Historic contractor loan arrangements, EBTs and alleged loan claims.

Greenwoods is monitoring developments and bringing together individuals who have received correspondence and Repayment Demands relating to West 28th Street’s alleged loan claims.

For individuals who have received a formal Repayment Demand, we are currently reviewing the demands, gathering information and assessing the wider legal position. This includes considering the documentation available, identifying issues that may arise, and evaluating whether there may be advantages in a coordinated approach alongside any individual considerations.

For individuals who have not received a Repayment Demand, our current recommendation is generally to monitor developments and remain informed. At this stage, we do not consider it necessary in most cases to take formal legal action or incur legal costs where only preliminary correspondence has been received.

Our focus is on building the clearest possible picture across those affected, so that any future steps can be taken in an informed, proportionate and cost-effective way.

Receiving a Repayment Demand does not automatically mean you are required to make payment immediately or that any alleged liability has been established, but it does represent a significant development that may require careful consideration.

If you have only received earlier correspondence, such as Corrective Annual Statements or Notices of Assignment, these documents were not expressed to be demands for payment and did not generally require an immediate response or payment.

Whether any payment is ultimately due, and whether any claim is enforceable, will depend on the individual circumstances, available documentation and the legal issues that may arise.

Greenwoods is currently reviewing the position in relation to the Repayment Demands that have been issued and gathering information from those affected before making recommendations on next steps.

For guidance on what to do if you have received a Repayment Demand, please see our latest update and register your details with us so that we can keep you informed as the position develops.

West 28th Street is asserting that certain individuals are liable to repay alleged loans that it claims to have acquired by assignment. However, liability and enforceability are not matters that can be established simply by issuing correspondence or a Repayment Demand.

For individuals who have received a formal Repayment Demand, the issue of liability has now moved beyond the earlier preliminary correspondence and may require careful consideration. However, receiving a Repayment Demand does not automatically mean that the alleged debt is enforceable or that payment is due.

Whether any liability exists, and whether any claim would ultimately be enforceable, may depend on a number of factors, including:

• how the original arrangements were structured;
  • the terms and availability of the underlying documentation;
  • the validity and effect of any alleged assignment;
  • compliance with any applicable legal or regulatory requirements;
  • limitation and whether any claim has been brought too late; and
  • any previous enforcement history relating to the alleged loans.

The relevance of these issues will depend on the specific facts and documentation in each case.

Greenwoods is currently reviewing the position and gathering information from affected individuals before commenting on any particular legal strategy.

Many of the arrangements now being referred to by West 28th Street date back more than a decade, but the length of time passed may not by itself mean that the alleged loan cannot be enforced.

Whether any alleged loan remains enforceable will depend on a range of factors, including the documentation available, any relevant statutory requirements, the effect of any assignment, and limitation issues.

The significance of these issues will depend on the circumstances of each individual case.

Greenwoods is currently reviewing the position and assessing the issues that may arise in relation to the Repayment Demands that have been issued.

Limitation may be an important issue in relation to some alleged loan claims, particularly where the original arrangements date back many years.

Whether a claim is statute-barred or otherwise prevented by the passage of time will depend on the specific facts, including the nature of the arrangements, the terms of any documentation, when any cause of action is said to have arisen, and whether any events may affect the limitation period.

The relevance of limitation issues will vary from case to case. Greenwoods is currently reviewing the position and assessing the issues that may arise in relation to the Repayment Demands that have been issued.

West 28th Street has now issued formal Repayment Demands to some individuals through Trethowans and Ethica Resolve. However, a Repayment Demand is not the same as court proceedings.

At present, we are not aware of court proceedings having been issued against the individuals who have contacted us. The issue of a Repayment Demand is a separate step and appears intended to seek repayment before any decision is taken regarding potential further action.

Whether West 28th Street ultimately seeks to commence legal proceedings, and whether any such claim would succeed, will depend on a range of factors including the underlying documentation, the legal issues arising and the circumstances of each individual case.

If you have received a Repayment Demand, we recommend retaining all correspondence and keeping up to date with developments. Greenwoods is currently reviewing the position and assessing the issues raised by the demands that have been issued.

If you have not received a Repayment Demand, our current recommendation is generally to monitor developments and take no immediate action unless your circumstances change.

Issues relating to HMRC and any alleged loan are legally separate.

Many individuals who have contacted us have already resolved their tax position with HMRC in relation to contractor loan, loan-based remuneration or Employee Benefit Trust arrangements.

However, the Repayment Demands being issued by West 28th Street relate to an alleged underlying loan, rather than any tax liability.

As a result, having settled with HMRC does not necessarily prevent West 28th Street from asserting that sums remain due under an alleged loan arrangement. Equally, the fact that such a claim is made does not determine whether the alleged liability is enforceable.

The relationship between any previous HMRC settlement, loan charge position or other tax treatment and the alleged loan may be relevant depending on the individual circumstances.

Because tax questions are among the most common concerns raised by affected individuals, Euan Palmer, Partner in Disputes, and Ingrid McCleave, Head of Tax, have recorded a short video discussing the potential tax implications for individuals who have settled with HMRC and those who have not.

Ultimately, the significance of any previous HMRC settlement will depend on the specific facts, documentation and circumstances of each case.

The answer depends on the correspondence you have received.

If you have only received earlier correspondence, such as Corrective Annual Statements or Notices of Assignment, those documents did not generally require a response and were not expressed to be demands for payment.

However, some individuals have now received formal Repayment Demands from West 28th Street through Trethowans and Ethica Resolve. If you have received a Repayment Demand, you should review the documents carefully and ensure that you retain copies of all correspondence and any supporting documentation.

While a Repayment Demand is not the same as court proceedings, it is a significant development and should not be ignored. The relevance of any deadlines or time limits will depend on the specific content of the correspondence and the circumstances of the individual case.

Greenwoods is currently reviewing the Repayment Demands that have been issued and gathering information from affected individuals in order to assess the position and consider what recommendations may be appropriate.

If you have received a Repayment Demand and would like us to include your documents within that review, please provide them via our enquiry form or by contacting the team directly.

No. Making enquiries or seeking information does not in itself trigger court action.

Many individuals have contacted Greenwoods after receiving correspondence or Repayment Demands from West 28th Street. Seeking legal advice, obtaining information or discussing your position with a solicitor does not, by itself, increase the likelihood of court proceedings being issued.

If you have received a Repayment Demand, obtaining advice may help you understand the position, the issues that could arise and any options available to you. If you have only received preliminary correspondence, you may simply wish to stay informed as the situation develops.

Whether West 28th Street ultimately decides to pursue legal proceedings will depend on a range of factors and the circumstances of the individual case. Contacting a solicitor does not determine or influence that decision.

The appropriate next step depends on the correspondence you have received.

If you have only received earlier correspondence, such as Corrective Annual Statements or Notices of Assignment, our current recommendation is generally to monitor developments and take no immediate action. Those documents were not expressed to be demands for payment and, in most cases, did not require a response.

If you have received a formal Repayment Demand from West 28th Street through Trethowans and Ethica Resolve, this represents a significant development and you should retain all correspondence and supporting documents. We are currently reviewing the position and gathering information from affected individuals in order to assess the issues arising and consider what recommendations may be appropriate.

In either case, you may wish to register your details with us so that we can keep you informed as the situation develops. If you have received a Repayment Demand, please provide copies of the relevant documents, together with any loan or scheme documentation you still hold, so that they can be included within our review.

If you have received a formal Repayment Demand from West 28th Street through Trethowans and Ethica Resolve, this is a significant development and should not be ignored.

However, receiving a Repayment Demand does not automatically mean that you are required to make payment or that any alleged liability has been established.

Our current recommendation is that you:

• retain all correspondence and supporting documentation received;
  • locate any loan or scheme documentation you still hold;
  • avoid making assumptions about liability or enforceability before the position has been properly assessed; and
  • provide us with copies of the relevant documents if you would like to be included within our review of the wider position.

Greenwoods is currently reviewing the Repayment Demands that have been issued and gathering information from affected individuals in order to assess the position and consider what options may be available.

The appropriate response, if any, will depend on the individual circumstances, documentation and issues arising in each case.

Yes.

We are aware of a growing number of individuals who have received similar correspondence and, more recently, formal Repayment Demands issued through Trethowans and Ethica Resolve.

While individual circumstances differ, Greenwoods is reviewing information from affected individuals in order to better understand the issues arising and assess whether a coordinated approach may be beneficial.

Many people find reassurance in knowing they are not dealing with this situation alone.

Understanding the wider picture also helps identify common themes and issues that may be relevant across multiple cases.

Online discussions, articles, forums and AI-generated content can sometimes help identify issues and explain terminology. However, they should not be relied upon as legal advice.

The relevance of any argument, defence or response will depend on the specific facts, documents and circumstances of the individual case.

If you are considering taking action in relation to correspondence or a Repayment Demand from West 28th Street, it is important to consider your own position rather than relying solely on information that may relate to different circumstances.

Our approach currently depends on the stage you have reached in the West 28th Street process.

If you have not received a Repayment Demand, we are not generally carrying out individual assessments at this time, as our current recommendation is usually to monitor developments and remain informed.

If you have received a Repayment Demand, Greenwoods is currently reviewing the demands that have been issued and collecting information from affected individuals in order to assess the wider position. As part of that process, we are reviewing documentation and identifying the issues that may arise.

Should we decide to offer a coordinated service or commence individual reviews, we will explain the information required, the scope of any work to be undertaken and any associated costs before you decide whether to proceed.

In the meantime, if you have received a Repayment Demand, we encourage you to provide copies of the relevant documents, together with any loan or scheme documentation you still hold, so that they can be included in our review.

Potentially, yes.

We are aware of a growing number of individuals who have received either correspondence or Repayment Demands relating to historic contractor loan, loan-based remuneration or Employee Benefit Trust (EBT) arrangements.

While each person’s position will ultimately depend on their individual circumstances and documentation, there can be significant advantages in understanding the position across those affected and identifying issues that appear to be common to multiple individuals.

Greenwoods is currently gathering information from those who have received Repayment Demands in order to assess the wider position and consider whether a coordinated approach may be beneficial. This can help promote consistency, efficiency and cost-sharing where appropriate, while still recognising that individual circumstances may differ.

If a coordinated approach becomes appropriate, we will provide further information about how this may operate in practice, together with details of any proposed legal service and associated costs.

For now, our focus is on building the clearest possible picture of the issues affecting those who have received correspondence or Repayment Demands from West 28th Street.

There is no cost to register your details with us and stay informed as the situation develops.

At present, Greenwoods is gathering information and reviewing the position in relation to the correspondence and Repayment Demands issued by West 28th Street. Individuals can provide information and documentation for that review on a no-obligation basis.

If we decide to offer a coordinated legal service or if you wish to seek individual legal advice, we will explain the scope of the work, the likely costs and any available options before you decide whether to proceed.

Any costs will depend on factors such as the nature of the issues involved, the extent to which they are shared with other affected individuals, and whether a coordinated approach is appropriate.

Where common issues arise, there may be benefits in considering a coordinated approach, which can help promote efficiency and potentially reduce costs for those involved.

For now, our focus is on building a clear picture of the wider position and keeping affected individuals informed as the situation develops.

Potentially, yes.

Some individuals may already have taken legal or tax advice in relation to their historic arrangements, the correspondence received from West 28th Street, or any Repayment Demand that has been issued.

If you have already obtained advice and would like an independent view, it may be possible for Greenwoods to assist. Whether a second opinion is appropriate will depend on the stage reached and the information available.

At present, our focus is on reviewing the Repayment Demands that have been issued, gathering information from affected individuals and assessing the wider position. As that review progresses, we will provide further information about any legal services we may offer, including opportunities for individual advice where appropriate.

If you would like us to be aware of your circumstances, you are welcome to register your details with us and provide any relevant documentation. This will help us build the clearest possible picture of the issues affecting those who have received correspondence or Repayment Demands from West 28th Street.

We are aware that many individuals are comparing the current situation with previous attempts to recover sums said to be due under historic contractor loan, loan-based remuneration and Employee Benefit Trust arrangements.

Whether any particular claim can be challenged will depend on its individual facts, documentation and circumstances. It is therefore important not to assume that the outcome in one matter will necessarily determine the outcome in another.

Greenwoods is currently reviewing the Repayment Demands that have been issued and assessing the issues that may arise before making recommendations on any potential approach. Historic contractor loan and remuneration arrangements have previously given rise to a range of legal and tax disputes, but the relevance of any previous matter will depend on the facts of the individual case.

Issues relating to HMRC and any alleged loan are legally separate.

Many individuals who have contacted us have already dealt with the tax implications of contractor loan, loan-based remuneration or Employee Benefit Trust (EBT) arrangements, whether through settlement with HMRC, the loan charge regime or other engagement with HMRC.

The Repayment Demands being issued by West 28th Street relate to an alleged underlying loan rather than a tax liability. As a result, the fact that an individual has settled with HMRC does not necessarily prevent West 28th Street from asserting that sums remain due under an alleged loan arrangement.

Equally, the tax treatment of an arrangement and the enforceability of any alleged loan are separate issues, and the relationship between them may depend on the specific facts and circumstances of the individual case.

Because tax questions are among the most common concerns raised by affected individuals, Euan Palmer, Partner in Disputes, and Ingrid McCleave, Head of Tax, have recorded a short video discussing the potential tax implications for individuals who have settled with HMRC and those who have not.

If you are concerned about the interaction between your tax position and any correspondence or Repayment Demand received from West 28th Street, we recommend keeping up to date with developments and ensuring that any relevant documentation is retained.

Individuals affected by historic contractor loan, loan-based remuneration and Employee Benefit Trust arrangements may be in different positions from a tax perspective. Some have settled with HMRC, while others have not.

The tax position and any alleged loan liability are separate issues, although the relationship between them may be relevant depending on individual circumstances.

Because the position can differ significantly from one person to another, it is important not to assume that the implications for one individual will necessarily apply to someone else.

For a discussion of these issues, including the difference between those who have settled with HMRC and those who have not, watch our video featuring Euan Palmer, Partner in Disputes, and Ingrid McCleave, Head of Tax.

If a coordinated approach becomes appropriate, a Management Board is one way that affected individuals may choose to organise and inform overall strategy.

This can help ensure that common issues are considered consistently, while still recognising that individual circumstances may differ.

A Management Board would typically act as a representative group, helping to communicate with legal advisers, provide feedback on common issues and assist with decisions that affect the wider group. Individual legal positions would still need to be considered where relevant.

At this stage, no such structure is in place. Our current focus is on reviewing developments, gathering information from affected individuals and building a clearer picture of the issues arising before deciding whether any coordinated approach would be beneficial.

If a coordinated approach becomes appropriate, we will provide further information about how it would work in practice and what it would mean for those involved.

If you have received correspondence or a Repayment Demand from West 28th Street, you are welcome to provide relevant documents to us on a no-obligation basis.

This may include:
• any Repayment Demand received from West 28th Street, Trethowans or Ethica Resolve;
• any covering correspondence or supporting documents;
• previous correspondence relating to the alleged loan;
• any original loan or scheme documentation you still hold; and
• details of the adviser, promoter or intermediary involved in the original arrangements, where known.

Reviewing documentation from a broad range of individuals helps us build a clearer picture of the issues arising, identify common themes and assess whether a coordinated approach may be beneficial.

Any information shared with us will be treated confidentially. If further information would assist our review, we will let you know.

If you have received a Repayment Demand and are considering instructing Greenwoods, please provide as much relevant documentation as possible so that it can be included within our review of the wider position.

Many affected individuals entered into contractor loan, loan-based remuneration or Employee Benefit Trust (EBT) arrangements many years ago and are understandably surprised to receive correspondence after such a long period of time.

West 28th Street is not the original lender. It claims to have acquired certain alleged loan balances through a chain of assignments and is now seeking repayment from some individuals.

Based on the documentation we have reviewed, many recipients first received Notices of Assignment and Corrective Annual Statements before some individuals subsequently received Repayment Demands.

The significance of the passage of time, and any impact this may have on an alleged claim, will depend on the circumstances of the individual case. Greenwoods is currently reviewing the wider position and the issues arising from these claims.

Some individuals who have received Repayment Demands have seen correspondence referring to Ethica Resolve.

Based on the information currently available, Ethica Resolve is described as the “servicer” acting on behalf of West 28th Street in relation to the alleged loan balances.

The involvement of Ethica Resolve does not change the need to consider the underlying documentation, legal position and individual circumstances of each case.

If you have received correspondence from Ethica Resolve, we recommend retaining copies and providing them to us as part of any information submitted for review.

Many recipients have received a Notice of Assignment alongside other correspondence from West 28th Street, Trethowans or Ethica Resolve.

A Notice of Assignment is intended to notify the recipient that rights under an alleged loan have been transferred from one party to another.
Receiving a Notice of Assignment does not, by itself, determine whether any alleged liability exists or whether any assignment is legally effective. Those issues will depend on the underlying documentation and circumstances of the individual case.

Greenwoods is currently reviewing the documentation received by affected individuals and the issues arising from the claimed assignments.

Many individuals first received documents described as “Corrective Annual Statements” before any Repayment Demand was issued.

These documents appear to have been provided in connection with obligations that West 28th Street considers relevant under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

For many recipients, the statements were accompanied by a Notice of Assignment and correspondence expressly stating that the documents were not demands for payment.

The significance of these documents will depend on the individual circumstances and wider documentation available. Greenwoods is currently reviewing the role these documents may play as part of the wider West 28th Street position.