Jump to content

SKJP

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    100
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. In your experience, jabba, and just based on what's written my charliesgranny on this thread, do you (like me) suspect that this should have been a case for compliance, rather an a full-on IUC jobby??
  2. Pretty much as I suspected, thanks. Yes, very clever, esp. in light of the personal info that I share with nobody - damn credit companies selling my info at some point, I guess I shan't bother pursuing a PPI claim, I'd only bother if I didn't have to go through the time and effort of contacting half a dozen companies, not even knowing if I'd ever had PPI. Was just wondering what this letter was all about... ...thanks
  3. Two video clips isn't much. Just two clips in total? Or a mish-mash of seperate clips put into two files to show to you? If it's two clips in total, i.e. just two incidences of 'walking', then tell them to go forth and multiply. Two clips is nowt! Anything else...photos, statements, etc? As jabba jones says, WHO took them? And do you mean March 2012? If so, they've jumped onto this 'fraud' pretty quickly!! A premature IUC for weak reasons, methinks. ETA: I see you say a work colleague took the vids. Pah. Get this in your correspondence. I could shoot amateur video of someone commiting murder, but it doesn't necessarily mean it'd be admissable in court. The DWP's surveillance, however, is conducted with strictly-controlled equipment that is supposed to be tamper-proof, hence why a video from the DWP would hold more weight than that of a work colleague who (presumably) isn't trained in the art of official surveillance.
  4. Hi all, Just wondering about a personally addressed letter I received from Charterhouse Claims today, thanking me for my recent enquiry as to PPI reclaims, and enclosing the relevant claim forms (I have never made any enquiry at all about PPI). Just wondering why I've received this - do they know something I don't know, or is it just spam, fishing for business? I say this because the letter bears my full name and address, plus my landline phone (that I had disconnected 3 years ago), and my 'proper' email address that I only use for official business like banking, etc. It's the inclusion of my landline number that piqued my interest - it was always ex-directory, is long gone, and was only ever given out to my creditors, and nobody else. To the best of my knowledge, I've never taken out PPI. When asked about it, I've always refused it. There may of course have been occasions when it was sneaked onto my accounts without my knowledge (hence the current PPI hoo-haa), but this is where it all becomes a blur. When I first started using credit cards, I was 19 (I'm now 27), had my own home for the first time, and relied on lots of different credit accounts just to find my feet. I got out of that spiral a few years ago, but in the initial years, I was maintaining half a dozen credit cards at any one time. I have no real idea if I have had PPI on any (other than when I've outright declined the cover when asked to purchase it). I've had credit cards with all of the following, some of which had whopping balances at some point, but all of which were managed well (no defaults, etc.): HSBC (2003) Capital One (2004) Barclaycard (x2 seperate cards) (2007 & 2011) Vanquis (2007) Virgin (MBNA) (2008) Aqua (Halifax) (2007) All of my credit has been specifically credit cards. Are Charterhouse known to be handling claims for any of the above companies? Might there be something 'in' this letter from them, or should I just ignore it? If I have had PPI, it has definitely been mis-sold...namely because I wasn't aware of it. Thanks for reading!
  5. So they DO have evidence, despite them telling your solicitor (twice?) that they didn't? They need pulling up on that. As far as I know, the DWP have no obligation to reveal the full extent of their evidence to solicitors (it just so happens that solicitors are often successful in extracting the info), but to lie is a different kettle of fish. Did your son give anything away during IUC? Did he admit anything, or agree with any of their allegations? When was the video taken? How many days was he filmed for, and over what period of time? Was he filmed at different times of day, or just coming and going to work? Did the DWP mention any other 'evidence' that provides a timescale for this 'fraud'? Sorry for the barrage of questions, but all are relevant. If your son kept schtum, if the video was shot in the recent past, and if that's all they've got, it will be difficult for the decision maker (who will look at his DLA award in the near future) to revise his award any further back than the first day filming took place, in the absence of any other hard evidence. This is good-ish news, in that any overpayment that arises could be substantially reduced from what the DWP wants. (I must point out, though, that the presence of other evidence - for example, statements from his employers stating that your son is fine and dandy - can push the date they're looking at backwards) If this video is all they have, you need to get in letter-writing mode. Write to them stating that their evidence is weak, and that you demand that they take the matter to the decison maker as quickly as possible. Mention the stress and strain this is having on your son. Point out that being disabled doesn't equate to being a 'sicknote' employee. Get the attention of your MP, GP, charities, etc., and point out to the DWP that you have consulted other such people in support of the case. However, you need to be very careful of what you say in your correspondence - do not make any admissions whatsoever. Address your concerns to the manager of the person(s) who conducted the IUC, and state that you would like your comments to be forwarded to the DM. Request in advance that the DM backs up any decision with a full written statement of reasons (basically, put the wind up the DM, and make it known in advance that you'll fight their decision to the hilt, if it's not made on proper grounds).
  6. Yes, I see your point, and also very much understand where the confusion comes from (especially since all depts. have your NINO, too, as OP points out). The fact is that in reality, the system doesn't run so smoothly, and should not be relied upon...hence why DWP benefit letters will always contain DWP-specific contact details for the purposes of reporting any changes. OP states that they were encouraged to contact TC to report of changes to DWP benefits, via brochures and such. In my experience, such brochures don't do this, but again it's easy to see how and why mistakes can easily arise, especially in the current situation where many "benefit" claimants are expected to maintain relationships with at least three different gov. departments - HMRC, DWP and their local council. It's always sad to see these innocent mistakes effectively twisted against claimants and used to push forward flimsy prosecutions...if I were a magistrate in this case, I'd wonder why - if the OP was so 'fraudulent' - they went through the trouble of contacting HMRC, but not the DWP!
  7. This is tosh, she appears to be spouting opinion on a certain disability, with no facts to back it up. What’s to say autistics don’t understand the concept of queuing? Not only is that patronising, but autism is not a one size fits all condition. Some (not all) autistics are absolute sticklers for rules, it’s a classical symptom, and I know of people who would quite happily queue for hours, because it’s a ‘rule’! Put a nice big fat complaint in. Good luck!
  8. I'm struggling to understand exactly how this prosecution was wrongful (not because I don't believe and support you, but because there are a couple of points that catch my attention). You should never rely on Tax Credits to pass on any relevant information to DCS (Disability & Carers Service). This is because Tax Credits are administered by HMRC, whereas DCS benefits are administered by the DWP. HMRC and the DWP have little more than a passing relationship when it comes to the administration of their respective affairs and benefits. They don't share absolutely everything with each other, never have, and probably never will. In a sense, it'd be like contacting British Gas to tell them you've moved homes for the purposes of your gas bill, and expecting them to pass on the info to NPower for the purposes of your electricity bill... Whilst I'm very glad you successfully argued your case, the above is incorrect, and if you'll excuse me, a little bizarre too. Dig out any letter from any DWP benefit you have/have had, and you'll find contact details for the purposes of reporting changes in circumstances. These contact details will not be for HMRC/Tax Credits. However, you may be onto something with this: This is potentially quite naughty, but it depends on the exact circumstances. In cases of benefit fraud, it is common for the authorities to contact employers (for instance, to establish how much you earn(ed), how long you've worked there, etc.). There is nothing wrong with the DWP doing this, but as far as I'm aware (and I do not speak as a legal professional), they're not necessarily supposed to reveal the exact details of your case to your employer. They should collect the facts, and that's it. If the DWP has simply collected facts from your employer, they're not at fault. If they've specifically informed your employer that you were subject to a benefit fraud investigation, they may be in the wrong. If your employer simply guessed/surmised that it was to do with benefit fraud, then the DWP is not necessarily at fault. My advice would be to consult with a solicitor to see if there's a case, and on what grounds. You need to be clear about the facts, though. All the best of luck.
  9. Stardust, how would you like it if someone made an anonymous allegation against you? Oh...it appears you already know what THAT's like... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?337376-Compliance-Officer-Visit-today. I'm not necessarily saying don't report her, I'm just wondering what you'd actually get out of it, personally?
  10. Hi Donald, I've worked for major banks, and continue to work in finance elsewhere. Mere 'bad credit' should not be a bar to employment in banks. CCJs, IVAs, Bankruptcy, Debt Relief Orders, etc. (applied during the last 6 years) are very highly likely to lead to your rejection, but you state that you don't have these, so should be OK. Defaults should be OK. There are different types of credit search available, a basic which screens only for 'public information' against your name (CCJs, insolvency, etc.), and a more 'enhanced' one which lenders use to assess general creditworthiness before offering you a credit product. Your prospective employer would most probably do the basic check only, and defaults don't show up under this search.
  11. What I meant was, the OU doesn't (or more accurately, didn't) provide much in the way of an 'income' for students, in the way that students at other universities can secure loan and grant packages that under the right financial and personal circumstances can add up to many thousands of pounds. In understand that the OP is concerned that her friend might be pushed onto ESA with a requirement to seek work at some point, that she's ill-equipped for. However, as a transitional fee student (with no access to any kind of financial support), I don't know what kind of 'cash' incentives OU study will bring from 2012 onwards, because I haven't had to research it myself.
  12. Good idea - I'm an OU student and could not recommend it highly enough. However, the financial package is different on the OU than with other universities. But, but, but, it is moving more in line with the same package as other universities, with changes happening pretty much now. Emma15, as for where to get advice from, I'd recommend an independent body over a gov. dept. The CAB and local law centres are very good with this kind of things. Some local councils and/or housing associations also offer advice of this nature. Most towns in the UK will have some sort of advisory service available to residents for all kinds of matters, including this kind of thing. You don't necessarily have to live near a university in order to study at it. Many further education colleges up and down the country offer HE courses validated by 'local' universities, even when the university isn't very close. My local college grants degrees validated through Lancaster Uni (one of the best in the country), and I live nowhere near Lancaster. http://www.ucas.com is the best (and official) place to search for courses, and will also list non-university 'colleges' that offer degrees in partnership. Most colleges and universities offer financial advice services, with whom budgets and such could be discussed both before and after enrolment.
  13. Prospects Services Ltd - who you refer to in your original post - provide 'Next Step' services on government contract. There's a bit of info here: http://www.prospects.co.uk/AboutUs/tabid/56/Default.aspx. PSL appears to be a private company with government backing to deliver 'welfare to work' services. I'm not exactly sure what that entails, but an educated guess suggests it involves running classes and training programmes designed to assist benefit claimants back into work. What it means for you personally - and other ESA claimants - I have no idea (and no idea if it's mandatory).
  14. Is she well enough, able to, or interested in studying (specifically at higher education level)? Because full-time students are not expected to seek work. It 'pays', too, via the student finance system, plus extra allowances for disabled students. However, some elements of studying (and its funding) affect some benefits. It doesn't affect DLA, but there are implications for Income Support, I.B./ESA and Housing Benefit. Council Tax benefit is irrelevant because (assuming she lives alone), FT students gain council tax exemption, anyway. However, there are various rules and exceptions for students of certain disability, household and income statuses, so it's a plan she'd need to hash out with an experienced adviser, before taking the plunge. If it's something she's at all interested in, it's worth having a look at, with the right advice. Any university worth its salt will have very comprehensive support systems in place for disabled (inc. mentally ill) students. Moreover, even if she doesn't have the right qualifications to gain entry, this is also negotiable in most cases for 'mature' students.
  15. Ah, I was looking at this: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/advisers/claimforms/dla1a_adult_print.pdf, which may differ from the service where you actually apply over the internet... The questions on the above form are mostly along the lines of 'tell us what help you need, and how often you need it'.
×
×
  • Create New...