Solicitors facilitating VAT fraud?

[HappyBunnies]

Hello.

I'm in a civil dispute (as a defendant litigant in person in England) with a building contractor. The Claimant is trying to recover 4k I withheld due to serious defects with his work (gas & electrical safety breaches, leaking toilet and shower...and a lot more), delays, and unfinished works.

He admits in his claim that there are defects and unfinished works, but says in his reply to my defence and counterclaim that the money is for subcontractor VAT. However, 2 of the subcontractors he has submitted VAT invoices to me for are not VAT registered, he added VAT on one of his company invoices but his company isn't VAT registered, lots of the invoices are heavily redacted so I can't even see a breakdown of the works, and one invoice is charging VAT on 8k for a single job he quoted 1.3k for in his contract.

His solicitor is refusing to unredact due to "confidentiality", and they've ignored every request I've made asking them to confirm the basis of the VAT claims since Jnauary 2026. I was able to unredact one invoice myself and it's addressed to a different company owned by the Claimant (I've checked Companies House and cant see any arrangement between the 2 companies).

I suspect the other redactions are hiding works done on other projects/properties.

The solicitor also haven't provided inspection of disclosure documents since my first request 2 months ago (I'm submitting a disclosure application shortly).

I've reported the VAT issues to HMRC, but can anyone please let me know if this is something I should be reporting to the SRA, and the Claimant's insurer who are funding his claim?

Any advice would be appreciated.

[atticus]

I suggest that you focus on what you need to prove to win your case. Did the claimant do what was agreed, and if not are you entitled to withold payment until it has finished the job?

Surely payment arrangements between the claimant and its subcontractors do not affect those questions.

Your concerns appear well-founded, but do not appear to be central to the question of your liability to pay. I would leave it with HMRC.

Have I missed something?

[HappyBunnies]

I suggest that you focus on what you need to prove to win your case. Did the claimant do what was agreed, and if not are you entitled to withold payment until it has finished the job?

Surely payment arrangements between the claimant and its subcontractors do not affect those questions.

Your concerns appear well-founded, but do not appear to be central to the question of your liability to pay. I would leave it with HMRC.

Have I missed something?

Hello. Thanks for your feedback.

To answer your question, the Claimant did not do what was agreed, and the contract entitled me to withhold the final instalment. His remedial work was unsuccessful, so i terminated the contract for brach of contract and loss of faith.

"Have I missed something?" - I'm concerned about the conduct of the solicitor and think their conduct should be looked into. I would like to understand why your feedback excludes reporting to the insurer funding them and the SRA, if you wouldn't mind telling me?

[atticus]

Because those are side issues and do not appear to be central to winning your case. Take it further if you must, but keep your eye on the ball of what the case is actually about.

As I said earlier, your concerns appear well-founded, but do not appear to be central to the question of your liability to pay.