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.
        • 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

Benefit fraud PROSECUTION. IUC?? Please HELP and reply :-(


dd101
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4181 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 want to DELETE my other post but do not know how to do it so sorry for posting this again but I wanted to change title and make clearer.

 

I am being investigated for benefit fraud. At this point, i am not sure what claims/ addresses they suspect or if they suspect all but I stupidly attended an interview under caution because the only offence I had knowingly committed was not changing my claim in time, that lead to 3 weeks overpayment, I admitted it and then got invited to interview. When I got to the interview I was interviewed for 2 and a half hours about ALL claims, the past 4 years of my life from age 16 to 19 and now, although I have not claimed for 6 months,now 20 years old.

 

Address 1: 16 years old. They say I could only have claimed if I was a care leaver, I was not, never claimed I was. Claim was initatlly refused due to age, boss who was also the landlord said he would look into it, then two weeks later got a letter saying it had been awarded based on new information. I asked my boss what information he provided, I had NOTHING to do with it and NO knowledge he was submitting info. He claimed he just wrote to them saying we was in areas etc. It comes to light now that he must have said I had come from care, as this would have been the only reason they would have awarded it.

 

Address 2: Lost job with first landlord, who was my boss. Guy who worked with this boss said to contact his Mother and ask to rent a room at her house as she used to rent to students. I had become depressed and quite mentally ill, self harming etc and I explained to the landlady I needed to claim HB. She said it was fine. During my time here, aged 16 and 10 months of age until 17 and 9 months of age, there was a fire that meant it was not safe for my landlords to live in and insurance put them in a hotel but would not house me. I stayed at the house during this time, investigator has flagged this up saying I couldn't have lived there. The difference is, is that the house was uninhabitable while work was going on for two people aged 73 and 74, one who had breathing problems from Asbestos. The kitchen was destroyed but I could still use a bedroom and bathroom, I pretty much didn't eat and when I did it was chips or toast etc. I stayed with friends when plumbing was done upstairs etc. I did not inform them of the fre, to be honest it NEVER crossed my mind.

 

Address 3: Moved to a room, found add on gumtree. Turns out landlord was a sub-letter and not landlord, who had a criminal record for fraud (investigator told me about fraud, I found out about him not being landlord) One Day fake landlord tells us to get out, we say no we have a tenancy, he explains it doesn't mean anything, hes not the landlord etc. I left the next Day but carried on claiming for 3 weeks until the landlord got post for me and phoned benefits department, I admitted this before and during interview and offered to pay back etc.

 

The son of Address 2, I started a relationship with during my time at address 3. He lived abroad during the time I rented a room at his parents and he would visit and stay in his own room. We become best friends and got very close but couldn't have a relationship and I was mentally unwell. Then we began a relationship some time after I moved out and he moved back to the UK.

 

BEING ACCUSED OF (Contradicting by the way)

 

Address 1: Not sure but they are suspicious of the fact I was not a care leaver. With all the new info I suspect my landlord lied to get them to change the claim decision from rejected to awarded by telling them I had come from care.

 

Address 2: Sharing a room with the son, being in a relationship and therefore not being entitled to claim when I lived there as it is his family. NOT TRUE.

 

Not living at the property during the fire, I suppose partly true and I shouldn't have stayed there due to the state of the house but I did.

 

Address 2 and 3: Of knowing my landlord at address 3, whilst living at address 2 who aided me in committing fraud on a larger scale (her own words I have no idea what evidence is on this).

 

Address 3: Continuing to claim fraudulently with the help of landlord at address 3. I suspect this is due to his history of fraud and they have put 2 and 2 together and made 11!

 

Contradicting accusations:

 

Address 2: Was in a relationship with son of landlord but he wasn't living there but because he was my boyfriend he paid the rent to his parents for me OR convinced his parents not to charge me.

 

Address 3: Having my partner (who at this point WAS my partner) paying my rent for me and me pocketing the benefit. Despite me telling them he was on a £600 a month wage.

 

I really would appreciate your advice in terms of;

 

IF I am guilty of some fraud, will me age of 16 and 17 make it harder to prosecute

 

Are other advice on the issues above. Cannot sleep or eat properly, having panic attacks and so on.

 

THANK YOU.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

Do you mean your first thread or the second one that you want to delete please?

 

I'm sure people will reply to you, but not everyone here knows about benefit fraud prosecutions, including myself. Please bear with us.

 

Have you spoken to the CAB?

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

Do you mean your first thread or the second one that you want to delete please?

 

I'm sure people will reply to you, but not everyone here knows about benefit fraud prosecutions, including myself. Please bear with us.

 

Have you spoken to the CAB?

 

My best, HB

 

Hi,

 

I would like to delete both others really as I made mistakes. Sorry, new here.

 

I called turn2us and they put me in touch with a solicitor. The solicitor referred me to another solicitor within the same firm but different department. I was promised a call within 48 hours, which would have been not last Friday but the Friday before. I have chased them up twice and she has re-sent the referral for the attention of two different solicitors (she done this Friday) so I am still waiting for a response. It is really effecting me not even being able to speak with a solicitor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the council could look to take this forward legally, as 16/17 years old makes no difference. It would be up to the CPS as to whether they would prosecute based on the evidence supplied.

 

I would suggest that you see a local solicitor, if you are being threatened with prosecution to see if you can avoid this.

We could do with some help from you.

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

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks,

 

Well they have not told me they will seek prosecution but the investigator disclosed this to my ex-landlord, she told him she will be seeking prosecution, I do not even fully understand what I am accused of yet! I am not sure she knows either. All I have been told is that I will be called for another interview at some point as she is currently digging into my 4 years of bank accounts, all addresses, my police records about the fire (I had to be arrested for it because at the time the owners were abroad and the police could not contact them to confirm who I was and that I had a right to be there etc). Problem with that, is that the owners did not know I was staying there while they were gone. There idiot of a son was not happy about a lodger staying there without them, even though it was my home and he kicked up a big fuss, so I offered to stay with a friend for the week they was gone. The friend let me down so after two nights I went back and stayed at the house. I was worried that I would be held responsible, so I did not tell the police I was living there, I told them I was living at my Mums address and this is were I was bailed to. My bail conditions also stated I was not allowed on the road of the property. Once the family cleared my name, I was still on bail and only got cleared once forensics came back that proved I had nothing to do with it. So, basically by looking at police records, it can prove I was living somewhere else, although I wasn't, I just didn't want the police to tell the owners I had been staying there. My solicitor at the time I was arrested said that if I explained I lived there but not for that week because the son did not trust me alone in the house, it would raise suspicions and so it was best that I just gave my Mums address for the purpose of the police interview, so I did.

 

I am still waiting to hear back from my solicitor, they referred me to someone else and now I have been waiting two weeks for a response.

 

If it goes to crown court, I would be shocked if a jury prosecuted someone for something they unknowingly did wrong when they was 16 and 17 years old with no family support and mental health problems, I am more concerned about a magistrate to be honest! If I get a criminal record I will not be able to continue running my business or go to university next year as I had planned and this really upsets me. I find it really scary that you can be prosecuted for such mistakes. I really feel like at 16 I should have been given more advice and support about clamming benefits, considering the punishments are so severe, if you do make a mistake. 16 and 17 year olds are generally not wise enough to understand the responsibities of claiming and I did not understand why I could and couldn't do.

 

Anyone else in a similar position or have been?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks,

 

Well they have not told me they will seek prosecution but the investigator disclosed this to my ex-landlord, she told him she will be seeking prosecution, I do not even fully understand what I am accused of yet! I am not sure she knows either. All I have been told is that I will be called for another interview at some point as she is currently digging into my 4 years of bank accounts, all addresses, my police records about the fire (I had to be arrested for it because at the time the owners were abroad and the police could not contact them to confirm who I was and that I had a right to be there etc). Problem with that, is that the owners did not know I was staying there while they were gone. There idiot of a son was not happy about a lodger staying there without them, even though it was my home and he kicked up a big fuss, so I offered to stay with a friend for the week they was gone. The friend let me down so after two nights I went back and stayed at the house. I was worried that I would be held responsible, so I did not tell the police I was living there, I told them I was living at my Mums address and this is were I was bailed to. My bail conditions also stated I was not allowed on the road of the property. Once the family cleared my name, I was still on bail and only got cleared once forensics came back that proved I had nothing to do with it. So, basically by looking at police records, it can prove I was living somewhere else, although I wasn't, I just didn't want the police to tell the owners I had been staying there. My solicitor at the time I was arrested said that if I explained I lived there but not for that week because the son did not trust me alone in the house, it would raise suspicions and so it was best that I just gave my Mums address for the purpose of the police interview, so I did.

 

I am still waiting to hear back from my solicitor, they referred me to someone else and now I have been waiting two weeks for a response.

 

If it goes to crown court, I would be shocked if a jury prosecuted someone for something they unknowingly did wrong when they was 16 and 17 years old with no family support and mental health problems, I am more concerned about a magistrate to be honest! If I get a criminal record I will not be able to continue running my business or go to university next year as I had planned and this really upsets me. I find it really scary that you can be prosecuted for such mistakes. I really feel like at 16 I should have been given more advice and support about clamming benefits, considering the punishments are so severe, if you do make a mistake. 16 and 17 year olds are generally not wise enough to understand the responsibities of claiming and I did not understand why I could and couldn't do.

 

Anyone else in a similar position or have been?

 

I agree & I find it quite disturbing that they are going to such extreme measures these days to claw back money. This country is just getting worse & worse. I was 40 when they stitched me up & I was nieve enough to not realise it then, what chance does a teenager have of understanding the complex way that benefits work, you just wanted a roof over your head.

Hope you can find a benefit solicitor that will fight your corner for you.

My children are 17 & 15 & wouldn't even be savvy enough to catch a bus on their own at the moment, yes, I have spoilt them with a car. There is no way at all they would know what to do with benefits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly disagree. Yes the workings of the DWP are complicated, but you just answer the questions they ask by giving accurate information and they tell you what your entitlements are. If there is anything which you are not sure of, then you ask the question or make DWP aware of, so at least they can't say that you did not mention it later.

 

In this situation of being accussed of claiming benefits not entitled to, then I would suggest that people visit their local Citizens Advice Bureau ASAP or to call them to book an urgent appointment. They may have solicitors or advisors that can help in this situation.

 

http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/index/getadvice.htm

We could do with some help from you.

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

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...