AIBU to refuse to pay cash

[cashorbanktransfer]

We have just had some decorating done. Used what appeared to be a small but reputable company. All prices/spec agreed by text.

Work is completed (fine) and now we have been asked to pay cash (several thousand pounds). We refused as the prices were not agreed for this and we have continually asked for bank details so we can pay in full.

Have now been told there is high rate interest added if work is not paid cash within one day of completion as per terms and conditions. We were obviously not told this in advance! I never asked to see terms and conditions as expected to pay in full on completion.

Can a business legally require cash without agreement in advance. Surely the only reason for cash is to avoid vat or ni or tax or something - or would there be any other reason?

Thank you

We took 3-4 customers a week over various wrangles as a trade business, and we always won. (£5 million turn-over) domestic customers.
Every time, the judge isn't bothered about accusations only facts.
If someone goes to court on the basis of a moral-ethical accusation in this case refusing to pay by cash because you may think the company is tax-avoiding, you will lose.
Plus you'll have to pay interest and costs.
They want cash-pay them cash.
Personally, I hate being paid in cash and cheques, but cheques aren't as painful with the ability to photo the cheque and the fast clearing times. I used to charge a processing fee for cheques.

You have no idea they are avoiding tax. And if this is your moral high ground I hope you don't use Amazon.

Op, I take issue that a sole trader is not a 'proper' or 'reputable' company. I'm a sole trader and even when people ask to pay cash thinking it will be cheaper I let them know the price will be the same.

And as you well know, the judge will have expected you to have produced a magical thing called an invoice with your terms of payment on it in order to prove your case. You will have a VAT number and a business address and so on.

The OP hasn't been issued with an invoice. Its a series of text messages and no evidence of terms and conditions. She will simply provide a series of text messages back proving she has tried to pay and payment has been declined.

You really think that a business that communicates in text messages and not in writing is going to (a) go to court and (b) succeed in court? All that will happen in the very unlikely event they managed to produce a PAP letter and summons is they would be sent to mediation and told to receive payment through a bank account.

The builder may be declaring the money and whether he does or not is not down to OP no, but for every builder that doesn't declare the money and pay the tax on it, there will be subbies paid in cash with no tax paid and so on. The knock on effect is a large amount of tax/vat going unpaid.

OP hasn't clarified if she has an invoice, she referred to everything being on text, but if no invoice has been provided and the builder insists on cash then it very much infers that he is not intending to declare it.

OP has a right to insist on an invoice for the work done. OP should have been given a copy of the T&C. OP should not have to take time off work and pick up a large amount of cash if she doesn't want to and if she was not made aware of the T&C up front.

OP could give the builder a cheque if he won't give his bank details, and then she has proof that she has paid him should it go to court. If the builder is trying to defraud the government, he is unlikely to want to take it to court.

Totally missing point of thread but thousands for decorating. One room. Wtf.

Come on, the customer and the service provider entered into a contract once the work was agreed upon and then completed.
I agree it's not a particularly formal way of doing business but the messages confirm intent.
I'd just pay the money, it might be the company are not wanting to place the revenue in the bank for the time being. No one knows really why they want cash..

Well, theres certainly a contract, but no-one knows what the terms are beyond a few vague text messages. No way to run a business. Can't see them insisting on cash payment only standing up in court. Can't see them risking going to court and being asked about their HMRC records at all.

I wouldn't pay without a formal written invoice but then I'd want the work guaranteed. Unless it was cheap as chips of course. Which it isn't.

Definitely tax avoidance under the CIS scheme

All OP needs to do do is show texts demonstrating that she has tried to pay.
What makes you think she would discuss a moral/ethical reason for not paying cash? Most people wouldn't want to collect thousands from the bank (and then walk home with it with the obvious security risk anyway) rather than do a quick bank transfer.

Come on, the customer and the service provider entered into a contract once the work was agreed upon and then completed. I agree it's not a particularly formal way of doing business but the messages confirm intent. I'd just pay the money, it might be the company are not wanting to place the revenue in the bank for the time being. No one knows really why they want cash..

The messages also confirm intent to pay.

@Hrpuffnstuff1

You are wrong

OP has neither been issued with invoice and details of how to pay (which usually includes bank details and options) nor had response to her offers to pay by bank transfer which is pretty instant.

No judge will agree she's is unreasonable to not be able to pay over £2000 in cash when she has offered to do online bank transfer.

The contractor will be in the wrong not OP. The contractor will have to pay costs, not OP.

If you're not already in the Fraud squad you should probably apply quickly. With that skill of being able to detect crime from next to no information could clear the backlog in hours

The new website doesn't let me scroll back when I'm doing a post but I don't remember seeing the OP say that there were sub contractors on the job, apologies if I've missed that.

They have been given options, pay by cash please.
The op is refusing because it's inconvenient, then making up a suspicious story about the company's financial dealings.

The amount of time it's taken to talk about it on here, she could've gone to the bank and back.😂😂

If they are a limited company, could you get the address for tgeircregustered office from Companies House, and send a cheque?

I'm surprised how many people are cool with contractors accepting payment in cash to avoid paying tax on their incomes. I pay tax on my income. Why shouldn't other people do the same? And, remember that you are paying more tax to make up for other people not paying their share. So, effectively, they are stealing from you

How do you know they're not paying tax.😂😂😂
Fgs, invoice total aren't taxed like PAYE.

Maybe op didn’t have cash and was intending to pay with a credit card for example

Not only is this a blatant tax dodge, you may end up with no come back if you find faults with the work later on. Without an invoice or any kind of proof of payment you would have difficulties with getting any bad work remedied. I expect you pay tax, I pay tax, why would you help someone to avoid it? When they have finished, and when you have paid by bank transfer, I would also make a quick call to HMRC. This kind of behaviour costs us all.

The more you attempt to make this argument, the more you betray your own ignorance.

Nobody, not one poster, has said that revenue and ‘PAYE’ (by which I assume that you mean ‘salary’; PAYE is the system by which employees are taxed at source) are the same thing. Not one.

I don't know if you can count as well as I, but thats not options, its an option.

You are remarkably invested in trying to normalise paying in cash.

Paying in cash is an extremely bad idea, particularly when theres no written invoice as here.

For one thing, theres no independent record that payment has been made.

Most people know this and unless they are getting a cheap job with no guarantee, will refuse to pay in cash.

You could always try driving "her" to the bank of course, thats a common trick of rogue traders.

Did I say rogue traders?

I wouldn’t want to pay a huge amount in cash either. I’d want to pay in the way most convenient to me. Bank transfers don’t result in charges ti the business, so why are they keen to avoid a record of it? I don’t want to support people evading tax and I can’t see any reason at all why they would refuse to have money paid directly into a bank account unless it’s so the money leaves no trace for the tax man! Refuse. They are introducing terms which you never agreed to.

The only way that you should expect to pay is by cash. just because so many businesses decide to take other payment methods, you've lost sight that this is the choice of the business. If you owe them money and you do they only have to accept cash.

They do not have to have a bank account to be in business and to pay the correct tax although it would be unusual - a business can completely be valid and not have a bank account; they certainly don't have to give the detail to you.

You are completely in the wrong, any asking to pay via any other means than cash would not stand up in court. This is the definition of legal tender - you can only not be sued if you've offered legal tender - and guess what - that BoE notes and royal mint coins - bank transfers don't count.

YABVU and completely in the wrong.

They have been given options, pay by cash please.

Options would imply that they have been given a choice on how to pay
which is not the case. They have been told that only cash will be accepted
after the work has been completed with no prior agreement.

The op is refusing because it's inconvenient, then making up a suspicious story about the company's financial dealings.

Not wanting to go to the bank several times and withdraw thousands in cash
is not "suspicious". It would require several trips probably and there is also a risk and walkiing around with thousands. It is not a minor inconvenience.

You are completely in the wrong, any asking to pay via any other means than cash would not stand up in court. This is the definition of legal tender - you can only not be sued if you've offered legal tender - and guess what - that BoE notes and royal mint coins - bank transfers don't count.

You are making things up.

True. It could be child maintenance they're avoiding.

Definitely some sort of scam, though.

Surprising how many people are happy to go along with tax evasion and other types of fraud if it saves them a few quid.

Also surprising how many people can't connect the dots between tax evasion, lack of funding for public services and NI rises, etc.