Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Should this ever happen to me, I will make an appeal at the first stage to avoid any problems that may occur at a later stage. Although, any individual in a similar position should decide for themselves what they think is an appropriate course of action. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Won esa appeal help what does this mean??


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4966 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

I have won my appeal but am unsure which group I shall be put into this is what the decision notice says.

 

The Appeal Is Allowed.

 

The Decision Of The Secetary Of State Issued On 12/01/2010 Is Set Aside.

 

The Tribunal Considers Descriptor 16 (b) Intiating and Sustaining Personal Action Is Appropriate And So 15 Points Are Awarded.

 

This Will Passport Mr (My Name) To Schedule 3 Descriptor 10 (b).

 

What group will I be put into I read up and schedule 3 descriptors mean limited capabiliy for work related activity. Wanted to confirm with people who have knowledge on hear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Schedule 3 pertains to people who have limited capability for work related activity therefore cannot be placed within the Work Related Activity Group, so are to be placed in the Support Group (though they can partake in work related activity if they volunteer to do so). You only need to meet one of the descriptors in schedule 3 to be placed within the Support Group, and the descriptor 16 (b) in schedule 2 awards the 15 points which brings you straight to descriptor 10 (b) of schedule 3.

 

You will be placed in the Support Group.

 

The tribunal should have explained that to you, it's good practice to place it in terms that the claimant can reasonably be expected to understand.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The tribunal should have explained that to you, it's good practice to place it in terms that the claimant can reasonably be expected to understand.

 

Absolutely. This sort of thing makes me ratty (or used to, I should say). And to be honest, most of the processors who would be expected to implement this decision won't know what "This Will Passport Mr (My Name) To Schedule 3 Descriptor 10 (b)" means and what the implications are either, because that's DM language, not AO (processor, for those following along at home, heh) language. If it was AO language it would read "Processor should enter code 02 in dialogue 674 and ensure this is correctly reflected in dia 200/405 before ending to issue arrears" :-D

 

Of course, that makes no sense to customers either. The Tribunal would, ideally, state "put this person in the support group because...." and then use the legal language. That way everyone's happy. The customer is happy because they can understand what's going on, the processor is happy because they know what to do, and the DM is happy because the case won't be referred to them unnecessarily.

 

Interestingly, I was seeing increasing numbers of Tribunal results saying things like "This feeble excuse for a 'medical' wasn't worth the paper the result is written on. At the very least, ATOS and the DWP should be following their own guidelines."

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

Well you will be surprised called DWP and were advised i've been put in the work related group and this is according to the decision. So I called my representative to confirm and he advised no the decision on the tribunal clearly states support group so I called the tribunal and luckily spoke to a judge who advised that the last paragraph does mean I should be in the support group.

 

Im surprised at the fact that these schedules are made by the DWP so how could they be so incompetent not to know exactly which group I should be in. The DWP have asked me to ask the tribunal to forward them a letter signed by the judge saying I should be in the support group and highlight reasons and the decision will be ammended accordingly.

 

Im quite upset and angry at the fact if they are saying they have gone by the decision of the tribunal and numerous body say exactly the same that I should be according to the last paragraph schedule 3 descriptor 10 (b) then why is it that the DWP are not doing the job right and putting people like me through another ordeal as the appeal wasn't enough to stress me out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Antone may confirm and I know this is stressful for you, but it could be part of the general scene of thousands of appeals and then staff who may not be properly trained or don't understand what should happen. No excuse, but as Antone will tell you, the majority of DWP staff aren't malevolent. I won't say it's not disappointing and I guess they could make savings by getting it right the first time round.

 

I hope you get some answers that help you.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Honeybee,

 

Thanks for your comment I spoke to the contact centre about 3 times today and finally spoke to a decision maker or the appeal section and they advised me the same that we are looking at the decision as we speak and you are in the correct group which is work related.

Its hard to understand if they are not disputing the tribunal decision and the tribunal have said that i have met the criteria for support group and therefore the decision they made is to put me in the support group why are DWP so annoying. Why can't they do their job right for once. If we made a simple mistake they would either prosecute or sanction benefit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be tempted to complain to the tribunal that the Secretary of State is ignoring their decision.

Edited by Zamzara

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Zamzara,

 

I have done exactly that and guess what after 4 days of arguing with the DWP today finally they gave in and put me in the support group after a angry call from one of the clerks at the tribunals service. Im so glad finally this nightmare is over thankyou very much for leaving a comment on this post. Wish me luck now to recovery lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi the way i understand the process is that although the Tribunal can make a decision as to what you group you are in they cannot enforce it!!!!!!!!!! there is a memo knocking around which will still allow a DM (decision maker) to ask for a statement of reasons from the Tribunal panel to decide on what group you are in. Glad you have given them a black eye.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The DWP can ask for a statement of reasons, yes. This is basically a statement from the tribunal which gives the reasons for their decision. They cannot just ignore the tribunal's decision and implement their own, though - they must follow the relevant procedure.

 

If, after reading the statement of reasons, the DWP disagree with the Tribunal's decision they can apply to the Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tier Tribunal - but they can only do so on a point of law.

 

TS do not have to grant permission for this, but if they do, the appeal will go to the Upper Tier tribunal (UtT) who will consider all of the facts of the case and the issues raised in DWP's appeal to decide if the First Tier tribunal (FtT) erred on a point of law in reaching their determination. If the UtT decides the FtT has erred in law, he can either substitute the decision himself or he can direct a new tribunal hearing.

 

A claimant also has the right to appeal to the UtT on a point of law.

 

Unless the DWP are appealing to the UtT, or there are other reasons why the FtT decision cannot be implemented immediately (see below) they must implement the FtT's decision.

 

There may be other reasons why FtT decisions cannot be implemented straight away, because of accidental error or because they are unclear in the context of the case. In these circumstances the DWP should seek clarification from the Tribunals Service. The only other thing that would prevent a FtT decision from being implemented would be where a party to the proceedings (claimant or DWP) applies for a set aside of the decision.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...