[[GQC] Tim]

Open to interpretation as you say Tim. Your interpretation seems to change though     I doubt theirs  will.

Well, to be fair, their interpretation, or should I say, clarification has also changed. Back when the SEISS opened up, there wasn't anywhere near the same amount of guidance on it. Infact, even the only box that had to be ticked was whether you were adversely affected or not. Which I still think holds true for a lot of those who claimed.

I also still think our children and grand children will be paying for this and there will be a lot of misery for a lot of us in the very near future. So far it's been better then expected personally these couple of months but if it would of continued from bad to worse you also need to look at the bigger picture, which we still have to do. One way or the other the biggest borrowing/recession in modern history will need to be paid for.

Before I was mainly commenting on the first grant but regarding the second I doubt most would have lost £14k by then. So the HMRC will have a closer look for those who claimed.

It's not a person that will be filtering out, that's computer algorithms. Then the case will be reviewed by a person.

[[GQC] Tim]

Also, reading the link start to finish, I think it's pretty clear who they will be going for first and foremost! I think some would definitely have to be very worried if they've already spent the grant or bounce back loan.

[Clever Forum Name]

Also, reading the link start to finish, I think it's pretty clear who they will be going for first and foremost! I think some would definitely have to be very worried if they've already spent the grant or bounce back loan.

You can use the bounce back loan to invest in the future of your company. There’s even blogs on the gov website about investing. I’m using my loan for that very purpose!

[[GQC] Tim]

Also, reading the link start to finish, I think it's pretty clear who they will be going for first and foremost! I think some would definitely have to be very worried if they've already spent the grant or bounce back loan.

You can use the bounce back loan to invest in the future of your company. There’s even blogs on the gov website about investing. I’m using my loan for that very purpose!

Yes, of course.

I was referring to the article:

If HMRC suspects a business did not actually require a loan, or that a sole trader ceased trading soon after receiving money from the SEISS scheme, it will be able to put the burden on those investigated to prove otherwise.

I wasn't referring to you, just in the general sense; if "one/someone" took the loan that didn't actually require it, then invested it, and the government asks for it back, well. That would be a problem now wouldn't it.

[CleanClear]

Yes, of course.

I was referring to the article:

If HMRC suspects a business did not actually require a loan, or that a sole trader ceased trading soon after receiving money from the SEISS scheme, it will be able to put the burden on those investigated to prove otherwise.

I wasn't referring to you, just in the general sense; if "one/someone" took the loan that didn't actually require it, then invested it, and the government asks for it back, well. That would be a problem now wouldn't it.

Thats how i seen it too. There is people on this forum who said get the loan, invest it, put it in premium bonds etc.. with no thought to just how it is going to be paid back from an investment point of view.  I.e.. 10k loan, pay back  £x a month.. what did you get with it ? .................. Nothing !! Put it in premium bonds 

[CleanClear]

Also, reading the link start to finish, I think it's pretty clear who they will be going for first and foremost! I think some would definitely have to be very worried if they've already spent the grant or bounce back loan.

You can use the bounce back loan to invest in the future of your company. There’s even blogs on the gov website about investing. I’m using my loan for that very purpose!

Thats great. They want you to invest, you did. They will encourage borrowing. You've still got to pay it back.
Here's an example i see as potential trouble...................
Guy claims the SEISS grant........................ he's been adversley affected.
Same guy now gets a bounce back loan...........................
What does he spend it on? Advertising, getting new customers, etc ? No, a new vehicle.

Now , if you have been adversley affected in your business in a negative way .................. why would you shell out for a new vehicle ?
How could you afford to ? So if you know you got the payments there, then what happened ? Its like shooting fish in a barrell.

I know this pandemic has caused us all to lose our nut a bit and do mad things........ but ultimatley you'll (anyone i mean) be liable for your own descisions.

[Slacky]

Third one down the list does it for me. We’re in June and still not doing commercial so that’s enough for me.

Why do they keep refering to this imaginary builder as a female? Mental.

[G Griffin]

Open to interpretation as you say Tim. Your interpretation seems to change though     I doubt theirs  will.

Well, to be fair, their interpretation, or should I say, clarification has also changed. Back when the SEISS opened up, there wasn't anywhere near the same amount of guidance on it. Infact, even the only box that had to be ticked was whether you were adversely affected or not. Which I still think holds true for a lot of those who claimed.

I also still think our children and grand children will be paying for this and there will be a lot of misery for a lot of us in the very near future. So far it's been better then expected personally these couple of months but if it would of continued from bad to worse you also need to look at the bigger picture, which we still have to do. One way or the other the biggest borrowing/recession in modern history will need to be paid for.

Before I was mainly commenting on the first grant but regarding the second I doubt most would have lost £14k by then. So the HMRC will have a closer look for those who claimed.

It's not a person that will be filtering out, that's computer algorithms. Then the case will be reviewed by a person.

You're right, they changed it at the beginning of May. They realised that being adversely affected financially would be difficult to gauge. I understand that it has been deliberately confusing, as well.
Just have your 'evidence' for being 'adversely affected' and you might not have to pay it back.
I know every guest that was on Loose Women from the end of March if anyone's interested?

[Arnold Palmer]

Lol

[Spruce]

Cambridge Dictionary:

Adversely:

in a way that has a negative or harmful effect.

Well, that's open to interpretation. Seeing as it was all or nothing I think a lot of people who didn't lose £7500 but still lost work did claim.

However taking the second one might be taking liberties, you'd need to see a very very significant shortfall to take that one as I'm sure HMRC will be on to who claimed the second one, not so much the first one.

Earlier in the year we also had no idea how long and how severe we would be in this mess. Thankfully it seems to be going down. More luck then wisdom if you look at all the idiots out there.

Still have lost work because of it this month and last month. I reckon when the furlough ends things could be bad for some customers.

Regardless I'm keeping a list of all the work I've either lost or was postponed.

I agree. This word adversely is open to interpretation. I believe these payments are financially based so adversely refers to a Windie suffering financial loss due to covid19.
If he choose to follow government guidelines to stay at home then he was adversely financially affected.

If his work is mainly commercial and he lost all his commercial work then he has been adversely affected economically.
If his customer base is mainly residential and he choose to continue to work and his income has basically remained the same, then financially he hasn't been adversely affected.
For businesses it's different. I work for a customer who has a family run plumbing business. 3 of their sons work as plumbers and gas fitters.
They closed the shop and put 2 of the sons on furlough. They kept the third son on to do emergency work only. They would not fit an outside tap for example but would repair or replace a boiler. They wouldn't redo a bathroom unless it was classed as an emergency.
Has their business suffered? Yes it has but they have managed to keep their heads above water due to the furlough scheme.
Many businesses had to rewrite their health and safety policy and will again rewrite it many times in the future as government changes the rules on social distancing etc.

[[GQC] Tim]

.......to continue to work and his income has basically remained the same, then financially he hasn't been adversely affected.

Sorry to pick one thing out of your post but this is another example of the shifting HMRC yardstick that has been clarified which I don't agree with.

If you've got a healthy business as a sole trader, then you'll see year on increase in turnover, even if you are at your maximum.

If your projections are an increase year on year of 3,5 or £4k, if you're anywhere down on that, even for those three months, but still have earned the same as the year before, you've also been adversely impacted. To be honest we've still got 10 months to go of this tax year, if it pulls together I might still have an increase over last year. Especially if you were to add a grant to that. So all of the sudden you're not negatively impacted? There's no business sense in that whatsoever.

The UK government is largely responsible for the fine mess we're in. The virus isn't their fault but their response has been woeful. It's only fair they pick up part of the bill and don't chastise people who are down on income but still have been able to trade and have at the end of the year had a healthy income.

[[GQC] Tim]

I think unless you're quite clearly have done an illegal thing, the government assurance that the grant will not have to be paid back will stand. At least the first one, stay tuned for the next one. As long as you've got records you've been negatively impacted in any way during those three months or so you'll be fine! 

[deeege]

Third one down the list does it for me. We’re in June and still not doing commercial so that’s enough for me.

Why do they keep refering to this imaginary builder as a female? Mental.

It’s the world we now live in. I’m surprised they’ve not gone all out and referred to ‘it’ as a trasgender, BAME who doesn’t identify as a any one being.

[G Griffin]

It'll be about whether you scaled down or temporarily stopped. If you worked as normal throughout I think you might struggle for 'evidence' should you need it.
And for all those not claiming the second grant- how do you know that you or someone that you've been in contact isn't going to get the virus?
You could be in an ICU with a pipe down your pie hole next week. It's not just something that affects other people.

[Arnold Palmer]

Third one down the list does it for me. We’re in June and still not doing commercial so that’s enough for me.

Why do they keep refering to this imaginary builder as a female? Mental.

Correct.



How dare they assume gender.

[Arnold Palmer]

Thats great. They want you to invest, you did. They will encourage borrowing. You've still got to pay it back.
Here's an example i see as potential trouble...................
Guy claims the SEISS grant........................ he's been adversley affected.
Same guy now gets a bounce back loan...........................
What does he spend it on? Advertising, getting new customers, etc ? No, a new vehicle.

Now , if you have been adversley affected in your business in a negative way .................. why would you shell out for a new vehicle ?
How could you afford to ? So if you know you got the payments there, then what happened ? Its like shooting fish in a barrell.

I know this pandemic has caused us all to lose our nut a bit and do mad things........ but ultimatley you'll (anyone i mean) be liable for your own descisions.

Why would you shell out for a new vehicle ?  - To increase productivity to help bounce back having been adversely affected by the coronavirus.

How could you afford to ? - The government ordered the banks to offer loans to help you bounce back if you've been adversely affected.

So if you know you got the payments there, then what happened ? - Huh?

Pesky barrelfish.

[Ooooooog]

Fraud squad gonna be busy, if I’d claimed and worked, I’d be sleeping with one eye open. They’ll be coming........knocking at the door.....best make sure accounts are in order.....

[NWH]

Have you had can you put me back a month or can you leave it until I text you,if you have  because of this virus it’s affected you so I wouldn’t worry even if productivity is up.
As said if you’ve been working and doing much the same whatever you’ve claimed will go on top of earnings so you’ll pay more Tax,better off for 18 months but you’ll pay the Tax in January 2021-July 2021. Like I say if you’ve still been arming much the same I’d calculate to see  you don’t go into the next bracket or what you’ve had will only be a loan as far as Your Tax bill goes 🤣.

[Rob.Hall]

You stay at home because the gov said so.
You have savings so not adversely effected.
You claim grant and business bb loan...

Gov said, go to work unless it is not safe to do so but as a wc you could have worked. You stayed at home all the same....and took grant and bb loan?
You stayed at home on your own back when you were asked to work....

You went to work but could not do some due to it being commercial, inside work, being turned away or very vunerable people. You were effected.
You took grant and bb loan.

I know I will get slated but everything is open to interpritation.

Its how hmrc look at it and there interpritation of adversely will be the one that sticks....

Await incoming. 😊

[Dave Willis]

I couldn’t work, I was protecting Sir Winston Churchill