Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, do the section 75 chargeback to your credit card provider.
    • See what dx thinks but it seems to me that sending a photo of your own pass isn't relevant to what happened. Let's wait and see what he says. HB
    • 1st letter image.pdf1st letter 2nd page.pdf
    • Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.
  • 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

House sold do i have to pay anything back to dwp?


jules9906
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4543 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

My brother due to mental illness has been on long term sick since 1989, DWP having been paying the interest on his mortage. He has now sold his house. Does anyone know if he has to pay back money to the DWP, there is a shortfall on his endowmentand he will come out with very little equity. If he has to pay back to DWP how can I be sure that he is being treated fairly, I would appreciate any guidance. Thank you all.


Link to post
Share on other sites

He does not have to repay mortgage interest payments to the DWP, no.

 

If his equity is more than £16,000, it may affect any means-tested benefits he receives, although this is a complex area of the law.

 

On edit: I'm working here on the assumption that he's receiving Income Support, IB or ESA on the basis of inability to work, and that's why he's had MI payments made to his lender on his behalf. If this isn't the situation, you'd need to tell us a bit more - what benefits does he receive, for example?

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

He does not have to repay mortgage interest payments to the DWP, no.

 

If his equity is more than £16,000, it may affect any means-tested benefits he receives, although this is a complex area of the law.

 

On edit: I'm working here on the assumption that he's receiving Income Support, IB or ESA on the basis of inability to work, and that's why he's had MI payments made to his lender on his behalf. If this isn't the situation, you'd need to tell us a bit more - what benefits does he receive, for example?

 

Thank you for replying so quickly to my thread.

 

My brother receives DLA. IB and income support. We sadly lost our mother earlier this year and she willed the house between her 4 children with the proviso that my brother could live there for as long as he wished, this is why he has has sold his house. After costs etc the equity from sale should be approx. £25,000. When the house was put on the market we enquired of DWP if anything had to be paid back but they would not commit to a % of pay back but certainly gave the impression that they would expect to be paid some of the equity.Any light you can throw on this grey area would so greatly received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My brother will not buy another house but will live in the house which my mother has left to us. Any idea what DWP will do about this?

 

His DLA won't be affected. There's something about the money being ignored for x months if the intention is to buy another house.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If he's not buying another house then the DWP will probably treat his equity as capital. This won't affect DLA, but it would affect any means-tested benefits such as IS. A person with more than £16,000 in capital is not entitled to these benefits.

 

The mortgage interest payments made to his lender count as part of his benefit from the DWP point of view - they're not relevant to the situation and the DWP can't ask him to repay them.

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

If the house is aleady sold, your brother needs to make a call to his benefit centre state that he has sold the propety and has capital of 25k after the sale.. The claim will then be suspended, he can also do a change of address, he will then be asked to send in copies of completion statements to include bank statement showing the date the money sale of the house went into the account. The claim will then close from the date the 25k went into his account. If he has been paid past this point then they may be a small over payment of I.S.

If he is in receipt if IB the capital will not effect this money and he will still receive this benefit.. But if he was IB credts then his benefit will cease as he would have been on full I.S.

The mortgage interest will not be recovered. This is the policy now :)

If he doesnt inform the dept and they keep paying the mortgage, this sometimes happens then they will be an overpayment and this will be raised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for this information, I have trawled the internet looking for the answer. Is this based on DWP latest policy? I assume so.

 

The capital limits for means-tested benefits are set by Parliament, not the DWP. The fact that the interest payments are not recoverable I'm less sure about - I mean, I know it's the case but I couldn't tell you if that's law or policy.

 

If you want to independently verify advice you get here (a wise idea - we do our best but we are fallible :wink: ) then a lot of the guidance to processors is available by searching the DWP website. Hint for this is to use google rather than the site's own search function. Go to the google homepage as type something like "site:dwp.gov.uk income support capital decision makers guide" (without quotes) and see how it goes. Searching the DWP site is annoying, but very often the information is there - buried under a ton of stuff you don't care about.

 

Edit: most other search engines offer a similar function if Google is not your preference.

Edited by antone

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...