Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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

Contribution based esa ending question


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4377 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, I receive contribution based esa which is due to end at the end of april due to the new 365 days rule. I realise this is affecting lots of people.

 

I have little savings (well under £6000) and no income and i'm single so presume I will be entitled to income based esa when the contribution based comes to an end.

 

After reading the information on the dwp site - (wont let me post links, its dwp, changes to contribution page) It says "Claimants with an underlying entitlement to income-related ESA will be automatically moved onto this benefit when their contribution-based ESA ends."

 

I got a letter a month or so back saying they would write again after the 9th april informing me how to proceed and i had assumed this would tell me that as I qualify for income based esa, I would automatically be moved onto this.

However, this second letter merely states that my contribution based esa will end on 30th april and that I may be entitled to income based esa and I should phone the number on the letter.

 

Has anyone called and been put straight onto income based esa? Will I have to re-apply from scratch? This worries me greatly, I had a hell of a time with all this before - atos medical gave me 0 points, appealed, got awarded 27 points in the appeal and was placed in the wrag. I have been attending the work program interviews although they now do these over email as they can see i'm not ready for work yet.

 

Having to reapply from scratch and no doubt having to have another medical etc fills me with dread. I really hope it is just a smooth transition after one phone call but knowing dwp have my doubts. Anybody made the transition painlessly without having to attend interviews/fill out forms etc?

 

Many thanks for any help.

Edited by Myfibro
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

have just listened to bbc this morning...paul lewis on moneybox...if you have a partner that works even if that is part time or earning minimum wage then after a year esa contributory would cease and you will be entitled to s#d all..this seems it will affect about 40,000 people in uk today...its a scandal and the sooner these parasites are voted out of office the better

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware and am happy to be corrected, to go through the transition from Contribution based ESA to Income Realted ESA you will need to complete form ESA3 which can be obtained by calling you DWP processing team (these forms are not stocked by the local JCP offices)

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no reason why this type of change would mean medicals, etc. Your only change (from what I can gather) is your contributions have run out.

 

Also, if you receive income based ESA, you should get full council tax benefit and housing benefit for your area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The DWP has begun telephoning claimants whose employment and support allowance (ESA) is due to end because of the time-limiting of contribution-based ESA for claimants in the work-related activity group (WRAG). Payments will cease for some claimants from 30 April 2012.

 

Claimants are now only entitled to 365 days of contribution-based ESA if they are in the WRAG. Time spent in the assessment phase which is immediately followed by being placed in the WRAG counts towards the 365 days. The new rules are retrospective, meaning that people who have already spent a year in the WRAG on contribution-based ESA will lose their benefit from 30 April unless they are entitled to income-related ESA.

 

Claimants in the support group will not be affected and payments of income-related ESA will also not be stopped.

 

The first payments are due to end on 30 April and the DWP have begun telephoning claimants whose payments are expected to end between 30 April and 3 June. They are being informed of the ending of their payment and asked if they wish to apply for income-related ESA.

 

Claimants whose payments are due to end after 3 June will be given eight weeks’​ notice.

 

Income-related ESA is means-tested. Claimants who have too much income (depending on their circumstances), capital of £​16,000 or more or whose partner works for 24 hours a week or more are unlikely to qualify for income-related ESA.

 

The DWP claim that around 60% of those affected by the changes will be entitled to some income-related ESA.

 

Claimants whose condition has worsened may be able to ask for their award to be looked at again if they consider they should now be in the support group, where the time limit does not apply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So from what I am reading then you pay your nhs contributions for 30+ years ...become ill and have not been able to work for the last 7+ years and have had to be on IB / ESA and been put into WRAG and have a partner that works but only just earns above min wage and you know that your condition is degenerative!

You are then put on the scrap heap losing nearly 400 a month which for most of us is food on the table !!!!! Yet those who have never paid a stamp ( going back in time ) can have everything they want and more ........arghhhhhhhh this makes me sooooo mad it is unbeleivable ....better tell my other half they would be better off going part time or not working at all !!!!!!! If only the concience would allow !!!!!!!

 

Might as well declare bankrupt now cos by Oct / Nov unless there is change we will starve and so will our kids !

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't work like that, Spots. I have never worked for various reasons and everything is income assessed. I don't have a partner but if I did, their income would matter from day 1. We also don't get everything for free - I still have to pay for my glasses.

 

If your income is really that low, you may get some more tax credits, housing and /or council tax benefits.

 

Sorry; but opinions like yours really **** me off. Not everyone who hasn't paid into the system has chosen not to pay. Their income either isn't enough or they've had bloody good reason not to work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The contribution based JSA will only be payable if he has paid suffiicent class 1 NI contributions in the relevant income tax years (2009/2010 and 2010/2011) and also if he is activerly seeking and available to take full time employment. (unless there are sufficent grounds to reduce the hours he is able to work or restrictions that can be agreed by an apersonal advisor.

The contribution based JSA is only payable for a maximum of 182 days too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While he is still receiving ESA I would recommend requesting an appointment with the Disability Employment Advisor (DEA) they will be able to discuss the options available to him withour making the jump between EA and JSA before he is ready.

Also base on your post as he has not been employed during the relevant tax years it will be very unlikely that he will qualify to receive te Contribution Based JSA. No Income Based JSA either due to your income so if he does transfer to JSA he will only be signing for his NI credits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about contibutions jsa will my partner be able to claim that as his esa ends 30th april and i work 30 hrs a week.

 

He can make a claim, yes. Whether he receives benefit will depend on his NI contributions in the tax years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011. JSA© can be paid for 182 days before it exhausts.

 

Edit: Or what Flumps said. Serves me right for writing a post and not actually hitting the post button for an hour...

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

Thanks i will tell him. Will his stamp that was paid while claiming benefits be enough for claiming jsa or do u have to work and pay it for claiming purposes.

 

His stamp will be paid, yes. The stamp is only for his pension.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again, I called them and they are sending an ESA3 form so hopefully it will be ok.

Thanks for the help.

I will actually be better off on income based esa as I wont have to pay for my prescriptions every month.

 

p.s. It would be preferable to start your own thread about JSA and not hijack this one...

Link to post
Share on other sites

If one is getting or has an underlying entitlement to Carers Allowance am I correct in believing the NI credits one gets are class 1, and if/when one ceases to be a carer it is possible to move onto contribution based benefits?

 

Also If while one is a carer they are on a time limited benefit, would the time limit be removed?

 

I ask as this as at the moment I am in the ESA support group, and am my wite's carer. If at a later date I am moved to the WRAG and/or cease to be a carer what would happen?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I am on Pension Credit and wife claiming ESA. We have decided that it would be better all round not to apply for income ESA and apply for PC to be increased as there is almost zero chances of her being able to work again unless a miraculous cure is found!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contribution based ESA cannot be claimed if your partner is on pension credits.

 

Before I was transfered from IB I thought ESA would be the same an did not realise it came in income and contribution based versions. My wife is on pension credits and when I read (on some obscure website, not on direct.gov and most DWP empoyees i spoke to where unaware) income based ESA could not be paid if one's partner got pension credits, I just assumed I would not get ESA and my money would just stop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife is on pension credits and when I read (on some obscure website, not on direct.gov and most DWP empoyees i spoke to where unaware) income based ESA could not be paid if one's partner got pension credits, I just assumed I would not get ESA and my money would just stop.

 

This makes sense - because if you claim any income based benefits and have a partner, it must be a joint claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contribution based ESA cannot be claimed if your partner is on pension credits.

 

Before I was transfered from IB I thought ESA would be the same an did not realise it came in income and contribution based versions. My wife is on pension credits and when I read (on some obscure website, not on direct.gov and most DWP empoyees i spoke to where unaware) income based ESA could not be paid if one's partner got pension credits, I just assumed I would not get ESA and my money would just stop.

My wife applied for contribution based ESA quite sometime after I started receiving Pension Credits and had no issue. Her contribution based ESA finishes at end of April.
Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4377 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...