Claim for charges taken from benefits

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by steven4064

Thanks tomterm, do you have contact details. My friend is on benefit (obviuously ) and therefore pobably entitled to legal aid. We are exploring that ATM

Unfortunatly, the contact details I've got were given in confidence, so I don't feel - ahem - confident in giving them out

officially, i believe you're supposed to ring up the CAB, and ask for an appointment with the specialist debt team, HOWEVER, I would suggest you PM sequenci, since he knows quite a few senior people in the CAB debt team and may be able to suggest a way of drawing their attention to this matter

[steven4064]

OK TT, I'll keep it in mind until I've exhausted the legal aid angle. In fact I have a close friend who works as a debt counsellor for CAB - I'll ask her.

[Vital Spark]

You and your friend have my utmost admiration, Steven. Seems he/she is forgoign higher return for the sake of all.

Thank you.

[tomterm8]

Is it worth publicising the claim LOL... sure some of the national newspapers / press / watchdog would be interested

[Vital Spark]

Tomtern, Can't you bring yourself to divulge via pm. Seems Steven and his friend are sticking their necks out for all of us. Plus, surely such an agency is for all of those how need it or it's useless, tehrefore, contact details for it should be public knowledge or at least accessible to the public at large. .

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by Vital Spark

Tomtern, Can't you bring yourself to divulge via pm. Seems Steven and his friend are sticking their necks out for all of us. Plus, surely such an agency is for all of those how need it or it's useless, tehrefore, contact details for it should be public knowledge or at least accessible to the public at large. .

Vital Spark, contact details for the C.A.B. are both public knowledge & accessible to the public at large... Get advice .

Private contact details of particular members of staff, which were given to me in confidence, will remain in confidence... sorry, but there it is. that's not negotiable.

I would note that if steven were to pm the member I mentioned earlier it would work to his friends advantage .

[steven4064]

If you bring a claim in Scotland (against a Scottish bank or possibly if you live in Scotland) then there is also some case law you can use:

Under s187 of the Social Security Administrtation Act 1992 and s45 of the Tax Credits Act 2002 benefits cannot be assigned. The theory is that benefits should not be subject to ordinary forms of arrestment. The principles underpinning the theory are in the Crown Proceedings Act 1947, in common law and in the case of Woods.

In the case of Woods v Royal Bank of Scotland 1913 SLT 1 Reports 499, a worker got compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 (an early form of benefit) and paid it into a bank account. This case held that the benefit itself could not be assigned to another person. If benefit was plainly identified in a bank account, it should also have statutory protection from arrestment. The money did not change character because it was paid into an account. In the judgement in this case it says, "A weekly payment, or a sum paid by way of redemption thereof, shall not be capable of being assigned, charged, or attached, and shall not pass to any other person by operation of law, nor shall any claim be set-off against the same."

Unfortunately this precedent does not apply in England or Wales.

The two Acts (SSAA 1992 and TCA 2002) both forbid "assignment from" or "charges on" money paid in benefits. The "charges on" bit doesn't apply to bank charges because it refers to things like attachment of earnings - a legal claim on the money (this is all defined in s27(1)(b) of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947). The point we have to establish is whether bank charges constitute an assigment from the benefits.

As the result of discussions I have edited the PoC in the first post.

[tomterm8]

27.
Attachment of moneys payable by the Crown.
— (1) Where any money is payable by the Crown to some person who, under any order of any court, is liable to pay any money to any other person, and that other person would, if the money so payable by the Crown were money payable by a subject, be entitled under rules of court to obtain an order for the attachment thereof as a debt due or accruing due, or an order for the appointment of a sequestrator or receiver to receive the money on his behalf, the High Court may, subject to the provisions of this Act and in accordance with rules of court, make an order restraining the first-mentioned person from receiving that money and directing payment thereof to that other person, or to the sequestrator or receiver:
Provided that no such order shall be made in respect of:—

(a)
pay wages or salary payable to any officer of the Crown as such;

(b)
any money which is subject to the provisions of any enactment prohibiting or restricting assignment or charging or taking in execution; [F1 or]

(c)
[F1 any money payable by the Crown to any person on account of a deposit in [F2 the National Savings Bank]]


(2) The provisions of the preceding subsection shall, so far as they relate to forms of relief falling within the jurisdiction of a county court, have effect in relation to county courts as they have effect in relation to the High Court, but with the substitution of a reference to county court rules for any reference in the said subsection to rules of court.

[F3 (3) In their application to England and Wales the preceeding provisions of this section shall have effect subject to any order for the time being in force under section 139(2) of the Supreme Court Act 1981.]

[tomterm8]

not completly sure why s27(b) would limit the meaning of "charge"?

[kennythecelt]

Originally Posted by Vital Spark

Tomtern, Can't you bring yourself to divulge via pm. Seems Steven and his friend are sticking their necks out for all of us. Plus, surely such an agency is for all of those how need it or it's useless, tehrefore, contact details for it should be public knowledge or at least accessible to the public at large. .

Don't worry Vital Spark.

Tom Term was referring to a specific individual, a friend who happens to work in one of the many CAB offices around the country, and he can't name an individual. That wouldn't be right.

[steven4064]

Originally Posted by tomterm8

not completly sure why s7(b) would limit the meaning of "charge"?

Its a basic problem of definition (and one that penalty charges have misunderstood - see posts 7 & 16 on this thread)

In the section quoted above the word 'charge' is used in a legal sense as a legal claim on money, for example an attachment of earnings.

My current thinking is that bank charges are an assignment not a charge as far as SSAA 1992 and TCA 2002 are concerned.

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by steven4064

Its a basic problem of definition (and one that penalty charges have misunderstood - see posts 7 & 16 on this thread)

In the section quoted above the word 'charge' is used in a legal sense as a legal claim on money, for example an attachment of earnings.

My current thinking is that bank charges are an assignment not a charge as far as SSAA 1992 and TCA 2002 are concerned.

I disagree, the section obviously includes both judicial, legal and equitable charges, for example on future income. http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...method=boolean .