Charged £550 two years on

marcarm

B2b is business to business

Are you acting in the course of a business or as a consumer

pappa_golf

Lulu0110 wrote: »

Not sure what a b2b contract is. As far as I simply see it, i was told a price and invoiced a price and then they realised they made a mistake and want me to pay for it. Whats to stop any person to make a bit more loot by saying whoops that was the wrong price, please pay more. Is it legal?

as per post above ,


ARE YOU ACTING in the capacity of a business , if so are you VAT registered




if you are , then you have been given the answer , if you are not , then why throw this into the equation ?

unholyangel

Being a business isn't necessarily going to leave the OP up the creek - just means they can't rely on consumer rights.

A contract still needs to be agreed before it is binding. So if its b2b, it would be up to a court to decide what the agreement was.

I mean we're not talking about a price being given and then getting invoiced on delivery for the amount + VAT. We're talking about performing a contract on one set of terms for over 2 years before turning around and claiming they should have been carried out under a different set.

SuperHan

LABMAN wrote: »

Is there legislation you can point to...I'm not entirely convinced the OP is a 'consumer' and suspect this maybe a b2b contract?

Yes, it's in the VAT legislation. It's in SI 1995/2518.. I think around regulation 14,15,16 (there are a few points on retailer invoices around there too)

J_B

antrobus wrote: »

As a general rule, rent is exempt from VAT.

Sorry, I haven't looked at the link.

My brother owns 'commercial property' that he rents out.
All his rental charges have vat added to them.

Domestic rents are zero rated.
Holiday rentals are standard rate.

I think!

Chucky1234

neilmcl wrote: »

Common misconception. You don't "claim back" VAT, you offset your liability from VAT sales against VAT purchases.

Unless the sales the business makes are zero rated, then there is no liabilty to offset it against, therefore they would indeed be 'claiming back' or reclaiming the input VAT.;)

Obviously irrelevant to the OP but just thought I'd mention it.