u/8NaanJeremy

Just back from a gym session at a small, pay per day gym in my neighbourhood.

Whilst using one of the leg press machines, the wire snapped. To be honest, it took the heart out of me, but luckily it didn't cause any injuries or any other disruption in the gym itself.

After the incident a couple of the staff went over to check the machine, confirming that the cable had broken or overextended or something, and then I just continued my workout in a different section.

Once I finished and headed for the exit, the reception guy came over with some messages translated in Burmese.

It started friendly and innocent enough. The first one was

>Sorry about the machine, we will fix it soon. Please don't use it.

Obviously fine. Then...

>We will speak with the office. It will be repaired soon.

I responded 'Great, that's fine'...

But then...

>'We will let you know the cost/price tomorrow morning'

I was pretty angry at this, as I was in no way using the machine in an irresponsible or incorrect manner. There is no way that it could be seen as my responsibility for breakage/repair.

Right then some other foreign customers came in and took attention away from the conflict, perhaps helpfully.

I eventually looked up Translate app for Burmese/English and showed them a message saying 'I was using the machine correctly. The break is not my responsibility'

The staff took a photo of this to send to his head office, and then I left.

Realistically, I think they are just trying it on, and hoping I am soft or stupid enough to pay for their own negligence.

But I am also a bit concerned that some meathead/body builder type is going to start menacing me for the repair money.

I could just stop going to the gym, in fact I probably will, but as it is right by my street, I am very likely to bump into the staff quite often.

Do I need to get the police or tourist police involved in this?

Hi

I have a complex case with HMRC regarding Voluntary Class 2s from abroad, and would like to get some closure, particularly as the rules change this year with everyone being moved up to Class 3.

I applied for CF83 in 2023 and received a reply that same year. So I was well 'within the system' pre deadline.

I was sent the standard shortfall chart, with amounts owed and for which years. (some class 2, some class 3 depending on activity)

My application was actually substantially held up between 2019 and 2022 due to misleading advice on HMRCs website. (Originally statement was that applicants must meet conditions a + b, but this was later changed to a OR b)

I was then held up again in 2023, from making any initial payment, my bank did not let me add the appropriate NIC identification code (1 character short)

I actually got through to them on the phone in 2024. With the banking issue resolved. After that, things get a bit sticky...

I proposed that I wished to clear my backlog of shortfall years by paying the class 2 rate at double the normal rate, 'over the next several years'. I believe that I mentioned a figure of at least 5 and up to 10 years, to do this.

I proposed that this would allow me pay off both my current and historic class 2 years, simultaneously, year by year.

I was told by the phone advisor that this would be 'noted on my account' and that overpayments arriving from me would be directed in this way. I also clarified that overpayments should be directed first at the oldest/cheapest years.

During this conversation I was not informed that the April 2025 deadline made this plan impossible. I believe I should have been warned, rather than an agreeable advisor 'noting this in my account'

I absolutely acknowledge that I should have been much more careful about the deadline, specified in the shortfall chart, sent as a response to my CF83.

At the same time, I was reliant on the advice I received on the phone and acted according to this advice, which has left me in a position now where I am unable to pay for those expired years.

Had I been corrected on the phone. 'This plan is not possible' or similar, then I absolutely would have paid a lump sum, before the deadline.

I feel really stuck in a 50/50 here. I am clearly responsible for having missed published deadlines, sent in a letter. But I missed the deadlines as a result of what was said on that phone call.

I believe the advisor I spoke to was someone from the overseas/NICS team, rather than a standard first point of response phone help desk, but am unsure.

To add insult to injury, a payment I made pre-deadline was not allocated in the way that we discussed on the phone anyway.

This misallocation forms the basis of a complaint I have already submitted.

I made a further payment this year, in line with the agreed approach on the phone call. Some of this has been applied to recent tax years. But HMRC have also written to me asking for confirmation on why I sent the money.

I do not know if that suggests my case is open, that allocation can still be changed, or that they are completely unaware of the 2024 phone log and records on my account.

Ideally, I want to argue for those years to be reopened, on the basis of my timely contact, intent to pay and confusing/misleading advice causing me to miss the deadline.

I would probably be happy to accept some of those expired years being reopened and absolutely, the correct allocation of payments sent pre deadline.

I guess that is all for now. Please do reach out if you can help or if I can clarify anything to support my case either way.

Thank you