not do it?

It would have been easy to build in controls, eg to ensure people can only buy 1 car every x years and put a cap on the market value as well.

[imbecile]

saxmund said:

To be honest it looks as if the system has been wide open to this... buy at a discount, sell on at a profit. Not sure why that should even be classified as fraud. If the system allows you to buy, sell on and then buy again... why not do it?

It would have been easy to build in controls, eg to ensure people can only buy 1 car every x years and put a cap on the market value as well.

Exactly. I can't see how they did anything wrong.

The true crime is VAT.

[J500ANT]

And remember it needed 2 car dealers in this scam too - the one selling it and the one buying (cos I doubt they'd be stooopid enough to sell back to the same dealer after a week)

[Mad Moggie2]

Chrispy Porker said:

I don't see why disabled criminals should be treated any differently from anyone else, in terms of sentence.

True. They bought the cars in bulk at discount and avoided VAT on the sale which able bodied have to pay whether of not they buy in bulk at trade discount or not..

More to the point we all pay the VAT on those cars in our taxes anyway They don't pay - but the tax payer not only subsidises these cars but also pays a double whammy in VAT too. Now that's the real crime here - having others pick up the tab in tax and funding in a double whammy in you like and why I will not have much sympathy if they end up in jail over this to be honest.

They also denied other disabled the opportunity to buy those cars specifically adapted to meet a serious need as well. An act of betrayal to fellow disabled if you like.

So I'm with CP on this one. They should receive the same as anyone else. Their bodies may not be as mine.. but their minds are criminally inclined whilst mine is not

[Deva Link]

Chop their legs off.

[telecat]

Where's the crime???? Until HMCR change the law it is perfectly legitimate.

[bobt]

Fine them heavily and then make them drive in those little light blue three wheelers that were the only vehicle available to real invalids when I were a lad.

[WildCat]

bobt said:

Fine them heavily and then make them drive in those little light blue three wheelers that were the only vehicle available to real invalids when I were a lad.

A m-mobility scoooter (Actually - you can have some right sassy fun on these ) )

[jezzaaa]

Guam said:

There are rumours going around of who was involved in this on the Motortrade side and If true it will cause shockwaves. If they did do this I would have thought these guys would have had more sense.

In truth I suppose its no different to the Car Manufactures coprporate fleet/ authorised second hand cars which profit from the VAT rules, and has been postulated to be the main cause for forecourt depreciation levels to the consumer.

I Imagine everyone is watching this with GREAT interest in the industry right now.


Cheers

Tom

As said by others, I don't think there is any crime here...the perpetrators are guilty of being cheeky with the rules...but if the rules don't stop them from buying multiple cars, I can't see that the authorities will have any grounds even to remove those involved from these same privileges, never mind thinking about prosecutions. And why on earth would the car dealers be worried? You can be sure they would have checked this out legally if they knew about the 'scam'...or if they're being sold a car, how would they have known it was a mobility purchase? Is it stated on the log book?

[WildCat]

jezzaaa said:

Guam said:

There are rumours going around of who was involved in this on the Motortrade side and If true it will cause shockwaves. If they did do this I would have thought these guys would have had more sense.

In truth I suppose its no different to the Car Manufactures coprporate fleet/ authorised second hand cars which profit from the VAT rules, and has been postulated to be the main cause for forecourt depreciation levels to the consumer.

I Imagine everyone is watching this with GREAT interest in the industry right now.


Cheers

Tom

As said by others, I don't think there is any crime here...the perpetrators are guilty of being cheeky with the rules...but if the rules don't stop them from buying multiple cars, I can't see that the authorities will have any grounds even to remove those involved from these same privileges, never mind thinking about prosecutions. And why on earth would the car dealers be worried? You can be sure they would have checked this out legally if they knew about the 'scam'...or if they're being sold a car, how would they have known it was a mobility purchase? Is it stated on the log book?

I do not know. I do not buy car adapted for such purpose. I would think though that the log book show the specific data relating to vehicle und might just list its modifications per requirement. (Ist case abroad as far as am able to establish but since I never had to buy one such vehicle or know someone with one = difficult to comment.)

I can only think that something must be on the registering document all the same. If not - then it should be

[catso]

jezzaaa said:

how would they have known it was a mobility purchase? Is it stated on the log book?

the car would be registered as 'disabled' (free road tax) rather than PLG etc, but you can change it by simply sending off the V5 for a change of class.

[Haze]

r5gttgaz said:

Clamp 'em.

Result

[J500ANT]

catso said:

jezzaaa said:

how would they have known it was a mobility purchase? Is it stated on the log book?

the car would be registered as 'disabled' (free road tax) rather than PLG etc, but you can change it by simply sending off the V5 for a change of class.

Actually, thats not the case. If they chose to pay the first reg fee and for the RFL then its classed as PLG in the same way as any other car.

[Mr2Mike]

telecat said:

Where's the crime???? Until HMCR change the law it is perfectly legitimate.

I wonder how many involved are also claiming incapacity benefits...

[jezzaaa]

Mr2Mike said:

telecat said:

Where's the crime???? Until HMCR change the law it is perfectly legitimate.

I wonder how many involved are also claiming incapacity benefits...

Ah well that's another issue...the rules are very clear on that one I think. And it is a criminal offence tantamount to fraud.