Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

First JSA claim questions for a 50+ year old.


The_Normal
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5024 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi.

 

My dad was recently found out he was losing his job of 25 years. Unfortunately he only got statutory redundancy which equates to about 7-8k. My dad is still being paid up until the end of July.

 

Today he rang up about JSA. He went to Citizens Advice and couldn't speak to anyone because it was appointment only, but someone mentioned to him to ring the JSA up so he did.

 

Anyway he rang up today to find out about JSA and the women on the phone ended up putting a claim in for him. He didn't want to put a claim in as his circumstances are changing next week (I'm moving out into my own place) but the (overzealous) woman started a claim anyway. She threatended him with fraud because he mentioned I was moving out next week. She also rail-roaded him into taking a job interview next week (Tuesday) for a 40+ hour job in a kitchen???

 

My dad still hasn't got his redundancy cheque and is still in 2 weeks lieu of wages. He is worried that this might jeopardise his redundancy. Plus he was planning on taking a two week holiday after his cheque clears and redecorating his house for a few weeks with some of his redundancy money. He also didn't want to return to kitchen work as the long hours over the last years have been making him ill.

 

Now I've been doing a bit of searching about JSA and I'm worried that he has been issued a Notified Vacancy by the woman on the phone and that if he goes for the interview and gets the job, but doesn't want it, his JSA will be withheld?

 

My dad is a bit worried about this and wonders what he should do? He is going to try and see the CA on Monday if possible. He is wondering if he can cancel, alter or delay his JSA claim? He doesn't want to jeopardise his redundancy payment by going for this interview while still in lieu of wages. Also, he doesn't want a kitchen job and as mentioned previously he has plans to take a well earned holiday of two weeks and do DIY on his house for another couple of weeks before seeking employment.

 

What is the best course of action now?

 

edit - My dad also lives in a council house (housing association). He has paid his rent for 25 years and is worried that any JSA problems might affect his housing benefit. Will this be the case?

 

Thanks.

Edited by The_Normal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.

 

The first contact system is designed to take new claims, not deal with general enquires. The very first question is "Are you calling today to claim benefit". Advisors can give general information but not advice, that is usually provided via the government's website. If he made it clear that he didn't want to claim at that point he should have been directed to different routes.

 

If the customer wants to go through an eligibility check to see what they might be able to get it goes through a series of questions culminating in a statement, namely: "from the information you have given you may be eligible for [benefit]".

 

Immediately after this there are two important questions.

 

Do you wish to continue with your claim?

What benefit do you wish to claim?

 

A short while later there's a question about whether the customer wants to claim from the day they are doing the call (or an earlier date if they are resuming a case). Assuming the system was followed correctly your father would have been given plenty of opportunity to avoid putting in a new claim on that day. He also should have been asked about whether he was able to work now, and looking for work, which if he'd said no to both would not have made him eligible for JSA in the first place.

 

This all assumes the process was followed to the letter however, and without listening to the call its hard to say whether this was done. Calls are recorded however, so it would not be difficult for the department to check if a dispute arose.

 

Any claim can be cancelled at any point, including after an interview has been booked. If that's what your father wants to do ring 08456043719 and ask for the appointment to be cancelled and the claim withdrawn. If he's not seeking employment for the better part of a month it would be better to put the claim in after then anyway.

 

As for the Kitchen job you mentioned as I said the calls are recorded, so as long a he mentioned at the time that he did not want to apply for the position that should provide good mitigation for not accepting the job. If he did not mention it at the time it could be a lot harder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for your reply.

 

I've since spoken to my dad and he did start a claim as he thought this was the best thing to do (CA told him to start it). Also about the job, what happened was the woman asked if he wanted to do a job search now and my dad being obliging said yes and she recommended a job that was on the system, that was all. I must of misheard what my dad said. It was his JSA face to face interview that he has on Tuesday not a job interview.

 

So really my dad has started a claim too soon? Like I said he wants to take a two week holiday from the 1st of August and then spend a few weeks decorating the house. He rang up to get the ball rolling so to speak as he thought this would be the best course of action, but obviously it wasn't.

 

So would he be best to cancel the JSA claim and put a new claim in 6 weeks? Will there be any repercussions for cancelling the JSA claim?

 

Regards.

Edited by The_Normal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if he's not looking for work and/or not intending to start work for another 6 weeks then the best time to start claiming from would be in 6 weeks. He can however do an advanced claim if he knows what date he wants to claim from. So yes, he started a claim too soon.

 

First he'd need to cancel the appointment and claim on the system, then he could ring 080000556688 and ask them for an advanced claim. They should book an appointment for the first working day from when he wants to claim and send out a claim form to him. This form will be essentially the same as the one he completed over the phone. He could alternatively just wait until that period finishes and then ring as normal.

 

As far as I know he won't be penalised for cancelling the interview or the claim. He would of course loose out on any payments of benefit and being assigned national insurance credits for that period though. I don't think it would prevent him claiming Housing or Council Tax Benefit but don't have much experience with those.

 

One thing you will want to check from some more experienced members though is whether spending a relatively large sum prior to making a claim might have an affect on the claim. I know that certain amounts of savings can affect benefits like Income Based Jobseekers Allowance. What I don't know is whether him spending money on a holiday/house re-decoration immediately prior to the claim might be considered what they call deprivation of capital.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing you will want to check from some more experienced members though is whether spending a relatively large sum prior to making a claim might have an affect on the claim. I know that certain amounts of savings can affect benefits like Income Based Jobseekers Allowance. What I don't know is whether him spending money on a holiday/house re-decoration immediately prior to the claim might be considered what they call deprivation of capital.

 

It might be an issue, but probably not. It won't be a problem at all if he is eligible for contributory JSA, since capital is not considered. If he receives income-based JSA it could possibly be an issue if he has savings between £6000 and £15999.99, or would have had such savings if he hadn't spent them.

 

Also, my understanding of current case law is that he would have to spend the money with the specific intention of qualifying himself for a means-tested benefit. I might be wrong about this, though, deprivation of capital decisions always go to the DMs - I would just implement the result.

 

Certainly on ESA I saw very few such cases. Can't imagine JSA would be radically different.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...