would you use SLR Hut

Lez325 said:
Just maybe - he's not VAT registered, just a though :D
Click to expand...

Possible, but that would be a unusual decision;

1. The website hails itself as the "where the pro's go" - pro's will want them to be VAT registered so they can reclaim.
2. Given that the business model requires holding a lot of valuable stock, for cash-flow purposes you'd have though they would register voluntarilly to reclaim input VAT on all the set-up costs. Of course, it means you don't have to charge output VAT, meaning your prices are more competitive to non-registered customers, but it makes no difference to "pros" (who could reclaim the VAT you charge them) and isn't a long term strategy if you plan on growing the business above the VAT threshold.
3. Not being VAT-registered tells customers that your turnover is low, which doesn't always inspire confidence.

Impossible to verify (3), as the company was only registered in September 2012 so no accounts have been filed yet.

Anyway, this is veering off-topic...
 
Lez325 said:
Just maybe - he's not VAT registered, just a though :D
Click to expand...

I see more of an issue with a company (who seems to have registered with their business name but hasn't done it officially via TP admin) trying to "tittle tattle" on their competition (who have done it properly and is an advertiser here).

Quite a sneaky little dig.
 
Last edited:
StewartR said:
Your turn now.
Click to expand...

(y)


Lez325 said:
Just maybe - he's not VAT registered, just a though :D
Click to expand...

Maybe but in that case you would have to ask why they are charging VAT since I've just gone through a dummy booking on there site...

Llamaman said:
Cheap shot given your website doesn't have a VAT number either.

-1 potential customer for you!
Click to expand...

Dave1 said:
I see more of an issue with a company (who seems to have registered with their business name but hasn't don't it officially via TP admin) trying to "tittle tattle" on their competition (who have done it properly and is an advertiser here).

Quite a sneaky little dig.
Click to expand...

Right on both points...maybe that two potential customers lost...I'll never touch them after that little episode..
 
Dave1 said:
So why did you charge Matt VAT when he did a booking? :shrug:
Click to expand...

I've just done a dummy booking myself and there is no VAT charged so not sure where Matt thinks we had charged him VAT.

Perhaps Matt could let us know?

But we are not VAT registered and we do not charge VAT, or give VAT invoices.

Thanks

Andy
 
LensFettish said:
I've just done a dummy booking myself and there is no VAT charged so not sure where Matt thinks we had charged him VAT.

Perhaps Matt could let us know?

But we are not VAT registered and we do not charge VAT, or give VAT invoices.

Thanks

Andy
Click to expand...

Well then you need to make changes to the wording on your site as it sure makes it look like your VAT registered see the attached screen shot


LF VAT by mwhcvt, on Flickr
 
Dave1 said:
If he bans you, you just might need to change your mind :LOL:.
Click to expand...

I sent them a bag of sweets so I thing we're good, though I still feel bad for breaking there kit, praise be to jebus for the insurance that you take out when you hire a lens :D
 
Ouch

still we did warn you that setting a long exposure then throwing you camera up in the air over a wire wool spin wasnt the best of ideas :LOL:

(I feel your pain - a few years back I hired a 400mm f2.8 - from calumet i think - and took a cricket ball smack on the front element :sulk: )
 
big soft moose said:
Ouch

still we did warn you that setting a long exposure then throwing you camera up in the air over a wire wool spin wasnt the best of ideas :LOL:

(I feel your pain - a few years back I hired a 400mm f2.8 - from calumet i think - and took a cricket ball smack on the front element :sulk: )
Click to expand...

Yeah not great, I went one way 5D3, Sigma 120-300/2.8 and 2xTC went the other way and when they landed they became three separate entities again, but not how you'd want them too :(
 
MWHCVT said:
Well then you need to make changes to the wording on your site as it sure makes it look like your VAT registered see the attached screen shot

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mwhcvt/8952557354/
LF VAT by mwhcvt, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Matt - I stand corrected as I've never noticed that before and I agree that it makes it look like we're VAT registered, but we're not and we've never sent out a VAT invoice!

I'll have our IT chap change the wording of that 1st thing tomorrow morning - thanks for pointing it out.

Thanks

Andy
 
LensFettish said:
Matt - I stand corrected as I've never noticed that before and I agree that it makes it look like we're VAT registered, but we're not and we've never sent out a VAT invoice!

I'll have our IT chap change the wording of that 1st thing tomorrow morning - thanks for pointing it out.

Thanks

Andy
Click to expand...

Not a problem at all (y)
 
Llamaman said:
I've made a report to the ISIS scheme pointing out the legal deficencies in their website.

Didn't bother with trading standards as they're outside the UK so outside their influence.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Just heard back from ISIS: they've forwarded my complaint - including my personal contact details - to SLRHut. Wish I'd read the bit at the top of the report form properly!
 
I wouldnt worry , I emailed SLR hut directly nearly a month ago with the same question - and they are yet to respond ;)
 
I'm not worried so much - it's a bit difficult for them to send the heavies round to my flat if they're in the US! I might get an abusive phone call though! :D

I tried calling them before contacting ISIS - got bored of being on hold. They might be a bit more proactive about responding if they risk losing their ISIS accreditation... but probably not.

I had a look at the "withdrawn" list - good old Harrison Cameras were on there :D
 
Update: got a phone call from Mr SLR Hut in New York last night (about 10:30pm!) after I'd told ISIS that I'd got no reply from them. They're clearly worried about losing the ISIS status!
He confirmed that "all taxes and duties are pre-paid", but when specifically asked about a UK VAT number was unable/unwilling to provide one. He also seemed to be confused/deliberately misleading about the difference between being a UK regsitered company and a UK VAT-registered company.
I didn't press him though, as I wanted to go to bed.

It could all be above board, but I personally wouldn't touch them with a transatlantic bargepole.
 
Llamaman said:
It could all be above board, but I personally wouldn't touch them with a transatlantic bargepole.
Click to expand...

I think that's definitely the right decision.

Shame ISIS can't/won't do anything though. Makes you wonder what the point of these accreditation schemes is, if they're not enforceable.
 
Well, this is a result:

Capture4.PNG


Lucy at IMRG (the company which runs the ISIS and IDIS schemes) was very helpful.

Of course, Mr SLR Hut will just take down the notices when they come to his attention, and Joe Public will be none the wiser. But it's progress of sorts.
 
StewartR said:
Well, this is a result:

Capture4.PNG


Lucy at IMRG (the company which runs the ISIS and IDIS schemes) was very helpful.

Of course, Mr SLR Hut will just take down the notices when they come to his attention, and Joe Public will be none the wiser. But it's progress of sorts.
Click to expand...

Well done Stewart, I hadn't got around to replying to Lucy after my late-night chat with my American chum. Glad to see ISIS are being responsible and I withdraw my (half-joking) cynicism in my earlier post.

A bit pat on the back allround for this forum I think. We can't necessarily get these guys shut down, but we can at least remove the veil of respectibility.
 
Hello everyone, first post here.

I ordered my 6D and 24-105 from SLRhut last night. I'm not bothered if they're doing anything illegal regarding imports and excise. I'd rather save money than put more money in Osbournes pocket, and dont Panamoz etc do the same? I bought a Sigma 10-20 from either Panamoz or Onestop cant remember now and they got around the import duty and VAT by sending the lens as a gift.

I worked for DHL express years ago and I was under the impression that all duties etc were calculated on entry to the UK based on the info on the invoice.

As regards to SLRhut, I've used my credit card so if there is a problem I'm covered.

I'll let you all know how I get on and I'll post pics to my Flickr, website ( www.400mlheroes.co.uk ) and Twitter just to prove I'm not an employee of SLRhut.

BTW I hope I've saved £699.99 by buying over seas.

Wish me luck.

Paul.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kempie26 said:
Hello everyone, first post here.

I ordered my 6D and 24-105 from SLRhut last night. I'm not bothered if they're doing anything illegal regarding imports and excise. I'd rather save money than put more money in Osbournes pocket, and dont Panamoz etc do the same? I bought a Sigma 10-20 from either Panamoz or Onestop cant remember now and they got around the import duty and VAT by sending the lens as a gift.

I worked for DHL express years ago and I was under the impression that all duties etc were calculated on entry to the UK based on the info on the invoice.

As regards to SLRhut, I've used my credit card so if there is a problem I'm covered.
I'll let you all know how I get on and I'll post pics to my Flickr, website ( www.400mlheroes.co.uk ) and Twitter just to prove I'm not an employee of SLRhut.

BTW I hope I've saved £699.99 by buying over seas.

Wish me luck.

Paul
Click to expand...

As I said on the very similar portus thread - this is a common misconception

If the grey importer (or indeed any trader but its more common with the grey) uses a third party to take payment (e.g paypal, world pay, google checkout etc) It appears SLR hut use Google check out (Portus use world pay) then you are not in fact covered for a section 75 refund

You might still get charge back cover if your goods don't arrive , at your card providers discretion - but that's about it

That aside - if you are a genuine member not an example of shills law the best way to "prove it" should you feel the need , is to be a genuine member, participate in the forum, post pics, give critique etc.

As an aside having just looked at the SLR hut website they are still claiming their prices are inclusive of VAT in the UK despite their (allegedly) admitting not actually being VAT registered ! - I still haven't had a reply to my email months ago asking for their VAT number !
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
As I said on the very similar portus thread - this is a common misconception

If the grey importer (or indeed any trader but its more common with the grey) uses a third party to take payment (e.g paypal, world pay, google checkout etc) It appears SLR hut use Google check out (Portus use world pay) then you are not in fact covered for a section 75 refund

You might still get charge back cover if your goods don't arrive , at your card providers discretion - but that's about it

That aside - if you are a genuine member not an example of shills law the best way to "prove it" should you feel the need , is to be a genuine member, participate in the forum, post pics, give critique etc.

As an aside having just looked at the SLR hut website they are still claiming their prices are inclusive of VAT in the UK despite their allegedly admitting not actually being VAT registered !
Click to expand...

I paid direct, I put that about "proving" that I wasn't a phoney because of the amount of c**p that some people have had fired at them for even attempting to defend SLRhut.

I'm not bothered if they're VAT registered or not, I just don't want to be ripped off by paying through the nose for goods I can get cheaper elsewhere.

I'll contribute, but to be brutally honest what I've read so far on this thread in particular doesn't seem like the most friendly place.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kempie26 said:
I paid direct, I put that about "proving" that I wasn't a phoney because of the amount of c**p that some people have had fired at them for even attempting to defend SLRhut.

I'm not bothered if they're VAT registered or not, I just don't want to be ripped off by paying through the nose for goods I can get cheaper elsewhere.

I'll contribute, but to be brutally honest what I've read so far on this thread in particular doesn't seem like the most friendly place.
Click to expand...

its a perfectly friendly place to people who are genuine, so I guess you won't have a problem. (this thread isn't typical - its attracted a lot of shill posting , which pee's off a lot of regular members who think people are trying to take them for fools, so don't judge TP on this one thread alone)

By the way when you say you paid direct - I think you'll find that even their direct payments are handled by a third party, so in that case you wouldn't actually have credit card cover apart from charge back - but hey cameras don't break much so you'll probably be okay

Also on the VAT thing I think you've missed the point - if a company has charged you VAT (which they say they have) , but isn't actually Vat registered (Which they allegedly say they aren't) then you've paid 16.6% too much.

So while yes they are pretty cheap , in that circumstance its not just the tax man who'd have been ripped off.
 
kempie26 said:
I ordered my 6D and 24-105 from SLRhut last night. I'm not bothered if they're doing anything illegal regarding imports and excise. I'd rather save money than
Click to expand...

Just to clarify this point, under UK law SLRHut are doing nothing wrong with regard to evasion of taxes and duty.

In terms of UK law, the importer is legally responsible for tax and duty, and it is the importer who is committing tax evasion.

You do realise who the importer is, don't you?

Just something to think about before making that boast in too many public places.
 
big soft moose said:
its a perfectly friendly place to people who are genuine, so I guess you won't have a problem. (this thread isn't typical - its attracted a lot of shill posting , which pee's off a lot of regular members who think people are trying to take them for fools, so don't judge TP on this one thread alone)

By the way when you say you paid direct - I think you'll find that even their direct payments are handled by a third party, so in that case you wouldn't actually have credit card cover apart from charge back - but hey cameras don't break much so you'll probably be okay

Also on the VAT thing I think you've missed the point - if a company has charged you VAT (which they say they have) , but isn't actually Vat registered (Which they allegedly say they aren't) then you've paid 16.6% too much.

So while yes they are pretty cheap , in that circumstance its not just the tax man who'd have been ripped off.
Click to expand...

I hope not, as for paying the extra 16.6%, I'd rather pay that than an extra £699.99

I just hope nothing goes wrong, like I said earlier I'll let people know how I get on.

Paul :)
 
Dave1 said:
Just to clarify this point, under UK law SLRHut are doing nothing wrong with regard to evasion of taxes and duty.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify this point, nothing wrong except (a) not being registered for VAT despite having a turnover which is in excess of the VAT registration threshold; and (b) stating that they charge VAT despite not being registered.

(And numerous different breaches of the Distance Selling Regulations of course, but I accept that your post didn't set out to address that.)
 
Last edited:
StewartR said:
Just to clarify this point, nothing wrong except [a] not being registered for VAT despite having a turnover which is in excess of the VAT registration threshold; and stating that they charge VAT despite not being registered.

(And numerous different breaches of the Distance Selling Regulations of course, but I accept that your post didn't set out to address that.)
Click to expand...


And false declarations to customs by mislabelling (probably at the posting location though), that's why I was specific about the tax evasion, which is what kempie26 seemed to think wasn't really his problem whilst in fact he is totally responsible.
 
I just had a look into reporting them to the revenue for the Vat thing - unfortunately the online reporting form requires a named individual :crying: rather than a company.

probably pointless anyway as I guess the revenue can do jacks*** to a company based overseas
 
Their website is full of lies and misrepresentation. Would I trust them with hundreds or thousands of pounds of my money? Not a chance.

Also, this is an American company defrauding the UK tax authorities. That means UK tax payers - me, your friends and family, that guy on the tube with the BO problem - are subsidising your hobby. I hope you're grateful.
 
Dave1 said:
Just to clarify this point, under UK law SLRHut are doing nothing wrong with regard to evasion of taxes and duty.

In terms of UK law, the importer is legally responsible for tax and duty, and it is the importer who is committing tax evasion.

You do realise who the importer is, don't you?

Just something to think about before making that boast in too many public places.
Click to expand...

Yes Dave I am perfectly aware who the importer is, like I said earlier I used to work for DHL express and I know exactly how import/export works. If customs this end decide that the correct duties etc have not been paid they will let me know on delivery. SLRhut advised me that all duties etc will be covered by them. I personally don't think they are doing anything illegal, using a few tax loop holes maybe but that doesn't concern me. Saving money and not paying UK prices for goods does.

Friendly forum this!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top